DESIGNERS'

EUROCODES
an ICG) initiative

DESIGNERS' GUIDES TO THE EUROCODES

DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN I992.2

EUROCODE 2: DESIGN OF CONCRETE STRUCTURES

PART 2: CONCRETE BRIDGES

Eurocode Designers' Guide Series

to EN

Dsrgtefs' Guide
lY.

1990. Eurocode: Bosis

of

Holickf. 0 7277 301| 8. Published 2002.

Designe' Guide

Sttucturol Desrbn. H. Gulvanessian, J.-A, Calgaro and

to EN 1994-l-1. Eurocode 4: Design of Composrre

Genero/ Ru/es ond Rules

for Buildings. R-

P.

Steel

ond Concrete Structurci port

Johnson and D, Anderson. 0 7277

3l5l

l.l:

3. Published 2004.

Designers' Cuide to EN 1997-1. Eurocode 7: Geotechnical Desn

Generoi Ru/es. R. Frank, C. Bauduin,
R. Driscoll, lv1. Kawadas, N. Krebs Ovesen, T. Orr and B. Schuppener. 0 7277 3 154 8- Published 2004.

Desrgners'Guide to EN 1993-l-1. Eurocode 3: Design ofSree/ Sruau rcs. General Rules ond Ru/es for Buildings.
L. Gardner and D. Nethercot. O 7277 3163 7. Published 2004.
Designers' GuriCe to EN I 992-l- I ond EN 1992- I-2. Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Svuctures. Generol Rules
ond Rules for Buildings ond SttucturolFire Design A,W Beeby and R- S. Narayanan.0 7277 3105 X. published

2005.
Designers' Guride to EN 1998-l ond EN 1998-5. Eurocode 8: Design of Struaures for Eafthquoke Resiston e.
Generol Ru/eg Semic Actiong Design Ru/es fot Buildings, Foundotjons ond Re:oining Structures. M. Fardis,
E. Carvalho, A. Elnashai, E. Faccioli, P. Pinto and A. Plumier. 0 7277 3348 6. Published 2005.
Designers' Guide to EN 1995-l -l . Eurocode 5: Design of Timber Stru ctures. Common Rules ond
Buildings. C. ll'em.0 7277 3 162 9- Forthcoming: 2007 (provisional).

Des{nerc' Guide to EN I99l-4. Eurocode

Forthcoming: 2007 (provisional).

!:

Actions on Srructures.

Designers'Cude to EN 1996. Eurocode 6: Port

Forthcoming: 2007 (provisionl).

I.l:

Design

fot

Rules ond

Wind Aajons. N, Cook 0 7277 3lS2 l.

of Mosonry

Sttuctures- J.

Morron.

7277 3155 6,

Desrgners' Gui,Ce to EN l99l-l-2, 1992-l-2, 1993-l-2 and N 19941-2. Eurocode I: Aajons on Structures.
Eurocode 3: Des(n of Stee/ structures- Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Stee/ ond Conqete Suctures. Firc
Engineering (Actions on Steel and Composite Structures). Y. Wang, C. Bailey, T. Lennon and D. Moore.

0 7277 3157 2. Forrhcoming: 2007 (provisional).

Desrgner' Guide to EN 1993-2, Eurocode 3: Desqn ofsteei Structres, Bridges. C. R. Hendy and C. J. Mu rphy.
0 7277 3l60 2- Forthcoming. 2007 (provisional).
Designers'Guide ta EN I99l-2, | 991^l -l, f99!-!-3 ond 199!-l-5 to !-7. Eutocode /j Acr,bns on Srrucrures.
Trafic Loods and Other Actions on Eridges. J--A. Calgaro, M. Tschumi, H. Gulvanessian and N. Shetty.

0 7277 3156 4. Forthcoming; 2007 (provisional).

Desrgnels'6uide to EN l99l-l-l,EN l99l-l-3ond !991-l-5to l-7. Eutocode I: Actions on Structurcs. Geetul

Ru/es ond Aaions on Bui/dings (not Wind), H. Gulvanessian, J.-A. Calgaro, P. Formichi and G. Harding.

0 7277 3158 0. Forthcoming 2007 (provisional).

EN 1994-2. Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Steel ond Concrcte Stuctures. port 2: Generol
ond Rules for Btidges. C- R. Hendy and R. P. johnson. 0 7277 3l6t 0. Published 2006.

Desners' Gur'de to
Rules

www.eurocodes.co.uk

DESIGNERS'GUIDES TO THE EUROCODES

DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN I992.2

EUROCODE 2: DESIGN OF
CONCRETE STRUCTURES

PART 2: CONCRETE BRIDGES

C. R. HENDY and D. A. SMITH

thomastelford

Published by Thomas Telfold Publishing, Thomas Tellbrd Ltd, 1 Heron Quay, London E14 4JD

URL:

http:,/i'lv..vw. thomastclford.com

Distributors for Thomas Telfbrd books are

LrSl: ASCE Press. 1801 Alexander Bell Drivc, Rcston, VA 20191-4400
,Iala : Ma1:uzer\ Ca. Ltd, Book Departmenr, I l0 Nihonbshi 2-chorne, Chuo-ku, Tokyo
Australi.t. DA Books ard Journals. 648 Whitehorse Road, Mitcharr 3132, Victoria

103

First pubtishcd 2007

Eurocodes Expcrt

Structural [rocodes offer the oppoitunity of harmonized design standards for the European
construction market nd the rest of the world. To achieve thisJ the constrction industry needs to
becorne acquainted nith the Eurocodes so tht the maximum advantge can be taken of these
opportunities
Eurocodcs Expert is a new ICE and Thornas Telford initiative set up to assist in creating a greater
awareness of thc impct and implementation of the Euiocodes within the UK consuction industry
Eurocodes Expert provides a range of products ard se ices to id and support the transition to
Eurocodes. For comprehcnsive and useful information on the adoption of the Eurocodes and their
implcmentation process pleas, visit our website or email eurocodes@thomastelford,corn

A cataloguc rccord fo. this book is availablc from thc British Library
tSBN: 978-0-7277-31 59-3

(O The authors and Thomas

Tellord Limited

2007

All rights, including translation, resened. Except as pemitted by

the Copyright, Designs and Patcnts

Ac1 1988. no part ofthis publiciltion may be reproduced, stored in a rctrieval systern or transrnitted in

ay form or by any mcans, electronic, mechanical. photocopying or othcrwisc. without thc prior
writtcn pennission of rhe Publishing Director, Thoms Te)ford Publishing, Thomas Telford Ltd,
1 Heron Quay, London El4 4JD.
This book is published on the nderstanding that th autbors ate solely responsible for the statements
made nd opinions cxpressed in it and that its publicalion does not ncccssariiy imply that such
stateme[ts andi'or opinions re or rcflcct the views or opinions of the publishers. While every efort
has been made to cnsurc that the statements made and thc opinions expressed in this publicatio
provide a safe and accurale guide, no liahility or responsibility can be aqcepled in this respect by the
authors or publishers.

Typeset by Acaderric

+ Technical, Bristol
Printed and bound in Grear Britai by MPG Books, Bodmin

Preface
Aims and objectives of this guide
The principal aim ofthis book is to provide the user wilh guidance on the intelpretation and
use of EN 1992-2 and to prcscnt worked examples. It covers topics that will be encountered
in typical concrete bridge designs and explains the relationship bctween EN 1992-2 antl Lhe
other Eurocodes.
EN 1992-2 is not a'stand lone'document nd refers extensiveiy to other Eurocodes. Its
format is based on EN 1992-l-1 and generally follows the same clause r.rumhering lt
identifies which parts of EN 1992-1-1 are relevant for bridge design and adds fut'ther
clauses that are speciflc to bridges. It is therefbre uot useful to produce guidancc on
EN 1992-2 in isolation and so this guicle covers material in EN 1992-1-l rvbich will need
to be used in bridgc design.

This book also provides background infbrmation and relcrences

Eurocode 2 to understand the origin and objeclivcs of its provisions.

to

enable users

of

Layout of this guide

EN 1992-2 has freword, l3 sections and l7 annexes. This guidc has an introduction which
corresponds to th foreword ofEN 1992-2, Chaptcrs I to 10, $'hich correspond to Sections I
to 10 of thc Eurocode and Annexes A to Q which gain correspontl to Annexes A to Q of the
Eurocode.
The guide generally follows the sectjon numbers and first sub-headings in EN 1992-2 so that
guidance can be sought on the code on section by section basis. The guide also Ibllows thc
format of EN 1992-2 to lower levels of sub-heading in cases $'here this can conveniently be
done and where thcril is sullicient material to rnerit this. The need to use several Eurocode
parts can initially make it dunting tsk to locate information in the order required for a
real design, In some places, therefore, additional sub-scctions are included in this guide to
pull together rclcvanL dcsign rules for individual elements, such as pile caps. Additional
sub-sections are identif,ed as such in the sub-section heading.

The following parts of rhe Eurocodc arc intended to be used in conjunction with
Eurocode 2:

EN 1990: Basis of structural design

EN 1991: Actions on structures
EN 1997: Geotechnical design
EN 1998: I)csign of structures for earthquake resistnce
hENs: Construction products relevant for concrete structures
EN 13670: Execution (construclion) of concrete stmctures
will gcnerally be required for a typical concrete bridge design, but discussion on them is generally beyond the scope of this guide.

These documents

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

In this guide. references to Eurocodc 2 are made bv using the abbreviation 'EC2' for
EN 1992, so EN 1992-1-l is relerred to as EC2-1-1. Where clausc numbers are relerred to
in thc lext, they are prefixed by thc number of the relevant prt of EC2. Hence:

.
.
.
.

2-2i clause 6.3.2(6) nens slause 6.3.2, paragraph (6),

of EC2-2
2-1-lr'clause 6.2.5(1) means clause 6.2.5, paragraph (1)- of EC2-l-1
2-2lExpression (7-22) means equation (7.22) in EC2-2
2- l- 1i Expression (7.8) means eqution (7.8) in EC2-1-1.

Note that, unlike in other guides in this series, eyen clauses in EN 1992-2 itself are pretxed
wilh '2-2'. There re so many references to other parts of Eurocode 2 required that to do
otherwise would be confusing.

Where additional cquations are provided in the guide- they are numbered sequentially
within each sub-section of a main seotion so that, fbr exmple, the third additional expression within sub-section 6.1 would be referenccd equation (D6.1-3). Additional Iigures and
lables fbllow the same system. For example, the second additional ligurc in scction 6.4
would be referenced Figure 6.4-2,

Acknowledgements
Chris Hendy would like to thnk his rvife, Wendy, and two boys. Peter Edrvin Hendy and
Matthew Philip Hcndy, for their patience and tolerance of his pleas to finish 'just one
more section'.
David Smith would like to thank his wife, Emma, for her limitless patience during preparation of this guide- He also acknowledges his son, Willim Thomas Smith. and the continued
support of Brian and Roslind Ruflell-Ward from the very beginning.
Both authors would also like to thank their empJoyer, Atkins, lor providing both facilities
and time lbr the production of this guide, They also wish to thank Dr Paul .Iackson and Dr
Steve DenLon for their helpful commi:nts on the guide.

Chrit Hendy
David A. Smith

Contents
Preface

Aims and objectives of this guide

Layout of this guide
vi

Acknowledgements
Introduction

Additional information spccific to EN 1992-2

Chapter

1.

Generl

1.1.

Scope

1-1.1. Scope of Eurocode ?

1.1.2. Scope of Part 2 of Eulocode

1.2. Normativereferences
1.3. Assumptions
1.4. Distinction between principles
1.5. Definitions
1.6. Slmbols
Chapter 2.

4
4
4

and application rules

5
5
5

Basis of design

2.1. Requirements
2.2. Principles oflimit state design
2.3. Basic variables
2.4. Verification by the partial factor method

'7

2.4.1. General
2.4.2. Design r alues
2.4.3. Combinations ol

Concrete

3-1.1.
3.1.2.
3.1.3.
3.1.4.
3.1.5.

actions

Materials

3.l.

2.5- Design assisted by testing

2.6. Supplementaryrequirementsforfoundations
Chapter 3.

Gcncral
Strength
Elastic deformation
Creep and shrinkage
Concrete stress strain relation for non-linear structural
analysls

l0
l0

ll
11

ll
t4
t4

l9

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

3-1.6.
3.1,7.
3.1.8J.1.9.

Dcsign conpressive and tensile strengths

Stress-strin relations for the design ol sections
Flexural teusile strength
Confined concrcte

Reinlbrcing steel

3.2.1.
3,2.2.
3.2.3.
3.2.4.
3.2.5,
3.2.6.
3.2.7.
3.3.

4.

5.

23

Strength

23

Ducrilily

2\

Welding
Fatigue
Design assumptions

25
25

Prestressing steel
3.3.1. Gencral
3.3.2. Properties
3.3.3. Strength
3.3.4. Ductilitl' characterislics

.J
25

26
27
21
28

28
29
29
29

Prestressing devises

Durability and coycr to reinforcement

31

4.1. General
4.2. Environmentalconditions
4.3. Requirements lbr durability
4.4. Methods of vcrilication

3t

4,4.1.
Chapter

22
23
23
23

3.4.1. Anchorages and couplers

3.4.2- External non-bonded Lendons
Chapter

2l

General
Properties

3.3.5. Fatigue
3.3.6- Design assurnptions
3.4.

20

32
35

36
36

Concrete cover

Structural analysis
5.l. Genelal
5.2. Gcomerric imperfections
5.2.1. General (additional sub-secLion)
5.2.2. Arches (additional sub-section)
5.3 Idealization of the s|Iuoture
5.3,1 Structurl models for overall analysis

5.3.2- Geon.retric data

5.4. Linear elastic analysis

5.5. Lincar elastic analysis with limited
5.6. Plastic analysrs
5,6.1.
5.6.2.

redistribution

General
Plastio analysis 1br beams. Ii'arnes and slabs

5.6..1. RorirtioncaFaciL)
5.6-4. Strut-and-tie models
5.7, NonJinear analysis
5.7.1, Method for ultimate limit states

5.7.2. Scalar combinations

5.7.3. Vector combinations
5.7.4. Method for serviceability limit

5,8.

39
39

40

40
43

44
44
44
48
49
52
52
52
53
56
58
58
60
61

sttes

Analysis of second-order cffects with axial load

5.8.1. Delinitions and introduction to second-order effects
5-8.2. Gcneral
5.8.3. Simplified critcrja for second-order effects

62

62
63

64

CONTENTS

5.8.4. Creep
5.8,5. Melhods of analysis
5-8.6. General method second-order non-linear analysis
5.8.7, Secontl-ordcr analysis based on nominal stiflness
5.8.8. Method based on nominal curvatute
5.8.9. Biaxial bending

5.9, Lateral instability

ol'slender beams
5.10. Prcstressed members and structurcs
5.10.1. General
5.10.2. Prestressing force during tensioning
5.10.3. Prestress force
5.10.4. Immediate losses of prestress for pre-tensrorung
5.10.5. lmmediate losses of prestlss for post-tensioning
5.10.6. Time-dependent Iosses
5.10.?. Consideration of prestress in the analysis
5.10.8. EIIects of prestressing at the ullimate limit statc
5.10.9. Effects of prestressing aL the serviceability and fatigue

limit

statcs
5.11. Analysis for some prticular structural members

Chpter 6.

sttes

Ultimate limit

6.1.

69
10
70

7l
76
80
80
ti1

8l
82
83

84
85

90
95
96
98
104

105

lbrce
sub-section)

ULS bending with or without axial

105

105
6.1.1.
105
sub-section)
6.1.2.
ll8
(additional
sub-section)
bems
6.1.3. Prestressed concrete
l2l
(additional
sub-section)
Reinforced
concret
columns
6-1.4.
(additional
prestress
with
failure
ofmcmbers
6.1.5. Brittle

Gcneral (ddirionl
Reinforced concrete bcams (dditional

t26

sub-scction)

6.2.

Shear

131

6,2.1. General vcrillcation procedure rulcs

6.2.2. Members not requiring design shear reinfbrcement
6.2.3. Membels lequirilg dcsign shear reinlbrcement
6.2,4. Shear betu,een web and flanges o[ T-sections
6-2.5. Shear t the interfce betwecn concrete cast at different

132

6.2.6.
6.2-?.
6.3.

times
Shcar and transverse bending
Shear in precast concrete and composlte constructon
(additional sub-section)

Generl
Design procedure
Warying torsion

6,4.

1.

reinforccment

6.4.5. Punching

sher resistance

t'72
5

l'7 6

t7'7

179

ol slabs and bases with shear

reinforcement

6.5.

160

1'7

6.4.2. Load distribution and basic control pcrirneter

6.4.3. Punching shear calculation
6.4.4. Punching shear resislance of slabs and bases without

Pile caps (additional sub-section)

Design with strut-and-ties models
6,5.1. General

6.4.6.

158
160

t7s

Generl

shear

154

\71
sub-section)

Punching
6.4-

140

166
166
167

Torsion

6.3.1.
6.3.2.
6.3.3.
6.3.4. Torsion in slabs (additional

133

183

185
193
193

IX

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

6.5,2. Stmts
6.5.3. Ties
6.5.4- Nodes
6_6.

Anchorage and laps

6.1

Partially loaded areas

6.8.

193

195

r96
201
201
208

Fatigue

6.8.1.
6.8.2.
6.8.3.
6.8.4.

Verification conditions
Internal lbrces and stresscs for fatigue veriflction

208

CombinaLion of actions
Velification proccdure for reinforcing and prestressing

209

stecl

209
210
212

6.8.5. Verication using damage equivlent stress range

6.8-6. Other verifiction methods
6.8.7, Verification of concrete under compression or shear
6.9.

Chapter 7.

Membrane elements

215

Serrjcebility limit sttes

7-

1.

225

General

225
226
230

7.2. StrcssliDiitation
7.3. Crack control
7.3.1,
7-3.2.
7.3.3.
7.3.4.

7.4.
7-5.
Chapter 8.

General consideratiors
Minimum areas of reinforcerrent
Control of cracking without direcr calculation
Control ofcrack widths by direct calculation
Deflection control
Early thermal cracking (additional sub-section)

Detailing of reinforcement and prestuessing stel

243
243

246

248
248
249
251

Anchorage of links and shear reinforcement

Anchorage by weldcd bars
Laps and mechanical coupJers

8.8. Additional rules for large

8.9. Bundled bars

234

246
247
247

8.4.1. General
8.4.2. Ultimate bond stres,,
8.4.3. Basic anchorage length
8.4.4. Design anchoraee length

8.7.1. General
8.7.2. Laps
8.7.3, Lp length
8.7.4. Transverse reinforcement in the lap zone
8.7.5. Laps ofwelded mesh fabrics made of ribbed
8.7.6. Welding (additional sub-section)

230
232

245

8,1. General
8.2. Spacing of bars
8.3- Permissible mandrel diameters 1br bent bars
8.4. Anchorage of longitudinal reinforcement

8.5.
8.68.7.

208

251
252

252
252

253
wires

diameter bars

8.10. Prestressing tendns

8,10.1. Tendon layouts
8.10.2, Anchorage of pre-tensioned tendons
8.10.3. Anchorage znes o I post-tensioned members
8.10,4. Anchorages and couplers for prcstressing tendons
8-10.5- Deviators

l)l
25',7

251
258
258
258

2s9
262
211

272

CONTENTS

Chapter 9.

Detailing of members and particular rules

9.1. General

n5

9.2.

275
275

Bems

9.2.1. LongitudiDal reinlorcement

9-2.2. Shear reinfrcement
9.2.3. Tot'sion reinfbrcement
9.2.4. Surface teinl'orcemenr
9.2.5. Indirect supports

9.3.
9.4,
9.5.

Chapter

10.

10.8.
10.9.

Chapter

11.

2'79

219

9.3.1. Flexural rcinforcement

9.3.2- Shear reinforcement

281

Columns
9.5.1. General

282
282
282
282

9.5.2. Longitudinal reinforcement

9-5.3. Trnsverse reinforcement

283
283

Walls

284

Deep bcams

Foundtions

284
285

Regions with discontinuity in geometry or acLion

2ti ti

Flat slabs

10.3.2. Prestressing steel

219

281

10.4. Not used in EN 1992-2

10.5. Structural analysis

r0.'7

278

Solid slabs

Additional rules for precst concretc elemnts and shucturcs

10.1. General
10.2- Basis of design, fundmental requiremenls
10.3. Materials
10.3.1. Concrctc

10.6.

2'7 5

289
289
289

290
290
290

290
290

10.5.1. General
10.5.2. Losses ol- prcstress

290

Not used in EN 1992-2

Not used in EN 1992-2
Not uscd in EN 1992-2
Particular rules lbr design and detailing
10.9. L Restraining moments in slbs
10.9.2. Wall to floor connections
10.9.3. Floor systems
10.9-4. Connections and supports for precast elements

29l

10.9.5. Bearings
10,9.6. Pocket foundations

292
293

Lightweight aggregate concrete strctures

11.1. General

291

291
291

29]'
29'l
291
291
291

29s

1.3-2. Elastic deformation

295
296
296
296
296

11,3.3. Creep and shrinkagc

291

I1.3.4- Stress strain reltions for non-linear structulal analysis

298

1.3.5 Design compressive and tsnsile strengths

I 1.3.6. Stress sLrain relations for the design of sections

298

I1.2. Basis of design

1L3. Mterials
I1.3.1. Concrete
1

1.3.7. Confined concrete

11.4. Durabiliiy and cover lo rcinforcement
1

298

298
298

xl

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

1.5. Structural analysis

1.6. Ultimate limit sttes
11.7. Serviceability linit states

xtl

298

298

I1.8- Delailing of reinfraement gcneral

I1.9. Detailing of members and particular rules

302

Chapter 12,

Plain and lightly reinforced concrete structures

303

Chapter 13.

Design for thc exection stges

13.1. Gencral
13.2. Actions during execution
13.3. Verification criteria
13.3.1. Ultimate limit stte
13.3,2. Serviceability limit states

307
107

309

Annex A.

Modification of partial factors for mterils (informative)

311

Annex B.

Creep and shrinkagc strin (informatiye)

313

Annex C.

Reinforcement properties (normatiye)

316

Annex D.

Detailed clcultioo method for prstressing steel relxtion losses

(informati ve)

3t7

Annex E.

Indicatiye strertgth classes for durability (informative)

322

Annex F.

Tension reinforcemeot expressions for in-plne stress conditions

302
302

308
309
309

(informative)

324

Annex G.

Soil-structure interction

325

Annex H,

Not ased in EN 1992-2

Annex I.

Analysis of flat slabs (informative)

326

Annex J.

Detailing rules for particulr situations (informatiye)

327

Annex K.

Structural effects of time-deperdent behaviour (informative)

33r

Annex L.

Concrete shell elements (informative)

344

Annex M.

Shcar and transverse bending (informative)

346

Annex N.

Damage equivalent strcsses for fatigue verification (informatve)

356

Annex O.

Typical bridge disconfinuity regions (informative)

362

Annex P.

Safety format for nonJinear analysis (informative)

363

Annex Q.

Control of shear cracks within webs (informalive)

3@

References

369

Index

371

lntroduction
The provisions of EN 1992-2 are preceded by a forcword, most of whjch is common to all
Eurocodes. Tbis Foreword conlains clauses on:

.
.
.
.
.
.

the background to the Eurocode programme

the status and teld of application of the Eurocodes
national standards implementing Eurocodes
links between Eurocodes and harmonized iechnical specif,cations for products

additional information specific to EN 1992-2

Nalional Annex for EN 1992-2.

Guidance on the common text is provided in the introduotion to the Designers' Gui.le to
EN 1990 Eurocotle: Basis of Structural Design,l and only background information relevant
t users of EN 1992-2 is given here.
It is the responsibility of each ntionl standards body to implement each Eurocode part
as ntional standald, This will con.rprise, without ny alterations, the full text of thc
Eurocode and its annexcs as published by the Europan Committee for Standardization
(CEN, lrom its title in French). This will usually be preceded by a National Title Page
and Ntional Foreword, and may be followed by a Ntional Annex.
Each Eurocodc recognizes the right of nationl regulatory authorities to cletermine values
related to sfety matters. Values, classes or methods to be chsen or determined at national
level are ref'erred to as nationally dctermined prmeters (NDPs)- Clauses of EN 1992-2 in
whioh thesc occur are listed in the Foreword.
NDPs are also indicated by notes immediately after relevant clauses- These Notes givc
recommended values. It is expected tht most of the Mmbcr Sttes of CEN will specify
the recommended values, as their use was assumed jn the mny calibration studies made
during drafTing. Reconmended values ate used in this guide, as the Ntional Annex for
the UK was not available t the time of writing. Comments are made regarding the likely
values to be adopted where different.
Each National Annex will give or cross-refer to the NDPs to be used in the relevant
country. Otherwise the Natinl Annex may contain only the followiug:2

.
.

decisions on the use of informative annexes, and

references

to non-contradictorv complemntarv information to assist the user to appll'

the Eurocode,
The set fEurocodes will supersede the British bridge code, BS 5400, which is required (as

condition of BSI's membcrship of CEN) to be withdrawn by early 2010,

ing national standard'.
a

as

it is a 'conflict-

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Additional information specific to EN 1992-2

The information specitc to EN 1992-2 emphasizes that this standard is to be used with other
Eurocodes, The standartl includes many cross-references to EN 1992-l-1 and does not itself
reproduce material which appears in other parts fEN 1992. Where a clause or paragraph in
EN 1992-2 modifies one in EN 1992- I -1, the clause or paragraph number used is renumbered
by adding 100 to it. For example, ifparagraph (3) ofa clause in EN 1992-l-l is modified in
EN 1992-2. it becomes paragraph (103), This guide is intended to be self-contained for the
clesign of concrete bridges and therefore provides commentary n other parts of EN 1992
as necessary,

The Iorev,orcl lists the clauses of EN 1992-2 in rvhich National choice is pennitted.
Eisewhere, there are cross-references to clauscs with NDps in other codes. Otherwise. the
Normative rules in the codc must be tbllowed, if the design is to be 'in accordance with
the Eurocodes'.
In EN 1992-2, Sections I to 13 (actually I l3 becausc cJause 13 does not exist in EN 1992-l - l)
are Normative. Of its l7 annexes- onl), its Annex C is'Nrmative', as alternative approaches
may be used in other cases. (Arguably Annex C. wl.fch detnes the properties of reinforcement suitable lbr use with Eurocodes. should not be in Eurocorle 2 as it relates to materil
which is contained in product standards.) A Nationl Annex may make Informative
provisions Normative in the country concerned, and is itsell Normative in tht cuntry
but not elscwhere. The 'non-conlradictory complimentarf infomation' referred to above
could include, l'or example, reference to a document based on provisions of BS 5400 on
mattcrs not treated in the Eurocodes. Each country can do this, so some spects of the
design of a bridge will continue to depend on whefe it is to be built-

CHAPTER

General
This chpter is concerned with the general aspects of EN 1992-2, Eurocode 2: Design ol
(:oncrete Structure,\. Part 2: Concrete Bridges. Thc material described in this chapter is
covered in section 1 of EN 1992-2 in the followine clauses:

.
.
.
.
.
.

Scope

Normative references
Assumptions

Distinction between principles and application rules

Definitions
Symbols

l.l.

l.l.l.

Clause 1.1
Clause I .2
Clause 1.3
Clause 1.4
Clause 1.5
Clsuse I .6

Scope
Scope of Eurocode 2

The scope of EN 1992 is outlined in 2-2/clause 1.1.1 by reference to 2- l- li clause l, l.l. lt is to

bc uscd with EN 19q0, Eurocode: Rass o-f Strtu:tural Desiga, which is the head document of
the Eurocode suite and has an Annex A2,'Application for bridges'. 2-IJ lchuse 1.1'I(2)
emphasizes that the Eurocodes are concerned with structural behaviour and that other
requirements, e.g. therml and acoustic insultin, re not considered.
The basis for verification ofsalty and serviceability is the partial factor method. EN 1990

recommends values for load factors and givcs various possibilities for conbinations of
ctions. The values and choice of combinations are to be set by thc Nationl Annex for
the country in which the structure is to be constructed.
2-l-l lclause I.l.I (3)P slaLcs that thc following parts of the Eurocode are intcndcd to be
used in conjunction with Eurocode 2:

EN 1990:
EN l99l:

F\ lqql:
EN 1998:
hENs:
ENl3670:

2-l-l/clouse
r

.r. t (2)

2-l-l/clause

t.t.t

(3)P

Basis of structural design

Actions on structurrs

Geotcchnicr I tlesign
Design of structures fr erthquke resistance
Construction products relevant for concrete s[ructures

Execution(construction)ol'concretestructutes

will often be required ftir a lypical concrete bridge design. but discussion
on them is generally beyond the scope of this guide. They supplemenL the normative refrence standards given in 2-2,/clause 1.2. The Eurocodes are conccrned with design and not
execution, but minimum standards of workmanship and material specification are required
to ensure that the design assumptions are valid, For this reason, 2-l-liclause l.l,l(3)P
includes the European standards for concrete products and for the execution of concrete
structnres- 2-1-llclause 1.1.1(4)P lists the other prts ofEC2,
These documeuts

2-l-l/clouse

I.t.t(4)P

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

One standard curiously not referenced by EN 1992-2 is EN 15050: Precut Concrete Bridge
Elenlents. At lhe trme of rvriting, this document was available only in draft lbr comment, but
its scope and content made it felevnt t precast concrete bridge design. At the time of the
review of prEN 15050: 2004, its contents were a rnixture of the following:

.
.
.
.
.
.

definitions relevant to precast concrete bddges

inlbnnative design guidance on items not covered in EN 1992 (e.g, fbr sheal keys)
cross-reference to design requirements in EN 1992 (c.g. for longitudinal shear)
informtive guidance duplicating or contradicting normative guidnce in EN 1992-2 (e.g.
effective widths for shear lag)
cross-reference to EN 13369: Common rules for preutst conuete products
requirements for inspection and testing of the finished product.

Comment was nlade that EN 15050 should not contradict or duplicate design requirements
in EN 1992. If this is achicvecl in the final version. there will be lirtle Normative in it for the
designer to follow, but there my remain some guidancc on Lopics not covered by EN 1992.

l.1.2, Scope of Part 2 of Eurocode 2

EC2-2 covels structurl design ofconcreLc bridges. lls format is based on EN 1992-l-l and
generally follows the same clause numbering as discussed in the Introduction to this guide. It
identifies which prts of EN 1992-l-1 are relevant for bridge design and which parts need
2-l-l/clouse
t.r

.2(4)P

modification. It also adds provisions which are specitc to bridges.

clause 1.1.2(4)P states that plain round reinforcement is not covered.

lmportantly,2-lJl

1.2. Normative references

References arc given only to other Europen stndards, all of which are intended to be used
as a package.

Formlly, the Standards ofthe International Organization for Standardization

(ISO) apply only if given n EN ISO designation. National standards for design and for
products do not apply if they conflict with a relevant EN stndard. As Eurocodes may
not cross-refer to national standards, replacement of national standards for products by
EN or ISO standards is in progress, with time-scle similar to that for the Eurocodes.
During the period of changeover to Eurocodes and EN standards it is possible that an EN
referred to, or its national annex, my not be complete- Designers who then seek guidance
Iiom national standards should take ccount of differences between the design philosophies
and salty lctors in the two sets of documents.
Of the material and product standards referred to in 2-l-llclause 1.2, Eurocode 2 relies
most heavily on EN 206-1 (for the specification. perfomance. production and compliance
criteria for concrete)" EN 10080 (technical delivery conditions and speciflcation of weldable,
ribbed reinforcing steel for the reinfblcement of concrete) nd EN 10138 (for the speciflcation and general requirements for preslressing steels). Further reference to and guidance on
the use of thcse standards can be found in section 3. which discusses materials.

1.3. Assumptions
It is assumed in using EC2-2 that the provisions f EN

1990 rvill be followed. In addition,

ECl2-2 identifles the following assumptions, some of which reiterate those in EN 1990:

.
.
.
.

Structures are designed by appropriately qualified and experienced personnel and are
constructed by personncl with appropriate skill and experience.
Thc construction materils and products are used as spccified in Eurocodc 2 or in the
relevant mterial or product specitications.
Adequate supervision and quality control is provided in lctories, il) plants and on site,
The structure will be adequately mintained and used in accordancc with the design
brief.

CHAPTER

The requirements for construction and workmanship given in EN 13670 are complied
with.

EC2-2 should not be used for tbe dcsign of bridges tht will be executed to specifications
othcr than EN 13670 without careful comparison ofthe respective tolernce and workmanship requirements. Slender elements in particular arc sensitive to construction tolerances ln

their design.

1.4. Distinction between principles and apPlication rules

Reference has to be rnade to EN 1990 for thc distinction between 'Prinoiples' and 'Application Rules'. Essenlially, Principles comprise general sttemnts and requirements that musl
bc followed and Application Rules are rules that comply with these Principles. Thcre may'
however, be other ways to oonply with thc Principles and these methods may be substituted
ifit is showu that thcy are at least equivlent to the Application Rules with respect to safcty,
serviceability and dr.rrability. This, holvever, presents thc problem that such a design could
not then be deemed to con.rply wholJy with the Eurcodes.
Principlcs are required by EN 1990 to be marked with a 'P' adjcent to the paragraph
number. In addition" Principles can also generally be identifled by the usc of'shall' within
a clause, while'should' and'may'are generally used lbr Application Rules, but this is not

completely cnsistent.

1.5. Definitions
Refercncc is made to the definitions given in clauses 1.5 of EN 1990 and further bridgespecific definitions are provided.
There are sme signilicant differences in the use of language compared to British codes'l-hese arose frm the use of English as the base language for the drafting process, and
the resulting need to inprove precision of meaning and to facilitate transltion into other
Europcan languages. In prticulr:

.
.

'action'means a load andlor an imposed delbrnation;

'ction effect' and 'eflect of action' have thc same meaning: any deformation or internal
force or moment Lhat results from n ction.

Actions are furLhcr subdivided int permnent actions, G (such as dead loads, shrinkage
and creep), variable ctions, Q (such as traflic loads, wind loads and temperature loads), and
ccidental actions. l. Prestressing, P, is lrcated as a permanent action in most situations.
The Eurocodes denote characteristic values of any parametcr with a suliix 'k'. Design

values are denoted with a suflix'd' and include appropriate partial factors- It should be
noted that this practice is dillerent from current UK practice in concrete design, whcre
material partial factors te usually included in fbrmulae lo ensure the).'are not forgtten.
It is therefore extremely important to use thc correct parmeters, duly noting the sullix. to
ensure that the maLcrial partial factrs are included when appropdate.

1.6. Symbols
The symbols in the Eurocodcs are all based on ISO standard 3898: 1987.' Each code has its
own list, applicable within tht code. Some symbols have more than one mcaning, the
particular mearing being staled in the clause. There ate a few important changes from
previous practice in the UK. For example, an:c -r axis is along a member and subscripts
re used extensively to distiuguish charactcdstic values from design values. The use of
upper-case subscripts for 1 factors for materials implies that the values given allow for
two tlpes of lrncertainty, i.e. in the properties of the material and in the rcsistnce model
used.

I. GENEML

CHAPER 2

Basis of design
This chpter discusses the basis of design as covered in section 2
following clauses:

.
.
.
.
.
.
2.

of F\ l99l-2 in Lhc

Roquirenents
Principles of limit state design

Clause 2.1

Basic variables

Clause 2.J

VcrificaLion by lhc partial factor melhod

Design assisted by testing
Supplementary requirernents lbr fbundations

C lau,se

l.

Chuse 2.2
2.4

Clause 2.5
Clause 2.6

Requirements

2-1-llclause 2.1,1nrakes referelrce to EN 1990 for the basic principles and requirements for 2-l-l/clouse 2.1.1
the design process for concrete bddges. This includes the limit states and combination of
actions to consider, together with the lequired per'foruance of the bridge at each limit
state- These basic pcrformancc rcquircmcnts arc decmed to be met if the bridge is designed
using actions in accordance with EN 1991, combintion of actions and load factors at the
various limit states in accordance with EN 199, and the resistances, durability and serviceability provisions of EN 1992.
2-1-l lclause 2,1.3 tefers to EN 1990 tbr rules on design working life, durability and quality 2-I-l/clause 2.L3

managcmcnt for bridges. Design working life predominantly ffects calculatiols on

ftigue nd durability requirements, such s concrete cover. The lalLcr is discussed in
set:tion 4 of this guide. Permanent bridges have an indicative dcsign life of 100 years in
EN 1990. For political reasons, iL is likel), rhat rhc UK will adopt a design life of 120
years in the Ntional Annex to EN 1990 for permanent bridges for consistency with previus
national design standards.

2.2. Principles of limit state design

limit sLatc design arc seL out in sccLion 3 ofEN 1990. They are not specific to
the design of concrete bridges and are discussed in reference L

The principles of

2.3. Basic variables

Actions to consider

2-l-l lclause 2.3.L1(,1.) refers to EN 1991 for acLions to consider in design and also refers to
EN 1997 for actions arising from soil nd wter pressures. Actions not covcred by either of
these sources may be included in a Project Specification.

2-l-l/clouse
2.3.t.

r(t)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

2-1-1/clause 2.3.1.2 and 2-1-l/clause 2.3.1.3 cover therml effects nd differential settlements respectively, which are 'indirect' actions. These are essentially imposed deformations

2-l-l/clouse
2.3. r .2(t )

2-l-l/clouse
2.3. r .3(2)

2-l-l/clouse
2.3.t.2(2)

2-l-l/clouse
2.3.t.3(3)

rther than imposed forces. The effects f imposed deformations must ls lwys be
checked at the serviceability limit state so as to limit deflections and cracking 2-1-11
clause 2.3.1,2(1) inC, 2-I-llclause 2.3.1.J(2) refer. Indirect actions can usually be ignored
Ibr ultimate limit states (excluding fatigue), since yielding of overstressed areas will shed
lhe locked-in lbrces generted by imposcd deformalion. However, a certain amount of
ductility and plastic rotation capcity is required to shed these actions and this is noted
itt 2-I-Ilclause 2.3.1,2(2) an<l 2-1-llclause 2,3.LJ(3). A check of ductility and plfftic
rotation capacity can be mde as described in scction 5.6.3.2 of this guide. The same
cluses also notc that indirect actions should still be considered where they are'signiflcnt'.
The examples given re wherc clements are prone to signitcant second-order effects
(particularly slender piers) or when fatigue is being checked. For most bridges, these will
be the only situations where indirect actions need to be considered for ultimate limit
states, providing there is adequate ductility and rotation capacity to ignore thern in other
cses.

Imposed deformations covered by the above discussions include those fiom:

. Thermal effects - r'ariable action

. Dillcrcntial selrlement permnenr acrion
. Shrinkage pcrmanent action, covered by 2-l-liclause 2.3.2.2
. Creep permnent action, covered by 2-1-l/clause 2.3.2.2.
2-

I-

l/clause

2.3.t.4

Secondary ellects of prestress arc not dealt with in the same way as the above imposed
deformalions because tests have shom tht they remain locked in throughout significant
rotation up to failure. Consequently, 2-l-llclause 2.J.1.4 does not contin similar provisions
to those above and secondary ellccts of prstress are always considered at the ultimate limit
sIate.

Moteiol and prcduct prcpenies

2-1-1lclnuse2.3.2.2(1) and (2) relate to the treatment ofshrinkge nd creep at serviceabil2.3.2.2(l ) ond (2) ity and ultimate limit sttes respectively and make similar requirements to those for thermal
2-l-l/clouse
effects and sefllenents discussed above. 2-1-l lclaase 2.3.2.2(3) requires creep delormtin
2.3.2.2(3)
and its effeats to bc based on the quasi-permanent combintion of ctions, regardless of
the design combination being considered2-l-l/clouse

Geometic doto

Generally, the dimensions of the structure used for modelling and section anlysis may
be assumed to be cqual to those that are put on the drarvings. The exceptions to this rule
arc:

(1) Mcmber imperfections due to construction tolerances thcsc need to be accounted

fbr where departure from the drawing dimensions leads to additional effects, such as
additional bending moments in slender columns under axial load (imperfections are
discussed in section 5.2 of this guide).
(2) Eccentricities ofaxial load a n.fnin.rum moment liom eccentricity ofaxil load has to be
considered in the design f beam-columns according to 2-l - I /qlause 6.1(4), but this is not
additive to the moments from imperfections,
(3) Cast in place piles without permancnl casing the size ofsuch piles cannot be accuralely
2- I- I /dause

2.3.4.2(2)

controlled so 2-I-llclause 2.3,4,2(2) gives the following diameters,4 to be used in

calculations based on thc intended diameter, d-., in the absence of specific measures
t0 control diameter:

d..

<

400 mm

400 < lnonr

d"o- >

r1noo'

20 mm

! l000mm d:0.95d".

1000 mm

rt

: d""

50

mm

2.

BASIS OF DESIGN

2-1-l lclause 2.4,1( 1./ refers to section 6 of EN 1990 for thc rules or the paltial lctor method.
They re not specific to the design of concrete bridges and are discussed in refcrence 1.

2-l-l/clouse

CHAPTER

2.4. Yerification by the partial factor method

2.4,l. General
2.4. t

(t)

2,4.2. Design values

Portial foaors for octions

Partial factors for actions ar given in EN 1990 and its Annex A2 for bridges, together with
rules for load combinations. EC2-l-l defines further speciTic load factors t be used in
concrefe bddge design lor shrinkage, prestress and fatigue loadings in its clauses 2.4.2.1 Lo
2.4.2.3. The values given may be modited in the National Annex. The recommended
values are sunmarized in Table 2.4-l and include lecormendcd values for prestressing
forces at SLS from 2-1-l1clausc 5.10-9. Thcy appl1, unless specific values are given elscwhere
in EC2-2 or the Ntional Annexes.
Table 2.4-1, Recommended values of load factors

mav be modifled in Ntional Annex

sls

sLs
fvourable

ULS

ULS

Action

unfavourble
(adverse)

favourable

unfavourable

(relievint)

(adverse) (relieving)

Shrinkage

fsr.r

t.0

1.0

Fatigue
1.0 if unfvourable

0 if favourable

Prestresseffects
Prestress -

?p,*r,,:1.3

tlobl

(See

Not l)

local effects

(Se

Note 3)

(2)

Note

2)

(See

Note

2)

1.0

(See

Note

2)

(See

Note

2)

1.0

Fatigue loading

(l)

(See
(See Note 4)

lrp,1"1

: l0

ln general, 2-l-l/.louse 2.4.2.2(l) requires 1p.r, ro be used for prstressing ctins at the ultimate limit state. The
use of tp.u"ra" in 2-l-l/clause 2.4,2.2(2) relates specifically to stbiliry checks f externally prestressd mmbers. In
previous UK prccice, rhe equivalent of fp.,"r"" was lso used in checking other situations v{her prestrss hs an
dverse eflect (e. where draped Eendns have n dverce effct on shear resistance) so this rpresents a relxtion.
2-1 -1 | clause 5 I A .9 Eives fctors tht differ for pre-tensioninS and post-te nsioning and lso for fvu rle and unfa-

2-l-[/clouse
2.4.2.2(t)

2-l-l/clause
2.4.2.2(2)

vourable effects.
(3) This value of ?p
applies to the design of anchorage zones. For externally post-tensioned bridges, it is recom""r,"
mended here drat the chractristic breaking lod of the tendon b used as rhe Lrltima desiSn load, as discrssed in
secdon

8.l0.l ofthis

guide.

(4) This value pplies to the prestressing force used in ultim[e bending resistnce calculation. For internl postension_
ing the prestrin used in Ehe bending clcultin shuld conspond to rhis design prestressing force, s discussed in
se.tion 6. I ofthis guide.

Moteriol foctors
2-I-l lclause 2.4,2,4 defincs specific values ofmaterial factor lor concrete. reinforcemenL and
prestressing steel to be used in concrete bridge design, but they may bc modifled in the
National Annex. These are summarized in Table 2,4-2. They do not cover re design. The
material faclor values assume that workmanship will bc in accordance with specified
limits in EN 13670-1 and reinforcement, concrete nd prestlessing steel conform t the
relevant Euronorms. If measures are taken to increase the lcvel of certainty of mateial

2-l-I/clause
2.4.2.4

strengths and/or setting out dimensions, then reduced material factors may be used in
accordance with Annex A.

2.4.3. Combinations of actions

Combinations of actions are generally covered in Annex A2 of EN 1990, as stted in Note I
of 2-1-llclause 2,4,3(1),but fatigue combinations are covcred in 2-2/clause 6.8.3. For cach

2-l-l/clouse

2.4.j(t)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Table 2.4-2. Recommended values of material factors

Design situation

1t for

ULS persistent and transient

ULS accidental

1.5(2)

Fatigue

t.5

r.

t5

t5
t.0
t. t5

sLs

t.0,'l

1.0(r)

t.0\'l

concrele

1.2(2)

1s

for reinforcing steel

_1s

t5
t.0
t.

for prestressing

s(eel

t.

2-l-l/clause
2.4.2.4(2)

2-l-l/clouse
2.4.2.s(2)

(l)

Unlss stated otherwise in specific.luses (2- I -Uclau.e 2.1.2.1(2)).

(2) fncrese by a recommended fctor of I-l for cast in place piles without prmanent

casin E

QJ -l/.lou.e 2.1.2.5(2)1.

permnent actjon, such as selfweight, the dverse or relieving prtil load factor s pplicable can generally be used throughout the entire structure when calculating each particular
action effect. There can however be some exceptions, as statcd in the Note Lo 2-I-I lclause
2-l-l/clause
2.4.3(2). EN 1990 clause 6.4.3.1(4) states that 'where the results of verifiction are very
2.4.3(2)
sersitive to varitions f the magniLude of a permanent action from place to place in the
structure, the unfavourable and the fvourble prts f this action shall be considered as
iudividual ctions- Note: this applies in particular to the veriflction of static equilibrium
and analogous limit states.' One such exception is intended to be the verification of uplilt
at bearings on continuous beams, whele each spn would be treated seprtely when pplying adverse and relieving values o[ load. The same applies to holding down bolts. This is the
2- l-l /clouse 2.4.4 btLsis for 2-1-llclause 2,4.4, which requires the reliability l'ormat for static equilibrium to be
used in such situations to achieve this separatiofl into adverse and relieving reas.

2.5. Design assisted by testing

The characteristic rcsistar.rces in ECZ have, in theory, been derived using Annex D of
EN 1990. EN 1990 llows two alternative methods ofcalculating design values ofresistanoe.
Either the characteristic resistance p is first determined and the design resistance R6
determined from this using appropriate partial lctors, or the design resistance is determined
directly. R represents the lower 5% lractile for infinite tests. Where it is necessry to
determine the characteristic resistance for products where this information is not availble,
one ol these methods has to be used- I)iscussion on the use of EN 1990 is outside the scooe of
this guide and is not considered further here.

2.6, Supplem etary requirements for foundations

Although

2- 1-l1clause 2.6 refers speciflcally to foundations in its title, the effects of soilstructure interaction may need to be considered in the design of the whole bridge, as is the
2-I-l/clause
case with most integral bridges. This is stted in 2-l-llclause 2.6(1,)P. Some further
2.6(t )P
discussion on soil-structure interaction is given in Annex G of this guide. 2-I-llclause
2- I-l /dause 2.6(2) 2.6(2) recommends that the effects ofdiflercntial st:tLlcment are checked where 'significant'.
It is recommended here that the eflects of differential settlement are alwavs considered for
bridges, as discussed under the comments to 2-1-liclause 2.3.1.3.

t0

CHAPTER

Materials
This chpter discusses materials as covcrcd in section 3 of EN 1992-2 in the following
clauses:

.
.
.
.

Concrete

Reinforcing steel
Prestressing steel
Prestressing devices

l.

3.

Clause
Clause
Clause
Clause

3.1

3.2
3.3
3.4

Concrete

.1. General
EC2 relies on EN 206-1 for the specification of concrete, including tests fr confirming
properties.2-Ziclause 3 does not cover lightweight concrete. Lightweight concrete is
3.1

covercd in 2-l-liclause 11.

3.1.2. Strength
Compressive strength

EC2 classifies the compressive strength of normal concrete in relation to the cyJinder strength

ft11) and its equivalent cube strength (/1p.""6") determined at 28 days. For example, the
strength class C40/50 denotes norml concrete with cylinder strength of 40N/mm'and
cube strength ol 50 N,/mn]'. All formulae in EC2. however, use the cylinder strength- 2-ll/Table 3.1. reproduced here as Tablc 3.1-1, provides material properties for normal
conqretes with typical cylinder strengths, The equivalent cube strengths arc such that
typically /11 0.8.r.""r". The characteristic compressive strength, /l, is defined as the
value below which 5% of all strength test results would be expected to fall for the specified
c()ncretc.

It should be noted that EC2-l-1 covers significanrly hjgher strength concrete than in
BS 5400, bnt 2-2lclause 3.1.2(102)P recommends limiting the range of strength classes
that can be used to between C30i37 and C70i85. The National Annex can alter these
limits. The UK has applied a more restrictjve ljmiL for use in clcultion of the shear
resistance. This is because testing carried out by Regan et a/.' identified that I/Rd.c (see
2-1-1,/clause 6.2.2) could be signitcantly overeslimated unlcss the value of/ls was limited
in calculation, particularly where limestone ggregte is to be used.
2-1-l lclause 3,1.2(6) gles an expression for estimating the nean compressive strength
of concrete with time, assuming a mean temperature of 20'C and curing in accordance
with EN 12390:

f",^(t)

P".(t)f",,,

2-l - 1(3.1)

2-2/clouse
3.

t.2(t

02)P

2-l-l/clouse
3. r .2(6)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

with

p""r,r:*o{,[, (i)'l]

2-t-t lG.2)

where:

/;(4
.[.,"
1
r

2-l-l/clouse
3.t.2(s)

is the mean comprcssive strength at an age of I days

is the n-ten compressive strength at 28 dal's given in

2-l-l/Tble

3.1

is lhe age ofconcrete in days

is a coeficient which dcpcnds on cement typc
: 0.2 fbr rapid hardening high-stength cements
: 0.25 for normal and rapid haldening cements
:0.38 for slow hardening cements-

The charactedstic concrete compressive strength at time / can then simil y be estimated

fron

2-1-I lclause 3,1.2(5 ):

Ik(,.t):.1"*(t)
.tu(/)

:tu

-8

for 3 < I < 28 days

(D3.1-1)

forr)28days

(D3.1-2)

Clauses 3.1.2(5) and 3.1.2(6) arc useful for estimating lhe time rcquired to achieve a particular streDgth (e.g. time to rech specified strength to permit ppliction of prestress or
striking of formwork). It is still permissible to determine more precise values from tests
and precasters may choose to do this to mjnimizc wailing timcs- The clauses can also be
used Lo predict 28-day strength from specimens tested erlier than 28 days, although it is
desirable to have tcsts carried out at 28 days to be sure of linal strength. 2-1-11clausc
3.1.2(6) makes it cle tht they must not be used ftrr justifying a non-conforming concrete
tested at 28 days by re-testing at a later date.

2-l-l/clouse
3.1.2(7)P

Tens/e strength

2-1-l lclause J.I.2(7)P defines concrete tensile strength as the highest stress reached under
concentric tensile loading. Values for the mean axial tensile strcngLh, /a,,, and lower characteristic strength, l;*,0.05j are given in 2-l-l/Table 3.1 (reproduced below as Table 3.1-l).
Tensile strengths are uscd jn several places rn EC2-2 where the effct of tension stilTening
is considered to be importnt. These include:

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

2-I-l/clause
3.

.2(9)

2-2lolause 5.10.8( 103) calculation ofprestress strain increases in external post-tensioned

members (sec section 5.10.8 of this guide);
2-2lclause 6.1(109) - prevention of brjttlc failurc in prcstrcssed members on cracking of
the concrete:
2-l-liclause 6.2.2(2) - shear tcnsion rsistance;
2-l-1i clause 6.2.5(l) interface sher resistnce t construction joints:
2-l-l/clausc 7.3-2 rules on minimum reinforcement;
2-l-liclause 7,3.4 rules on crack width calculation, which are influenced by tension
stiffening bctwcer.r cracks;
2-l-li clause 8.4 - rules on bond strength for reinforcen.rent anchorage;
2-l-1,/clause 8.7 rules on laps for reinforcement;
2-1-llclause 8.10.2 translnission zones and bond lengths fbl pretensioned members.

Tensilc strength is much more vrible than compressive strength and is influenced a lot by
the shape nd texture of aggregate and environmental conditions than is the compressive
strcngth. Great care should therefore be taken if the tensile strength is accounted for in
design outside the application rules given.
2-1-llclause 3.1.2(9) provrdes an cxprcssion, I'or esLimating lhe mcan tensile, /l*(l),
strengLh al time /:

"-(r)
t2

: (.r*(r))'1.

2-l-1(3.4)

CHAPTER 3, MATERIALS

fd
Edr
gEB
!:.

=tB

^r
. * E

tz-!:s

'.ri."ii,'"::
'..e.-==;itr

=
o

"5

*t "! i *5' "i'd,i

!,t I
cq
\ol-c.rr

o.9o.

'|

,rr

!:

!:

/\r

Ot

:
cie
r

I
q9
E =
l"q
, F 9):"!'i,a'F".9+
Uq!aeS--'.:.,,*faa
3' - I I e ;- .b '1. :
. - t:9II
i
'ls s S b. d| -"i X
r9lo-s

:t
'\r

*- e

oo

:sx
+]!o

ci
i
I .t

J d

"Y

d]

1
3
F

q.!

d;

"1

..j

:-

3!

.q

F,?oF
i
i
o.

- -: -'

t
.rr \o l ar .{

-t-\OO
di ui

, u :i'f.irl
' .b
I
R "re
^X -i f di R
--: -i d
LI
6

oq

.!q\.q

/\

!:

-:

--:

=
_1
oq

.2

q'lq\ul

qq.j!'t

--i di

\OOt

.\ho

(6

9-q.q

;
F
t3

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

where:

p""(l)

is as deflned in 2- 1- I,/Expression (3.2), repr<xluced above

(t)
is the mean tensile strcngth at an age of 1 days (it should be noted that the tensile
/",I1.,
strength coresponding to a given early age compressive strength is less than that
corresponding to the same 28-day compressive strength in 2-l-liTable 3.1)
is the rnean tensile strcngth at 28 days given in 2-1-l/Table 3.1
T
rs the age ol concrete in dys

:1.0 lbrr<28
:2/3 or / > 28

2- 1- l,/Expression (3.4) is only an approximation because of thc large number of factors

influencing the raLc of strength gain. If a more accurate prediction is required, this should
be obtained liom tests which account for the actual exposure conditions and member
dimensions, as identified in rhe NoLe to 2-l-liclause 3.1.2(9).

3.1.3, Elastic deformation

The mean value of the modulus of elasticity, .6.,o, can be obtained froln 2-l-l/Table
which is based on the following relationship:

a-:,,(rdi)'"

2-l-l/clouse

3.t.3(r)
2-

l- | /dause

3.1

(D3.l-r)

with/11 in MPa. Limestone and sandstone aggregates typically lead to greater flexibility and
the values derived om equation (D3.I -3) should be reduced by 10% and 300/o respectively.
For basalt aggregtes the values should be increased by 20%.
Values of E"- derived from equation (D3.1-3) are based on secant stillness for short-term
loading up to a stress of 0.41"-, as shown in Fig. 3.1-2. Consequently, fr lower stresses, the
responsc may be slightly stiffer and for higher stresses (which is unlikely under norml
Ioading conditions) the response could be quite a lot more flexible. Given the inherent
dimculty in predicting elastic moduli for concretc and the effects f creep on stiffness for
sustined loading, the values obtained from equtin (D3.1-3) will be satisfactory fbr
clastic analysis in most normal bridge design applications. Where the differential stiffness
between parts of the structure witli dilTerent concretes or matcdals is unusually criticl to
the design, either testing could be sarried out to determine a mote ccurate stiffnesses or a
sensifivity anlysis could be carried out. 2-1-llclause 3.1,-1f1l relates to these considertions.
An approximation for estimating the variation of the modulus of elasticity witi time
(which should only be required for loading at very early age) is given in 2-1-1 lclause 3.1.3( 3 ):

3. t .3(3)

a-ro:

(f)"a.

2- 1-

(3.5)

8""'(l) and /l- (l) are the valucs at an age of r days and 8",n and /1," are the values
determined at n ge of 28 days.
where

Other relevant properties f concrete deflned in 2-l-1/clause 3.1.3 are:

.
.
.

Poisson's ratio for uncracked concrete:0.2

Poisson's ralio for concfete cracked in tension
Coefficient olthermal expansion l0 x l0-6i"C.

:0

3.1.4. Creep and shrinkage

3.1.4.1. Creep
Creep of concrete causes deformations under sustained forces to continue to grow beyond
the initial elastic rcsponse or alternatively causes forces to reduce lrom the initial elastic
values when a section is held at constant sffain. Creep is particularly important in prestressed
concfete s the continued long-term shortening of the concrete in comprcssion leads to a
reduction in prestressing force. Creep is also important for bridges built-up in stges as

t4

CHAPTER 3. MATERIALS

the long-term creep deformtions cuse changes in the internal actions derived solely from
modelling the construction sequence. This is discussed in greater detail in Annex K of this
guide. The creep paramcLcrs in this section only apply to normal densily concrete. Section
I I gives supplementary requirements for lightweight concretes.
2-I-llclause 3.1.4(1)P identifies that creep ol the concrete depends on the ambient
humidity, the dimensions of the element and the composition of the concrete, Creep is
also influenced by the age of the concrete when the load is first applied and depends on
the duration and magnitude of the loading.
Creep deformation is normally related to the elastic deformation hy way of a creep factor
as given in 2- l- I i Expression (3.6) such that the total final creep deformation 5cc(oc, /0) at
tirle l: co for a constant cmprcssivc strcss oc is:

e-(co,

16)

,r(*,

tn)

2-l-l/douse
3. t .4(t )P

2-l-1(3.6)
r"&

where .8" is the tangent modulus which. ftom 2-1-l lclause 3.1.4(2),may be tken qual to
1.05-cn' with .,o according to 2-1-1/Table 3.1. The flnal creep coefficient dj(cc,l0) may be
derived from 2-l-l/Fig.3.l, plovided that th concrete is not subjected to a compressive
stress grcatcr than 0.45ik(10) at an age 1 at first lading, the ambicnt temperture is
between -40"C and +40"C and the mean relative humidity is greater thn 40%. The fbllowing definitions are used in EC2 for both creep and shrinkage clculations:

2-l-l/clause
3. | .4(2)

is the age of the conqrete al first loading in days

is the notional size (or effective thickness) - 21"/ , where l" is the concrete crosssectional area and r is the perimeter(s) of the section which is exposed to drying, i.eopen to lhc almosphcre. Where /16varies along a member, an averagc value could be
used as a simplification bsed on the sections which are most highly stressed
is fbr slow-haldening cements as identified in 2- 1 -11clause 3.1,2(6)
is l'or normaL and rapid hardening cements as identified in 2-1-llclause 3.1.2(6)
is for rapid hardening high-strength cements as identified in 2-1-liclause 3.1.2{6)

hI

Where the humidity lies between 407o and 100%, the qrecp ratio should be determined by
interpolation or extrapolation as relevant from 2-1-1lFigs 3.1a and 3.1b for 50% and 80%
humidity respectively, or by direct calcultion from 2-l-l/Annex B. For cases outside the
humidity and temperature limits given,2-1-1/Anncx B may also be used. In the UK, it
has been normal prctie to use a relative humidiry of 70% in design.
2-l-17'Annex B also gives inlbmration on how to determinc the development ofcreep strain
with time, which is nceded in the anaLysis of bridges built by staged construtin. The
development of creep rvith time is determined by the parameter B"(1. 10) which varios ftom
0.0 at first loading to L0 after infinite time such that d0 d(cr,16) and:

d(t. to) = Q0. BJ1,t = o(cc, to),4(r.

4(t.to): iisi - t
(r

2-r

ro)

ro)

-l/(8.1)

2-1-1(8.7)
to

coefficient depending on the relative humidity (-RIIin 7o), the notional member sizc
in mm) and the compressive strenglh as follows:
a
1 (fr
rn n|r orrilSlr"
1< < 1500 fbr
2-l- li (8.8a)
/.. < .15 MPa
.uH
-.0
73s is a

(/rn

pH

1.5[1

+ (0.012R11)r8]r0 +250L1:j05 <

i5

1500

1,4;

0.5

for /1," >

35 MPa

2-l-l(8.8b)
2- I - I,/Expression (8.7) can also be used in conjunction with the simple graphical method
of 2- 1- I i Fig. 3. I to determine the development of creep with time, rather thn calculating the

creep factor directly from 2-1-l/Annex B.

The use of both 2-1-1/Fig. 3.1 and 2-1-l/Annex B to calculate p(co.l0) is illustrated in
Worked example 3.1-l where the relevant fonr.rulae in Annex B are reproduced. The creep

t5

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-l-l/clouse
3.t.4(4)

TO EN I992-2

factors produced in this way are avcrage values. If the structure is particulrly sensitive to
creep then it would be prudent to allow for some variation in creep factor. The circumstances
when this night be necessary arc presented in 2-2lAnnex B.105 and discussed in Annex B of
this guide.
When the compressive stress ofconcrete at n age t0 exceeds 0.45f(16), non-)inear crecp
can give rise to greater creep deformalions. Non-linear creep can often occur in pretensioned
precast bems which are stressed t an early age and initially have only small dead load. A
revised creep factor for usc in 2- 1- l,/Expression (3.6) is glenn 2-1-l lclaase 3.1.4(4) lor th)s
situation as follows:

dr(oo,ro)

o(oa,

10)

exp(1.5(ft"

2-r-t l(3.1)

0.45))

where ko is the stress strength ratio o.1.t', (t, o" is the compressive stress and /1,,,(16) is
the mean concrete compressive strength at the time ol loading. There is an anomaly in
this equation as Lhe criterion fbr its consideration is bascd on/11(r,1), whereas the formula
contains the mean strengthjtm(r0). This means that for a concrete stress of 0-45/11(t6), the
formula actually reduces the creep factor, which is certainly not intended. A conservative
approach is to redelinc k" as o"/.f.e!. Arguably, as deformations are bascd on mean
propcrlies, it is the criterion for the start of non-linear creep which should be chnged to
0.45*(10), rather than changing the formula. but this approach is not advocated here.
For high-strength concrete with grade greater than or equal to C55/67, 2-2,tAnnex B gives
lternative rules for creep calculation which were considered by its drafters to be more
accurate than lhose in EC2-1-1. This suggcstion of'greater accuracy' has not, however,
been universally accepted. Concretes with nd without silica fume are treated separately
with signilicantly reduced creep strains possible in silica fun.re concretes. This is discussed

lurther in Annex B of this euide.

describes

:1l?lu

t6

ql'1e

amounr of creep that

CHAPTER 3. I4ATERIALS

i:.:::::li::

:.EFp.r.!9

:::i::::::.::

::::::::t:l
..

'.

::1:

6.0 5.0 4.O 3.0 2.0

1.0

100

700 900 1 100

1300 1500
ho(mml

Fig.3.l-1.

Extract from 2- l- l/Fig. 3.lb, showing determination of

/(cr',

t6)

t7

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

3.1.4.2. Shrinkoge

2-l-[/clause
3.t.4(6)

2-1-llclause 3.1.4(6) splits shrinkage into two cmponents. Autogcnous shrinkage oocurs
during hydration and hrdening ol the concrete without loss of moisture nd the ttl
strain depends only on concrete strength- The majority ol Lhis component therefore occurs
relatively qickly and is substantially complete in few months. Drying shrinkage is
associated wilh novement of wter through and out of the concrete section nd therefore
depends on relative humidity and eliective section thickness as wcll as concrete composition.
Drying shrinkage occun more slwly taking several years to be substantially complete. The
total shrinkagc is the sum of these two componentsShrinkage is particularly impofiant in presessed concrete as thc continued long-term
shortening of the concrete leads to a reduction in prestressing force, as discussed in
section 5.10.6 of this guide. In calculating shrinkage losses, it is inportant to consider at
what age of the cncrete thc prestressing force is to be applied. In composite sections, differential shrinkage between prts ol thc cross-section cast at dilTerent ges can also led to
locked in stresses in the cross-section nd secondary moments and forces from restraint to
Lhe free deflections. This is discussed in Annex K4.2 of this guide. The shrinkage parameters
in this section only apply to nrmal densiLy concrete. Section I I gives supplementry reqirements for lightweight concretes.
Drf ing shrinkage
The drying shrinkge is givcn as:
cd(r)

d"(/, 1,) .h .rcdo

2-r-ri(3.e)

is lhe nominal drying shrinkage taken from 2-1-tlTable 3.2 (reproduced below s Tble
3.1-2) or can be calculated in accordance with 2-l-1/Annex B.
k1, is a coeflicient dcpending on the notionl size /rn according to 2-1-1/Table 3.3 (reproduced belorv as Table 3.1-3).
cd,6

,6a,(r,

r.)

(r

:
ir

r.;

r")

+o.O+fr

is a factor to calculate the rate of shrinkge with time (wherc 1" is the age of the qoncrete at
the end of curing) which equals L0 for the final shrinkage vale. All times re in dys.
Autogenous shrinkage

The autogenous shlinkage strain is given as:

e""

(t)

P",(r)e""()

2- 1-

(3.1r )

where:

e""(co)

P",(4

:2.s(/11

- I

exp(

l0) x l0

2-r-tlQ.rz)

o,2to5)

2-

Table 3.1-2, Nominal unrestrained drying shrinkage

values e.o,o

(x

r-r(3.13)

106)

Relative humidity (%)

f"/f.p,."6.
20/25
40/50

60t75
80i95
90i t05

t8

(MPa)

20

40

60

0.2

0.58
0.46
0.36
0,28

0.49
0.38
0.30
0.24

0.10

0.t7

0.24

0.

t3

0.

t0

0.25

o.2l

0- 13

0
0
0
0

0.48
0.38
0.30
0.27

80

0.
0.

t9
t5

t00

0.08
o.o7

CHAPTER 3. MATERIALS

Table 3.l-3.

Values of k6 in 2- l- l/(3.9)

t00

t_0

200
100

0-85

>500

0.75
0.70

Alternative rules fbr high-strength concrete (class C55/67 and above) are given in 2-2i
Annex B.

3.1.5. Concrete stresFstrain relation for non-linear structural anlysis

When non-linear analysis is to be used according to 2-2,/clause 5.7, the relation between
short-term concrete stress and strain in 2-l-1/Fig. 3.2 may be used, which is reproduced
here as Fig. 3.1-2. The stress strain reltionship is given as follows:

o"

k\-n'

h - 1+(-2)a

2-l- l(3. r4)

wherc:

s"r is the strin at pek stress according to 2-l-l/Table 3.1

/.:

1-05t"",

><

16"1l1.f"

2-2/clause 5.7 an.rends the above curr'e when carrying out nonJinear analysis for bridges at
the ultimate limit state. so that it is compatiblc wirh thc reliability format proposed there.
This el1ctively modifies the detnition of/"* in 2- l- li Expression (3.14) from that given in
2-1-l/Tablc 3-1, as discussed in section 5.7 of this guide.
2-1-Ilclause 3.1.5(?) sttes that other idealized stress-strin relations may be applied, if
they 'adequately represent the behaviour of the concrete considered'. This could be
interpreted as being adequatc to produce a safe verification of the element being checked.
This leaves scope to use design values of stress-strain response in analysis in circumstances
where a reduced stiffness rvould be adverse. This method is discussed lurther in section 5.8.6
of this guide in the context of the design of slcndcr picrs and has the great advantage that a
verilication ol the strength of cross-sections is then mde directly in the analysis. 2-2,/clause
5.7 also permits dcsign values of material properties to be used in nonJinear analysis,
but adds cveat that caution is required when there re imposed deformations to
consider since more flexible properties will, in this case, underestimatc the lorces ttrcted.
In all cases. creep may modify the stress strain curve furthcr- This is also discussed in

2-l-l/clouse
3.

.5(2)

section 5.8.6.

Fig. 3,1-2, Stress strain relation for non-linear structural analysis

t9

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

3,1.6. Design compressive and tensile strengths

2-2/clouse

3.t.6(t0|)P

Design strengths are obtained by combining partial safcty factors lor materials with their
charcteristic values. The design compressive strength for concrete is deflned by 2-2lclause
J.1.6tl101 )P as follows:
2- l

'lc

1(3.15)

where:

.le
crcc

is the partial sfety factor for concrete

is a coemcient taking account of long-term effects on the compressive strength and
of unfavourable effesls resulting lrom the way the load is applied.

For persistent and transient design siluations, the recommended value of 1" for concrete is
given as l-5 see section 2.4.2 ofthis guide.
The value of r-r." in 2-l-li Expression (3.l5) is recommended to be 0.85 fbr bddges, but this
is prdominantly intended to be applied L calculalions on bending and axial load in 2-2i
cluse 6-1. o"" may also in prt be a aorrecting factor between the true stress-strain
behaviour, where a pcak stress of ,k is reached but then this stress reduces up to the
failure strain (similar in form to Fig. 3-1-2), and the jdealized parabola-rectangle diagram
(Fig. 3.1-3) which maintains the pek stress up to the failure strain. The factor a"c therefofe
contributes to preventing flexural resistances from being overestimated by the neglect ol the
drop ollin stress towards the failure strain. It was intended that a value of L0 should be used
for shear calculations (as the formulae were produced from test results on this basis) and also
in the membrane rules of2-2/clause 6.9. which contain a 0.85 factor explicitly in the formulae
for direct compressive strength. In other situations there js lcss clarily and this guide makes
comment n appropriate values of a." to use in calculations throghout its sections, The
requirements of Ntional Annexcs must be followed.

--

0.0007

0.020

0.00175 0.020

--7-

0.0030

0.035

(c) Alternalive concrete desiqn sess blocks for lck < 50 [/|Pa

Fig. 3.l-3. Stres!-sain reltions for rhe design of concrete sections

20

CHAPTER 3. MATERIALS

The design tensile strength for concrete is defined in a similar manner in 2'2ltlaase
3.1.6( 102 ) P:

,
rctd

2-2/clouse

3.r.6(t02)P

ctlctk,o.05

2-2i(3.16)

1',c

where:

r"t
jtrk

0 5

is a coefncient taking account of long-tern effects on the tensile strength and of

unfavourable effects resulting from thc way the load is applied
is the chrcteristic axial tensile strength below which 57o of all strength test results

would be expected to fall for the specified concrete

(see

2-1-llTable 3.1)

The value for the a", factor is recomn.rended Lo be taken as 1.0 for bridges. This value is
appropdate for shear and is necessary for use in bond calculatioDs Lo avoid longer bond
and lap lengths being genefated thn in previous UK practice to BS 5400. It is, however,
more appropriate to take it equal to 0.85 when using thc tensile sftength in the dcrivation
of thc rcsisLance of compression struts to splitting, s discussed in section 6.7 of this guide,
3. | .7.

Stress-strain relations for the design of sections

EC2 makes a distinctin bctwccn the requirements for stress strain relationships for use
in global analysis (for nonJinear analysis) and fbr use in the verification of cross-sections.
The lbrmer is discussed in section 3.1.5 above which also refetences other parts of this
guide- F'or cross-section design, 2-l-Ilclause 3.1.7(1), (2) and (J) provide three alternative

stress-strin diagrams: parabolic rectangular, bilinear and simplifled rectargular, as

illustrated in Fig. 3.1-3. They are for ultimalc limit state (ULS) design on1y, not for

2-l-I/douse
), (2)

3. r.7(t

ond (3)

serviceability limit state (SLS).

The stress stlain diagrams

expressions given in EC2:

in Fig.

3,1-3 have been constructed using the following

Parabolic-rectangular diagram

.)'l I
",: nlt (,
:c-2l
\

rbr o

for

! e, !

2-1-rl(3.1'7)

.-.2

2-1- 1(3.18)

e"2 1! e" 1- e"u2

where:

lr
tcz
rcu2

is the exponent defined in 2-l-1lTable 3.1

is thc sLrain at rcaching the maximum strength (defined
is the ultimate strain (defined in 2-l-liTable 3.1)

in 2-l-1lTable 3.1)

Bilinear digram
c] is the strain at reaching the maximum strength (defined in 2-1-l/Table 3.1), i e. t
/11 when design values are used
(defined in

cu,r is the ultimte strain

2-l-liTable

3.1)

Simplifi cd rectangular diagram

and 4 factors arc used to dellne the effective height of the compression zone and effective
strength respectively, where:

\ -ne

for/.p <

fl.

\n\

- 0.8 '"lOO-"'

?- l o-GLlo)

50 MPa

2-l-l(3.19)

ftrr 50 < f,.1 < e0MPa

2-

for.t S

2-1-r iQ.21)

50 MPa

for 50 </ls <

90 MPa

l- r /(3.20)

2-r-r lG.22)

Table 3.1-4 conpares these three idealizations in terms of avelage sttess over a rectangull
compression zone (from extreme compression fibre to neutral axis) and the distance from the

')l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Table 3.l-4. Comparison of stress block idealizations for o-^

Parbolic rectangular

Average

stress
(MPa)

Centroid
(as

to

ratio of depth
n.. depth)

c20

9.t75

0.4 t6

c25

| | .468

0.4 t6

cl0

t3.762

0_4

0.4 t6

c40

t6.056
t8.349

c45

20.643

0.4t6

c50

)1q7'7

0.4t 6

c55
c60

23.194

0.393

23.582

0.377

Not

n.a.: neutrl

t6

o.4t 6

0-85
Simplified rectanSulr

Average
stTess

(MPa)

8.500
t0.625

t2.750
t4.875
t7.000
I9. t25
2 t,250
22.098
22.872

Centroid
Average
(a,s ratio of depth s(Tess
to n.. depth)
(MPa)
0-389

9.067

0.389
0.389
0.389
0.389
0.389
0,389

I t.333

0.374
0.363

t3.600
ts.867
r8. r 33

20,,o0
22.667
23.930
25.033

Centroid
(as

to

ratio of depth
n.. dpth)

0.40
0.40
0.40
0-40

0.40
0.40
0.40
0.39
0.39

xis.

compression face o the section to the centre of compression. It is produced for rr". : q.35.
This table can be used for flexural design calculations as illustrated in section 6.1 ofthis
guide. It wilt bc seen in the worked examples presented there that Lhe rcctangular block
generally gives the greater ilexural resistance. which is obvious becuse the depth of the
stress block required to provide a givcn force is smaller than fol the other two alternatives.
The bending resislances produced will, however, not vary significantly regardless olmcthod
chosen.

The avcrage stresses,./uu, and centroid ratio, (depth to the centroid of the compressive
lbrce over depth ofcompression zone), have been produced from the following expressions:
Parabolic rectangular

| ;^\

_cr I
f
11
Ja\ -1 ../cdlr --_-l
r?+
tcr/
\
-2

e2^,2

p:

(D3.1-4)

2 (l+1)(,+2)
^2 'cu2ccz
-ccu2
t1+. I

(D3.1-5)

Bilinear

f"':f""(1-o.5lq)
cu3,/
\
^2
ccul

2-

r r

-:
'cu3

(D3.1-6)

-2
ccl
6

cu3'ci

(D3.1-7)

Simplified rectangular

J^,: \,a
:^12

(D3.r-8)
(D3.1-e)

3.1,8, Flexural tensile strength

2-l-l/clouse
3.

t.8(t)

2-l-1 lclause 3.L8(7) relates the mean flexural tensile strength of concrete to the men xil
tensile strength and the depth of the cross-section. Thc mean flexural tensile strength. /1,*.n,
should be taken s the maximum ofLr. taken from 2-l-l/Table 3.1 or (1.6-i/1000)/1,''
where
is the total member depth in millilletres. The increase in tensile strength for
shallow beams or slabs (of depth less than 600 mm) arises because of the high stress gradient

CHAPTER 3. MATERIALS

reducing stress over the dcpth of a potential crack, thus elevating the peak stress at the
surface needed to cuse fracture. The flexural tensile strength is not explicitly used in the
EC2 application rules. but it could be relevant in a non-linear nalysis to determin
tendon strain increases in external post-tensioning, as discussed in section 5.10-8 of this
guide. The relationship above also holds for chalctelistic tensile strcngth vlues.
3. 1.9. Confined concrete
In cases where a concrete elenent

is under triaxial stresses, 2-l-llclause 3.1.9 allows

cnhanccmcnt of thc charactcrislic comprcssivc strcngth and ultimate strain limiLs. Such
confinement may be provided by link reinforcement or prestressing but no guidnce on
detailing is given in the code. If benelit of confinenent by links is taken, it is tecommended
that reference be made to test results demonstrating that the link geonetry proposed cn
generate such constraint without premature failure of the concreLc occurring. It was not
intended that this rule be invoked for general calculalions on bending and axial forcc. It
was primarily intended for use with concentrated forces, and loosely forms the basis of
the increased resistance in partially loaded areas, discussed in scction 6.7, where the confinement is provided by the tensilc strcngth ol Lhe surrounding concrete.

3.2. Reinforcing steel

3.2.l. General
2-1-I lclause 3.2.1( 1)P allor.r,s thc usc of bars, dc-coiled rods. welded fabric or latLicc girders
(made with ribbed bars) as suitable reinforcement- For bridge applications, reinforcing bars
are nost common and the rest of this guide deals only with reinforcing bars. EC2 relies on
EN 10080 for the specification of reinforcement, including tests for conlinning propefiies,
classification details and methods of production. 2-1-llclause 3.2.1(2)P sttes that if site
opcrations arc sucb that the matcrial propertics can be altered, the properties need Lo be
re-checked for conformance. lf steels are supplied to stndards other than EN 10080. then
2-1-llclause 3,2,1(3)P requires such steels to be checked to ensure they ate in accordance
rvith 2-1-I,/clause 3.2.2 to 3.2.6 and 2-1-liAnnex C. As noted in 2-l-l/clause 1.1.2, plain
round bars are not covered by EN 1992.

2-l-l/clouse
3.2. t (t )P

2-l-l/clouse
3.2.t (2)P

2-l-l/dause
3.2.t (3)P

3.2.2. Properties
The most important reinforcement property to the designer is usually the characteristic yield
strength, fr1. Horvever, the specification of many other properties is necessary to fully
characterizc thc reinforcemert as noled in 2-l-llclause 3.2.2(1)P. These include tcnsile
strength, ductility, bendability, bnd chrcteristics, tolerances on section size and fatigue
strngth among others. 2-l-l/Annex C gives requirements for material properties and
groups bars into three ductility classes A, B and C. The rules given in EC2 assume
compliance with Annex C, which is clarif,ed n 2-I-l lclause 3.2,2(2)P. They are applicable
olly to ribbed and weldable reinforcement (and therefore cannot be used lbr plain round
bars)- 2-1-llclause 3.2.2(3)P states that the rules are also only valid for specited reinforcement yield strengths between 400 and 600 MPa, although this upper limit is a nationally
determined parameter. Other paragraphs of clause 3.2.2 make further relrence to 2-1-1,/
Annex C for prperty requirementsThe commonest reinfbrcement grade haslrl
500 MPa. The yield strength and ductility
class for wcldablc ribbcd rcinforcing sLccl havc to bc specil.ied in accordance with EN 10080For a bar with yild strength of 500 MPa and ductility class B, the bar is specif,ed by '85008',
where 8500 refers to the f ield strengrh of a 'bar' and the subsequent B is the ductility class.

2-l-l/clouse
3.2.2(r )P

2-l-l/clouse
3.2.2(2)P

2-l-l/clouse
3.2.2(3)P

3.2.3. Strength
Thc charactcrisLic yicld strcss.f,k, is obtaincd by dividing the chractedstic yield load by the
nominl cross-sectional area f the br. Alterntivelt/, for products without a pronounced

23

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

l=

lv-

"r
steel

0.2%

(a) Hot rolled

Fig.3.2-1.

(b) Cold worked steel

Stress-strain diagrams of typical reinforcement sreel

yield strcss. the 0.2ol0 proof stress,,6.', ma1' be used in pJace of the 1,ield stress. 2-1- l/Fig. 3.7,
reproduced here as Fig. 3.2-1, illustrates typical stress strin cruyes for reinforcement.
2-1-li'clause C.2(1)P specifies that /;..- must not exceed l,3lr, Since ductility generally
decreases as yield stress increases, in applications where ductility is crirical (such as seismic
design or plstic methods of verification) it is important to ensure the ctul yield strength
docs not excessively exceed the specified value. This may be the reason behind 2-l-1/clause
C.2(l)P, although ductility is controlled by 2-2,/clause 3.2.4. It is more likely to relat to
aspects of design where consideration ol over-strelgth is important, such as in seismic
design where the lbrmation of plastic hinge is oftcn assumed in elements visible above
ground s as to limit the forces transmitted to uninspectble elements below ground.
Excessive over-sength in Lhe above-ground elements could therefbre lead to greater
forces devcloping in the below-ground parts and therefore greatcr damagc-

3.2.4. Ductili
2-2/douse

3.2.4(t

t)P

2-2lclause 3.2.4(101)P specrfres that reinforccmenL shall have adequate ductility as defined
by the rtio of tcnsile strength to the yield stress, ([,lf\')k, Lnd the strain at maximum
fbrce, eu. The use of strain al maximun.r force differs from previous UK practice, rvhere
the strain at fracture u/as used as a measurc. Thc Eurocode's choice is the more rational
as it relates to the stable plastic strin which can be developed without loss of loadThree ductility clsses (A, B and C) are defined in 2-l-l/Annex C, with ductility increasing
from A to C. Thc ductility requirements are summarized in Table 3.2-l and are discussed

further in Annex C of this guide. The Note to 2-2/clause 3.2,4(l0l)P recommends that
A reinforcement is not used for bridges, although this is sub.jcct to variation in the
National Annex- This recon.rmendation has been made for bridges because considerable reClass

inforcement strain can be necessary in dccp concrele beams in flexure (as are lrequently used
in bridge design) before the concrete compressive filure strin is reached. No explicit check
on reinforcement strain is requircd in cross-section design if the idealization with horizontal
plteu in 2-l-l/clause 3,2.7 is used. It was also considered that greater ductility should be
provided in bridges to ensure that the usual assumptions mde regrding dequcy of
elastic global analysis could be made (see scction 5.4 of this guide). Sections with Class A
reinforcement can be prone to bdttle flexural failures, proving very low rottion capcity.
Typically only mesh reinforcemcnt is Class A, so the restriction will have no practical
consequence lor bridge design.
Table 3.2-

Clss

A
B
c

l.

Ductility classes for reinforcement

Characteristic strin at
maximum force, uk

>2.5%

>s%
>7.s%

Minimum value

of

k:

(f;l)k

> r.os
> | .08
> Lt5, < t.35

CHAPTER 3. MATERIAL5

kfs

fyo/E"

.uk

Fig. 3.2-2. ldealized and design stress {!rin digrams for reinforcement (tenrion and compression)

3.2.5. Welding
EN 1992 permits welding of reinforcement under certain circumstances

as defined in 2-1-1i
Table 3.4 (not reproduced here)- Only bars with approximately the same diameters may be
wcldcd. The requirements are more restrictive for bars where the load is not 'prcdominantly
sttic', i.e. there is fatigue Ioading. although there is less restriction on bars in compression.
Welding processes for reinforcement are defined in EN 10080. The fatigue performance of
welded rcinforcement is muoh lower than that ofnon-welded reinforcement and so particular
attention should be given to verifying pcrlormancc in accordance with Z-2,/clause 6.8,
although all reinforcement shor.rld be checked in this rvay.

3.2.6. Fatigue
Fatigue strength of reinforcement has to be verified in accordance with EN 10080.
Annex C givcs further information for such requirements.

2-l-li

3.2.7. Design assumptions

For cross-section design. 2-1-Ilclause 3.2.7(2) llows the use of two alternativc stress
strain relations as indicaled in Z-l-l/Fig. 3.8, reproduced here as Fig. 3.2-2. These are

2-l-l/clouse
3.2.7 (2)

either:

inclined top branch with a strin limit of E.d and a maximum stress of kl,khs at ,k

(which cannot be reached in design) or,

horizontl top branch with strcss equal to /ra without strain limit.

The value ofeu6 ma1' be found in the National Anncx and is recommended to be taken as
0.9eu. ;u and ,t can be obtained from 2-l-liAnnex C. Material partial safety lactors atc
discussed in section 2.4.2. FLtr persistent and transient design situations, the recommended

value of 1 for reinforcing steel is I .15. The design value of the modulus of elasticity, 8",
may be assun.red to be 200 GPa in accordance wrth 2-1-l lclause 3.2.7(4).

2- I- l/clause

3.2.7(4)

3.3. Prestressing steel

3.3.l. General
EN

1992 relies on EN 10138 lor the specification of prestressing tendons in concrete structures, including tests for confirming properties and methods of production. EC2 allows
use ofwires, bars and strands as prestressing tendons. Prestressing steel is usr.rally specified
by its strength, relxtion class and steel cross-sectional area.

25

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Table 3,3-

Relaxation classes for prestressing steel

ptooo, relaxation loss

Prestressing steel type

at

Ordinary relaxation (wire or strand)

Low relxation (wire or strand)
Hot rolled nd processed bars

8.0%

1000

hourr at 20"C

2s%
4%

3.3.2. Properties

EN 101038 for generl properties of prestressing steel.

Part I gives general requirements, while Parts 2, 3 and 4 deal with wirc, strand
and bar respectively. These give standard designations to identify prestressing steel. For
examplc, EN 10138-3 would refer to a l5.7mm diameter, 7 wire strand (S7), with
l860MPa ultimate tensile strsngLh using the designation Y 1860S7-15.7. Similar designations
are used to describe bars and wires. Additionally, 2-1-l lclause 3.3.2(4)P specifies three
classes for prestrcssjng lendons based on their relaxation behaviour. These classes, together
with the relaxation losses to be assumed according lo 2-1-I lchuse 3.3.2fd), re indicted in
Table 3.3-l. Despite the use of the words 'ordinary relaxation' to describe Class l, nost

2-l-l/.louse

2-1-llclause 3,3.2(1)P refers to

3.3.2(t )P

EN

2-[-l/clouse
3.3-2(4)P

2-l-l/clause
3.3.2(6)

10138

prestressing strand is Class 2.

2-I-l/clause

The amount of relxation f steel stress depends on time, temperture and level of stress.
Standard tcsls for relaxation determine the valu 1000 hours alier tensioning at a
temperature of 20'C. Values of tbe 1000-hour rclaxation can be taken from Table 3.3-1 or
alternatively from manufacturers' dt or test certificates. The tbulted values from
2-l-1/clause 3-3.2(6) are based on an initial stress ol 70olo of the actual measured tensile
strength of the prestressing steel.
Thc [ollorving three expressions are provided in 2-1-I lclause J,3.2(7) for determining

3.3.2(7)

rela)ttion losses:

Cluii l

rdnr

-, /

r \n-'I

Il

1)

|
opi -5.39p1un0eo' {=-\ lu0{J /
--'1"

^^
Clsr2 ::-!l
d

0.66p,ooocqr"[

\.
ClaisJ; -ll-|- _
ooi

| .9gp,uuu e8

r.,

,tJ15(l

.'..)
\ 1000 /

0/,

/
I

, \n.7s{t
__:
I

\ ll'00/

/.,

'. l0

2-l-1.(1.28r

rl0'

2-l-11].29)

.tO 5
-

2_l_l/(J.10,

whcrc;

oo.

rpi

is the absolute value of the relaxation losses of the prestress

is the absolute valuc of the initial prestress taken as the preslrcss value applied to
the concrete immediately fter tensioning and nchoring (post-tensioning) or
after prestressing (pre-tensioning) by subtracting the immediale losses see
sections 5.10.4 nd 5.10.5

Jp

is the characteristic value of rhe tensile strength ol lhe tendon

p166n is the value of relaxation loss (as a percentage) from Table 3.3-1
/
is the time aftcr Lensioning (in hours)

2-l-l/clouse

il.2@)

2-l-l lclause J.3.?(l) allows long-term (final) values of relaxtion loss t be estimated
using the above equations with a time of 500 000 hours. The authors are not aware of the
origin of these equations. The equations produce curious results as a function f time:

.
26

they do not give loss equal to

p1000

whcn evaluatcd at

t:

1000 hours

CHAPTER 3. MATERIALS

they re arbitrarily uscd to obtain long-term values at 500000 bours even though the
equations predict further losses after this time.

Nevertheless, the results so obtined ppear to be conservative and can therefbre be safely

adopted for dcsign.

Relaxtion losses re sensitive to varialions in stress levels ovcr time and can therefore be
reduced by taking account of other time-dependent losses occurring within the structure at
the same time (such as creep). A n.rethod lbr determining reduced relaxation losscs under
such circumstnces is given in 2-l-liAnnex I) and discussed jn Annex D of this guide. Ir
has been previous UK practice to base design on the relaxation loss at 1000 hours without
considering the interaction with creep and shrinkage nd the exanple in Annex D suggests
that this is generlly reasonable approximalionOthcr losses to consider lbr prestressed structures re discussed I'ully in section 5.10.

Lndy

r'

itr'rtll -:,1

-oo)*

to-'

o.o+:,

te.

3.3.3. Strength
The high-stlength steels used for prestressing do not exhibit a wcll-delined yield point and are
lherefore characterized by a proof stress rther thn yield stress. The 'xolo proof stress' is
the stress for which thcre is a permanent strain deformation of rol0 when the load is removed.
2-1-lldause 3.3.3(l)P uses the 0.lyD proof stress,,o rr, dcfined as the charcteristic value
of thc 0.1 % proof load divided by the nominal cross-sectional are. Similarly, the specified
value of tensile strength,4k, is obtaincd by dividing the characteristic maximum load in axial
tension by the nominal cross-sectionl area. For strand to EN 10138-1,/p0 L is typically 86%
oflo1. The reJationship is nore varied fbl wires and bars. 2-l-liFig. 3.9, reproduced as Fig.
3.3-1, illustrates a typicl stress.-strain curve for prestrcssing sLeel where e is again defined
as the strain at maximum force.

2-l-l/clouse
3.3.3(r)P

3.3.4, Ductility characteristics

Prestressing tendons with k in accordance with EN 10138 arnd.fofJ'n .,* ) , where ft is a
constant which my be found in the Nalional Annex, are deemcd to have dequte ductility.
The recommended value for is 1.1.

27

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Fig. 3,3-1. Stress-strain diagram for typical prestressing steel

3.3,5. Fatigue
FaLigue suess ranges for prestressing steel must comply with EN 10138full details of fatigue design requirements of prcstressing steel to EC2.

2-l-l/clause
3.3.6(2)

2-l-l/clouse
3.3.6(3)

2-l-l/clouse
3.3.6(6)

2-l-l/clouse
3.3.6(7)

See section 6-8

for

3.3.6. Design assumptions

2-l-llclaase j.3.6(2) and 2-1-l lclause 3,3,6(3) allow the dcsign value of the modulus of
elasticity, tp, to be assumed to be 205GPa for rvires and bars and l95GPa for strands.
Thcre can typically be +5% variation in these values and therefore it is usual to check site
extensins during strcssing on the basis of thc LcsL value on certificates ccompanying th
plestessing steel supplied.
Thc design proof stress 1br prestressing steel J0,1, is defined fu 2-1-l lclaase 3.3.6(6) as
,/po.rrh, where t is the partial salely laclor. For persistent and transient design situations,
the recommended value of 1; for prestressing steel is given as 1.15 see section 2-4.2 of
this guide.

For cross-sectin desrgn, 2-I-l lclaase j.3.6(7) allows the use of two alternative stress
strain relations as indicated in 2-1-1iFig. 3.10, reproduced as Fig. 3.3-2. These arc either:

.
.

inclined top branch with a strain limit of 6,,,1 and a n.raxinun.r stress of/c /. J;kl'ls at
(which cnnot be reached). Alternatively, the design may be based on the actual stressstrain relationship if this is known; or,
horizontal top branch with stress equal tolra rr/,r! without strain limit-

The Note to 2-l-l/clause 3.3.6(7) allows the value ofeu6 to be given in the National Annex
and is recommended to be taken as 0.9suk. Further recommendations olthis NoLe allow eu3

--------=t-t'.'''

fplEp

aud

Fig. 3.3-2. ldealized and design stress-strain diagram for prestressing steel

28

CHAPTER

and/pn.rr//pr. to be tken as 0,02 and 0.9 respectively, whete mote accurate vlues are not
readily available.

3,4. Prestressing devices

3.4.

. Anchorages and couplers

EC2 defines rules for the use of anchorages and couplers in post-tensioned conslruction.
These are specitcalll, related to ensudng that anchorage and couplcr assemblies have
suficient strength, elongation and latigue characteristics to lneet the requirements of the
design. Detailing of anchorage zones and couplers, as it affects the designer, is discussed

in greater detail in section 8.10.

3.4.2. External non-bonded tendons

Detailing of anchorage zones is discussed in gleater detail in section 8.10.

3.

MATERIALS

CHAPTER 4

Durability and cover to

reinforcement
This chapter discusses durability and cover to reinforcement as covered in section 4 ol'
EN 1992-2 in the following clauses:

.
.
.
.
4.

General

Environmentalconditions
Rcquircmcnts for durability
Methods of verifiction

l.

Clause
Clause
Clause
Clause

4.1

4.2
4.3
4-4

General

Bridges must be sufficiently durable so tht they remain serviceable thrughout their design
life. EN 1990 section 2.4 gives the following general requirement:
'The structure shall be designed such that deterioration o\)er it,\ tlestgn working lif does
not impair the performance of the ,structure below that intended, having due regard to
itli environme t atld the antlcipaled level of maintenqnce.'

Durability is influenced by design and detaiJing, specilication of materials used in construction and the qulity f construction.
In recent years, durability problems have arisen in a number of concrete bridges in many
countries and these problems have led to extensive research into the durability of concrete
structures. The subject of durability is therefore treated extensively in Eurocode 2 in an
effort to promote oonsideration of a lowest wholelife cost design philosophy, rather thn
minimizing the initial cost,
2-I-llclause 4.1(l)P rctterates EN 1990 section 2.4. It requires tht concrte structure
shall be <lesigned, construcled and operatcd in such a way that, under the expected environmental cnditions, the structure maintins its safety, serviceability, strength, stability and
acceptable appearance throughout its intended working life, without requiring exccssive
unforcsccn main lena nce or repair2-1-I lclause 1.1(2 )P requires the required protection of the structure to be established by
consir.lering its intended usc, service life, maintenance programme and actions. For bridges,
'intended use' dicttes the 'actions' that will be applied and hence, for example, the likely
crack widths to be expected. Service life is relevant because deterioration. due to reinforsement corrosion lor example, is a function of tirne. Maintenance programme is lso important
because regular routine maintenance provides the opportunity to intervene ifdeterioratjon is
progressing at a rate greater than expected- 2-1-llclruse 4,1(3)P reilerates the need to

consider direct and indirect actions and also environmental conditions. Environmental

2- l- Ildause
4. t

(t)P

2-l-l/clouse
4.

(2)P

2-l-l/clouse
4.r (3)P

DE5IGNERS' GUIDE

2-l-l/clause
4.r (4)P

TO EN I992-2

conditions are vcry important because the onset ofreinforcement corrosion, for example, can
be vastly accelerted by an aggressive envifonment. These are discussed in section 4.2 below.
Concrete cover provides corrosion proteqtion to steel reinforcement by both providing a
physical barrier to contaminants and through its alkalinity, which inhibifs the corrosion
reaclion. The density of the concrete, its quality and thickness are therefore relevant s
oted by 2-I-llclause 4.1(4)P. Density and qualjLy can be controlled through mix design
in accordance with EN 206-1, together \,ith speciction of minimum strength classes.
2-2ic)ause 4.4links the minimum concrele cover required to concfete strength, s discussed
in the comments to that clause. Cracking is also relevant as it leads to local breaches in
the concrete barrier. Cracks are controlled to acceptble sizes using design in accordance

\llrn _-t'ctause /-J.

In exceptinally aggressive environments, consideration could also be given to epoxycoated reinfolcement, use of slainless steel reinforcement, pplying surface cotings to

2-l-l/clouse
4.t (6)

inhibit the ingress ofchlorides or carbon dioxidc, or applying cathodic protection, Additionally, and importntly, concrete outlines should be detiled in such a way as to avoid ponding
of waLcr and promote free drainagc. In post-tensioned construction, problems cn arise due
to incomplete grouting of ducts or poor detailing of anchorage zones, such that a path for
water to reach the tendon exists. The Concrete Society Technical Report TR47r gives
advice on these issues, Further discussions on durable detailing of post-tensioning systems
is beyond the scope of this guide,
2-I-llclause 4,1(6) remrnds thc designer that there may be some pplictions u/here the
rules given in section 4 are insufficient and need to bc supplemented by other requirements.
Such additional considerations will rarelv be needed for bridees.

4.2. Environmental conditions

2-l-!/clouse
4.2(r )P

Exposure conditions are defined in 2-I-l lchuse ,1.2(1JP as the chemical and physical conditions to rvhich the structure is cxposed, in addition to the mechanical ctions. The main
mechanisms leading to the deterioration of concrcte bridges that may need to be considered
at the design stagc are listed below. They ll have the potential to lead to corrosion o[ the
reinlorcement or presfiessing sysLcm:

. chloride ingress into lhe concrte

. carbonation of the concrete
. frst attack
. alkali silic rections
. attack from sulphates
. acid attck
. lcaching
. brsion2-l-l/douse
4.2(2)

The first thfee ofthe mechanisns above are covered by 2- 1-l lclause 4.2( 2) while the others
re covercd by 2-l-li clause 4.2(3) and arc discussed below in the commnts on that clause.
Environmental conditions arc classified by 'exposure classes' in 2- 1- l/Table 4.1, based on the
same classcs as in EN 206-1. 2-l-llTable 4.1 has been renroduced here as Table 4.2-l lbr
convelllence nd has been extended (in bold type) t incorporate the extra classification

recommendations given in EC2-2 (which are subject to variation in the Ntinl Annex).
The relevant clause relrences from EN 1992-2 are also given in the table. It should be
noted that a detail may fall into more thn ne clss, but only classes X0, XC, XD and
XS lead to requirements for covcr thickness.
The mst common and serious cause f deterioration of reinlorced concrete structures is
the corrosion of reinforcement- The ingress of chlorides is pafticularly detrimentI. In
normal circumstnces, the high alkaline nature olconcrete prolects any steelwork embedded
within it frm corrosion. Chlorides cn destroy this passivating influence even if the

alkaiinity of the surrounding cencrete remains high, This degradation usully occu$

32

CHAPTER

4. DUMBILITY AND COVER TO

REINFORCEMENT

looally, leading to local pitting corrosion of the steel components. Chlorides are contained in
a variety of sources, including de-icing chemicals uscd on roads and sea wJter in marine
environments. The rte t which chlorides penetrte the concrete depends mainly on the
density and quality of the concrete.
The alkaline nature of the concrete may aLso be reduced due to carbonaLion- This is a
raction between carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the alkalis in the cement matdx,
The process starls at the concrete surface and over time gradually diffr.rses into the concretc.
resulting in a reduction ofalkalinity ofthe concrete. Nturl protection ofthe reinforcernent
may be lost when the carbontion fiont reaches the level of the reinforcement- As with the
ingress of chlorides, carbonation is less rapid with good quality concrete.
Once the passivity of steel has been eroded, corrosion will continue if there is sumcient
moisture and oxygen present at the reinforcement, When concrete is wet. oxygen penetration
is inhibiLed. ln very dry conclitions. where oxygen levels are sumcient, moislure levels are lowThe gretest risk of corrosion is therefore in members subjected to cyclic welting and drying
and this is reflected in the high exposure class designations for these conditions in 2- l- liTable
4.1 , nanely XC4 and XD3 for corrosion induced by carhonation and chlorides resPectivelySturted concrete subjected to cyclic freezing and thawing is prone to the expnsive
eI1cts of ice, leading to surface spalling. Frost damage of concrete is best avoided by
either protecting the concrete fuom saturation, using air-entrained concrete, or by uslng
higher-strength concretes.
ln addition to Lhe conditions detailed in Table 4.1-1, 2-l-l lclause 4.?(J) requires the
designer to give additional consideration to other forms of attack.
Alkali silica l'eaction is a reaction between the alkalis in the cement matrix nd certain
forms of silica in the aggregate. This reaction leads to lhe formation of a hygroscopic
silica gel that absorbs water, expands and causes cracking. The cracks resulting from the
reactions can be several millimetres in width, albeit not ertending excessively into the
section - typically only 50 to 70 mm- As well as the potential risk for increasing reinlorcement
corrosion, the tensile and compressive strengths of the concrete arc also reduced. Alkali
silica rcaction can be avoided by using sources of aggregates that hve previously becn
shown to perform satisfactorily in other structures with similar environmentaL conditions,
by using cement with low alkali content. or by the inhibitiol of water ingress.
Sulphate attack may occur where, in the presence of water, sulphate ions reacl with the
tricalcium aluminte component of the cement. This reaction again causes expnslon,
leading to cracking. Foundations are most susceptible Lo sulphte attack, due to the
source of sulphates in the surrounding earth, but can be avoided by adopLing sulphate
resistant cements, such as Portland cement, with a low tricalcjum aluminte contnt.
Altcrnativcly, carcfully blended cemenLs incorporating ground granulated blastfurnace
slag or fly ash have been shwn t improve concrete resistnce to sulphate attack.
Acid attacks the calcium compounds in concrete, converting them to soluble salts which

2-l-l/clouse
4.2(3)

can be washed away. Thus the effect ofacid on concrete is to weaken the surface and increase

permeability. While large quantities of acid can seriously damage concrete, the reltively
small amounts from acid rain, for example, will have littlc effect on bridge over a typical
design life.

A similar effect to acid attack is leaching by soft water. Calcim compounds are nildly
soluble in soft water and over time can therefore be leached out if the concrete is constantly
exposed to running soft water. This process is slow but can sometimes be observed at bridge
abutments where the deck joint above has failed.
2-1-l/clause 4.2(3) also requires abrasion of the cncrete to be considered. Abrasion of
concrcte in bridges may occur due to direct trallicking (uncomrnon in the UK) or from
the efli:cts of sand or gravel suspcndcd in running water- Resistnce to abrasion is best
obtained by specifying higher-strength concrete and abrasion resistant aggregtes or by
adding a sacrificial thickness to the cover (as required by 2-2i clauses 4.4.1,2( I 14) and (1 I 5)).
2-2lclause 4.2(104) requires the possibility ofwater penetration inlo voided structures to
be considered. It is often desirable to provide drainagc points to the voids at low points in
cse there is wter ingress, prticularly il the deck drinage system passes inside the void.

2-2/clouse

4.2(t04)

33

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Table 4.2-1, Exposure

designation

classes

from 2-l-lable 4.1, incorporaring EN 1992-2 recommendarions

Description of the
environment

Informative examples where exposure classes

may occur

l. No risk of corrosion or attack

X0

For concrete

Wthour

Concrere inside buildings with very low air humidity

Teinforcment or embedded metal:

allexposures exceptwhere there is

freeze/thaw, abrasion or chemical
attck
For concrete with reinforcement
or embedded metal: very dry

2. Corrosion induced by carbonation

xcl

Dry or permanently wet

xc2

Concrete inside buildings with low air humidity

Concrete permanently submerged in water
Concrete surfaces subiect to lont-trm wter
conIct
Many foundations

XC3

Moderate humidity

Concrete inside buildints with moderre or high air

humidy
External concrete shelred from rain including

the

inside of voided bridge structures remote

from water drainage or leakage from the

carriagwy
Surfces protected by waterproofing (approved

in accordance with national requirements)

including bridge decks. EN 1992-2.lause

4.2(105) refers

xc4

Cyclic wet and dD/

Concrete surfaces subject to water contacq nor

covered by exposure class XC2

3. Corrosion induced by chlorides

XDI

f4oderate humidity

Concrete surfaces exposed to airborne chlorides

XD2

Wet, rerely dry

Swimming pools

Concrete components xposed to industril waters

contining chlorides

XD3

Cyclic wet nd dry

Parts of bridges exposed co spray containing

chlorides including surfaces within 6 m

(horizontally or vertically) of a carriageway

whr de-icing salts are usd (e.9. perepts,

walls and piers) and rurfaces (such s the top
of piers at expansion ioints) likely to be
exposed to water draining/leaking from the
carriageway. EN 1992-2.lause 4.2(106) refers
Pvments

Car park slabs

4. Corrosion inducd by chlorides from sea water

xsl

Exposed to airborne salt but not in

direct contac( with sea wter

Struclures near to ot on the coast

x52

Permnntly submerted

Parts of mrine structures

xs3

Tidal, splash and spray zones

Parts of marine structures

5, Freez/thaw ettck
XFI

34

Moderate water saturation,

Verticl concrele surfces exposed to rain and

without de-icing genr

freezing

CHAPTER

Table 4.2-1.
Class

designation

XF2

XF4

REINFORCEIYENT

Continued

Descriprion of the
environment

Informative examples where exposure classes

may occur

l''loderate water sturation, with

Vertical concrete surfaces of road structures

exposed to freezing nd airborne de-icing a8ents
including surfaces grter than 6 m from a
carriageway where de-icing salts are used.
EN 1992-2 clause 4.2(106) refers

de-icing agent

XF3

4. DURABILITY AND COVER TO

High water saturation, without deicing gents

High warer saturation, wirh de-icing
agents

or

sea

watr

Horizontal concrete surfces exposed to rain and

freezing
Road and bridge

deck directly exposed to

de-icinE

aSents

Concrete surface! exposed to dirct spmy

containing de-icing agents and frezing

including

surfaces within 6 m (horizontdlly or vertically)

ofa cariagway where de.icing salts are used
(e.9. parapets, walls and piers) and surfaces
(such as the top of piers at expansion joihts)
likely to be exposed to water draining/leeking
from th carriagway. EN 1992-2 clause
4.2( | 06) refrs.
Splash zone of marine strlctures exposd to freezing

6. Chemical atta.k

XAI

Slightly aggressive chemical

environment (in accordance with
EN 206- l, Table 2)

Natul soils and ground water

XA2

Modrtely aggressive chemicl

environment (in accordance with
EN 206- I, Table 2)

Natural soils and ground water

XA3

Hi8hly ttressive chemical

environment (in accordance with

Natuml soils and ground water

EN 206-

l, Table

2)

4.3. Requirements for durability

To adequately design members of concrcte bridges for durability. the designer must first
establish how aggressive the environment to which the member is exposed is, and second
seLect suitablc matcrials and design the structure to be able to resist the enyironment for
its intended life. 2-1-llclaase 4..1(?)P rcquires durability to bc considered throughout all
slages of the design including structural conceptin, mteril selection, construction
details, construcljon, quality control, inspection, verilication and potential uses of sFecial
measures such s cthodic protection or use of stainless stecl.
2-2lclause 4.3(103) req:uires external prestlessing tendons to colnply with the requirements ofNtinl Authodties. This may include restrictions on the type ofsystem permitted.
The choice is typically between either:

.
.

2-l-[/clouse
4.3(2)P

2-Uclouse

4.3(t03)

strands within a duct filled with either grout or grease, or

sftnds individualty sheathcd and greased all within an outer grout-fiLled duct.

The ltter flords the benefit of casier de-stressing of tendons and thc possibility of removal
and replacement of individul strnds- Replacement of individual strands is, however,
difficult in rcality and it is usually only possible to replce a strand with one of a slightly
smaller cross-section. The former system is somctimes prefcrred (when the duct is filled
with grout) because of the passivating influence of the grout directly against the strand.

35

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

4.4. Methods of verification

2-l-l/clouse

4.4.t.t(t)P
2-l-l/clouse
4.4. t. t(2)P

4.4.1. Concrete cover

4.4.l.l. Cenerol
2-I-l lclause 4.4.1.1/1)P detnes covcr s the disLance om the concrete srufce to the surface
ol' the nearest reinforcement including links, stirrups and surfce reinforcement where
relevant. This dellnition will be fal.riliar to UK designers. 2-1-l lclause 4.4.1.1(2)P further
defines the nominal cover, cnom, as a minimum coverj cmin (see section 4.4.1.2), plus an
allowance in thc design for deviation, Ar,1"u (see section 4.4.1.3):

cno.
cnon' is
4.4.1

2-l-l/clouse
4.4.t.2(t)P
2-l-l/clause
4

4|

c,n;n

)-t-1I4 t\

Ac,1"u

the value of the nominal cover that should be stated on the drawings.

.2. Minimum cover

The main durabiJity provision in ECZ is the specification of concrcte cover as defence
against corrosion of the reinforcement. In addition to the durbility aspect, adequate
concrete cover is also essential fbr the transmission of bond forces and for providing
sumcient flre resistance (which is of lcss signilicance lor bridge design) 2-l-llclause
4.4.1.2(1)P. The minimum cover, cmio, satisfying the durability nd bond requirements is
defined in 2-l-l lclause 4.4.1.2(2)P by the following expression:

7/7\D

cmir

max tcmin,b; c-1,..1u. F c6u.,",

- Acau.,.,

4c,1,,,,,,,1,1:

l0mm|

)-1-t

ta )\

whcre:

cnin.b

to bond requirements and is defrned in 2- l-liTable 4.2

by way of 2-1-Ilclause 4.4.1,2( 3 ). The anchorage and lap requirements in 2-l-1,/
clause I assumc these minimum valucs arc observed
r-;.1u. is the minimum cover for durbility requirements from 2-1-1iTable 4.4N or 4.5N
for reinforcing or prestressing steel rspectively, These tables can bc modined in
the National Anni]x
4c,1,,.,^, is an additionl sfety element which 2-I-llclause 4.4.1,2(6) recommends to be

2-l-l/dause
4.4.t.2(3)

2-l-l/clause
4.4.t.2(6)

umm

r1u.,,
l- I /douse
4.4.t.2(7)

2- I- I /douse

4.4.t.2(8)
4.4.r.2(5)

is a reduction of minimum cover for the use of stinless steel. which,

if adopted,

should be applied to all design calculations, including bond. The rccommended

value rn 2-1-I lclause 4.4.1 ,2(7 ) is }mm
4c6...,,11 is a reduction of minimrlm cover for the use ofadditional protection. This could
covcr coalings to the concrete surface or reinforcement (such as epoxy aoting).
2-1-l lclause 4.4.1.2(87 recommends taking a value of0mm

2-

2-l-l/clouse

is the minimum cover due

Tlre minimum cover according to 2-I-l lclause 4.4.1.2(5) for durability requirements,
6u., depends on the relevant exposure class taken from 2- 1- l/Table 4.1 and the structural
class from 2-l-I,/Table 4.3N, which is subject to variation in a National Annex. 2-1-ll/Annex
c,,.,;n

E dciines indicative strength classes for cncrete wlich depend on the exposure class in Table
4.1-l of the elemcnt under consideration. These indicative strengths are base strengths fr
each exposure class from which the necessary minimum covers are defined, For greater
concrete strcngLhs, these covers can be reduced. For the indicative minimum concrete
strengths fbr different exposure classes given in 2-l-l/Annex E, EC2 recommends taking a
structural class of 54 for structures with a design life of 50 years. 2-l-liTable 4.3N (which
can be modified in the National Anncx and which is reproduced here as Table 4.4- l) contains
recomrended modincations t the structurl clss for ther situtions which include:

.
.
.
.

36

of 100 years (to cover bridges, although the

is likely to assign a design lil of 120 years to bridges)
provision of n increased strength clss of concrete
a design life

UK National Annex to EN

1990

provision of special quality control on site (although rec;uirements arc not defined)
'members with slb geometry' where the placing of the particulr reinfol'cment
considered is not constrined by the construction sequence or the detailing of other

4. DURABILITY AND COVER TO

CHAPTER

REINFORCEMENT

Table 4.4-1. Recommended structural classiflction

Structural class

4.l)

Exposure class (from 2- l- l/Table

xcl

Critrion

of
years
St.ength clss
(see notes I
and 2)
lYember with

xc2/xc3 xc4

XDI

Service life

lncrease

Increase

Increase

tncrease

100

class by 2

class by

.lss by 2

class by

> C30/37

>

slab

geometry

reduce

by

class

by

class

class

by

by
by

lnctseclass
by 2

reduce clss

reduce
class by I
Reduce
class by I

Reduce
class by I

Reduce
class by I

Reduce class

Reduc
clss

lncrease
class by

reduce
class

Increse

XD3/XS2/XS3

2 clss by 2
> c40/s0 > c40l50
Teduce reouce
class by I
class by I
Rduce Reduce
clss by I
class by I

c30i37 > c35/4s

reduce
class by I

Reduce

Reduce
class

XD2/XSl

>

c40/50 > c4siss

by

Reduce class

by

(position of
not affected by
construction
process)
Specil

quality

control

Reduce
class

by

Reduce
by I

Reduce
class

by

Reduce
class

by

by

ensured

I The stength class and water/cement rtio are considered to be related vlues. The reltionship i3 subject to a national
cde. A special composition (type of cement, c value, fine fillers) with the intent to produce low permeability may be
2 Th limic may be reduced by on strngth .lass if air encrainment

of more rhn 4%

is applied.

reinforcement, as might occur where fixed length links are used which constrain the
posiiion of a layer of reinforcement in one face of the section with respcct to that in
the other lace.
The recommended valucs for cnrin {lf are given in Tables 4.4N and 4.5N in EC2-1-l lbr
reinfbrcing and prestressing steel respectively, and are reproduced here as Tables 4.4-2
and 4.4-3. They can be amended in the National Annex.
Where in situ concrete is placcd against other concrete clements, such as at construction
joints, 2-2lclause 4,4.1.2( 109) llows the minimum concrete cover to reinforcement to be
reduced- Thc recommended reduction is to the value required for bond. provided that the
concrete clss is t lest C25i30, the exposure time of the temporary concrete surface to

2-Uclouse
4.4. r .2(t 09)

an outdoor environment is less than 28 days, and the intelface is roughcned. This recommendation can be modilied in thc National Annex.

Tble 4.4-2. Minimum cover requirements, c.".d,., for durability (reinforcing steel)
Environmntal requirements for c.'n.6u. (mm)
Exposure class (from

Structurel clss

sl

t0

s2

s4

t0
t0
t0

s5

t5

s6

20

s3

2-l-llTable 4.1)

xcl

xc2lxc3

t0
t0
t0

t0

t5

t5

20

70

25

t5

25

l0

35

40

45

20

30

35

40

45

50

40

45

50

XD I/XsI

xD2txsz

XD3/XS3

20

25

30

30

35

40

30

37

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Table 4.4-3. Minimum .over requirements, cmin_du' for durability (prestressing steel)
Environmental requirements for

amin,dur

(mm)
Exposure class (from 2-l-l/Table 4.1)

xcl

Structural class

sl

s4

t0
t0
t0
t0

s5

t5

s6

20

t5
15
20
25
30
15

xcuxc3

XD I/XS

25
30
35
40
45
50

20
25

30
35

40
45

xD2txsT

XD3/XS3
40

30
35

40

40
45

45

45
50

50

55

50

55

60

55

60

65

2-l-l/clouse
4.4. t .2(t

t)

2-l-l/clouse
4.4.r.2(t 3)
2-2/clouse

4.4.t.2(t t4)

2-I-l lclaase 4.4.1,2(11) requires further increases to the minimum covers for exposed
agglegate nishes, rvhile 2-I-l ldause 4,4.1.2(13) gives requirements where the concrete is

subject to abl'asion. Specific requirements are given rn 2-2lclause 4.4.L2(II4) and 2-21
chuse 4.4.1.2(115J to cover bare concrete decks of road bridges and concrete exposed to
abrasion by ice or solid transportalion in running watcr-

2-Uclouse

4.4.t.2(t I5)
2-l-l/clouse
4.4.

t.3(t )P

2-l-l/clause
4.4.t.3(3)

2-l-l/clause
4.4.t.3(4)

in design for deviotion

The actual cover to be specified on the drawings, c,,o1n, has to include a ftrrther allowance for
deviation (Ac6"u) according to 2-l-lldause 4.4.1.3(1)P such that c.o. : c*;n + Ar:a"u. The
value of Aca"" for buildings and hridgcs ma1, be dcfincd in the National Annex and is
recommended by ECz to be taken as llmm. 2-l-llclaase 4.4.1.3(3) allows the recommended value of r:6"u lo be reduced in situations where accurate measurements of cover
achieved can be tken and non-conforming elements rejected, such as is the cse for
4.4.1 .3. Allowonce

manul-aclure of precast units for erample. Such modif,cations can again be given in the
National Anncx- 2-1-llclause 1.4,1.3(4) gives further requirements where concrctc is cast
against uneven surfaces, such as directly onLo the ground, or where there are surfce fetures
which locally reduce cover (such as ribs). The fbrmer will typically cover bases cast on
blinding or bored piles cast djrcctly against soil.

54- From Tal

r
.
.

lor l0Gyear design 1ile. add 2

for concrete grade in exciss of C35/45, deducL

for men

Therefore fina1 structural class is 54, From Table 4,4N

structural
-' -''-'- class
''-: "i4:"
c11;030,
caioj,'
-

of EN t992-l-l tor XC3

25 mm

From bond rxrngiderations.

rn,,n 6

20 mm (Lhe ba

r size):

cln6-. max{rn,,n,;.;cqin.a,, -t Ac*,,.1 Acnu..., Ara,,r,n: l0mm}

- max{20;25 r 0 0 .0: 10} = 25 -lrr
The recommended value of Arde, = l0 mm so:
rnom

38

cm,n

" Ac6"'

25

- l0 -

35 mm

and

CHAPTER 5

Structural analysis
This chapter discusses strtrctural analysis as cotered in section
following clauscs:

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

oI EN

1992-2

in

rhe

General

Clause 5.1

Geometricimperfctions
Idealization of the strucrure

Ck

Linear elastic anall'sis

Lincar elastic analysis with limited redistribution
Plastic analysis
NonJinear analysis
Analysis of second-order elTects tvith axial load
Lateral instbility of slender beams
PresLressed members and structures
Analysis for some particular structural members

5.l.

se

5.2

Clause 5.3
Clause 5.4
Clause 5.5
Cltruse 5.6
C lause 5 .7
Clause 5.8
Clause 5.9
Clalrse 5 -10
Clause 5.1l

General

2-1-I lclause 5.1.1 ( /) P is a reminder that a global analysis ma1' not cyer all relevant structural effects or the true behaviour so that separate local analysis may also be necessary. A
tlpical exanple of this situation includes the grillage analysis of a beam and slab deck

where the lngitudinaL grillage n]embers have been placed along the a)ds of the main
beams only, thus not modelling the effecLs of local loads on tlle slab.
The Note to 2-1-liclause 5.1.1(l)P mkes an imFortant observation regarding the use of
shell finite element models: that the application rules given in EN 1992 generally relate to
Lhc rcsistance of entire cross-sections to intcrnal forces and lnonlents. bul these stress resultnts re not determined directly from shell flnite element models- In such cases, either the
stresses determined can be integratcd over the cross-section to detemine stress resultants
for use with the member application rules or individual elements must be designed directly
lbr their stress frelds. 2-1-l lclause 5.1,1f3l refers to Annex F for method of designing
clcncnLs subject to in-plane stress fields only. Annex LL provides a method for dealing
with elements also subjected to out of plane forces and moments- The use f bth these
annexes can be conservative bccause they do not make allowance for redistribution across
a cross-section as is implicit in many of the member rulcs in scction 6 of EN 1992-2.
2-I-llclaase 5.1.7(21 gives other instances where local analysis may be needed. These
relaLe to situations where the ssumptions ol beamlike behaviour are not valid and planc
sections do not rcmain plane. Examples include those listed in the clause plus any situation
where a discontinuity in geomctry occurs, such as at holes in a cross-section. These local
analyses can often be carried out using strut-and-tie ana)ysis in accordance with section
6.5 of EN 1992-2. Some situations are covered lully or partially by the application rules

2-l-l/clouse

s.t.t(t)P

2-l-l/clouse

5.t.t(3)

2-l-l/clouse

5.t.t(2)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

EN 1992- For example, load application in the vicinity of bearings is partially

covered by the shear enhancement rules in 2-l-l/clause 6.2, while the design of the bearing
zone itselfis parLially covcrcd by 2-l-17clause 6.7. The design of post-tensioned anchorage
zones is partially covered by 2-2/Annex J.
As a general principle, given in 2-7-1/clause 5.1,I ( 4) P, 'appropriate' idealizations ofboth
the geometry and the behaviour of the structure have to be made to suit the partjcular design
verification being perlbrmed, Clauses 5.2 and 5.3.2 are relevanL to geometry (covering
imperfections and efleclive span). Behaviour relates to the choice of model and section
properties. For example, skew flt slb could be safely modelled for ultimate limit sttes
elsewhere in

2-l-l/clouse

s.t.t

(4)P

using a torsionless grillage, but this woukl be inappropriatc for serviceability limit state
crack width checks; Lhc modcl would fail to predict tp crcking in the obtuse qornersSection properties, uith respect to the choice of cracked or un-cracked behaviour, are
discussed ir section 5.4 of this guide. Clausc 5.1.2 also covers sheat lag, which affects
section stiffness.

2-l-l/clouse

s.t.1(s)
2-l-l/clouse
s.t.r(6)P
2-2/clouse

s.t.r(r08)
2-l-l/clouse

5.t.r(7)

2-l-l/douse
5. t .2(t )P
2- I- I /douse

5.t.2(3) to (s)
2-2/clouse

5.t.3(t0t)P

2-1-llclause 5.1,1(5) alnd 2-1-llclause 5.1.1(6)P require each stage of construction to be

considered in design as this nray affect the final distribution of internal effects. Timedependent effects, such s fedistribution of moments due to creep in bridges built itt
stagcs, also need to be realistically modelled. 2-27Annex KK addresses the specific case
of creep redistribution, which provides some 'recognized design methods' as relerrcd to in
2-2lclause 5.1.1( 108 ).
2-l-I lclause 5.1 ,1( | gives a general stalcment of the types of shuctural analysis that may
be used, which include:

.
r
.
.

linear elastic analysis with and rvithout redislribution

plastic analysis
strut-and-tie modelling (a special cse of plastic analysis)
non-linear analysis.

Guidance on when and how t use these analysis methods is given in the scctions ofthis guide
corrcsponding to the relevant sections in EC2.
Sil-structure interaction is a special case of the application of 2- l- l/clause 5- 1 .1(4)P and
is covered by 2-1-llclsuse 5.1.2(1)P. It should be considered where jt significantly affects the
analysis (as would usually be the qase for in tegral bridge design). 2-1-l lclause 5.1.2 ( 3 ) to ( 5 )
also specifically mention the need to consider the interaction between piles in analysis u'here
thev are spaccd centre to centre at less Lhan three times the pile diarneter,
2-2lclause 5.1.3(101)P essentially requires all possible combinations of actions and load
positions to be considered, such that the nost critical design situation is identied. This
has been common practice in bridge dcsign and often necessitates the use of influcnce

surfaces, The Note to the clause allows a National Annex to specify simplified load
arrangcments lo minimize the number of arrangements to consider. Its inclusion was
driven by the buildings community, where such simplifications are rnadc in current UK
practice. The equivalent note in EC2-1-l therefore makcs recommendtions fbr buildings
but none are given for bridges jn .C2-2. The comments made on load factors under
clause 2.4.3 are also relevant to the determintion of load combinations.
2- I - l/clouse 5.1.4
2-I-l ldaase 5,1.4 requires that second-ordcr cllects should be considered in bridge tlesign
and these are much more formally addressed than previously was the case in UK prctice.
DcLailed discussion on analysis for second-order eflccts and when they can be neglected is
nresented in section 5.8.

5.2. Geometric imperfections

5.2,l. General (additional sub-section)
The term 'geometric irped'ections' is used to describe the departures frorn the exact
centrelinc, sctting out dimensions specified on drawings that occur duling construction.
This is inevitble as all construction work can onlv be executed to certain tolerances.
40

CHAPTER

5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

2-I-1 lclaase 5.2 ( 1) P requires these irrperl'ections to be considered in analysis. Thc term does
not apply to tolerances on cross-scction dimensions. which are accounted for separately in
the material factors, but does apply to load position. 2-l-l/cluse 6.1(4) gives minimum
requirements for the latter. Geonetric inperfctions can apply both to overall structure geo-

metry and loclly t members.

Geometric imperlctions can give rise to additional moments from the eccentricity ofaxial
loads generated. Thcy are therefore particularly important to consider when a bridge or its
elements are sensitive t second-order effects. 2-1-l lclause 5.2(2)P, however, requires
imperfections to be considered for ultimate limit sttes even when second-order effects can
be ignored in accordance with 2-l-liclause 5,8.2(6). Fol short bridge elements, the additional
moments caused by imperfections will oftcn be negligibJe and the effects of imperfections
could Lhen be ignored in such cases with experience. Imperfections need not be considercd
for serviceability limit statcs (2J-l lclause 5.2(3)).
2-2lclause 5.2(104) stes that the values of imperfections used within 2-2,/clause 5.2
assume that workmanshin is in accordance with deviation class I in EN 13670. If other
levels of rvorkmanship are to be used during construction, lhcn the imperfections used in
design should be modified accordingly.
In general, imperfections can be modelled as either bows or angular dcpartures in
members. EC2 generalll' uses angular dcpartures as a simplification. but sinusoidl bows
wjll often be slightly more critical and better reflect the elastic critical buckling mode
shpe. For this reason, sinusoidal imperfections have to be used in the design of rches to
2-2r'clause 5.2(106). The type of imperfection relevant for member design will depend on
the modc o[ buckling. An overall lean to a pier will suffice where buckling is in a swal'
mode, which EC2 describes as 'unbraced' conditions in seqtion 5.8. This is becuse the
nron-rents generated b,v tlie imperfection will add to those frm the additional deflections
under load. An overall lean would not, however. sulTice for buckling within a member
when its ends are held in position, which EC2 describcs as 'braced' conditions, In this
latter casc, a lean of the entire column alone would not induce any rnomenls
the
"\'ithin
column length. It would. however, induce forces in the positional restraints, s n imperfection of ihis type would be relevnt for the design of the restraints. A local eccentricity within
the member is thcrefore required lor buckling of braced members. This illustraLcs the need to
choose the type ofimperfection carefully depending on the effcct being investigated. Further
discussion on 'braced' and 'unbraced' cnditions is given in section 5.8 of this guide and
Fig. 5.2-l illuslratc' thc dilTerencc.
A basic lean imperfection, d1, is defined for bridgcs ft 2-2ltlause 5.2(105l as follows:
d1

2-2i (s.101)

dno6

2-l-l/clouse
5.2(t )P

2-

l- I /dause
s.2(2)P

2-I-l/clouse
s.2(3)
2-2/clouse
5.2( t 04)

2-2/douse

s.2(t 0s)

where:
0D

(lh

is the basic value of angular departurc

is the reduction factor fr height with ua
2ltA; aa
is the length or hcight being oonsidered in metres

(a)Unbraced

Fig. 5.2-1. Effect of geometric imperfecrions in isolated members

4l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

The lower linril for a6 given in EC2-l-l was removed in EC-'2-2 to avoid excessive imperfctions in tll bridge piers- The value of d6 is a nationally determined prmeter but the
recommended value is I /200^ which is the srne s previously used in Model Code 90.
2-l-l/clouse 5.2(7) 2-1-llclaase 5.2(7.) allows imperfections in isolaled membcrs to be taken into ccunt
either by modelling them directly in the structurl system r by replcing them with quivaIent forces. Thc latter is a useful alternative, as the same n.rodel can be used to apply different
imperfections, but the disadvantagc is rhat the axial forces in members must tst be known
belbre the equivalent forces can be calcr.rlated. This can become an iterative procedure. These
lternatives are illusLrated in Fig. 5.2-1 for the trvo simple cases ofa pin-ended strut and

cantilever. They are:

(a) Application of n eccentricity, sj

2-l-1,/clause 5.2(7) gives the follorving fomula for the imperfection eccenLricity:
e;

where

2-t-t t(s.2)

0lo12
16

is tbc effective length.

For the unbraced cantilever in Fig. 5.2-l(a). the angle ol lean from 2-2l(5.101) leads
directly to the top eccentricity of ei - 011 - 0lsl2, when /0 : 21 (noting that i > 2/ for
cntilever piers wiLh real foundations as discussed in section 5.8.3 of this guide).
For the braced pin-ended pier in Fig. 5.2- l(b). partially reproducing 2-1- 1i Fig, 5.1(a2), the
ecccnlricjty is shown to be applied predominantly as an end eccentricity. This is not in
keeping with the general philosophy ol applying imperfections as angular devitions. An
altemative, therefbre, is to apply the imperlectin for the pin-ended cse as a kink over
the half wavelcngth of buckling, based on two angular deviations, dt, as shown in
Fig. 5.2-2. This is then consistent with the equivalent forse system shown in Fig. 5.2-l(b).
It is also the basis ofthe additional guidance given in EC2-2 fbr arched bridges where a deviatron a : 0rl/2 has Lo be attributed to the lowest symmetric modes as discussed below. This
melhod of application is slightl) less conserrative.
2-l-l iExpression (5.2) can be misleading lbr effective lengths less than the height of the
member, s the eccentricity c1 should rcally apply over the hall wavelength of buckling, /n.
This interpretation is shown in Fig. 5.2-3 for a pier rigidly built in at each end. It leads to
the same peak imperfection as for the pin-ended case, despite th iact the effective length
lbr the built in case is half that of the pinned case- This illustrates the need to be guided
by the buckling mode shape when choosing inperfections.

(b) Application of a transverse force, f{, in the position that giyes maximum moment
The following formulae for the imperfection forces to apply are given in 2-l-l/clause 5.2(7):
H; =
H;

QtN

lbr unbraced members

(see

Fig. 5.2-1(a))

2- 1-

- 20tN for blaced members (see Fig. 5.2-1(b))

2-l - 1(5.3b)

wbere N is tl.re axial load.

et=0

Fig. 5,2-2. Alternative imperfection for pin-ended stTut as n angular devition

42

l/(s.3a)

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

lo

=2e

0ll2

112

Sinusoidal

impedection

Angular imprTection

Fig. 5.2-3. lmperfection for pier buik in ar borh ends

Where the imperfections are applied geometrically as a

these forces arc direotly equivalent to the imperfection.

kink or lean

as discussed above,

5.2.2. Arches (additional sub-section)

2-2lclause 5,2(106) covers imperfections for archcs for buckling in plane and out of plane.

2-2/clouse

s.2(t06)
lnflone buckling
For in-plane buckling cases where symmetric buckling modc is c tical, for example
fiom arch spreding, a sinusoidal in.rperf'ection of a - 012 hs to be applied as shown in
Fig. 5.2-4. This magnitude is derived by idealizing the actual buckling modc as a kink
made up from angular deviations, 91, despite the clause's recommendtion tht the
imperfction be distributed sinusoidally for arch cases as discussed above.
Wherc an arch does not spred signiflcantly, the lowcst mode of buckling is usually

anti-symmetric, as shown in F-ig. 5.2-5. In this case. the mode shape, and thus
imperfection, can be idealized as a saw toolh using the san.re basic anguJar dcviation in
conjunction with the reduced lengtlt Ll2 relevnt t the buckling mde. The imperfection
therelbre becomes a - AlLf 4. Once again, EC2 requires the irperfection to be distributed
sinusoidally.

Out-of-plone buckling

For out-of-planc buckling, the same shape of imperfection as in Fig- 5.2-4 is suitable but in
the hodzontal plne.

Kink imperfection

Sinusoidal
imperfeclion

Fig. 5.2-4, lmperfection for in-plane buckling with spreading foundarions

43

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Kink impedection

Sinusoidal
impertection

Fig. 5.2-5. lmperfection for in-plane buckling with 'rigid' foundations

5.3 ldealization of the structure

2-l-l/clouse
s.3. r(t )P

2-l-l/clouse
5.3. r (3), (4), (s)

ond (7)

5,3.1 Structural models for overall analysis

2-1-llclause 5,3,1(1)P lists typical elements comprising a structure and sttes that rules are
given in EC2 to covcr thc dcsign ol these various elements. While detailing rules are provided
by element type in section 9 of EN 1992-2, rules lbl resistances arc generally presented by
resislance type rather than by element typc in section 6. For example, 2-21clausc 6.1
covers the design of sections in general to cmbintions of bending and axial force. These
rules iply equally to beams, slabs and columns.
2-I-I lclause 5.3.1( 3 ), ( 4), ( 5 ) and (7) provide definitions of beams, deep beiLms, slabs and
columns. The definitions given are self-explantory and are otien useful in delining the detailing and analysis requirements lbr the particular element. For cxample, the distinction n.rade
between a beam and deep bcam is useful in determining the appropriate verification method
and detailing rules. A beam can be checked fol bending, shear and torsion using Z-27clause
6.1 to 6.3, while rleep beams are more appropriately treated using the strut-and-tie rules of
2-2iclause 6.5. No distinction is, however, made between beams with axial force and
columns in EC2 in cross-section resistanc design. A distinction, however, rematns necessary
whcn sclccting tbe most appropriate dctailing rules from section 9. Sometimes it may be
appropriate t tret prts f bem, such as a flange in a box girder, as a wall r column
for detailing purposes! as discussed in section 9.5 of this guide.

5.3.2. Geometric data

5.3.2.L Effeaive width of flonges (oll limit stotes)
In widc liangcs, in-plane shear flexibility leads to a non-uniform distribution of bending
stress across the flange width. This effect is known as shear lag. The sftess in the flange
adjacent to the web is conscqucnLly found to be greter than expected tiom section analysis
with gross cross-sections, while the stress in the flange remote from thir web is lower than
expecled. This shear lag also leads to an apparcnt loss ol stiffness of section in bending.
The determination of thc actual djstribution of stress is a complex problen which can, in
theory, be determined by finite element nalysis (with appropriate choice of elements) if
realistic behaviour oI reinforcen.rent and concrete can bc modelled. For un-cracked concrete.
the behaviour is relatively simple but becomes considerably more complex with cracking

of the concrete and yielding of the longitudinal

2-l-l/clouse
s.3.2. t (t )P

44

rcinforcernent, which both help to

redistribute the stress across the cross-section. The ability of the transverse reinforcement
to distribute the fbrces is also relevant.
2-IJ lclause 5.3.2.1(1,lP accounts for both thc loss ofstillness and localized increase in flange
stresses by the use ofan effective width offlange, which is less than the actual available flange
width. The effective flange width concept is artifioial but, when used with engineering bending
theory,leads to uniform stresscs across the whole reduced flange width that are equivalent to the

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

pek values adjacent to the wcbs in the 'true' situation. It lbllows from the above that if finite
elemenL modelling offlanges is performed using appropriate anlysis elements, shear lag will be
taken into ccount automatically (the accuracy depending on the matedal properties specilied
in analysis as discussed above) so an effective flange need not be used.
Thc rules for effective width ma1' be used for flanges in members other than just 'T' beams
as suggested by 2-l-l/clause 5.3.2.1(l)P; box girders provide an obvious addition. The
physical flange width is unlikely to be reduced for many typical bridges, such as precast
beam and slab decks where the beams are placed close together. The effect of shear lag is
greatest in loctions of high shear where lhe force in the flnges is changing rapidly Conscquently, eflctive widths at picr sections will be smallel than those for the span regions.
2-l-1,/clause 5.3.2-1(1)P notes that, in addition to the considerations discussed above,
effective width is a function of type of loading and span (which affect th distribution of
shear along the beam). These are characterized by the distance between points of zero

2-l - l/clouse
bending moment. 2-l-llclause 5.3.2.1(2) and (31, together with 2-1-tiFigs 5.2 and 5.3
flange
5.3.2.1(2) ond (3)
(not reproduced). allow cllcctive widths to be calculated as a function of the actual
width and the distance, 10, between points of zero bending moment in the min beam
adjacent to the location considerecl. This lcngth actually depends on the load case being
considered and the approximations given are intended to save the designer from having to
dctcrmine actual values of /0 for each load case. Thc totl effective wjdth acting with a
web, "p, is given as follorvs:

"n:I"n.i +,<
b.r

.0.21,.

'

0.lio

- , and

2-t-t16.7)
<0.21,

2-r- | l(5

.7

a)

whele is the Lotal flangc width available for the particular web and i is the width available
to one side of the web, measured iorn its lace.
2-l - 1,/Expression (5.7) and 2- I - 1/Expression (5.7a) differ liom similar ones in EN 1994-2,
as a minimum o1207o of the actual flange width may always be tken to act each side of the
web where the spn is short. The reference in 2-1-lrclause 5.3.2.1(3) to'T' or'L'beams is
only intended to describe wcbs with flanges to either one or both sides of a web lt is not
intended to limit use to main beams of these shapes.
The limitations on span length ratios for usc of 2- l-li Fig. 5.2, given in the Note to 2- 1-l /
clause 5.3.2.1(2), arc made so that the bending moment distribution within a span conforms
with the assumption that spns have hog moments at suppofis and sag moments in the span.
The simple rules do not cater for other cases, such s entire spans that are permanently
hogging. tl spans or moment distibutions do not comply with the above. then the distnce
between pints of zero bending momenl, /6, should be calculated for the actual momenl
distribution. This is jLeralivc because analysis will have to be done fust with cross-section
properlics based on the full flange width to determine the likely distribution of mment.
The same efiective width for shear lag applies to both SLS and ULS This is unlike
previous tlesign to BS 5400, where it was permissible to neglect shear lag at ULS on the
basis that the effects of concrete cracking and rcinlorcement yielding discussed above
llow stlesses to redistribute across a flange. EC2, however, bases cffective widths at ULS
on widLhs approximating more closely to the elastic valucs- thus voiding tbc complexity

of providing rules to calculate ellctive widths which allow for these redistribution effects.
This diflers from the approach jn EN 1993-1-5 for steel flangcs, where consideration of
plasticity is allo"r,ed at ULS and greater effective widths can be acl eved The prctical
significance of using the same eflctive width at ULS and SLS will not usually be great for
concrete bridges and often the full width will be available.
For global analysis,2-I-llclause 5.J.2.1(4) permits section properties to be based on the
mid-span value throughout LhaL cntire span. Quite oflen this will lead to the full flangc width
being used- It can, however, be advantageous to use lhc actual distribution ofeffective widths

2-l-l/douse
s.3.2.

(4)

ne

to supports and at mid-span in continuous beams to reduce the stiffness t supports and
hence also the support hogging moment- A more accurate prcdiction of stiffness, and hence
eflcctive width distribution throughout the span, may also be necessary where prediction of

45

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

deflections is impoftant to the construction process, such as in balanced cantilever construction. For section desi{rl, the actual effective width at the location being checked must lways
be used.

Where it is neccssary to determine a morc rea.listio distribution oflongitudinal stress across

the width ofthe flange, as may be required in a check of combined local and global eflects in a
flange, the formula in EN 1993-1-5 clause 3.2.2 could be used to estimate strcsscs. This is
explicitly permitted for slabs in steel,.concrctc con.rposite construction in EN 1994-2. A
typical location where this might be necessry wouLd bc at a transverse diaphragrn
between main bean.rs al a support where the deck slab is in tension under global bcnding
and also subjected to a local hogging moment from wbeel loads. The use of the formul
in EN 1993-1-5 can be beneficial here as often the greatest local ellccts in a slab ooour in
the n.riddle of the slab between webs rvhere thc global longitudinal stresses are lowest.
Thc effective flange widths in 2-l-liclause 5.3.2.1 do nor apply to the introduction ofaxial
loads, such as those from prestressing or anchorages in cable-styed bridges. Thc phenomcnon of shear lag still applies to locl concentraLed axial loads. but stresses spred out
cross the section at a lte un-connected to the bending moment profile. Where concentrated
axial Ioads are applied to a section, separatc assessment rnust be mde ofthe area over whjch
this l-orce acts at ech cross-section thfough the span see 2-1-1/clause 8.10.3.

.c,

0.2i
.2bi

5?00

0.1 -o.zx'
i| 0.110-tt.2x"'i"
i"

0.1 x ?8000 -3l70mm

l 0.t
0.210
- 3l70nm <<.0.210

greater
but rhis is^
bu.t
is grea
ter than the
th available width of 5700/2
(ken
taken as 2850 mm.

ei"ufly,

fro-

Z-

56
5;(

2850 mm so rhe effect

effe

/(5.7) the total widrh of flange acring w.lth an ourer w!

.n=16*.' ' b.. - 1600 + 2850 - 300 = 6750 mrn

-.,'-.This is almost thc
.hc whole
wnole available
avallble widrh.
widl.h.
Considerirq lhe suppofi

s;

From 2-l-lrFig. 5.2. /0 - 0.t5(/r .4) - 0.-l5 x (3000 , 4C[00) = l0500mn

Ffom 2-l-l/f5.7a), the cantilqver poftion has effective width given by:

^."

1x4000+01x10500
,

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

Fig. 5.3-

l.

Box girder for Worked example 5.3-l

5.3.2.2. Effeaive spdns ofbedms dnd slobs

2-2i clause 5.3.2.2 gives requirements for the eflcctive span, 1*11, of beams and slahs. Exmples
arc given in 2-l-li Fig. 5.4. The main cases of interest in bridge design are:

(i)

Beams monolithic with support\

Where a horizontal membcr is built in monolithically to nothel' vertioal member, the effective span is tken to point within the vertical member which is the minimum of half the
vertical member thickness, l, and half thc horizontal member depth, . from the edge of
thc vertical member according to Figs 5.3-2 (a) and (b), The limitation to /2 is intended
to keep the centre of reaction in a realistic position where Lhe supporting member is very
thick. Cases (a) and (b) could apply, for example. to integll bridges and to the trnsverse

cantilever design of box girder bridges respectively. In rhis sitution, 2-1'llclawe

5.3.2,2(3) and its Note state that the design momenL should be taken as that at the face
of the supporl bul not less than 65% of the actual maximum end moment.

(ii)

2-l-[/clouse
5.3.2.2(3)

Beams on bearings

2-1-llclause 5.3.2.2(2) permits rottional restraint from bearings to generally be neglected.

This is the usual assumption made for most rnechanical bearings but the designer needs to
exercisc judgcment- Clearly- for example, the trsionl restraint provided by linear rocker
bearings should not be ignored.
The elTective span is rreasured between centrcs of bearings as shown in Fig. 5.3-2(c). The
moment so obtaini:d may, however, be rounded off over each bearing in accordance with 2-2/
clause 5.3.2.2( 104). This has the efect of reducing the moment by FEd.-p//8, wherc 1 can be
defined in thc National Annex- The recomrnended value in the Note to 2-2/clause
5.3.2.2(104) is the 'breadth of the bearing'. This is intended to be the dimension jn the
direction of the span of the bearing contact surface with the deck. FEd,.up is the suppoft
reaction coexisting with the moment case considered.
The deflnition of I above is intended to be used for a rectangular contact area. For
bearing rvith circular contact arca, using the diameter for t is slightly unconservative and,
for consistency, the moment should be reduced by FE 1,.',oD/3r, based on the centroid of
half of a circular area, where D is the contacl diameter. The contact dimensions should be
taken as the lesser of the physical top plate size or the din.rension obtained by spreading
from the edges of the stiff part of the bearing through the top plate. A spread of 1:1 is
suggested, in keeping with that given in EN 1993-1-5 cluse 3.2.3, although greter
spread at 60" to the vertical ws allowed by BS 5400 Part 3.'
The wording of 2-2/clause 5.3.2.2(104) differs from that in 2- l- l/clausc 5-3.2.2(4) in order
to clarify tht the rounding can only be made if the analysis assumes point support. The
wording in EC2-1-1, which starts with'RegardJcss ofmethod ofanalysis...', was considered
undesirabLe as the support width could be included in a nore deLailed analysis model.

2-l-l/clouse
s.3.2.2(2)

2-2/clouse

s.3.2.2(t04)

47

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

minlh/2, tl2)

*,.-l

trl

(a) l\r0nolilhic

Fig. 5.3.2. Examples of effective

(b) Canlilever

span

5.4. Linear elastic analysis

2-l-l/clouse
s.4(t)
2-l-l/clouse
5.4(2)

Linear elastic anal.vsis is the most commonl1, used technique for bridge design and may be
used to clculate action eficts at all limit states in accordance with 2-1-llclause 5.4(1),
2-1-llclause 5.4(2) allows linear elastic analysis t assume un-cracked cross-sections
and lincar slress strain relationships with mean values of the elastic modulus. The use of
un-crcked linear elastic analysis. despite the apparent anomaly that sections will behave
in a nonlinear mnner at thc ultimare linit state, is justifled by the lower-bound theorem
of plasticit)'. This states tht providing equilihrium is maintained everywhere and the yield
strength of the material is nowhere exceeded, sfe lower-bound cstimatc of resistance is
obtained- Some ductility is necessary for the lower-bound theorem to be pplied, s tht
peak resistance at a section is maintained during rcdislribution of moments, but this has
not been lbund to be a problem in real structures. The margin of safety in this respect
may, howevcr, not be as high in Eurocode 2 as it was in previous UK practice, since there
is no requirement to prcvent over-Leinforced flexural behaviour in reinlorced and prestressed

concrete scction design (which may lead Lo sudden concrete lilure before reinforcement
yield),
Un-cracked elastic analysis has many advantages over other calculation methods, including the facL lhat the reinforcement does not need Lo be known prior to peforming the global
analysis and the principlc ol superposition my be pplied to the results of individual load
cases- Additionally, the alternatives ofpiastic analysis and elastic analysis with redisftibution
can only be used for ultimate limit states so an elstic analysis must then additionally be used
for serviceability limit states. Nonlinear analysis can be used for both SLS and ULS as an
alternative, but superposition of load cascs cannol be perlbmed.
An un-cracked elastic analysis leads to only one solution of a possiblc infinitc number of
solutions that can bejustifled by the lower-bound theorem as above. The modelled behaviour
must, however, hc realistic (particulady for SLS), as required by 2-2/clause 5.1, and therelbre
it may sometimes be more appropriate to consider some crcked sections. An example is in
the calculation of transverse stiffness for a bridge with prestressing in the longitudinl
direction only- In this case, the concrete in the transversc direction is liable to be cracked
while that h the longitudinal direction remains un-cracked- A non-linear analysis is most
realistic in this situation (and in general) as discusscd in seqtion 5.7 of this guide, as the
analysis can model cracking and other aspcts of matefil non-linear response.

48

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

Where there are signilicant second-order eflects (see section 5.8 f this guide), these must
also be Laken into account and Iinear elastic analysis must then only be pcrformed in conjunction with further magnilication of nomenls and reduced stiffness properties accounting
for cracking anil creep, as dcscribed in section 5.8.7 of this guide.
At fhc ultimate limit stte, 2-I-llclause 5.4t'3) allows an analysis using fully cracked

2-l-l/clouse

section properties to be used for load cases where there are applied deformations lrom
temperature, settlement and shrinkage- Creep should also bc included by reducing the
eflecLive modulus for these load cases, as discussed in sections 5.8.7 and 3 1.4 of this
guide. However, it should be noted that it will usully be possible to neglect these effects
altogether at thc ultimate limit stte, providing there is sulficient ductility, as discussed in
sections 2.3 and 5.6 of this guide,
At the serviceability limit statc, 2-l-liclause 5.4(3) requires a'gradual evolution ofcracking' lo be considered. This appears to cover the situation where cracking occurs only in some
parts of the stlucture, which increases the nroments at other sections compred to the valucs
which would be obtained wcre all sections fully cracked (or fully un-cmcked) T(t investigte
this would require a nonlinear analysis, modelling thc effects of tension stiffening. While
non-linear analysis is covered in section 5.7- no guidance is givcn on modelling tension
stiflning in global analysis. The use of either mean or lower characteristic values of the
tensile strength cn be justi{ied depending on whether the effect is favourable or unfavourable, Tension stiffening is gcncrally favourable as, for exauple, in second-order analysis of
piers. Whcre this is the case, it would be consryative to use lower characteristic values of
the tensile strength. However. for the non-linear analysis of externally post-tensioned
bridges, where cracking at sections other thn the clitical section is benelicial in increasing
the tendon strain, mean values of tensile strenglh would be safer, as discussed in section
5.10.8 of this guide. Since Z-l-liclausc 5.?(4) requires 'realistic' properties to be used,
arguably mcan tensile properties for concrete could be justified in all cases.
Since a fully un-cracked elastic analysis will generally be conservative (as it does not lead to
redistribution of mment away from the most highly stressed, and therefore cracked' ares),
an un-cracked elastic global nalysis will be adequate to comply with 2-1-liclause 5.4(3) for
the serviceability limit state. This avoids the need to consider tension stiffening. Where significant imposed dcformations are presenl, n un-cracked anal1,sis provides a stiffer response
and will therefore also be conservative. A fullv cracked analvsis is nol conservtlve.

s.4(3)

5.5. Linear elastic analysis with limited redistribution

Elastic analysis results in both a set of internal actions that are in equilibrium with the
applied loads and geonetric compatihility in the structure after the predicted elastic deflections havc taken place. The 'real' moments in the structurc may be significantly different to
these predicted ones because the stiffness of the bridge is unlikely to conform accurately lo
that predicted by the use o[ un-cracked gross-section properties and mean elastic concrete
propcrties. Factors ffecting real stifiness are the variability in material properties, cracking
ofconcrete and mterial nonJinearity with load lcvel- In practice, therefore, some redistribution of momenl fron Lhat assumed in un-cracked elastic analysis usually occurs in real
bridges as the ultimte limit state is approached, even if redistribution was not assutned in
the design, The neglect of this redistribution in elastic nalysis has traditionally beenjustified
as being sale on the basis of the lower-bound theorem of plasticity discussed in section 5.4.
Designed redistribution ofthe lnon]ents from an elastic analysis is permitted for bridges at

the ultinate limit sLate according to 2-l-llclause 5.5(2), prol'iding equilibrium is still
maintained between the applied loads and tbe resulting distribution of moments and
shears 2-I-llctause 5.5(J) rcfers. This again follows liom lhc lower-bound theorem of
plasticiLy, but there must lso be suflicient ductility (or rotation capacity) to allow this to

2-

l- I /douse
s s(2)

2-l-l/clouse
5.s(3)

occuf.

In

the

limit,

an elastic analysis with unlimited redistribution ofmoment effectively becomes a

as discussed in section 5.6. Howevetr the amount ofredistdbution

lower-bound plastic analysis,

49

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-Uclouse

s.s(t04)

TO EN I992-2

possible is limited by the rotatjon capacity ofthe section, which is itself limited by the compressive failure strain olthe concrete and the tensile lilure strain ofthe reinforcement. Simplitied
rules lbr determining thc amount of redistribution permitted are given in 2-2lclausc 5.5(104).

They depend on the relative depth of the compression zone. Members with a relatively small
depth ofconcrete in compression can produce a greater stl.ain in the reinforcement at concrete
failurc and hence a greater curvature and rottion capacily. lf the sin.rplified rules re used, no
explicit check of rotation capacity, as discussed in section 5.6_3, is neccssary. Moments should
not be redistributed for SLS verificationsThe simplified rules in 2-2,iclause 5.5(104) limit the amout of redistribution to l5% (the
recommended value by way of the paraneter ; below) for members with class B or C re-

inforcement, This is half the maximum redistribution recomnended for buildings. This
reduction in limit was made for bridges due to the lack of test resulLs for rotation oapacity
for the deep flangcd beams typically encountered in bridge design. Note 2 to clause
5.5(104) therefbre permits the greater amount of redistribution allowed in EN 1992-1-1 to
be applied to solid slabs. The following limits are given for the ratio, 6, of the redistributed
moment to tht from lhe elastic analvsis:
b

>

6>

) k5 lbr /11 < 50 MPa

\rkax"f d |5 for /lt>50Mpa
k1 +

klxuld

2-2i(s.l0a)

2-2lg.tqb)

where:

,r
d
1

is the dcpth of the compression zot: at the ultimte limit stte under the
lotal moment after redistribution (which will usually be the ultimate moment

resistance of the section)

is the effec[ive depth of the section
to 5 are nationally determined parameters whose recommended values are as follows:

kt:044
: 1.25(0.6 + 0.0014/e",,2)
. : 0.54
k4 : 1.25(0.6 + 0,0014/e.,2)
k::085
:

cu2

is thc ultinate concrete compressive strain which is 0.0035 for concretes with

L.

<

50 MPa_

For concretes wirh strengthik < 50 MPa, the limit on r,/d - 0.328 for l5% redisrribution while no redistribution is pemitted when ru// : 0.448. The limit on amount of
redistribution also helps to provide satisfactory perlbrmnce at the seniceability linit
sLate, where the behaviour may be close to that of the un-cracked elastic anlysis. Further
checks must be done in any casc aL serviceability, based on elastic analysis without redistribution, Worked example 5.5-l illustrates the use of 2-2,/clause 5.5(104)_
Redistribution withut explioit check of rotation capaciLy in accordance with 2-2lcluse
5.5(104) is not pennitted in the foliowing situations:

.
.
.

Membels where the reinfbrcement is Class A (which are deemed to have inadequate
ductility). It is additionally recommended in 2-2lclausc 3.2.4 that Class A reinforcement
should not be used at all for bridges.
Bridges where the ratio of adjacent span lengths exceeds 2,
Bridges with elements subject to signilicant compression-

For the common case of multiplc beam and slab decks, redistribution oflongitudinal beam
moments implies change in the transverse moments arising liom the additional deflections
in the main beams. Redistribution cannot therefore be considercd for a beam in isolation.
One possibility is to lorce the desired redistribution in such decks by applying imposed
settlements lo the bem intemtediate supports so as to achieve the amount of redistributin
required in the main beams. If the deck bcame overstressed transversely under this redistributior.r, in principle it rvould be possible to check rotation capacity in the trnsverse members
as discussed in section 5.6.3 of this guide, so that this additional transverse rnoment could

50

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

itscll bc rcdisLrihutcd. This would become iterative and rvould involve introduction of plastic
hinges into the model.

2-1-llclause 5.5{1)P requires the 'influence of any rcdistribution of tlle uomenls t'n all
of the design' to be considered. No application rules are given for this principle
but i is recommended hele that the design shear'lbrce at a seclion should be taken as the
grealer of thaL bel-ore or afler redistribuLion. This is because shear lailure may not be a
sufficiently ductile failure mechanism t permit the assumed redistribution of moment,
Similarly, reactions used in the design of the substructure shorLld be the greater of thosc
before or aftcr rcdistribution. Caution with moment redistribution would also be required
in integral bridges with sil-structure interctin as the implied deflections from redistribution in the fi'ame could also cause a change in the soil forces attracted.
Rcdistribution of momcnts is not permiLted in some other specilic cases. Thcsc are:
aspects

2-l'l/clquse
5.5(t)P

Bridgcs whcrc Lhc actual rotation capacity could not be calculated rvilh confidence.
Examples inch.rde curved bridges (where redistribution of flexural moment can lead to
an increase of torsion and sudden brittle failure) and simila y skerv bridges 2-21

2-2/clause

clause 5.5(105 ) refers.

Tlre design of c o\tt'nns.2-1-1lclause 5.5(6) requires columns to be designed for the elastic

2-I-l/clouse

momcnts from frame action without redistribution.

s.5(t0s)
s.5(6)

0.125 WL

Fig. 5.5-1. Moment diagram for Worked example 5.5-l

5l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

5.6. Plastic analysis

2-2/clouse

s.6.t(t0t)P

2-l -l /clouse
5.6. t(2)P

2-l-l/clouse
5.6. t

(r 03)P

5.6. |, General
2-2lclause 5.6.1( 101lP permits plastic analysis for verifications at ULS only. Plastic analysis

is an extreme casc of

moment redistribution. whete the moments re distributed in

accordance with the structurc's ability to resist them. This requires a high level of rotation
cpcity to allow the bddge to deform sufliciently to develop Lhe assumed moments.
2-I-llclause 5.6.1(2)P relates to this need to check rottion capcity.
As with the method of moment redistribuLion, it is ncessary to naintain equilibrium
between internal action ellcts and extetnl ctions to automatically arrive at a safe solution.
This is aclrieved if a lower-bound (static) analysis is used. However, 2-1-l lclause 5.6.1( 103 )P
lso permits the use of an upper-bound (kinematic) approach, bascd on balancing internal
and externl work in assumed collapse mechanisms. Many standrd texts re available on
thjs. A commonly used exmple of this mcthod is yield line analysis lor the assessment of
slabs. When using an upper-bound approach, it is therefore necessary either to verify tht
equilibrium is stisfied and that the plastic resistance moment is nowhere exceeded in the
assumed mechanism (in which cse the 'actual' load rcsistancc has bccn found), or to
consider sulTicient collapse mechanisms, such tht a \ery close approximation t the real

collapse load is found from the lowcst collapse load obtained. The fomer is impractical

for slabs while the latter requires experience to chieve.

By way of 2-2/clause 5.6.I ( 101)P, rational authorities may further restrict the use ofplastic
mcthods. It is likely tht most will linrit the use of plastic analysis to accidental situations
only. Sme countries might permit its use for deck slab design, although the large number
of load cases necessary to consider in bridge design is likely to make plastic analysis less
ttractive. Cousideration of compressive membrane action is often a better way to
improve efficiency in deck slabs and it should also be borne in mind tht seruiceability
requirements are likely to become critical-

5.6,2, Plastic anlysis for beams, frames and slabs

Trvo nethods re avilable for ensuring that the bridge possesses the necessary rotation
cpacity for the use of plastic anlysis- These are:
2- I- l /douse

5.6.2(t)P

(1) Method without direct check ofrottion cpcity (permitted

(2) Method with direct check of rotation capacity.

by 2-1-l/clause 5.6.2(I

)P).

The first method is discussed herc while the second is discussed in section 5.6.3 below.

2-2/clouse

Method without direa check of rototion copoitty

Adequate rotaLion capacity for plastic nlysis is deemed to be achieved in accordance with
2-2lclause 5.6.2(102J if the depth of the compression zone is everywhere restricted to a depth

s.6.2(t 02)

as lollows:

for
x"/d < 0.10 for
xu/d < 0.15

!
./11 )
/"p

50MPa

(D5.6- 1)

55 MPa

(D5.6-2)

The ratio of moments at intermediate supports to those in adjacent spans must also lie
between 0,5 and 2.0 nd, for bridges, Class A reinforcement nust not be used due to its
low ductility- lf the above criteria re met, the effects of imposed deformations, such as
those from settlement and crccp, ntay be neglected at the ultimate lirnit stat. as discussed
in section 2.3 of this guide.
Th restrictions on compression depth are more onel'ous than the colresponding ones for
buildings in EC2-l-1 because ofthe greater depth oft!'pical bridge members and tbc lack of
test results for then. However. lbr solid slabs. the limits in EC2-1-l can be used. which are as
follorvs:

x"ld < 0.25 lbr ./" I 50MPa

x"/d < 0.15 tbr l, ) 55MPa
52

(D5.6-3)
(D5.6-4)

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

5.6.3. Rotation capacity

5.6.3.1. Method with direa check of rototion copocity (odditionol sub-section)
If the criteria in 2-2,iclause 5.6.2 are not fulfilled, it is necessary to verify Lhe plastic rotation
capacity of the bridge against the actual rotation implicit in thc analysis. The rules in 2-2i

clause 5.6.3 apply to continuous bcanrs and onc-way spanning slabs. They cannot be
applied to yield line analyses of two-way spanning slabs.
The plastic rotation capacity can be derived by integration ofthe plastic curvature along the
length, lo, of the beam where the reinforcement strin exceeds that at first yicld. This plstic
length is determined by the diflerence in section moment fronr firsr yieLd to final rupture (as
shown in Fig. 5.6-1) and also by any shifL in thc tensile l'orce caused by shear truss actionas discussed in section 6.2 of this guide. (The ltter is not shown in Fig. 5.6-1, but, from the
shill method, lvould give a length of beam where the steel is yiclding at least equal to the
eflective depth of Lhe beam.) The plastic rotation capacity then follolvs liom:

0,,.r:J"),,ffia"

(D5.6-5)

where:

Ae(a)
d
r(a)
a

is the mean reinfbrcement strain in excss of that at lirst yield

is the e{Tective deplh
is the depth of the compression zone
represenls the longitudinal posilion within the length ZD

Thc mcan rcinforccmcnt strain at l:ach position, Ae(a), should include the effccts oftension
stiffening s this reduces the rttin cpacity. A method of accounting fr the effects of
tension stilening in this way is given in reference 6.
It is not, however, necessary to perform the integrtin in (D5,6-5) sincc 2-1-liFig. 5.6N
(reproduced as Fig. 5.6-2) gives simplilied values lbr do1.,1 which link the plastic rotation
capacity to -r.,1d for dillrent reinorcement duqtility and concrete strength classcs 2-1-I/
chuse 5.6.3(4) relers. It is conservatively based on a length deforming plastically of
approximately 1,2 times the depth of the section and is procluced for a 'shear slenderness',

2-l-l/clouse
s.6.3(4)

3.0.

The shear slenderness itself gives a measure of the length olthe plastic zone. It is defined as
the distance between the points of n.raximum and zcro noment after redistribution. divided
by the eflective depth. The distnce between the points of uaxinum and zero moment is
typically l5% of the span. Z. With this assumption, a shcar slenderness of 3.0 equatcs to
a span Lo dcplh ratio of 20, which is typical for continuous construction. The assumed
plstic length used in 2-l-liFig. 5.6N relates to this shear slenderness- For other values of
, the plastic rotation capacity frorr 2-l-1i Fig. 5.6N thus needs t be corrected by multiplying by a lactor l:1 : ,,[- For intermediate concrete strengths, the plastic rotation cpacity
cn be obtained by interpolation.
The naxinum curvalure i the section, and hcnce rotation cpacity, ocurs when the

section is balanced such tht both reinforcement nd concrete reach their failure stlain
simultaneously. This accounts fbr the naxina in the values of rotatiou capacity in

Fig.

5.6.l.

Length of beam undergoing plastic deformation

53

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

35

/ -A -..
r;/ / \r \ \
\

30

lr

820
E

!.-

10

0.05 0.10 0,15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40

0.45

lxld)
Fig. 5.6-2. Allowable plastic rottion,
reinforcement (

2-2/clouse

5.6.3(r02)

r9ot.d,

of reinforced concrete sections for Class B and C

3.0)

Fig. 5.6-2. Al high x./d, failure of the concrete may occur shortly after yielding of the
reinfbrcement so the class of reinforcement has little effect on rottion capacity. At lo\i!values of -t,,,/d, the reinforcement lails before the concrete reaches its failure strain. These
situtions are illustrated in Fig. 5.6-3.
A ful'ther abslute limit is placed on the depth of the compression block at plastic hinge
locations by 2-2lclause 5.6.3(102,) as follows:

r./d

< 0.30
x"/d < 0.23

for 1"1 < 50MPa

for /;k > 55 MPa

(D5.6-6)
(D5.6-7)

These are again more onerous than corresponding liD.rits in

2-l-l/clouse
5.6.3(3)

EC2-l-l

due

to the greater

potential dcpth of bridge beams.

The plastic rottion capacity has to be compared with the actul rotation at the hinge
implied fronr the global analysis. 2-1-I lclaase 5.6.3(3) statcs only that the rotation should
be calculated using design values for materials. One possibility is t use elstic anlysis to
deten ne the fraction of Lhe load, a, at which the first plastic hinge forms (that is when
the moment resistance is just exceeded at the hinge location) and Lhen to appl), Lhe rcmaining
load increments to a model with the plastic hinge modelled as a hinge without any moment
rigidity. This determination of the plastic rotation. ds, is shown in Fig. 5.6-4.
The question thcn arises as to what stiffness to use lor the s yet unyielded prts of the
bridge in Fig. 5.6-4 for a uniformly distributed load. If gross elastic cross-section properties
are used, bascd on the design valie of the qoncrete, Young's modulus '"6
4o'/1s with

^tce.:1.2 (fron 2-1-1,/clausc 5.8.6(3)), this will overestimate the 1el stiffness nd therefore
undercstimate rotation at the hinge. A rcasonable approximation might be to use fully
cracked properties, again based on the design value of the concrete, Young's modulus
Failure of steelbelore
concGte (small xu/d)
bfore stel (lrss

Simultneous lailure
of concrete and sleel

Reinforcemenl

Fig. 5.6-3. Possible srrain diagrams at failure

54

.dd)

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

(aJ l,'lomenls under unilorm load beJorc and

Defleciions under (1

afterlirst hinge formation

- r)W

{b) Dellections ailer firsl hinge lormtjon

Fig. 5.6-4. Rotation at plastic hinge for two-span bfidge beam wilh uniformly distributed lod, W

E* - E"./16

and steel modulus 8". This could still overestimate stiffness in the n.rosl highly
to lbl.ln, but would undcrcstimate stiffness
everywhere else. To minimize ny un-conservatism in this respect, it is desirable to base
stressed arcas where another hinge was about

the section bending resistance here on the reinforcement diaglam with thc llat yield
plteu in 2-l-liFig- 3.8. The 'real' behaviour can only be obtained through nonlinear
analysis considering the 'real' mtefial behviour.
5.6.3.2. Check of rotntion capocrty when negleding imposed deformotions at the
ultimote limit stote (odditional sub-seaion)
A similar caLculation of rotation capacity and plastic hinge rotation has

to be mde when

elastic analysis is used, but the effects of imposed deformations re to be ignored at lhe
ultimate limit staLe as discussed in section 2.3 of this guide. The rotation caused by, for
example, settlement cn be checked on the basis ol the angular chnge produced il the
setllenent is applied to a model with a hinge t the loction where rotation capacity is
being checked in a similar way t that in Fig. 5.6-4. In general (1or differential temperature
or dill'erential shrinkge for example), the plastic rotations can be obtained from the'free'
displacemcnts as shown in Fig. 5.6-5, or by again applying the free curvatures to a model
with hinged supports,
In verifying the rotation capacity in this wy, it should be recognized that even the usc of
elastic global analysis may pJace some demands on rotation capacily see section 5.4 ofthis
guide. The entire plastic rotation cpcity may not therefore be available for the above
check. so it is advisable to leave some margin betu,een plastic lotation oapaciLy and plastic
rotation due to the imposed delormation. Generally. the proportion of tot:rl rottion capacity required lbr this check will be small and adequate by inspection. It has, in any case. been
common practice in tl.re UK to ignore in.rposed detbrmations at thc ultimate limit
state without an explicit check of rotaLion capacity. EC2, however, demands more
caulion, particularly as there are no restrictions on designing reinlbrced concrete bcams
with over-reinforced behaviour.

Fig. 5.6"5. Plastic rotations caused by imposed culatures such

as

from differentil temperature

55

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

If the limits in (D5.6-l) or (D5.6-2) are met, the effect of imposed defbrmations could
automtically be neglcctcd. Alternatively, 2-27'Expression (5.10a) or 2-2lExpression (5.10b)
could be used where it ws only necessary to shed 15% of the moment (or other limit as
specified in thc National Annex).
5.6.4. Strut-and-tie models
Anal),sis with strut-nd-tie modeLs is a special case of the application of the lower-bound
theorem of plasticity. Strut-and-tie models have not been commonly used by UK engineers,
mainly because f the lack of codified guidancc. Whcn such modcls have been used, as for
example in tl.re design of diphragms in box girder bridges, there has not been a consistent
appfoch used for the chcck of the strength of compression struts and ndcs. EC2 now
provides guidance on these limits, but it is far from a complete guide in itself nd reference
can uscfully be made lo texts such s reference 8 for more background. There will often
be difculties in applying specific rules from EC2 for compression limits in nodes and
sLruts, and engineering judgement will still be needed. However, the use of strut-and-tie
modelling is still very valuable. even when used simply to detemine the locations and
quantities of reinforcement.
2-1- I iclause 5.6.4 gives general guidnce on the use of strut-and-tie models, Strut-and-tie
models are intended to be uscd in areas of rlon-linear strain distribution unless rules are given
elsewhere in EC2. Such exceptions include beams with short shear span which are covered in
section 6.2. In this particular case, the use of the strut-and-tie rules in prelrenc to the
test-based shear rules would lead to a very conscrvative shear rcsistance based on concrete
crushing.

2-l-l/clouse

Typical examples where non-linear strain distribution occurs are areas where thcre are
concentrated loads, corners, openings or other discontinuities. These ares are often called
'D-regions', rvhere'D' stands lbl discontinuity^ detail or disturbance. Outside these areas,
whele the strain distribution again becomes linear, stresses nray be derived from traditional
beam or tluss theory depending on whether the concrete is cracked or uncrcked respectively. Thesc areas are known as 'B-r'egions', where 'B' stands lor Bernoulli or beam.
EN 1992 also refers to them as 'contiuil),' regions- Some typical l)-regions, together with
their approximate extent, are shown in Fig. 5.6-6. Strut-nd-tie models are best developed
by following the flow of clasLic force from the B-region boundaries as shown in Fig. 5.6-6,
or from other boundary conditins, such as support reactions, when the entire system is a
D-region (such as a deep beam). 2-1-llclause 5.6.4(1,1 indicates that strut-and-tic modelling

s.6.4(t )

can be used

2-l-l/clause
s.6.4(3)

2-l-l/clquse
5.6.4(s)

2-l-l/clause
5.6.4(2)

56

lbr both continuity and discontinuity regions.

Strut-and-tic modelling makes use of the lower-bound theorem of plasticity which states
that any distribution of stresses used to resist a given applied loading is safe, s long s
equilibrium is satisfied throughout and ll parts f the structure have stresses less than
'yield'. Equilibrium is a fundamental requirernent of 2-1-l lclause 5.6,4(j).ln reality, concrete has limited ductility so it will not always be safe to design any arbitrary force system
using this philosophy. Since concrete pemrits limited plastic deformations, tbc force
system has to be chosen in such a way as Lo not exceed the deformation limit anywhere
before the assumed state of stress is reached in the rest of the structure. In practice, this is
best chieved by aligning struts and ties to follow the internal forces predicted by an
un-cracked elastic analysis. To this end. it may sometimes be advisable to flrst model
lhe region rvith finite elenlents to establish the flow of elastic forces before constructing
the strut-and-tie model. This is the basis of 2-1-I lclause 5.6.4(5).
The advantage ol closely lbllowing the elstic behaviour in choosing a model is that the
same analysis cn then be uscd for both ultimate and scrviccabi]ity limit sttes. 2-1-1/
clause 5.6.4(2) requires orientation of th struts in accordance with elstic theory. The
stress limit to use at the serviceability limit state lbr clack control may be chosen according
to bar size or br spacing, as discussed in section 7 of this guidcFailure Lo follow the elastic flow of force and overly relying on the lower-bound theorem
oan result in resistance being ovcrestimaLed. This can occur for example in plin concrete

CHAPTER 5, STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

r-:--T-

lK"'::--i I
-^111
| lj 'i momentl
-|

J'

-aarl

Lcros,ns

tr
(a)

*"1

(b)

t
I

ffi=o*n."
Fig. 5.6.6. Examples of strut-and-tie models and extenr of D-regions

under a ooncentrated verticl load if the load is appJied to a small width. Neglecting the
transverse tensions generaled, as shown in Fig. 6.5-1, by assuming that the load docs not
splead across the section, can actually lcad to an overestimate of rcsistance. This prticulr
casc is discussed at length in section 6.7 of this guide. Similar problems can arise if the
ssumed stmt angles dcpart significantly liom the elastic traiectories, as discussed in
section 6,5.2.
Expericnce, however, shows that it is not alwa!,s necessry to rigidly fbllorv the elastic flow

of force at the ultimate limit state. The most obvious example is lhc truss model for
reinfbrced concrete shear design, which permits considcrable departure of both reinforcement and compression strut directions liom the principal stfess directions of 45' lo thc
vertical at the neutral axis. Generally, it is desirable to follow Lhc lines of force from
elastic analysis, unless experience shows tht it is unnecessary to do so.
Often there appears to be a choioe of model even when the elastic load paths have been
lbllowed. In selecting the best slution, it should be bornc in mind tht the lods in the
real structure will try to follow the paths involving least force and defbnr.ration. Sincc
reinforcement is much more dcformable Lhan the stiff concret struts. the hest model will
minimize the number and length of the ties. An optimization criterion is given in reference
8. This requires tbc minimization of the internal strain energy, ! F;Z;e,n;, where:

: force in strut or tie I

: length of strut or tie i
ctrli mcan slrain in slrut or Iie /
l"r

Zi

The terms for the concrete struts an usually be ignored as their strains are usually much
smaller than those of the ties. As guide to constructing models, in highly stressed node

57

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

regions (e.9. near concentratcd loads) thc compression struts and ties should form an angle of
about 60" and not less than 45'.
Detailing of nodes is also inportant and guidance is given in sectjon 6.5-4. This guidance
also applies to the design oflcl areas subject t cncentrted lads even if the design is not
performcd using strut-and-tie analysis,

5.7. Non-liner analysis

2-l-l/clouse

s.7(t)

2-l-l/clouse
5.7(4)P

2-

l- I/dause

5.7(2)

2- I-l /douse
5.7(3)

Non-linear analysis of concrete bridges, in the contexl o[ 2-1-l lclause 5.7fl), ccunts for
the nonliner nature of the matedal properties. This includes the effects of cracking in
concrete and non-linearity in the material stless strain curves. The analysis thcn ensures
both equilibrium and compatibility of defcctions using these matedal properties. This
represents the most realistic representtion of structural behaviour, provided that the
material propcrtics assumed are realistic. Such an analysis may thcn be used at SLS and
ULS. Nonlinear analysis may also model non-linearit1, in suucturl response due to the
changing geometry caused by deflections, This is irrportant in the design of elements
where second-order effects arc signitcant, as discussed in section 5.8 of this guide. It is fbr
second-order calculation for slender members, such as bridge piers, that non-linear analysis
is often particularly beneficial, as the simplified alternatives are usually quite conservative.
This is discussed in section 5.8.62J-l lclause 5.7(4)P requires the analysis to be pedbrmed using 'realistio' values ofstructural
stiflnesses and a mcthod which takes account of unccrlainties in thc resistanse model. The most
'realistic' values re the men propefiies as these re the prperties expected to be found in the
real slructure. lf mean strergths and stifinesses are used in analysis, rather than dcsign values,
there is n pparent incompatibility bctween local section design and overall analysis. The
rationale often given fbr this is tht materil factors are required to account for bad workmanship. It is unlikell' rhat such a severe drop in quality would affcct the matedals in large prts of
the structure. It is more likely that this would be localized and, as such, would not signitcantly
allcct global behaviour, but would alect the ability of local sections to resist the internal effects
derived from the global behaviour. This is noted by 2J-l lclause 5.7(2), which requires local
cdtical sections to be checked for inelstic behaviour.
For thc buckling ofcolumns. however, it could be argued that even a rclatively small area
of'design mteril' t the critical section could significantly increse deflections and hence
thc moments at the critical section. Care and experience is therefore needed in selecting
appropriate mterial properties in diflerent situations.
2-1-llclause 5.7(3) generllJ," permits load histories to be ignored for structures subjected
predominantly to static load and all the aclions in a combination may then be applied by
increasing their values simultaneously.

5.7.l. Method for ultimate limit states (additional sub-section)

lbrulti-

2-2/clouse

2-2lclause 5.7(105) makes a proposal for thc properties to use in nonlinear analysis

5.7(t 0s)

mate limit states and provides a sfety formt. The proposed method, which may be
amended in the National Annex, essentially uses mean propcrtics for steel and a reference
strength fbr concrete of 0.84/". The material stress strain responses are derived by using
the strengths given below in conjunction with the non-linear concrcle stress-strain relationship given in 2-l-1,/clause 3.1.5 (Fig. 3.2), the reinforcement stress strain relationship for
curve A in 2-l-liclause 3.2.7 (Frg.3.8) and the prestressing steel stress .strain relationship
for curve A in 2-1-llclausc 3.3.6 (Fig. 3-10):

2-l-1/Fig. 3.2 fbr concrete:

2-1- 1/Fig. 3.8

lor reinforcemcnt:

t.t !!

/l-

is replaced uy

dr

is replaced by I -1{.1

7"1

icdr is replaced by 1.lkdr.

2-l-l,/Fig. 3.10 for prestressing stccl:

58

lr1 is replaced by l.llrp

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

These modifications are necessary to mke the mteril characteristics comptible with the

verilication format given. which uses a single value of mterial saf'ety factor, 1b,, to cover
concrete, reinfblcement nd prestressing stecl. This can be seen as followsFor reinforcemcnt lailure, the strength used above corresponds approximately to mean
value and is taken asl,,''
- 1 .lf,, and since the desrgn ultimate strength isf,1 : I,r/1.l5 the
cquivalent matedal fctor to use withdn : 1. 1r is 1cy = L l x l.I5 - 1.27.

For

the reference strength for analysis is tken s /l:

concrcLc failure,

1.1

(1.15/ l.5y;k : 0.843ir, and since the /eslpr ultimate strength is/;d : l;k/ 1.5 the equivalent
material factor t use withl : 0.843Ik is a/o, - 0.843 x 1.5 = 1.27. The concrele reference
strength is thercfore not a mean strength but one that is necessar)' to give the sme matefil
lactor for concrete and steclThc above concrete strengths do not includc the factor o"", which is needed for the
reslstnce. To adopt the same global safty factor s above and include &"" in the resistance,
it nust also be included in the analysis. This inplies that ./1," should be replaced by
l.l (ir,/1)rr"" /l in 2-l-l/Fig. 3.2, contrary to the above. This change appeared to have
been agreed by the EC2-2 Project Team on severl occasions but failed to be made in the
final text.
Although not stated, lurther modification is required to the stress-strin curves where
there is signiflcant creep- The stress strain curve of 2-l-l/Fig. 3.2 for concrete (and
Figs 3.3 and 3.4) is l'ol short-term loading. Creep will therefore have the effect of making
the respnse to long-term actions rore flexible. This cn conservtively be accounted fbr
by multiplying all strin vlues in the concrete stress strain diagram by a factor (l + (rcf),
where {"1 is the effective creep ratio discussed in section 5-8.4 of this guide. This has the
ellect of stretching the stress strain curve along the strain xis,
If the analysis is performed until the ultimatc strcngth is reached at one location (based on
the bove material properties) such that the mximum combintion of actions reached is
4"6 = rr;,1(1'6G +7qQ), where 1GG +1aO is the applied design combir.ration of aclions
and ag4 is thc lod factor on these design actions reached in the analysis, then the sfety
verilication on load would bc:

^
1..V + 1t,U

<-_

rrLr,l(16G

16Q)

(Ds.7- 1)

lo,

The above veriflcation bascd on applied load is rnodifled in EC2-2 so as to be based on

intcrnal actions and resistances. This is done in order to:

(1) Distinguish between over-proportional, linear and under-proportional behaviour which

a global sfety lctor applied Lo the maximum load cannot do as it takes no account ol
Lhe

path by which the ultimte ld was rcached.

(2) Introduce the cffects ol model uncettainties seprtely n both internal actions and
resrstances.

In respect of the second point, the material factor 16, includes a partial factor 1p6 which
accounts l-or uncertainties in the resislnce model used together with uncertinties in the
geolnetric imperfections modelled, such that 7o, :.tR,l-Io.As a result, EC2-2 provides the
followins safetv veritcation:

1p.E(1G+1qe).

^(#)

2-2i (5.102 aN)

where R(q,,6/7q) is the matcrial resistance corresponding to the combination of actions

q"6/16 tnd, E(16G +iqQ) are the internal actions under the design combination of
actions 1G+1qQ. The suggcsLed values of.yo and 1Rd are 1.20 and 1.06 respectively
such Lhat 1,-1Rd.to:1.06 r 1.20:1.2'/ s discussed abovc. thus giving the same
material fctr for steel and concrete.
At this point it should be noted that the load factors 1o and 1c thcmsclves contain a
prtil fctor 15,1, which represents error due to structural modelling uncertainties, such
that 1O : ?sofi, and 1G :1s,11g. This then gives the possibility in the nonlinear analysis

59

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

15,1 to either thc action itseLf or to the ction etlect it produces.

The former possibility is catered for in 2-2,/Expression (5.102 aN), but a further inequality is
provided to cater for the second possibilit.v:

of applying the partial factor

lonis6E(1rG

1u0) a

2-2l(5.102 cN)

"(1*)

The value of 7sd is suggested to be taken as 1.15.

2-2ic1ause 5.7(105) allows either 2-2lExprcssion (5.102 aNl) or 2-2lExpression (5.102 cN)
to be used (or a third formulation in 2-2lExpression (5.102 bN) below). Clause 6.3.2 of
EN 1990 effectively says the f'actor 1s,i should be applied to the loading where the rsulting
action effect increases at a laster rate than the loading, and should be applied to the action
eflct where this increases t lower rate than the loading. EN 1990 would therefore appear
to suggest that both inequalities shoultl be vcrilied, although this seems overly onerous.
The basic procedure for carrying out the non-linear analysis and verifying Lhe structure is
then as fbllows:

(1) Determine the maximum value of action combination 4,,,1 reachecl in Lhe nonliner
analysis, which corresponds to the attainmenl of Lhe ultimate strength lt(qud) in one
region of the structure (bascd on the analysis mterial properties) or instability for
second-order calculations,

(2) Apply a
R(.q,d

/td

g1oba1 salcLy facLor

16 to the ultimate structurl strength R(q.d) to

get

(3) Apply 2-2,/Expression (5,102 aN) or 2-2lExpressiol (5.102 cN) for the global salty
verilication.
is not obvious how to apply these inequalities in all situations so 2-2,iAnnex PP attempts
illustrate their use. The mcthod is simplest rvhere there is only one action effect contibut-

It

to
ing to filure (sclar cmbintin - typiclly a beam in beuding). Thc alternative is that
scveral aclion effects contribute to failure (vcctor combination - typically a colun.rn undcr
bending and axial force). These are both explained furthel belou, where it is noted tht it
rvill often not be clear which part ofthe structure is the criLical clement with respect to attaining the ultimaLc strength ,R(4"6) in orc rcgion of the structure. This tends to favour the use of
simpler, more tried and tested methods of analysis.
A late addition to the drafts of EN 1992-2 was the veritcation format of 2-2i Expression
(5.102bN):

E(16G+1qo)

^(#)

2-2l(5.102 bN)

This follows the simpler format of(D5.7-1), having only one safety laclor on the resistnce
side. and is simpler to interpret and use. It does not, however, lollow item 2 above, taken
lrom 2-2lclausc 5.7{105) itsclf.

It should be noted that othel methods of non-linear analysis are possible, including
analysis with mean propcrtics and subscquent section by section resistance checks against
the internl ctions from the globl analysis, or use of design propertics throughout. The
latter is discussed at the end ofthis section. The former is oftcn appropdte for serviceability
analysis.

5.7.2. Scalar combinations (additional sub-section)

2-Uclouse

PP.r(t0t)

60

Scalar combinations of internal actions are covered by 2-2lclnuse PP,1f701). The method of
application of the inequalities (except for 2-2,/Expression (5.102 bN) which is simpler) is
illustrated in Fig, 5,7-1 fbr under-proportional behaviour. The case of over-proportional
behaviour is similar. "fhe ultimate sLrength in one area of the structure is reached at point
A, which corresponds to the ction combination at point B. This action combination is
reduced by thc global safeLy factor 16 lo give the reduced combination of actions at poinL
C, This corresponds to a new point on the internal action path at point D which defines a

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

Inlernalaclion path

Inlernalclion path

E.B

R(,q',lIa)

0sG*too).*

qudtYa

qud

Use of inequallty 2-2lExpression (5.102 aN)

Fig, 5.7-

l.

Safety format

(loG*.,qo).*

qu,rryo

qud

Use of inequality 2-ZExpression (5.102 cN)

for scalar under-proportional behaviour

reduced resistance given by point F.. For inequality 2-2iExpression (5 102 rN), thc resistance
at point E is reduced further by 1-Rd to give point F, which corresponds t point G on the
intcrnal action pth- Point G cotresponds to the finl maximun.r permissible value of the

combination of actions at point H. which must be greatcr than or equal to the ctual
value of thc load combination 1cG + ^iaQ.For incquality 2-2i Expression (5.102 cN), lbc
resistance t point E is reduced furthcr by 'tid/sd to give poir.rt F, which corresponds to
point G o[ the internal action path. Point G corresponds to the final maximum allowable
value of thc load combination t point H and this must be greater lhan or equal to thc
actual value of the combination of actions tG + nQ.

5.7.3, Vector combinations (additional sub-section)

Vector combinations ofinternal aclions arecovered by 2-2lclause PP.1(102) The mcrhod of

application olthe inequalities is illustrted in Fig. 5.7-2 for over-proportional behviour and
the incquality of 2-2iExpression (5.102 aN). Thc case of under-proportionl behaviour is
similar. The ultimate strength in one area of the structure is reached at point A For
simple beam-likc structures, it is possible, by section analysis. using the same matedal propertics as in the nonlinear analysis, to construct the filure surface a, which defines local
failure for all combinations of Ms6 and e6. The applied action combination is reduced
by the global safety factr ?o so that the internal acLions reduce follorving the internal
action pth to give the reduced intcrnal actions at point B.
The ellect of uncertaintics in the mteril resistance morlel is next taken into accunt by
reducing both M66 and \a at B by 1R6 to give point C- (The reduction is made by reducing
the length ofthe vector OB by'1*6.) Point C will not generally lie on the internal action path'
whereas the point corresponding to actual design failure must do so. To dctermine point D,
corrcsponding t the maximum allorvable <.lesign combination of actions on the internal
action path, it is ncessary to construct prt of the design failure surface, This surface
has exactly the same shape as surface a but is scaled down radially everywhere by the
ratio e/OC. Point D lies on ihc interseetin of this surface and the internal action
path. The final verification is then performed by ensuring that the linal maximum value o1'
ihe load combination 7cc+1o0 lies insicle Lhe failure suface - i-e. point D is not
reached under the application ol 1G ! 1qQ. The sme procedure is used for incquality
2-2i Expression (5.102 cN), except 7Rd is replaced by 1R61sd and lcG + ?aO is replaced by

2-2/clause

PP.t(t02)

lsc
-A + fqo.

major criticism of this n.rethod is that it is not clear how il should be applied when the
cdtical section. defining the ttainment of the ultjmaLe strength (4"a) in one region of thc
stfl.rclure, is not readily identjfiable. This will not usually apply to analysis of a simple
element, such as a single clumn, but it usually will to the analysis of a slb. It will also
be noted that this procedure is rather lengthy. It will therefore often be much simpler to
use design values direclly in the stmcturl analysis so that the bridge resistance is verilied

6l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Internalactions path

\telly,"

:_

'(ff)/""'(ff) 't*r
Fig. 5.7-2. Safety format for vector over-proporrional behaviour using inequaliry 2-2lExpression
{5,102 aN)

directly in the analysis. Where second-order effects are important, as in the design of slender
piers at the ultimate limit stte, ir will also be more conservativ to use design values directly
in this way. It will not, however, always be conseryative to do this, particularl), at SLS when
there arc imposed displacements as the structurl response is then artitcially flexible. This is
noted in Note 2 to 2-2,/clause 5.7(105). The use of design propertjes in global analysis is
discussed lurther in scction 5.8.6 of this suide.

5,7,4. Method for serviceability limit states (additional sub-section)

For global analysis at the servicebility limit state, the concrete stess-strain curve of 2-1-l/
Fig.3.2 could be used directJy without the modification proposed in 2-2iclause 5.7(105).
Creep should be accounted for using E"1 according to section 5-8.4, cxcept thar M1E(l
should be taken applicablc to the serviceability limit state.

5.8. Analysis of second-order effiects with axial load

I. Definitions and introduction to second-order effects

5.8.

Second-order effects are additional action ellects caused by the interaction ofaxiat tbrces and
deflections under load. Filst-order deflections lead to additionl moments caused by the axial
forces and these in turn lead to lurther increases in deflection. Suqh effects are also sometimes
called P A effects because additional moments are generated by the product of the axial
force and element or system deflections. The simplest case is a cantilevering pier with axial
and horizontal forces applied at thc l-op, as in Fig. 5.8-1_ Second-order cffeots can be
salculated by second-order analysis, which takes into account this additinal deformation.
Second-order effects pply to both 'isolated' members (for cxample, as above or in Fig. 5.82(a)) and to overall hridges which can sway involving several members (Fig. 5.S-2ft)). EC2
refel s to two types of isolted member. These are:

Ic
,

Fig,5.8-1. Deflections for

-:_--

Defleclion from Pand H

tsecono oroerJ

an initially straight pier with transverse load

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

(a) Buckling of individual pierc (braced)

(b) Overallbuckling in sway mode (unbraced)

Fig. 5.8.2. Buckling modes for braced and unbraced members

Braced members - members that are held in posilion at both ends and which may or may
not hve restraining rotational stiffncss at the ends. An example is a pin-ended strut. Thc
effective length lor buckling will always be less than or equal to the ctual membcr lengthUnbraced members - members \ryhere one end of the member cn translate with respect to
the other and which have restraining roLational stiffness at one or bolh ends. An example is
the cantilevering pier above- The effective length fbr buckling will always be greatcr than or
equal to the actul member length.
The compression members of cornplcte bridges can often be brokcn down into equivalenL
isolated mcrnbers that are either 'braced' or 'unbraced' by using an effective length nd
apprprite boundary conditions. This is discusscd in section 5.8.3.
Sone engineers may be unfamiliar with performing second-order anlysis, which is the
default analysis in the Eurocodes, A significant rlisadvantage of second-order analysis is
that the principle of superposition is no longer valid and all actions must be applied to the
bridge together rvith all their respective load and combination fctors Forlunately, there
will mostly be no need to do second-ordcr analysis, s alternative methods are given in
this chapter and lrcquently second-order effects are sn.rall in any case and may Lhcrefore
bc neglected. Some rules for when second-order effects may be neglected are given in
clauses 5,8.2 and 5.8.3 and are discussed below.
Slender compression elements re most susceptible to second-order effects. (Thc delinition
of slenderness is discussed in section 5.8.3.) The degree of slenderness and magnitude of
second-order effects are rclated to welfknown elstic buckling theory Although clastic
buckling in itselfhas little direct relevance to real design, it gives a good indjcation of susceptibility to second-order effects and can be used as a parameter in determining second-order
effecls from the results of flrst-order analysis; section 5.8.7 refers.
Second-order analysis can be performed with most cmmercially available structural soflware. ln addition to the problem of lack of validity of the principle of superposition. the

Ilexural rigidity of reinforced concrete structures, 81, is not constant. For a given axial
load, EI reduces with increasing moment due to crcking of the concrete and inherent
non-linearity in the concrete stress-strin response. This means that second-ordcr analysis
for reinforced concrete elements is nonlinear with respect to both geometry and material
behaviour. This non-linearity has to be tken into account in whatever methotl is chosen
to address second-order effects. This is dealt with in subsequent sections.
For bridges, it is slender piers that will mosL commonly be affected by considerations
of second-order ffects. Consequently, ll the Worked examples in this section relate to
slender piers. The provisions, however, apply equally to other slentler members with
significant axial load, such as pylons and decks f cble-stayed bridges.

5.8.2. General
When second-order calculaLions are performed, it is important that stiffnesses are accurately
determined as discussed above. 2-I-llclause 5.8.2(2)P therefore requires the nalysis to

consider the elects of cracking, non-lincar material properties and creep. This can be
done either through a materially non-linear analysis (as discussed in section 5.8.6) or by
using linear material properties based on a reduced secant stiffness (as discussed in section
5.8,7). Imnerfections must be included as described in section 5.2 as these lead to addiLional

2-l-l/clouse
s.8.2(2)P

63

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

tlst-order moments and consequcntly additional second-rder moments in the presence of

2-

l- l/dause

s.8.2(3)P

2-l-l/clouse
s.8.2(4)P

2-l-l/clause
s.8.2(5)P

2-l-l/clouse
s.8.2(6)

axial compression.
Soil structure interction must also be taken into accotnt (2-1-l lclause 5.8.2(3)P), as rt
should be in a lirst-order analysis. There are few rules specific to the analysis of inlegral
bridges, but the slenderness of integral bridge piers can be determined using the generl
procedures discussed in section 5.8.3 of this guide.
2-1-l lclause 5.8.2( 4/P requires the structural bchaviour to be considered 'in the direction
in which deformation can occur, and biaxial bending shall be taken into account when
ncessary'- Oftcn, defbrmation in two orthogonal directions needs to be considcrcd in
bridge design under a given combination of actions. although the moments in one direction
may be ncgligible compared to the ffect of moments in the other- A related clause is ?-1-i/
clause 5.8.2(5)P which requires geometric imperfections to be considered in accordance
with clause 5.2.2-l-17'clause 5.8.9(2) states tht imperfectjons need only be considered in
one direction (the one tht has the most unfavourable effect), so biaxial bending conditions
need not always be produced simply due to considcrations of imperfections.
It wilf not always be neccssary to consider second-order cflecls. 2-1-I lclause 5,8.2(6)
permits second-orrler elects to be ignorcd if they are less than 10% of the corresponding
nrst-order eflects. This is not a very useful critedon as il i! first necessary to perform
second-order analysis to check compliance. As a result, 2-l-llclause 5.8.3 provides a
simplified criterion for isolated members based on a limitins slenderness. This is discussed
below.

5.8.3. Simplified criteria for second-order efrects

5.8.3./.

S/enderness criterion for isolated members

Where simplified methods are used to determine second-order eflects, rather thn a secondordet' nonlinear computer analysis, the concept of effective length cn be used to determine
slcnderness. This slenderness can then be used to determine whether or not second-ordet
effects necd to be considered. According to 2-l-l/clause 5.8.3.2(l), the slenderness ratio is

delined as follows:
2-1-1(5.14)
where /n is the ellcctive length and
cross-scction.

I is tht: radius of gyr.ation of the unctcked concrete

2-l-l/clouse

A simplified criterion for determining when second-order anlysis is not required is givcn
in 2-1-llclause 5.8.3.1(1), based on a recommendcd limiting value of the slenderness s

s.8.3. t (t )

follows;

) < rim :

20. B.

Cl\/i

2-l-1(5.13N)

This limiting slenderness may be modificd in the National Annex. n: Ns6/(,4"/16) is

thc relative normal force. The greater the axial force and thus n become, the more the
section will be susceptible to thc development of second-order eflecLs and, consequently,
the lower the limiting slenderness becomes. Higher limiting slenderness can be achieved
where:

.
.
.

there is little creep (because the stillness of the cncrete part f the member in compression is then higher);
there is a high percentage of reinforcement (bccause the total member stiffness is then less
affected by the cracking of the concrete);
the location of the peak first-order is not the sane as the location of the peak secondorder moment.

Tbesc elects are ccounted for by the terms

A:llQ+0.2rb"r)
64

l,

B and C respectively where:

(D5.8-l )

CHAPTER 5, STRUCTUML ANALYSIS

where .r"r is the eflective creep ratio according to 2-1-1/clause 5.8.4, If d.r is not knwn, I
may be taken as 0.7. This corresponds approximately t rer:2.0 which would be typical
of a concrete loaded at relativell' yolrng ge, such that ," - 2.0, and with a loading that
is entirely quasi-permanent. This is therefore rcasonably conselvative. I is not, in any
case, vcry sensitivc to realistic variations in qrer, so using the default value of 0 7 is
reasonable.

(D5.8-2)
B-\/1 +2*,
where *' : A,f,dt@,1" is the mechanical reinforcement ratio- If o is not known, B may be
tken as l.l which is equivalent to r.r - 0.1. This value would usually be achicved in a slender

column, but is slightJy gcncrous compared to the ctul minimum reinforcement required by
2-l -l iclause 9.5.2(2):

( (Ds.8-3)
where r,,., is the moment ratio M91/M02, where Mx1 and M02 arc the first-order end moments
such that lMot > Mot. If r,n is not known, C may be taken as 0.7 which corresponds to
uniform moment lhroughout thc member. C should also be taken as 0.7 where there is transverse loading, where rst-rder moments are predominantly due to imperf'ections or where
the member is unbraced. The reasons for this are explained in section 5.8.7 of this guide.
Before carrying out a non-linear analysis or using the simplified methods of 5.8.7 and
5.8.8, it would be usual to check whether such eflcts can be ignored using 2- 1- 1 /Expression
(5.13N). The use of this formula is illustrated in the Worked example 5.8-2.
5.8.3.2. Slendemess ond effeaive length of isoloted members

2-1-1/clause 5.8.3.2 gives methods of calculating effective lengths for isolated membersTypical examples of isolated membet's and their corresponding effective lengths are given
in 2-l-l/Fig. 5.7, reproduccd hcre as Fig. 5.8-3. Exmples of application include piers with
free sliding bearings at their tops (case (b)), piers with fixcd bearings at their tops but
where the deck (through its conneotion to other elements) provides no positional restraint
(case (b) again), and piers with fixed (pinned) bearings at their Lops which are restrained
in position by connection by way of the deck to a rigid abutment or other stocky pier
(case (c)).

The effective Lengths given in cases (a) to (e) assume thal the fundations (or other
restraints) providing rotational restraint are infinitely sliff- In practice, this will never be
the case and the cflcctive length rvill always be somewhat grealcr than the theoretical
value for rigid restrints. For example, BS 5400 Part 4' required the effective length for
case (b) to be taken as 2.3/ instead of 2l - 2-I -I lclause 5.8.3.2f3,l gives a mcthod of accounting
for lhis rotational flexibility in the effective length using equations 2- l- l/Expression (5.15)

2-I-l/clause
s.8.3.2(3)

(P
,,||

,Fl

il

il
\H

\td

f,
(a) /o=

(b)

to=21

(cj

to=o.71

ld)10=112

(e)/o=i

llJIl2<lo<t (S)/o'2/

Fig, 5.8-3. Examples of different buckling modes and corresponding effective lengths for isolated
members

65

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

for braced members and

2- 1- l

/Expression (5.16) for unbraccd men.rbers:

r,,,
/" o5i/(,
,#-) (, .#t*.)
1.: / -^{

2-

-1(5.l5)

2-r -r (5.16)

where &1 and k2 are the flexibilities of the rotational restrints t ends 1 and 2 respectivelv
rclative to the flexural stiffness of the member itself such thaL;

@/M). @rlt)

where:

d
EI
/

2-

t - I /dause

s.8.3.2(5)

is the rotation of the restraint fbr bendins moment M

is the bending stiffness of conrprcssion member see discussion below
is the clcar height ofcompression membcr between end restraints

2- 1- 1/Expression (5.16) can be used for unbraced menbers with rotational .restrint t both
ends. Quick insFeclior of 2- I - l/Expression (5-16) shows that the theoretical case of a
member with ends built in rigidly for moment (k,, : kz:O), but frec to sway in the
absence of posilional restraint at one end, gives an elective length 1. : / s expected.
It is the relatiye rigidity of restraint to flexural stiffness of compression mernber that
is important in determining the ellcctive length. Consequently, using the un-cracked value
of E/ lbr the pier itself will be conservtive as the rcstraint will have to be relatively stiffef
to rcduce the buckling length to a given value. It is also compatible with thc definition
of radius of gyration, l, in 2-l-l,/clause 5.8.3.2(l) which is based on the gross cross-section.
2-1-llclause 5.8.3.2(5), however, requires cracking to be considered in deter.mining the
stiffncss of a restraint. such as a reinforced concrete pier base, if it signilicantly affects the
overall stiffncss of restraint offered to the pier. For. the pier exmple, however, often
the overall stiffness is dominated by the soil stiffness rather than that of the reinlorced

concretc clernent.
The Note to 2-l - 1i clause 5.8.3.2(3) recommcnds that no value of is taken less thn 0.1.
For integral bridges, or other bridges where restraint is provided at the top of thc pier by its
connection to the deck, cracking of the deck must also be considered in producing the stitrness. The vlue of end stiffness to use for piers in integral construction can be determined
from a plane frame model by dellccLilg the pier to give the deflection relevant to the
mode ofbttckling and detennining the moment and rotation produced in the dck at the connection t the pier. Alternatively, the elastic critical buckling method described below could
be used to determine the elTective length morc directly.
It should be nted that the cases in Fig. 5.8-3 do not allow for any rigidity of positional
restraint in the sway cases. If significant lateral restraint is available, as might be the case
in an integral bridgc where one pier is very much stiller than the other.s, ignoring this festraint
will be vcry conservative as the more flexible piers may actually be 'braced' by the stiffer one.
In this sitution, a computer elastic critical buckling ar.ralysis will give a reduced value of
effective length. (In manl' cases, however. it will be possible to scc by inspection thar a
pier is brced.)
Where cases are not coveled by 2-1-1,/clause 5.8.3.2, effective lengths can be calculted

2-l-l/clause

5..2(6)

from lirst principles according to 2-L-llclaase 5.8.3.2(6). This might be rcquired, for

example, for a member with varying section, and hcnce El along its length, The procedure
is to calculate the buckling load, Ns. from a computer elastic critical buckling analysis, using
the actual varying geonetry nd loading. It will be conseruative to assume un-cracked concrete section for the member of interest and cracked conqrete for the othel.s (unless they cn
be shown to be un-crcked)- An eflctive length is then calculated from:
t,:'

- "t/ EI lNn

2-t-u(5.11)

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

(a) Bucklins of individual piers (braced)

(b) Overall buckling in swy mode (unbraced)

Fig. 5.8-4. Typical braced and unbraced situations

where Zl may be freely chosen but comptible value of radius of gyration. l, and therefore
concrete cross-sectional area, 1", must be used in calculaling the slenderness accorcling to
2-l-liExpression (5.14)- A 'sensible' choice of E1 would be to base it on the actual crosssection in the middle third of the buckling half wave.
Efiective lengths can also be derived for piers in integral bridges and other bfidges wherc
groups of piers of varying stiffness are connected to a common deck. ln this instance. the
buckling load, and hence effective length, of any one pier depends on the load aud
geometry of thc oLher picrs also. All picrs may sway in sl,mpathy and act as unbraced
(Fig. 5.8-a(b)) or a single stiffer pier or abutment might prevent srvay and give braced behaviour lbr the other piers (Fig. 5.8-a(a)). The analytical metbod abore could also be used in

this situation to produce an accurate effective length by applying coexisting loads to all
colutnns and incleasing all loads ploportionately until a buckling mode involving the
pier o[ inlercst is found. Ns is then tilkcn as thc axial Load in the member of intcrest at
buckling.

Finally. elective lengths can be taken fuom tables of approximate values such as was
provided in TabLe I I of BS 5400 Part 4.'

67

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

50O pier bse

drainge pipe

Fig. 5.8.5. Pier dimensions for Worked example 5.8-l

--,

06 07 06 07 06

07

06 07 06 07 06 0t

06

a*Q

'c,

::J

9"

ze

:::l
:\

07

r,,{ r23
06
Fz
Vo' ^_os "-,
orlos r o" o, o. o' oe or oo o'{ ^_
9

a1 0 01 06 a1 0 01 04 0? 06 0?

Fig. 5.8-6. Pier reinforcement layout for Worked example 5.8- |

6a

06

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTUML ANALYSIS

5,8.4. Creep
Creep tends to increase deflections from those predicted using short-tenn propcrties as
discussed in section 3.1.4,so 2-l-l lclause 5.8.4(1)P requiles creep cllects to be included
in second-order analysis. To perform this calculatjon rigorously, difiet'ent stress slrain
relationships would be required for different lod pplictions, To overcome this problem,
a simplified relationship is given using an effective creep ratio, /"r, which, used together
wiLh thc total design load, givcs a crecp deformation corresponding to that ftom the
qusi-pefmanent load only, as is required. The effective creep factor is given in ?-.f-1/
clause 5.8.4(2 ) as fbllorvs:
2-l-1(5.r9)
o. - tP(:n, tn) Mxsrrl MnBa

2-l-l/clause
5.8.4(t )P

2-l-l/clause
s.e.4(2)

lvhele:
o(oo, ro) is the final creep coellicient according to 2-l-llclause 3-1.4
Morun is the frrsl-ordcr bending moment in thc quasi-permanent load combination (SLS)
M|,Ba is the flrst-order bending moment in the design load combination (ULS)

The use of an SLS value for quasi-permanent loads and a ULS value for the design
combination does not appear logical and it is recomnerded here tht either SLS or ULS
values are used to calculate both moments- By way of illustration, if all the moments
were due to pelmanent load then 2-l-liExpression (5.19) as written would lead to
rp"r

< d(co. /o) which

is incorrect.

as suggested. the use of 2- l- l lExpression (5.19) in secondorder calculations will generally be conservative. This is because short-term increments of
axial load from live load will tead Froportionately to a greter inctease in sccond-order
moment than a similar increment of dead load as the incren.rent is occurring at higher
axjal krad. Thc first-order moment ratio in 2-l-li Expression (5.19) rheretbte overesLimates
the proprtin of dead load mment in the led up to filule. To avoid this conservtism,
the Note to 2-l-liclause 5.8.4(2) allorvs o"p to be based ol the moment ratio Mpon/Mp6
including second-order effects, but this would become iterative.
2-1-l lclause 5.8.1(4/ llows creep to be ignored and thus shofi-term concrete prpertles to
be used if all tluee of the followins are satisfied:

With pprpriate modifrcation

(j,(, to) <

Mt)F.o1Nuo

>

2-l-l/clouse
5.8.4(4)

<75

where /r is the cross-section depth in the plane of bending.

The latter criterion is unlikely to appll' very often in bfidge pier design, so creep will
normally need to be considered as above. A warning is also made in the Note to 2-l-li
clause 5-8.4(4) that creep should not be neglected, as well as second-order effccts il the
mechanical reinforcement rtio. r.,r, fiom 2-l-liclause 5,8.3.1(l) is less than 0.25.
2-2lclause 5.8.4(105) pcrmits a morc accuratc mcthod ofaccounting fbr creep to bc LLsed.
allowing for the cleep defolmations from individual load cases, rathcr than by the use of
one effective creep factor to apply to the lotal combination of actitls. Relreuce is madc

2-2/clause

s.8.4(t 0s)

69

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

to 2-2iAnnex KK. The additional effort involved in such an pproch is generally not
warranted fbr the analysis of second-order effects with axial load and has the disadvantage
of requiring the analysis to be split into several stages.

2-l-l/clouse
5.8.5(r)

5.8.5. Methods of analysis

Three metlrods for tking second-ordcr cflccts into account are given
5.8.5/ /7. Thcsc are;

(l)

in

2-1-l lclause

NonJinear analysis according to clause 5,8.6.

based on magnification of first-order morrents according to clause 5.8.7.
based on maximum predicted curvatures according to clause 5.8.8-

(2) Method
(3) Method

Method (1) will give the lowest totl moments while method (3) is the quickest to peform. Of
methods (2) and (3), mcthod (2) typically gives lower moments lbr small creep ratios
(0"r < 0-5, say) or for high reinforcement content, but lor higher creep ratios and norrnal
reinforcement conteut, method (3) gives lower moments.

2-l-l/clouse
s.8.6(t )P

2-l-l/clouse
5.8.6(6)

2-l-l/clouse
s.8.6(2)P

5.8.6. General method - second-order non-linear analysis

For the reasons explained in section 5.8.1 of this guide, it is essential that a second-order
analysis with axial load for reinforced concrete sections realistically models material nonlinearity as well as the geometri non-linearity. 2-I-I lclause 5.8.6(l )P provides a general
methd based on non-linear analysis, which allows for both these sources of nonlinearity.
To illustrate the effects ofnon-linearity on the resistance of a system, it is sitr.rplest to consider a canlilevering pier such s the one in Fig. 5.8-1- The moment'curvature relationship
for a sectin under a specified axial load, N, can be determined and used to produce a
moment deflection curve for the mcmbcr by rclating curyalure directly to displacement.
For a cantilcvsring pier, an approximte reltionship can be obtained by assuming the
maxlmurn moment at the base of the pier acts over the full merlber height. This leads to a
tip deflection A : kL2 l2 wbere k is the cruvature at the base ol thc picr. From equitibrium,
the ttal applied noment : M0 + A where M0 is the flrst-order moment inclding
moment li'om initil npefections. This can be pJotted ou the pier resistance moment
deflection curve as shown in Fig.5.8-7. nd used t find the equilibrium deflection such
that there is equilibrium and compatibility. Equilibrium is achieved at the stable equilibrium
position, as shown in Fig. 5.8-7.
Structural analysis packages perlbrm a similar process to the above within the lengths of
mcmbers, so approximte relationships between momenLs and defleclions as abovc arc not
required. Such approximate methods based on cl itical cross-sections re, however. permitted
l:y 2-1-llclause 5.8.6(6 ).
White thc above illustrates the structurl behaviour in general terms, it does n ddress
the issue of what material properties should be used in the aa|ysis.2-I-llclause 5,8.6(2)P
rtates only that stress-strain curvcs for conqrete and sleel should be 'suitable for overall
nalysis' and should take creep into account. The resistnces of locl sections ate govetned

Fig. 5.8-7. Moment-deflection rlationship for

70

canrilever pier

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTUML ANALYSIS

by design values of the material strengths while, argr.rably, the overall behaviour will bc most

similar to that produced with mean matedal strengths, EC2 generally requires 'realistic'
stiffnesses to be used in the analysis, as described in seclion 5.7, and this leds to the
lengthy vedfication fbrmat described therein, which can be used for second-order analysis.
An alternative aflou,cd by both 2-2iclause 5.7 alnd 2-1-llclause 5.8,6(3) is to use design
values of material properties throughout the analysis so that, if equilibrium and con]patibility are attained in the analysis, no further local design checks are required. Tbis is
conservative where all applicd actions are external forces as the resulting deflections (and
hence P A effects) will be greater because of the uniformly reduced stiffnesses implicit in
thc mcthod. In lhis case, it will also be conserlative to neglct the e11cts of tension stiffening
as noted in 2-I-I lclause J.8.6il5). The clause permits the inclusion ofthe effects of tension
stilening, but no method of its cnsidertion is given.
It should be noted that ignoring tension stiffening is not lways conservative, dcspite the
Note to 2-l-1,/clause 5.8-6(5). One example is in the analysis of extcrnally post-tensioned
beams. where greter force increase can be obtained in the tendns if all sections are

2-l-l/clouse
.R

/?l

2-l-l/douse
R

i/5)

not lo be tension stiflned.

design properties are used, the stress strain relationships given in 2-1-1/Fig, 3.2 tbt'
concrete (modilied as specilied in 2-l-l/clause 5.8.6(3) for design values) and 2-l-1iFig. 3.8
assumcd

If

for reinforcing stcel can bc used. Creep may be accounted for through 2-l-llclause
5.8.6(4) by multiplying all strain values in the above concrete stress strain diagrarr by a
factor (l + e"r), where p"1 is the effective creep ratio discussed in section 5.8-4. The analysis
wor.rld be performed using the design combination of actions relevant to the ultimate linit
state. When this procedule is followed, no further checks of local sections are required. as
strength and stability are verified directly by the analysis, Care is needcd, however, where
there are indirect ctions (imposed displaccmcnLs) as a sti[Icr overall system may attract
more load to the cdtical design section, despile the reductin in P A ellcts. A sensitivity
analysis could be tricd in such cases.
Analysis at SLS should, however, be performed using mteril stress strain diagrams
bascd on realistic stiffnesses. particularly whele imposed deformations can gcnerate internl
effects. The modelling should therefore foLlow that suggestcd for SLS nonlinear analysis in
section 5.7 of this guide.
5.8.7. Second-order analysis based on nominal stifrness
Although the elstic critical buckling load or moment itself has little direct relevance to real
design of reinforced concrete, it gives a good indication of susceptibility lo sccond-order
in determinilg second-order effects from the
results of a trst-ordel analysis. The method of 2-l-liclause 5.8.7 is based on the elastic
thcory that tolal rnonents in a pin-ended strut, including second-order eflccts, can be
derived by multiplying flrst-order moments (including momcnts arising from initial imperfclious) by a magnifier that depends on the axial force and the Euler buckling load of the pier.
The simplest example of this is a pin-endcd column. length L, under axial load only with an
initial sinusoidal bow imperfection of maximum displacement an. The Euler buckling load is
siven bv:
eflects and can also be used as a parameter

Nu:intlrz

(Ds

q-4J

(Determination of E/ l'or rcinforced concrete columns is covered by 2-1- liclause 5.8.7.2 and
is discussed later in this section.)
If the axial load is 66 then the final deflection is given by;

,:*l*1^,".1,rJ

(D5.8-5)

(This is obtained lrom simple elastrc theory b1' solving .C1ld2(r 1]0)/dxr] + Ns,r?r:0.
where r., is the latcral displacement as a function of heigl.rt ,r up the column and
x'o

.70

sin

1r/I.)

2-l-l/clause
s.8.6(4)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

The corresponding final maximum moment including second-ordor effects, Ms6

js lhen given by:
rf.fro

Nuo

where Mxs6

Il

(!d/NB)

l:**[ r

Ns1a,

(D5.8-6)

(NEd/NB)

Ns6a6 is the flrsGorder moment. The n.ragnifier here is

l/(l

Ns6/Ns), which

assumes that the

initial imperfection is sinusoidal. Similar results are prduced for the

magnification of moments in pin-ended struis with applied end moments or transverse
load, but the magnifler varies slightly depending on tbc distribution of the first-order
moment- For unilbnn moment, the mplifier above is slightly unconselvative but it will
2- l-

l/douse

s.8.7.3

(r

generally suflice with sulficieut accuracy.

The above illustrates the basis of 2-1-l/clause 5.8.7.3(l), which allows total moments in
bridges and bridgc components, including second-ordel efTects, to be tbund by increasing
the irst-order rnoments (including the ellccts of all imperfections) as follows:
,tZuo

2-l-l/clouse
s.8.7.3(2)

2-l-l/clouse

,lZn.o

ll

(NB/NEt)

2- 1-

l(5.28)

where p: n2/c6 from 2-l-llclause 5,5.7.3(2) and Nu : r2EI ffi wbere / is the effective
length for buckling determined in accordance with 2-1-1iclause 5.8.3-2. M6Ed is the design
moment from a first-order analysis but this must include the mment from initial imperfections (M0Ed and N63 arc design values and n.rust include all load factors). c0 depends on the
distribution of moment and hence curvature in the column. For uniform curvature, c0 : 8.
For sinusoidal curvalure, co - rrl and the expression for moment simplifies to that of (D5.86) as given in 2-I-llcltuse 5.8.7.3(4):

5.8.7.3(4)
2-

l-1(s.30)

2-l-1,/clause 5.8.?.3(4) recormlrends the general use of this magnifier as a reasonablc

approximation for other moment diagram shapes. It is not. however, conservtive for
cases of uniform or near uniform moment where A:nzlt.3:r2/8
shoulcl also be
used where an equivlent uniform moment has been assumed when there are differing
first-ordcr end moments as discussed belorv.
The above expressions assume that the peak first-order moment occurs at thc samc section
- A effect. Cnsidering first braced columns, this is true for a
pin-ended strut without cnd moments or with squal end moments but is nol necessarily true
when end moments are present and are not equal. It would therefore be conservative to
as thc peak rnoment from the P

2-l-l/clause
5.8.7.3(3)

magnily the firsl-order nlonents throughout the height of the pier by the above magnilication in this ltter cse. 2-I-l lclause 5,8,7,3(J,) (as did IIS 5400 Part 4') partly overcomes
this conscrvatism by allowing an equivlent flrst-rder moment to be used only where there
rs no trcmsverse loarl applied in the height of the column and the cohtmn ii raced- Differing
first-order end moments M6 and Mn|. giving rise to a linear variation of moment along
the height of the picr, are replaced by an equivalent first-ordel end n.ron.rent M according
to 2-l- I /clause 5.8.8.2(2'):
Mx,

Q.6Mx2

+ 0.4M01 > 0.4Mx2 where lMozl

>

Morl

2-t-1i(.32)

Where moments give tension on lhe same side of the member. tbey have the same sign,
otherwisc n.roments should be given opposite signs. This gives an equivalent lirst-order

in the middle of the colunn which can be magnified using 2- l - I7'Expression

(5.28) and used in design of the middle of the column. Tbe total moment t design fr al
the column end should also not be taken as less thn M02 as discussed below, although
this is not explicitly statcd. Similarly. where reinfbrcenent varies, each end of the column
should be desisned for at lest the first-order end moments.

moment

72

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

A linearly vrying moment is only obtained when imperlections are ignored and 2-l-l/
Expression (5.32) only pplies to the linedy varying part of the rnoment. lmperfections
must, however, bc qonsidered and the use of 2- l - l i Expression (5.28) becomes slightly
confusing in this cse as it includes the first-order term from imperlctions in Mnp,1. To
ovelcome this problem, it is recommended that the flrst-order efiects from linearly varying
momcnt and imperfection are kept separate and the reduction according to 2- I - 1,/Expression
(5.32) is made only to the linearly varying part, such that the total ellctive first-ordcr
non.rent is as follows:

M6s6:

M6s6,1

M6s6,;

(D5,8-7)

where:

Moga.t is the effective firsL-ordcr uniform momcnt determined in accoldance with

2-l-li Expression (5.32) from the linearly varying tlroment, but excluding
lmperlecuons
M

or.a.t is the maximum first-ordcr moment from impcrfections in the middle ol the
plef

The moment according to eqution (D5.8-7) is then used in 2-1-1,/Expression (5.28) to derive
the total clesign effects including second-order effects at the middle part of the member.
In reality, for braced columns, the moments lrom linearly vrying lirst-order momenl,

first-ol'der urornents from imperfections and additional second-order moments from

P A cffccts add as shown in Fig. 5.8-8. (The second-orcler cnd moments shown do not
develop if there is no end restrint rotatinl stiffness.) It is then necessary to consider
three design locations:

(l) P

ellcts add

to fint-order moments in the middle of the mcmber. This total

approximatcly when the equivalcnt lirst-order moment from

^ is obLaincd
moment

(2)
(3)

equation (D5.8-7) is magnified ccording t 2- 1 - 1i Expression (5.28).

P A eflcts reduce the first-order moments at the end with the larger first-order
moment so the initial moment M1t only necds to be che{rked t this end, assun.ring no

P A eflects ot imperfections.
P A effects increase the first-order moments

at the end with the smaller first-order

plus
moment so the moment M6y
the first-order effects from imperlctions should be
gives
increased. EC2. however,
no requirement for this check and neither did BS 5400
Part 4-e In practice, this chcck is unlikcJy to bc critical. Work by Cranstonr0 indicated
tht this moment would be less thn those in (1) and (2). If there were specific concerns
that this check might be critical" computer second-order non-linear analysis would have
to be carried out- Care is particuLarly needed if reinforcement is curtailed.

For unbraccd columns (Lhat are therefore able to sway). the above reduction according to
- 1/Expression (5.32) should not be made, although this is not made clear in EC2. This is
again best illustrated through the simplest case of a cantilevring pier where the pek fustorder moment at the base obviousll' coincidcs with the peak moment fiom the P A
effect. In these cases the first-order moments throughout the height of the picr should be
magnificd according to 2- 1- llExpression (5.28).
This method of addressing second-order effects is straightforwatd for structural steel
members, where 1 can be taken as constant up to yield. For concrete structutes, the
situation is morc complicated as lhere is significant non-lincarity involved in cracking of
the concrete and inherent non-linearity in the concrete stress strain responsc. The result is
that',El ior a given axial force reduces with increasing moment and is not unique, ?-1-1/
clause 5.8.7.2(1) overcmes this difficulty by providing constant 'nominal stifTness' 7
ior a given cross-section, which depends on all the relevant paran'reLcrs, i.e. reinforcement
2-

2-l-l/clouse
s.e.7.2(t)

content, axial force, concrete strength, creep and slcnderness:

EI

K.E"dl"+ K"EJ,

2- 1-l

(5.21)

73

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

+t/
l_
1

(a) First-order moments

(excluding impedeclions)

(b) Dellection lrcm

(c) Additionl second-order momenls

lirslotder momenls

trom magnificalion of first-order

(excluding imperf ections)

moments (exclud ng imperfections)

Ltr

t9

L
(d) Firsl-order moments

lrom imperfections

(e) Dellection lrom lirslorder

moments f rom imperfections

(0 Additional second-order moments

Jrom magnificalion of first-order
moments f rom imperteclions

Total momenls including second-order ellecis are lhe sum of (), (c). {dJ and (l)

Fig.5.8-8.

Braced columns with end moments and impertections

where:

E"a

/.
E,
1"
K"
K

design value

ofYoung's modulus for concrete, 8","/%s from 2-1-1/clause 5.8-6(3)to be equal to L20 but is nationally determined parmeter

1"6 rs recommended

- inertia of rros5 concrete secrion

- design valuc of Young's modulus for reinforcment
= iuertia of reinforcement about lhe concrete section centroid
: factor allowing fbr cracking, concrete material nonlincarity
: factor for contribution of reinforcement: 1.0

and creep

The calculation of these parameters is illustrated in Worked exan.rple 5.8-3.

Only one El value can be used throughout the member heighL in this calculation method.
Care has to be taken with this method when reinforcement is curtailed in the member as this
mighr affect the distribution fcurvaLurc assumcd when using the above 3 parmeter. Where
reinforcement is curtailed continuously to match the moment capacity envelope, it will be
nlore approprite to use the d value of z'18 for constant moment. Since the second-order
moments depcnd on the stiffness ofthe section which is itselfinfluenced by the reinforcement,
the calcultion according Lo the method of 2-l-l/clause 5.8.7 becornes iterativ if the rinforcemcnt is to be reduced from tht assumed in an initial calculation.

74

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTUML ANALYSIS

'

iiiiriii .Vei$i{tl i
d-. for this n

.0 and

.o.

35

l0r MPa. Calculate the final

1c base o['the pier.

of the concrete cross-section and oI rhe rcinforcerrent about t]re concrete

centroLd are hrst clculated. I hese are as lollows:

,s

.f.

3.1 7? ma

,1":7.81

* l0']rn'

{Comnressionreinlorcementisincludedintheabove-seethediscussiononcomnrcssion
ieinloicemcnt
in section 5.8.IJ below.)
' "iil.

;;.;:;';''.';;:i'ii:;il:;:-'

- = /*,- ,l|-,o.,_.
k2 n.fi.,,

*o
o

0.314 >

^."r.i"u""

H., -

Y-li.

,-r-ri(s2i)

rcquircd

0.125 < 0.2 as rcquircd

6.125

t o* rtrluwo.r'.d

4L' o,!

2-l-l
^5.24,

example 5.8-2)

0.088 (for p >

0,002)

2-r-l,(5.22)

The concrete modulus

11,:,;,1.*;-il'"

",lffill-llJ:]
l:=

ing load

*,i::.,
..ri.-.,.

iiq

ll l;lli

72eo3kN

75

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

1366 kN

Fig. 5.8-9. Pier loading for Worked example 5.8-3

5.8,8. Method based on nominal curvature

2-l-l/clouse
5.8.8. t ( r)

2-l-l/douse
s.8.8.2(t )

The method of2-l-1i clause 5.8.8 is based on similar theory to the slender column method in
BS 5400 Part 4'' in Lhat an estimate of the maxirrurr possible curyature is used to calculate
the second-rder momenl 2-l -l lclaase 5.8,8,1(1) notes thal thc method is primarily
intended lbr use with members tht cn be isolted frm the rest of the bridge, whose
boundary conditions can be represented by an effective length applied to the membcr. The

first-order moment, including that from initial imperfections, is added t the moment
from the additional naximum deflection according to the exprssion in 2-I-llclause
5,8.8.2(1). (This differs from thc method in US 5400 where initial imperfections are not
considered.)

My6-

Mns4+ M2

2- l

1/(s.31)

wherc:

ozd
M2
M

is thc first-order noment. including the efTect of imperf'ections

is the estimatcd (nominal) second-order moment

The additional second-ordcr momcnl is givcn as follows:

M2

Ns4e2

2-1-1(5.33)

M2 is determined by calculating r:2 from Lhe cstimated curvalurc at failurc, l//, according to
the fornrula, e,= (.1lr)li/c. c depends on the distribution of curvtufe in the column, The
definition of r dillers from c6 used in 2-l-ticlause 5.8,7 as it depends on the shape of tlle

76

CHAPTER

5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

totl curvture, not just lhe curvature from first-order moment- For sinusoidal curvture,
c: I and for conslant curvature, c - 8 as discusse<l in section 5.8.7.
Thc latter value f c is best illustrated by considering a free-standing pier of length t with
rigid lbundations and hencc /o : 2L. For constant curvature, l/r, the deflection is obtined
bv intesration of the cuNature as follows:

^:IJ;(];o'o': (i)u,,
From the above formula for

e2,

(i),t,,= (1)+r'rt -

with c -

(D5.8-8)

and ln

: 2L,lhe deflecLion ts:

(l)*,,

which is the same result as that in (D5.8-8).

The value of c: ur2 is recomn.rended tn 2-1-l lclause 5,5'5.2(4), but care should again be
taken when reinforcemcnt is curtailed continuously to match the moment capacity envelope
In that situation, it will be more appropriate lo usc c: 8 s for consLant moment.
The value of curvature l/r depcnds on creep and the magnitude of the applied axial load.
For members with constant symmetrical cross-section (including reinforcement) it can be
dcterrnined according to 2-1-llclause 5.8,8.3(l ):

- *,u^!

2-

l- 1(5.14)

where:

llrn
K,
K,i,

is the basic value ofcurvature, discussed below

is a correclion factor depending on axial loatl, discussed below
is a lactr for tking account ofcreep, discussed below

2-1-liExpression (5.34) is only applicable to constant symmetric sections with symmettlc

reinforcernent. The lattcr implies that the reinforcernent in compression is considered in the
sLilTness calculation. Reinlblcement in compression is also considered in the stiffness
calcultion in 2-l-liclausc 5-8.7.2(l). No criteria are given for the detailing ofreinlorcement
in compression to enable its contribution to stiffness to be considercd- Criteria fbr thc
detailing of cmpression bars to enable their use in the closs-section resistance calculation
are, however, givel in thc following clauses:

. Beams
. Columns
. Walls

2- l

l1claate 9.2.1.2(3)

2-l-l iclause 9.5.3(6)

2- 1-

l lclause 9.6.3(1)

These requirements are discussed under the relevant clauses. The rulcs for columns, in
particular, require compression bars in an outer layer to be heltl by links if they are to he
included in the resistance check. It is, howevet, not considered necessary here to provide
such links in order to consider the contribution of rcinforcement in compression to the
stilTness calculation. This apparent incompatibility is justilied by the conselatrve nature
of the methocls of clauses 5.8.7 nd 5.8.8 compared to a general nonlinear analysis and
lhc similar approach tken in EN 1994-2 clause 6-7 for composite columns. Ifthere is specilic
concefn over the adequacy of thc restraint to compression bars, the suggested curvatule ln
fD5.8-10) below could be used as more conservative value.
The curuature l/rn is based on a rcctangular beam with s.vmmetricl reinforcement nd
strains of yield in reinforccment at ech tbre separated by a lerer arm z - 0.9/, where d

is tbc cllective depth (the compression and tension reinforcement thus being considered to
reach yield). Hence the curvature is given by:
9vd

'titJ

o.45d

(Ds.8-e)

2-l-l/clouse
5.8.8.2(4)

2-l-l/clause
5.8.8.3(r)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

This difiers from the method in BS 5400 Part 4,v where curvature was hascd on steel yield
strain in tension and concrete crushing strin at the other fibre. Despite the pprent reliance
on compression reinlbrcement to reduce th linal concrete strain, the results produced will
still be similar to those from BS 5400 Part 4 because:

(l)

The moment from imperfections hs to be added in EC2.

(2) The strain difference cross the section is less in BS 5400 parr 4, but it occurs over a
smaller depth (not the whole cross-scction depth) thus producing proportionally
more curvature.
2-l-l/clause
s.8.8.3(2)

For situalions rvhere the rcinforcement is not just in opposite faces of the section, d is
r'. in accordnce with 2- 1-l lclause 5.8.8.3 (2), where is is the radius ofgyration
of the total feinforcement area. This expression is again only pplicble to uniform
symmetric scctions with s),mmctric reinforcement.
No rule is given where the reinforcemcnt is not symmetrical. One possibility would be to
determine the curvature from similar assumptions to those used in rel'erence 9. These are that
the tension steel yields at ero and thc cxlrene fibre in compression reaches its failure strain 8".
so the ourvature 1/16 would be given approximately by:
vd +6c
,,
taken as /2 +

/ro: - h
where I is the depth ol the section in the direction of bending
L

(D5.8-10)

(used as an approximation to
the depth to the outer reinforcement layer). The concrete strain can consen,atively be tken
as c : ecu2. If cquadon (D5.8-10) is used, the factor (. below should be taken as 1.0.
K. is a lactor which accounts fbr the reduction in curvature with increasing axial load and
is given as (zu n)1fu,, - n,ofi < 1.0. lu, is the ultimte capacitl, of the section under axial

load only, N", divided by A"l"a.N, implicitly includes all rhe reinforcemcnt area,
calculating the compression resistance such that N, : 1".,{a + ,4./;,1 so tht

"
2-l-l/clouse
5.8.8.3(3)

2-l-l/clouse
s.8.8.3(4)

ls,

.
_(/l".fc,t Asl,d\ _, _,4,J,,r

A"T"

A,f,A

in 2-1-Ilclause 5.8,8.3(3). n6n1 is the valuc ofdesign axial load, divided by,4"L6,
which would naximize the moment resistance of the section see Fig. 5.8-10.
The clause allows a value of 0.4 to be used for z6u1 for all symmetric sctions. ln other
cases, the value can be obtaincd from a section analysis- K. may always be conservatively
taken as 1.0 (even though for r<n6u1 it is calculated to be greater than 1.0), and this
approximation will usually not result in ny great loss of economy for bridge piers unless
the compressive Joad is umrsually high.
Kd is a lactor which allows for creep and is given by 2-1-l lclause 5.8.8.3(4) as follows:
as gJven

Ka-t+

l.id.i

>

1.0

2- r- 1 l(s

where:
Qcf

is the effective creep ratio. discussed in section 5.8.4

0.35 +./;k/200

)/150 and

is the slenderness ratio discussed in section 5.8.3

Fig, 5.8- 10. Axial force for a 'balanced' section

78

in

.37)

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTUML ANALYSIS

For braced nembers (hcld in position at both ends) \!hich do not have transverse loading,
an equivalcnt flrst-order moment for the lineally varying part of the momcnt may be
used according Io 2-1-llclause 5.8.8.2(2). This, together with the othcr checks required, is
discussed at length in section 5.8.7 bove. It is discussed thcre tht the final first-order
moment MEd should comprise the reduced equivalent moment from 2- 1 - li Expression
(5.32) added to the full first-orcler moment from imperfections.

2-l-l/clouse
s.8.e.2e)

79

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

5.8.9. Biaxial bending

2-l-l/clouse
s.8.e(2)

2-l-l/clouse
s.8.e(3)

2-l-l/clouse
5.8.e(4)

The effects of slcntlerness for columns bent biaxially are most accurtely determined using
non-linear analysis, as discussed in section 5.8.6 of this guide. The provisions of 2-1-1,/
clause 5-8.9 apply when simplilied methods have been usedThe approximate n.rethods described in sectjons 5.8.7 and 5.8.8 can also be used for the
case ol biixial bending. The second-order moment is first determined separately in each

direction following either f the above methods, including imperfections. 2-1-l lclause
5.8.9(?,) sttes that it is only necessry to consider imperfections in one direction, but the
direction should be chosen Lo determine the most unfvourablc overall effect. 2-1-1 lclause
5.8.9(3J allows the interaction between the moments to be neglected (i.e. consider bending
in cach direction separately) if the slenderness ratios in the two principle directions do nt
differ by more than a factr of 2 and the'relative eccentricities' satisfy one f the cdteria
in 2-l-llExpression (5.38b) (not reproduced here). Where this is not stisfied, the moments in
the two directions (including second-order effects) must be combined, but in.rperfections only
need to be considered in one direction such as to produce the mst unfavourable conditions
overall. Section design under the biaxial moments and axial lbrce may be done either by a
rigorous cross-section analysis using the strain comptibility method discussed in section
6.1.4.4 of this guide, or the simple interaction provided in 2-I-l lclause 5.8.9(4J may be used.
Where the method of2- I - llclause 5.8.8 is used, it is not cxplicitly stated whether a nominal
second-order noment, M2- should be co[sidered in both orthogonal directions sirnultaneously, given that the section can only 'faif in one plane of bending. If the method of
section 5.8.7 is used, the fimt-order moments in both directions would be amplifled, but
the resu]ting mo[rents in given direction would be small if the first-order moments (including those from impcrfections) were small. M2, howcver, can be signilicant in both directions.
From above, a case could be made for considering M2 only in the direction that gives the
most unfavourablc verification. For circular columns, it is possible to take the vector
resultant of moments in two orthogonal difectins, thus tmnsforming the problem into a uniaxial bending problem with ,141 considered only in the direction of the resultant moment. In
general, however, it is rccomrnended here that M2 conscrvatively be calculated for both directrons, as was practlce t BS 5400 Part 4.' Bending should then bc checked in each direction
independently, and then biaxial bending should be considered (wrth M2 pplied in both
dircctions together unless second-order effects cn be neglected in one or both directions in
accordance with 2-l-1,/clause 5.8.2(6) or 2-l-liclause 5.8.3) if 2-l-l/clause 5.8.9(3) is not
lulfilled. hnperlections should only be considered in one direction, In many cases, ,,l12 will
not be very significant for bending about the major axis, s the curvature from equation
(D5.8-9), and hencc nominal second-order momcnt, is smaller lbr a wider section.

5.9. Lateral instability of slender beams

2-l-1,/clouse
s.e( t )P

80

2-1-llclause 5.9(1)P requires the designer to consider lateral instability of slender concrete
beams. The instability refcrred to involves both lateral and torsional displacement of the
beam when subjected to bending about the major axis. Such instability needs to bc considered for both erection and finished conditins, but is only likely to be a potential problem for
concrete bridge beams during Lransportation or erectin before they are sufliciently braced
(by deck slab and diaphragms, for example) within the final stfucture.

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTUML ANALYSIS

2-1-l lclause 5.9( 3 ) delines geometric conditions to be satisfied so that sccond-order eflects
from the above mode of buckling can bc ignored. These limits are noL applicble where therc
is axial force (such as duc [o external prestressing), as the axial force leads to addjtional
second-order effects s discussed in section 5.8. It is recommended that sections are generally
designed to be within these linits to avoid the complexity of verifying the beam through
second-ordcr analysis. The limits should be met for most practicl beam geomctries used
in bridge design with the possible exception ofedge beams with continuous integrl concrete
parapts. Where such upstands are outside the geometric limits but have been ignorecl in the
ultimatc limit state checks of the edge beam, engineering judgernent may oftcn be used to
cnclude that the upstand is adequate. (Somc care would still be required in the verilication
of crackil1g in the upsland.)
If the simple requirements of 2-l-l/clause 5.9(3) are not met, then second-order analysis
needs to be crded out to detennine Lhc additional tnsverse bcnding and torsional

noments developed. Geometric imperfections must be taken into account anl 2-1-Il
claase 5.9(2) requires lteral deflection of //300 to be assumed as a geometric imperfectiou,
where / is the total length ol the beam. It is not necessary to include an additional torsional
imperfection as wcll- Any bracing. whether continuous fron a dcck slab or discrete l'rom diaphragms, should be included in the model. Such analysis is cornplex as it must allow tbr both
the nonlinear behaviour o[ the matedals and the geometric nonJinearity of the instability
type, for which finite element modelling (with shell elemcnts) would be required.
No further guidance is offered in EN 1992 and further discussion ol a suitable nonlincar
analysis is bc.vond the scope ofthis guide. The comnentary lo clause 6.6 3 3 4 of Model Code

2-l-l/clouse
5 e(3)

2-l-l/douse
s.e(2)

906 gave a simplifled method of designing slender bcams and refereuce could be made to this
if required. Regardless of tl.re method used, the supporting structures and restraints musl be

designed for thc rcsulting torsion

2-1-I lclause 5,9(4).

2-l-l/clause
s.e(4)

5.10. Prestressed members and structures

5.10.1, General
2-2iclause 5.10 covers speciflc rules for pfestressed concrelc members and structures nd
co\-ers both pre-tensioned as well as post-tensioned bridges. It deals wiLh maximum pennissible prestressing forccs, prcstress losses and the tretment of prestress in section design and
global analysis. It does not cover the design of anchoragc zones, which is covered by 2-27
clause 8.10. The t'ules in this section atc very much gered towards post-tensioning and
son-te interprelation is needed for pre-tensioned beams made composite with a deck slb.
as noted in the text and examples below.
2-1-llclause 5.10.1(2) al1ows the effects ofprestressing to be qonsidered as an action or as
part of the resistance, but individual clauses usually make iL cler as to which approch ls to
be used so there is little real choice. In genera), prestress is treated as an act:Lott (2-I-l lclause
5.,10.1(3)) and is included in Lhe combinations in EN 1990 as such. For example, pre\trcss is
treated as an applied force in the design of end blocks (see section 8.10) and, where elastic
anall'sis is used. in menber serviceability design and in the flexural design of unbonded or
erternally post-tcnsioned members. The effects of prestress are usualll, split into axil
force and moment components.
For the bending resistance of members with bonded prestressing. the prestressing is most
conveniently treted as part of the tesistance. 2-1J lclause 5.10'1(4) requires that the
conlribution of the prestressing tendons to the section resistance should be limited to their
additional strenglh beyond prestressing. This is intended to prevent double-counting of
the design presuessing force, whicl.r would occur if it was included both on the loading
side (as a prin]ary prestress moment and axial force) and in the seclion resistance calculation'
This rcquirement is most simply chieved by treating the secondary effects ol prcstress s an
pplied ction on the loading side, buL omitting the primary eflcts of the design prestressing
fbrce. The design prestressing force is then taken into accounL in the section bending resistance by shifting the origin of the design stress strain diagram for the prestressing tendons
by an amount corrcsponding to the design prestress. The initial strain in the prestress

2-l-[/clouse

5.t0.t (2)
2-l-l /clouse
s. r0. t (3)

2-l-[/clouse

s.t0.t (4)

8l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-l-l/clouse

s.r0.t(5)P
2-Uclouse

5.t

0.

r(t06)

TO EN I992.2

corresponding to this prestressing force is called the prestrain. This rnethod is discussed
fulther in scction .1 of rhis guidu
2-1-lltlause 5.10.1(5)P requires that brittlc failure of a prestressed member, caused by
sudden failure of prestressing tcndons upon crcking of the concrete in flexure, is avoided.
2-2lclause 5.10.1(106) requires this to bc achieved using one of the methods in 2-2lclause
6.1(109), which are discussed in section 6.1 of this guide. tt is a new codilied check for
UK designers. The requirement is analogous to tht for minimum rcinlorcement in
reinforced concrete clenrents.

5.10.2. Prestressing force during tensioning

Mqximum stressring force
EC2 deflnes rnaximunl pennissible limits to the stressing Ibrce both during and after tcnsioning in order to reduce the risk oftendon failure, to avoid stressing into the non-linear portion
of the prestrcssing cable's stress slrain cul\e and to ensure that excessivc relaxalion of the
slress in the tendons will not occur. The limit during tensioning is covered in this clause
while the limit after tensioning is covered in 2-1-llclause 5_ 10.3.
The maximum force applied to a tcndon. P."., should not exceed the value givcn in 2-1-i/
5.1 0.2.1 .

2-

l-

l/clouse

5. r0.2. t (t )P

clause 5.10,2.1(1)P as follows:

P,nn.

2-l-l/clouse
s.t 0.2. t (2)

,4oop,max

2-t-116.41)

where.lo is the cross-sectional area ofthe tendon and a0,.,," is the maximum allowable stress
for the tendon, defined as he minimum of irl f1 or kr70,,,, where fr1 andfo6y1 are the
characteristic stless and 0.1% proof stress respectivcly, as discussed in section 3.3. The
values of /.1 and ft2 may be given in the National Annex and arc recomnended by EC2 to
be taken as 0.8 and 0.9 respectively. It is worLh noting that, for these recommended values
(and assun.ring a minimum /nr : l. !lpo.rr, as discussed in section 3.3,4), the maximurn permissible tendon jacking stress is slightly greater than the design yield strength (O.8Eo.rr
or 0.90{,o.rr compared 1(.' design yield of 0.87porr. if 1: 1.151. For prestressing strnd ro
EN 10138-3, typically f611 : 0.86.4,r whereupon the first limit equatcs to the even highet
value of 0.93/po tr. A sirdlar situation arose in BS 5400 Part 4.e
2-l-I lclause 5.10.2.1(2) allorvs higher stressing, ro /rj fp. if the lbrce in the jack can be
rnesured Lo an accuracy of 5% of the final value of prestressing forcc. The value of fr3
ma1, be given in thc National Annex and is rccomnended by EC2 to be taken as 0-95.
This value should never be assuned during design. Its use is intended ibr overcoming
shorttlls in Frestressing fbrce caused by unforeseen problems during construction, such
as unexpectedly high lriction and lvobble losses in ducted tendons. (2-l-liclause 5.10.3
requlles that prestress force should be checked on site by measuring both force and
tendon extensions as is normal good practice.) The decision to prestress to this elevated
stress must be nade in conjuncLion with the prestressing supplicr as it carries an increased
risk of srrand failure during stre5sing.
5.10.2.2. Limitotion of concrete

srress

2-1-liclause 5,10.2.2 defines several rules for prestrcssed concrete members to ensure that
crushing or splitting of the concrete is avoided during the presLresssing operations and
throughout the life ol the structure. At anchorages, such eflects are generally critjcal at
initial application of the prestress due to the long-tcmr reductions in prestress force and
the strength gain of concrete with timc, although the plestress force in unbonded and externally prestressed members can potentially increase to a higher value under ultimate load conditions - see section 5.10.8.
In the design of post-tensioned members. prestressing fbrces are applied directJy to the
member cnds as concentratcd lorces liom reltively small anchorages. These fbrces must
then spred out over the cross-section ofthe rlember resulting in higb local ooncrete stresses
in this zone. The design and detailing ofsuch cnd blocks is discussed further in section 8.10 of
this guide. Transmission lengths in pre-tensioned members are also discussed in section 8.10.

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

Although rules for checks on bursting of concrete rund nchorages are covered in EC2-2,
no explicit check is given on crushing nd splitting of the concrete directly in front of the
nchor plate in post-tensioned beams. 2-1-l lclause 5.10.2.2(1)P requires such local
damage to be avoidcd. As in previous UK prctice, it is therefore necessaty to ensure that
the concrete has achieved the requiled mitimum strengLh quoted in thc prestressing
suppliers' systern specification, referred Lo in 2-l-I lclause 5.10.2.2(2) as the 'European
Technical Approval' (ETA).
Where a tendon is loaded in stepped increments or is not stressed to the llaximum force
assumed in the ETA, 2-l-llclause 5,10.2,2(4) allows the required minimum concrete
strength at transfcr to be reduced, subject to an absolute mininum vah.re. This value can
be specified in the National Annex and is recommended by EC2 to be takcn as 507o of
the required n.inimum concrete strcngth for ftrll prestressing according to the ETA. 2-l-li
clause 5.10.2-2(4) recommends that the l'equired conorete strength can be obtained by
linear interpolation such that a presLressing force of 30Yo of the maximum requires 50o/o
of the ooncrele strength lor full prestress and full prestress requires the full concrete strength
specified in the ETA.
The compressive stress in lhe cocrcte away from anchorages should also be limited to
prevent longitudinal cracking, which is undesirable from durability considerations- 2-1-1/
clausc 5.10.2.2(5) defines a limit of 0.6/l(t), where/lp(l) is the characteristic compressive
strcngth of the concrcte at the time of prestressing. This limit corresponds to that provided
in 2-2lclause 7.2, which is used to prevent longitudinal cracking where the element is in an
aggressive environment. This lin.rit can bc increased (to a recomuerdcd value of 0.|.1(t).
which may bc varied in the National Annex) for pre-tensioncd elements where lcsts or
experience show tht longitudinal cracking will not occul. If the compressivc stress in the
concrete exceeds 0.45[k(l) undcr the quasi-permanent combinalion of ctions, 2-1-1/
clause 5.10.2.2(5) requires nonJinear creep to be considered as discussed in section 3 1.4.
No limits are given for concrete tensile slresses at transler so it nust be assumed that the
serviceability limit state crack width limits of2-2iclause 7.3 apply. The decompression check
required by 2-2/Table 7.l0lN need only be applicd at 100mm fiom lhe strands so is
inappropdate for the beam top fibre, where this is remote from the strands. Crack widths
could, howcver, be checked nd limited to 0.2mm in accordance with Z-2/Table 7.101N.
Alterntively, the National Annex may modify 2-2iTablc 7.101N to give further guidance.
Possibilities woulcl be to redefine the decompression check so that it applies to the extreme
fibrcs for checks at transfer, ot to specify a limit of I MPa of tension as was permitted in

2-|-l/douse
s. t 0.2.2(r)P

2-[-l/clouse
5.r 0.2.2(2)

2-l-l/clouse
s.t0.2.2(4)

2-l-l/clouse
5.t0.2.2(s)

BS 5400 Prt 4.'

5.10.3. Prestress force

At any given time, t, and distance, -r, from the stressing end of the tendon, lhe mean prestress
force, Pn..r(-t), is equal to the maximum force applied at the iacking end (Pn,,,) minus the
immediate losses, P1(,r), and time-dependent losses,

P-,,(x)

P,"""

AP1(,r)

AP"*.*.:

AP.,,.

(D5.10-l)

This deflnition is provided rn both 2-1-llclause 5.10.3(I1P and 2'1-llclaase 5.10.3(4).

Care is needed in applying the above, as EC2 presents equations for short-term losses,
P1(x), for single tendon, wheleas the long-tenn losses, APc+s+., are presented for the
whole group of tendons.
Whatcver the initialjacking load, 2-l-1/clause 5.10,3 defines maximum petmissible stresses
in the tendon imrnediately after anchoring (post-tensioning) or transler (pre-tensioning)
including the cllccts of immediate losses only (i.e, at a time of 1: l0). The prestressing
force after stessing and immediate losses is given by;

P-o(x):2.,,
P"'o(x)

,4oon.o(.r)

2-l-l/clause
5. t

0.3(4)

(D5.10-2)

AP;(-t)

This must nowhere exceed the

l- I /douse
s. r0.3(t)P

2-

lirrit

given in 2-1-l lclause 5.10.3(2):

2-

2-r-ri6,43)

l- l /douse
5. t 0.3(2)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

where ao*o(r) is the stress in the tcndon at point x immeditely fter tensioning r transfer.
2- l- I /clause 5.10.3(2) limits oo-6 (x) to the minimum of k7.fry or ks.fon , where./oL and./po.rr
are the characteristic stress and 0.1o% proof stress respectively. The values of /t7 and 3 ma]
be given in the National Annex and are recommended by EC2 to be taken as 0,75 and 0.85

2-l-l/clquse
5.t0.3(3)

rcspectively. These are Lypically a little higher than used in prcvious UK bridge design
prctice- For prestressing strand to EN 10138-3, typically
fis 1s : 0.86/pk s the second
limit governs, giving an allorvable force of 73.1% of the characteristic tensile strength.
The limit on force after tcnsioning was 7070 of the sharacteristjc tensile strength of the
tendn in BS 5400 Part 4.Y
2-1-llclause 5.10.3(-l) requires the following to be considered in detenr.rining the immediate losses, AP;(x):

.
.
.
.

losses due to the elastic deformation of concrete, APelj

losses due to short-tenn relaxtion, AP, (only affecting pre-tensioned members where
there is a dely between stressing and transfer to the concrete);
losses due to liiction, AP,(-r);
losses due to ancborage slip (or wedge draw-in), AP.1-

These losses are discussed in sections 5.10.4 and 5-10.5. The time-dependent losses of
prestrcss are designated 4P"1"*' and result from creep nd shrinkage of the concrete and
the long-term rclaxation of the prestressing stccl- Time-dependent losses are discussed in
seclion 5.10.6.

2-l-l/clouse
s.

t0.4(t)

5.10.4. lmmediate losses of prestress for pre-tensioning

2-1-llclause 5.10.4(I) requires the following losses to be considered for pre-tensioned
memben:

(r) Loss due to friction t the bends (for cuned wires or strnds) during the stressing process
clculation of friction losses is analogous to that for externally post-tensioned bridges
discussed in section 5.10.5.
(2) Loss due to wedge draw-in of thc anchorage devices. This depends on the construction
pl'ocess nd it is not nonnally considered by the designer, altiough the losses can be
calculated in the same way as for post-tensioned members discussed in section 5-10.5,
if the draw-in is known,
(3) Loss due to the relaxation ofthe pre-tensioning tendons during the period which elapses
between lhe tensioning of the tendons and the prestressing of the concrete. This is
calculated according to 2-l-liclause 3.3.2.
(4) Loss due to the elstic deformation of the concrete as the tesult of the ction of the
pre-tensioned tendons when they are released from lhe anchorages. The loss of force
in each tendon of area ln varies along its length and can be approximated from:
aP"r(x)

: ;,;fu""{.r)

(D5.10-3)

where o"(x) is the stress in the concrete adjacent to the tendon at transfer. E,rlEcnG) is
the modular ratio, with the modulus for concrcte based on its age at transfe;. This loss
will typically be a greater percentage than that lor post-tensioned members for the
rcasons discussed in the ncxt section. It is possible to refine this equation to allow for
the chnge in concrete stless during transfcr by adding a denominator similr to thal
in 2- I - I i Expression (5.46), but with a zero crep factor, C,, as follows:
E^
Aro-io,(x)
n A,(,
1*
'4..

E.(rt l. \'

(D5.10-4)

I"'"

Dcfinitions of ,4c nd zcp are given with the comments on 2- I - 1,/Expression (5-46).
equation (D5.10-4), ,40 can be bascd on either one tendon ol on group of

In
84

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

tendons as an approximalion. In the lattcr casc, oc(-r) then relates to the cablc group
centroid. Care is needed to be consistent with deflnitions.

5.10.5. lmmediate losses of prestress for post-tensioning

5. I 0.5. I . Losses due

to

elosc deformotion of the concrete

To perform a rigorous calculation ofelastic loss in a sequentially stressed tendon group, each
tendon has to be considered individually and the loss in each dctennined from the progressivc slrcssjng of cach subsequent tendon. The change in stress induced iu each tendon ts
determined from the chnge in strain induced in the adjacent concrcte, averged over the
tendon's length, from stressing of each subsequent tcndon. The need to use an avcrage
concretc s[rain ariscs bccausc, whcre individual tendons re unbonded prior to stressing
subsequent tendons, the strin chnges in tendon and adjacent concrcte are not constrained
to be equal and the loss offbrce in the tendon rvill be uniform along its length (negleoting the
effects of l-riction). It js thcrcforc usua] to calculate an average elastic loss for lhc cntire length
of tendon. If an individual tendon is bonded prior to stlessing subscquent tendons, the loss
of force in it will vary throughout its length as Lhe change in steel strain is conslrained to be
the same as the change in strain of the cncrete immediately adjaoent- (This is the case fbr
ple-tensioned beams as discussed in section 5.10.4.)

As a simpler alternalive lo scparatc consideration of tendons, 2-1-llclause 5.10.5.1(2)

allows an entire group of tendons to be treated together (acting at their centroid) and the
sress fron tensioning the complete group used to deLermine n verage loss. This is a
common approximation, albeit sometimes slightly unconservative, which has been used in
previous UK practice nd which is also used in the calculation of long-term losses in 2-lliclause 5.10.6. An approximate formula is provided for this average loss when tendons
are 'identical'. by which it is meant that they re the same size and havc the same initial stressing force. 2- I - I i Expression (5,44) gives the mean loss per tendon, wherein,4o is the arca of
one tendon. The progressivc loss ol prcstrcss with sequential stressing is accounted for by
rvay of the factor, l:

ar"

-rnEnl ts,,,J

2-l-l/clouse
s. t 0.5. t (2)

2-t-ri6.44)

where:

A^
Ep
4.(,
o"(l)

is thc cross-sectional area of a tendon

is the modulus f elsticity of prestressing steel
is the modulus of elasticity ofconcrele aL timc / (see section 3.1.3)
is thc vadation of stress at the centroid of the tendon group applied t time l. It
will inch.rde contributions from the prestress force logether $'ith any simulLaneous change in other pern.ranent actions, such as the gradual development of
self-weight forces developed as a beam lifts from its formwork during stressing.
As discussed above, o"(t) will be an average value along the tendon grolrp
centroid where all tendons are unbonded prior to collpletion of stressing. It
will also inch.rde stresses from variations of permanent ctions applied aftcr
prestressing (e.g. removal of supports. a jacking operation or addilion of superimposed dead load)- but these need to be considered separatcly as they will have a
diflerent L' value

j : (n I)/2n, where z is the number of identical' tendons successively prestressed. As an

approximation. it can bc takiln as 0.5- Where the stress vries in the tendons due to \'tiations
of permanent actions applied after plestressing, j - I as all tcndons are ailected similarly
This is the reason for the'!' sign in 2-l-liExprcssion (5.44)- 2- I - I i Expression (5.44) can
be applied to determine the total lss in a group of tendons dircctlf if ,40 is adiusted
accordingly (as is done in Worked examples 5.10-1 and 5.10-3).
One final point to note is that ifalready installed bonded tendons are included in the beam
section pfoperties fbr subsequent stressing operations. the 'elastic loss'iu these bonded
85

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

tcndons liom stfessing subsequcnt tendons will be included directly in the calculation of
concrete cross-scctional stresses. It is then not necessary to apply 2- 1 - l/Expression (5.44)
to these tendons. This approach is followed by some software.
5.

2-l-l/clause

s.t0.s.2(t)

/0.5.2. Losses due to fdction

In post-tensioned systems. prestress losses occur due ro friction in the duct as a cable turns
through an ang1c. These losses are caused both by the intended angular deviations forming
the cable profile and by unintentional variations in the tendon profile, often referred to as
wobblc, whiol.r arise from tolerances in setting out. from sag in the ducts between duct supports nd from movcnent of ducts during concreting. With external prestressing, friction is
concentrated at the pints of angular deviation.
2-1-l lclause 5.10,5.2(1) gives fhe following expression, from which the loss due to friction,
AP,,(,r), in post-tensioncd tendons may be estimated:
P, (r)

P-u,(1

e-P(l'+r*))

2-r-116.4s)

where:

17 is the sum ofthe angular deviations over a distnce -r: (irrespective ofdirection or sign)
p is the coeficient of friction between the tendon and its duct. Values for p depend on
both tendon and duct type and are bcsl dctcrmined from manufacturer's t]ata for
the particular prestressing system to be used. In the absence of such data, 2-l-1/
Table 5,1 defines valucs which n.ray be assumed lbr p, reproduced here as Table

I for

5.10-

2-l-l/clouse
5.t 0.s.2(3)

2-I-l/clouse
5.t 0.s.2(4)

-r
2-

I-

is the

convenience

'wobblc' factor to account fol unintentionl ngular deviation ofthe tendon (per

unit length). Again, values are best determined from nanuf'acturer's data. 2-1-llclaase
5.10.5.2(3) recomn.rends values within the range 0.005 < ft < 0.01 (per metre) if no
such dat is available- For external prestressing tendons, 2-l-Ilclavse 5.10,5,2(4)
allows the wobble loss due to unintentional anglcs to be ignored, althugh striclly
sorne llowancc should be made if it is possible t hve ny significnt angular error
in setting out deviation angles on site. Usually such unintentional angles are a small
fraction of the intended ones and can therefore be ignorcd
is the distance along the length of the tendon from the stressing end (i.e. the point
where the stress in the tendon is equal to P-.*)

l7'Expression (5.45) can be fernged such that the tendon force at x, P(x) is given by:

P(,r)/r,"""

!(d+

/")

(D5. r 0-5)

For small values of p,( + -r), equation (D5.10-5) may be written

P(-r)/P,"",: I p,0- p,kx

as:

(D5.10-6)

It

cn be secn that equation (D5.10-6) gives a linear reduction in forcc along thc tcndon
where lhere is either no intentional deviation of the tendon (i.e. wobble loss only), or
whcre the angular deviation per mcLrc is linear (parabolic profile).
Table 5.10-1. Coefflcients offricdon recommended for post-tensioned tendons
Internl tendons

External unbonded tendons

(for tendons

Cld drawn

Strand

wire

filling about half

of the duct)

Steel duct

(nonJubricated)

HDPE duct
(non-lubricted)

0.17
0.19

0.25
0.24

0.

t4

0.

0.

r2

0.

Deformed bar
0.65
Smooth round bar 0.33
Note HDPE: high-density polyethylene.

86

Steel

duct

(lubricated)
t8
t6

HDPE dct
(lubricated)
0.
0.

t2
t0

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

It should be noted that the detinition and value of the wobble factor, /r. used b\,e is not
the sane as is use<l in previous UK practice. due to the format of thc loss eqution. (The EC2
values of /t are equivalent to those used previously within BS 5400 Part 4.' divided by the
coeilicient of liiction. u.)
5.10.5.3. Losses ot onchoroge

Account hs to be taken of the losses due to wedge draw-in of the archorages, during the
anchoring operalion after tensioning, and due to the deformation of the anchorage itself.
Apprprite values of rvedge draw-in are given in mnufcturet's' data shects lor their
systems. Current systems usd in the UK have a design draw-in of betrveen 6mtn and
12mm. although actual site draw-in valucs arc usuallv lower than the quoted valucs for
the particulal system. For relatively short tendons, this loss can be particularly signicant
and can affecl the entire length of the tendon. For long tcndons. the loss fron draw-in
usually does not affect the whole length ol the tendon due to the interaction with riction
losses. Calculation ofloss from anchoring is illustrated in Worked example 5.10-1.

and vertical prcslrcssing profile itlustrared in Fig. 5.l0-2. The tendons are straig.trt in plan-

46m

II

t,,tiospan
l\ridspan

I
(3)
Pler 1

l.

_(11_

--,-

46m

,
_t-

(?) ttar
l
t',tiaspan I
Midspan

(1)
_
.(1)
End supn
Fig. 5.10-

50.

-T

_l

rzt

Midspa
viaan

(3)
-111^
Pit 2

|I

- 0)lll ,
End suppo.l

Schematic elevation of three-span concrete box girder

t"

section.properties'

centroi<l 2'

1^':'.'-'., 4.245
1":::"',4
End supports l2.J]7 m'
m- ::'.*:
I .0 t22 m
(2) Midspan I & 3 10.882mr 4.370m4 1.0420m
(lJ Pier tiPier 2
t0.4i5mr 4.001ma 0.9706m
(4t Mittspan 2
I0.882m" 4.370m4 1.0420m
(l)

properlics:
Matcrial
M
atcrial uroDcrlics:
Deck concrete clss is C40/50.

thus/11 40 MPa and, from 2- I -llTable 3.l."fcm 35GPa.

Presressing comprises low-relaxation strand wirh/01
1820 MPa. c.nefficient of friction,
: ;
factor. ;.0.05/ni.
cr.rmprise 28 strands with a total
0.19 and wobblc
wobbl.:fct4-
0.0051nr. :ftte.
Thc tnilns
Lendons impr
/r = 0:19:nd
r rea:
area of
4620mm2 aro:ectr:e
and each of th:
the :.q:
24 tenoirs
tendons i,
in rh:tei#h,
rhe length ol lhe dcck is stressed to
of :+6ZOrnut':lrom both
I he stressing
1orc per tendon is
rs lherefore
lher(
0.70 4620 x 1820 "
u. /u/ot from
0.70/01
bolh ends.
ends. The
stressrng force

I-

l0 r=

5886kN. Thc a"cragc

6. lor thc particuLar

barch

of

prstressing

srand

is

GPa. ( ls5 CPa would tsualI be assuned in the a bsence of sucb informalion in accorda nce with l- l - l,clause 1.3.6.) The d raw-in at anchorages is 6 mm from the supplier's data.
100

Prolil symmetrical
abo{d

, 55'

:!/

\+

M____________F X___i_

.li

li

u 4.1
0
uob
uo5

q== Centrellne
Nole V
NOIe
centreline

Fls.

23

3:l.5
32.5

44 4b
46

4A
46

137s

5,l0J. id"rlit"d .l"u".ion of vertical tendon

62
bZ

7l
/I x
X (m)
tm)

47?

Haiht
Hioht l^
to l..in
lendn

""itroia

imml

orofiles

87

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

88

TO EN I992-2

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

: a:a

cur t the sharD changes i[ the idealiz:d

-tensioned ,*r*urar. tb. friction losses '

r*":::i

lglh f ths

can be consuucted illustratine the friction (and anchorace draw-in) loss as a

Ll prestressing fbrce. Thus. the {bllowing values have heen used to con-

-:r.:-r]:..-:' ..,..::. :I. .: :r:..'. r'-

/at ,x -

+.

If

:..

.r, ::

. :.:l

Ad = 0" glving P(x)/P."* = c

0 relo0

r0txi5'arl

0.996

{ |\ 0.978
,i'{rr=0g7g
e 0lr00e6 000<
-

- 5,5' 10.096 rad) grving p(.r1/p.,, ,\I]T:

At
Ar n
J. - IJIn:
ljm:
23m:
A - 5.5" (0.096 rad) grving P(x)/P,,,, = 0.9frl
0

- 32.5 m:
5.5' (0,096 rad ) givjng tf y) /P,.- - 0,951
^d
.]'0: l0 (0.175rd)eivine P(x)/P,*, .918
Ar -r - 44m:
Ad: l0 t0.l75radl d\ins P(rl/P-.,, = 0.928
P . 14.5 (0.253 radl giving P(.t)/P.", - 0.914
Ar.r : 46m:
At x

Ar

^d

14.5 (0.253 rad) giving P(x)/P,"", -. 0.912

48m:

l.\t, t4.)- (u.l)J rd I r1!rng P(xl/P-.- -- 0.911

t\u - n5.l- (u.Jlrd) glvtng Pt x\ t P^^- . 0.899

Arx Ari Ad Atx

62m:
18.2" \0,118 rad) giving

Pqx.l/P-,*

2 L.s t.0,J82 rad) givjng Pf"r)//*,

-

0,888
0.877

7lm:

At = 21.9

(0.-l82rad) giving P(:r)/P,*,

0.869

qx\lP*
Initlal icldn0
lcrce
lnltlal
iacldno tcrce

ri.o0
rm

{-.------------f.i-----------------'----"---.-

tr r'::-- r-1.:-;

"'l

,il

- :---- t-

iii
----Ti---;i
; ,

osol-i
0.90

-- -.

89

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

that c(.r) : P(
be seen to be

'''

''
s8s6

Foir

kN

(.ooo)

I.
?

{
f

':f,i" f;

u*u,L
lo.sror

5.

2-l-l/clouse

s.t0.6(t)

'?,.
.,/ ., -

---,.,

rs6 kN

-.

t.....

l*

0.6. Time-dependent losses

Over time, further losses ofprestressing force occur due to the reduction f steel strain caused
by the deformation of Lhe concrete due to creep and shrinkge nd the reduction of stress in
the stecl due to its relaxatin under tcnsion. Relaxation losses are sensitive to variations in
stress levels and can therefore be reduced by taking ccount of other time-dependent
losscs occurring within the strcturc aL the same time. The Note Io 2-1-Ilclause 5.10,6(1)
notes tht the rclaxation of steel depends also on the reduction of steeL strain caused hy
creep and shrinkage of the coDcrete. This reduces the steel fbrce and hence the relaxation
loss. This can apploximately be accounted for by using a reduction faotor of 0.8 applied
to the relxation loss calculated, based on the initial stress in the prestressing after anchoring

accordirg to 2-l-liclause 3.3.2.

A method for dctcrnfning reduced relaxation losses under such circumstances is given in
2-l-li'Annex D and discussed jn Annex D ofthis guide. It has been previous UK practice to
base design on the relaxation loss at 1000 hours rviLhout considering the interaction with
creep and shrinkage, and the example in Annex D suggests that this is generally a reasonable
approxination. Fol low relaxation strand, it is generally not worth the additional calculation
effort of using Annex D.

90

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

To rigorously account for creep, shrinkage and relxation losses usually requircs a computer program becausc thc losses produced in an inten'al of time affccts the state of stress
and therelbre also the creep nd relaxtin losses over the next interval of time. This is
discusscd in more detail in Annex K of this gtide. 2-I-I lclaase 5.10.6(2) therclore gives
the follorving simplified expression to cvaluate the time-depcndent losses t a point, -x,
under the pernanent loads for the group of tendons:

.,fp + 0.8Aoe, +

AP"+.+, :,4nAon,"1.1. =

where

all

lp

t.

**,(' f

3+(r,
x.:m

2-l-l/clouse
5.t0.6(2)

rr)o.on

;*) t' + 0 8.,(,,,o))

2- r -1i

{5.46)

compressive stresses and corresponding strains should be tken as positive

and:

Aoo."*,

r.

",
Et,
4.
Aop.

,b(t, to)
oc.op

Ap

is the bsolute value of the variation of stress in the tendons due to creep,
shrinkage and relaxation at location .r, at time /
is the estimated shrinkagc strain in accordancc with 2-l-1/clause 3,1.4(6)
is the modulus of elasticity for the prestressing steel
is the short-term modulus of elasticity for the qoncrete from 2-1-liTable 3.1
is the absolute value of the vrition of stress in the tendons at location ,r, at
time r, due to the relaxation of the prestressing steel. This is defined as being
determined for a stress of oo(G* P,"o + !zQ), i.e. the initial stress in the
tendons due to the initial prestress and qusi-pernanent actions
is the creep coelficicnt at a time I for initial load application t time /
is the stress in the concrete ad.jacent to the tendons due to self'-weight, initial
prestress and all other quasi-permanent actions where relevanl

olall the prestressing tcndons at thc section being considered note

that elsewhere it is deflned as the re f one tendon. Either definition can be
uscd providing it is used consistently
is the arer ol the concrete secLion
is lhe second n]oll1ent of area of the concret section
is the eccentdcity of the tendons, i.c. thc distance between the centroid of the
is the area

A,
,/c
Z"p

tendons and the centloid of the concrete section

The geometric terms above are shown in Fig. 5.10-5 for a typical bean.r. A more rigorous
analysis would necd to consider the change of concrete stresses caused by the losses
throughout and the effect of this on the crccp losscs still to tke place. If the above
formula is applied to unbonded tendons, then mean stresss averaged along the tendon
must be used as identified by 2-1-llclause 5,10.3(3).
The derivation of 2- l- li Expression (5.46) can be illustrated for bonded tendons. For the
beam in Fig. 5.10-5, a change itl prstress stress Acro leads to a change in concrete stress

2-l-l/clouse
5. t 0.3(3)

grven by:

a"":T('-+)

(D5.10-7)

Cnlroidal axis

Fig.

5. |

0'5.

Propercies for use in 2- l-l/Expression (5.46)

9l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

The losses fbr shrinkage, relxtion and creep re then derived individually using the
above equilibrium cquation and the lollowing strain compaLibility relationships.
Shrinkage loss
The fiee shrinkage strain is e"r. Howevcr- as the concrete shrinks, the prestressing steel must
compress by the salrre strain which cuses a loss of prestress and a change in the concrete
stress. The net concretc strain is therefore e". Ao"/8"", where 4" is the effctive concrete
modulus rvhich must allow for creep s the change in stress ccurs over some time, This strain
equals the change in prestress strain, thus:

Ao" o,
E", EP

(Ds. r0-8)

From equation (D5.10-7) and (D5.10-8), the prestless loss due to concret shdnkage

'.*+,| *f

is:

(Ds.l0-e)

':,

Relaxation loss
The unrestrained relaxation of stress at constant strain in the prestressing is oor. However,
as this loss of prestress leads to a chnge of concrete stress Ao. and hence a change in
concrete strain, iL must also lead to a change of strain in the tendon so thaL Lhe actual loss
of plestress oo is as follows:

Aon,. Aoo Ao"

Ep

(D5,10-10)

8""

From equation (D5.10-7) and (D5-10-10), the prestress loss due to steel relaxation is:

,.tL(, *f,:,
^,'p.

(D5.10-lr)

Creep loss

The free creep strain is oc{p(1, r0)/8", whcrc o" is Lhe initial concrete stress adjcent to the
tcndons. However, as the concrete creeps, the prestressing steel must change strain by
the same amount, which causes a change in prestress and a change il the concrete stressThe net concrete strin is therefore oc(t,tt))lEc - Lo"lE*. This strain equls the change
in nrcstrcss strain. thus:

o, ..
- v\"r0l

o" _ 5o"
:-

(D5.10-12)

This cquation ignoles the fact that losses in prestress will alter the value of o. and hence
the creep strain and iteration is lecssary to get the correct answer. From (D5.10-7) and
(l)5.10-12). lhe ptestre\s loss due to creep is:

F
"]aQ,tu1o"

, EnAr('
'-E*4\'-l"'*

A"-z

(D5.10-13)

In all the losses above, the effective concrete modulus,6." must allow for creep. For a
constnt stress applied at time t0, the relevant modulus would be E"-/(1 + (t,t)
(taking ,8":4 rther than 4: 1.058"", as spccilicd in 2-l-liclausc 3.1.4, but there is
only 50 difference). However, as the modulus is in each case needed to calculate the
stress iiom a concrete strain that occurs slowly wiLh tirue, a more appropriate modulus is
Ece: Ect,.l! + 0.8d(r, /0)). The 0.8 multiplier on the creep factor is the equivalent of the

92

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

geing coellicient discussed in Annex K. If this m odulus is substituted in Lhe above equations,
the rclaxation loss is multiplicd hy the factor 0-8, discussed at the start ofthis section, and Lhe
three losses are added, the total loss in 2- I - I /Expression (5.46) is obtaind.
The denominator of 2- 1 - 1,/Exprcssion (5-46) effectively makes allowance for the resistance
provided by thc prestressing steel in resisting the shorteni[g ofthe concrete, thus reducing the
concrete strain chnge and hence the plestress loss. Often the denominator approximates to
L0 and may conservatively be takcn as such so that the equation simplilles t form which

rvill be familiar to most engineers. A mote rigorous analysis would need to consider the
change of concrete stress caused by the losses throughout and the effect o[ this on the
creep and relaxation losses still to take place. A general method as in Annex K2 of this
guide coulcl bc uscd which would require computer program. If 2-1-L'Annex D is used
to calcr te a reduced rehxation loss, a further reduction should not be obtained by using
this loss in 2- 1- I iExpressior (5-46) in conjunction with the 0.8 factor; the 0.8 lactor
should bc omitted. 2- I - 1i Expression (5.46) can be applied in one go, with some simplifications, t I : cc to give long-teml losses, as illustrated in Worked examplc 5.l0-3.
Stged construction
stged construction is used, the lOsses will nced to be clculted over scveral time intervals
and suu.rmed. Whcrc dead Load and prestress effects accumulate u'ith time, the creep faclor,
in principle, needs to be obtained for each adclilional loading depending on the age of the
concrete and the loss for each detcrmined to time infinity and summcd. When considering

If

each additionaL loading, only the increment of stress should be considered in calculating
the creep loss fiorr this pafiicular loading. For simplicity, as additional stages of construction often reducc thc concrete stress at the leyel of the tettdons, the ttal loss can ofLen

conservatively be based on the initial loading where lhis produces the grcatest stress
djcent to the tendons. (Alternatively, if litrle creep occurs before thc concrete stress is
reduced by a lurthcr stage of construction, the full creep loss could be based ou this lower
stress, lthough this would be slightly unconservaLive.) Loss calculatiou in staged construction is conplex and simplilications like the above usually have to be mde if a computer
program is not used.
For indetenninate structures built by stagcd constmction, the deformations ssociated
with creep lead to the development of restraint moments and a further change of strcss.
Methods of calculting this creep redistribution are discussed in Annex K.
Composite construction
Where prestressed beams are used which are subsequently made composite with a deck slab,
tlle losses lrom 2-1-l/Exprcssion (5-46) need to be calculated and applied in two phasesFirst, the loss occurring prior to casting the deck slab should be calculated. Thc effects of

this loss of prestress are determiDed by propofiiontely reducing the prestress

stress

calculated on the prestressed beam section alone, Second, the remaining loss after casting
the deck slab needs to be calculated. Since this loss of force is applied to thc composlte
section, the e1lcts of this loss arc best represented by applying Lhe loss of fotce as a
tensile load to the composite section t the level of the centroid of the tendons- In
determining the loss of force befote and after casting the top slab, it is simplest in using
2- l - I i Explession (5.46) to take ocep as the stress due to bean self-weight nd prestress
only in both phascs. For simplicity, it is also possible to take the denominator as unity to
avoid the problem of the section properties differing in the trvo phases. With these two
assunptions, 2-l-1,/Exprcssion (5.46) need only be calculated once (based on the beam
only case). The loss of force occurring before and after casting the slab should still be
applied to the bean only scclion and composite section in the appropdte ratios (based
on lapsed time) when determining the change in concrete strcss from this loss.
For composite beams, additional strcsscs are set up by differential creep and differential
shrinkage, and thcsc arc discussed in Annex K4 of this guide. Creep also ledistributcs
moments for beams that ale made continuous, as discussed in Annex K Stress chesks in a
pre-tensioned bean.r n.rade composite arc illustrated in Worked example 5.10-3.

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

2-l -l /clouse 3.1.4

2-l - l/douse 3.1.4

(SDL) contributjon also. as it was assumed lt

)L cau be ignored in this calculation as it.reduc
o

2-l-|/clouse 3.3.2

ns.

lrom

2-l-l

<ed example

94

lclause 1.3.2

i3- l. lhe long-rerm rela-ration

is

r1

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTUML ANALYSIS

5.10.7. Consideration of prestress in the analysis

2-1-1,/clause 5.10.7 gives miscellaneous rcquircments for the ttetme[t oiprestress in analysis,
in addition t the generl sttements in 2-l-l/clause 5.10.1. The main issues raised are:

.
.
.

the difference in behaviour betlveen externl and internal post-tensioning;

the dill'erence in behaviour between bondcd and unbonded prestress;
treatment of primary and secondary effects of prestress.

Exlernal versus inlernal post-tensioning

There re two main differences between external and internal post-tensioning, First, secondorder effects can arise fronr prestressing rviLh external tend,ons 2-1-Ilclause 5.10.7(1).Tbrs
occurs because of the lack of continuous contct between tendon and concrete so that the
tendon does not everywhere deflect by the sarne amount as the concrete member. This
can lead to a loss of prcstress moment under applied load, as shown in F-ig. 5-10-6 for an
extreme case, r cn similady lead to an inclease in presttessing moment where the lirst-order

2-l-l/clouse
s.r0.7(r)

Applied load on xternally prestressed beam

Deflected shape under load showing loss of eccentncily

Fig. 5.l0-6, Second-order effects in externlly post-lensioned beam with no intermediate deviatrs

95

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

deflections are dominated by the pretressing. This effect must be considered in the mcmbcr
design. The in.rpact is greatly reduced by the provision of intermediate deviators, constraining the tendon to movc with the concrete. 2-1-llclause 5.10.7(6) allows cxternal tendons to
be considered to be stright betwscn deviators, i.e. the ellect of sag Llnder their self-weight
can be ignored.
Second, by comparison with bonded internal post-tensioning only, a different approach to

of the ultimte flexural strength for externally post-tensioned members is

required, as discussed in section 5.10.8. This is because the strain in external tendons does
not increase at the sme ratc as the strain in the surroundins concrete.
calculation

Bonded

lnd unbonded prestress

Where thc prestress is unbonded, thc strain in tendon and surrounding concrete re not
equal, This leads to the diffrent tretment of ultimate llexural strength discussetl in
sestion 5.10.8. Similarly, losses of prestress depend on the strain in the djcent concrete
averaged long thc tendon's length rthef than varying continuously along the tendon
length u'ith the locl concrete strain. This is discussed in section 5.10.5 above.
Primary and secondary effects of prestrcss
For statically determinate memhers, the preslress moment at any section is given by Pe; the
axial force ofthe prestress at the section multiplied by the ecccntricily of the tendon centroid
to the cross-section centroid- This is known as the primary ptestress moment. Secondary or
'prsitic' moments may be introduccd due to prestressing of statically indeterminate
structures. These arisc due to the restrint by the supports of the dcflections caused by the
prestressing. These secondary moments are often very signiflcnt and, unlike the nme
might suggest, should never be neglected.
To illustrate lhe source of these secondary presttess moments, consider the two-span
continuous bridge deck in Fig. 5.10-7(a), which has a constant axial prestressing force, P,

2-

l- l/douse

5. t 0.7 (6)

() Prestressing of continuous lwo-span member

(b) Dellcted shape due to prstssing without central suppon

(c) Pimry preslress

(e) Total prestrcss moments

Fig. 5.l0-7. Primry and secondary prestress moments

96

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

acting at a constant eccentricity, e. First, ssuming the ce[tral support is unable to resist any
vertical uplvard movement, the deflected shape of the beam due to prestressing would be as
shown in Fig- 5.10-7{b). This structure is nw stticlly determinate and the prestress
moment t any section would be the plimary moment, Pe, as shown in Fig. 5.10-7(c). In
practice, however, the continuous beam is restrajned at the centlal support and a downward
reaction, R, must be applied in order to maintain the cornpatibility ol zero deflection there
This applied force induces secondary moments in the beam, which are illustrated in Fig. 5.l07(d). For this case, the force -R is 6PelLand the maximum secondary nroment is 1-5Pe- Note
Lhat the secondary moment distribution varies linearly between supports since the secondary
moments are produced only by the suppofi reactions induced by the plestressing- Figure
5.10-7(e) sl.rows the final Lotal distribution of primary and secondary moments along the
beam.

If

elastic global analysis is used, the secondary moments are assumed to remain locked
in aL U LS and are considered on the loding side when checking the bending resistance
2-l-llclause 5.10.7(3) allows redistribution of mornenls to be carried out in accordance

witli 2-l-liclause 5.5 providing thc primary and secondary prestressing mments re
appiied before the redistibutin is carried out. If plastic global analysis is carried out,
2-I-llclause 5.10.7(4) suggests that the secondary moments re treated as additional
plastic rottions at the supports and included in the check of rotation capacity The
plastic rottions can be determined as discussed in section 5.6-3,2 of this guide.
Effects of prestressing at the ultimate limit state
The design valuc of the prestressing force at the ultimate limit state is d.efined in 2-I-I lclause
5.10.8( 1) as Pa.,(x) : lrP"'.,("), where P-,, (x) is the mean value of the prestress force at
time I and distance -r, discussed in seqlion 5.10-3 above.
The ultimate bending resistance of bems with bonded tendons is discussed in section
5.10.1 of this guide and Worked examples are prcsented in section 6.1. Un-bonded
tendons, however, do not undergo strain increases t the same ratc as in the djacent
concrete section. Any increase in tendon strain arises only from overall deformation ol
the structure. This can often lead lo nly relativell' small increases in tendon force
(which can conservatively be ignored), mking the ultimate limit stte critical. 2-7-1/
clause 5.10.8(2) allows an increase of stress fron the effectivc prestess to the stress t ultirnate limit state to bc assumed without any calsulation. This assumed increase, Aoo uLs,
may be given in the Nationl Annex and is recommended by ECZ to be taken as
l00MPa. Generally, this value will bc suitably conservative. Some caution is, however,
requircd- The strain increase in tendon that does not follow the bending moment
proflle and passes through areas where the concrete is in r.:ompression could be less than
this value. Such arrangements arc not uncommon. The top flange cantilevering tendons
used in balanced cntilever designs, for example, frequently cxtend lrom hogging zones
over the piers into sagging zoues at midspan while remaining in the top flange- Caution
should also bc cxcrcised where the tendons have very low eccenlricity, s, again, the
100 MPa might not be achieved,
It l ght also appear optimistic to assumc a strss increse of 100MPa. where a tendon ls
initially strcssed to its maximum permissible limit from 2-l-l/clausc 5.10.2.1 and little loss
has occurred at the time considered. In such a case, the assumed sttess increase might take
the tendon beyond its dcsign proof stress, as illustrted in Fig. 5.10-8. I1 'design' material
were present throughout the tendon, the strain increase and hence overall extension
needed to generate the l00MPa strcss might not be achievable from the overall structural
dcformation- It can be argued, however, that 'design' tendon material would only bc
present locally at the critical section and would not thcrel'ore significantly aller the overll
stiffness of the tendon (other than for very short tendons). A tcndon sttess increase of
100 MPa would not be sumcient to reach the inclined branch of the 'mean' or even charac5. | 0.8.

2-l-l/clouse
5.t 0.7(3)

2-l-l/clouse
s. t0.7(4)

2-l-l/clause
s. t 0.8(t )

2- l-l /douse
s. r 0.8(2)

teristic prestress stress strain curve, givcn thc restrictions on allowable forcc after lock-off in
2-l-liclause 5.10-3, and would not therefore require signilicant lendon extension.

97

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

IrLarge increase in sirain required

Small increase in strain required

Fig. 5.10-8. Strain increase for exlernal rendons with hish initial stress

2-2/douse
s. r0.8(r03)

Where the overall deformation of the bridge is to be considered in dcriving the increase in
prestrcssing totce,2-2lclause 5.10,8(103) requires a nonliner nalysis to be used in
accordance with 2-2,iclause 5.7. Although not expliciL]y stated. this analysis should also
takc into account the effects of tension stifiening of the concrete away from thc crilical
section. This is to ensure the strain incrcasc is nol overestimated due to overestirntion of
th total beam defornation. Away from the critical seclion, the stiffening effects from
tension stillning between cracks and I'r'orl entire sections remaining uncracked in flcxurc
should be considered. Mean values of concrcte tensile strength are most representative of
thc values to be found in the real structure but. fr sfety, it would be appropriate to use
upper characleristic values in determining the adverse effects of tension stiffening.
2-2,/clause 5.? docs not provide unique requirements for other material properties and allows
thc use ofeitier something close to mean properties or the use ofdesign properties, as discussed
in section 5-7 ofthis guide. In either casc, the adverse effects oftension stiffening discussed above
should be included away fiom the critical section as olherwise structure deformations and
tendon strain increases may bc overestinated. The former method gives a veriiication of the
member rathcr Lhan an explicit calculation of strcss increase. Analysis with design properties
has the advantge that thc nonlinear analysis is then itself the verification of thc structure
and the actual strain increse achievcd is not itself importantj if convergence is achieved in
the analysis under the ultimate limit stte pplied loads, Lhc bridge is adequate under that
load case. Analysis with design properties has been commonly used in the UK for this type
of analysis in the past because of its greater convenience. It may be slightly less conservative
Lhan the other anlysis mcthod proposed in 2-2l'cluse 5.7, due to thc slightly greater deformation away lrom the critical section due Lo the greater extent of design mteril assumed.
An lternative to using a nonJinear analysis is Lo calculate the strain increase tiom linear
elastic model using uncrackcd section properties. This will give some strcss increase, but
probably less than that permitted in 2-1-llclause 5.10.8(2) without calculation.

Nonlinear analysis can sometimes illustrate a pfoblem with short tendons in highly
It is possible for short tendons lo reach stresses in excess of yield t the
ultimate limit stte (for example, those for the shortest tcndons in balanced cantilever

stressed areas.

construction) and thereforc care must be taken in designing the bursting zones acr:ordingly
fbr the full characleristic breaking load of the tendon. Seotion 8. l0 of this guide gives further
commentafy on the design of bursting zones for prestressed concrcte anchorages. A greater
potential problcm with short yielding tendons is that the tendons themselves migit fil t the
anchorage wedges at a strcss just below their chrcteristic tensilc strength if the strain were
sufficiently high.

2-l-l/clouse

s.t0.9(t)P

98

5.10,9. Effects of prestressing at the servicebility and fatigue limit states

For serviceability limit state vcrilications, 2-1-llclause 5.10.9(1)P requires allowance to be
lnade in the design for possible variations in prestress. Consideration of this varition is

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

achicvcd through thc dcllnition

of an upper and a lower chalacteristic valuc of

the

prestressing force:
P,..n
P;,;"

r.,nP..,(.x)

2-r-rl(5.47)

r;,,1'P..t(t)

2-1-1(5.48)

arc defined in thc National Annex but the recommended values

are 1.05 and 0.95 respectively fr pre-tensioning or un-bonded tendons, and 1-10 and 0.90
respectively for post-tensioning with bonded tendons. The lormal use of favourable and
unlavourablc valucs of prcstrcss at thc scrviceahility )imit state was not found in BS 5400
Part 4' and does not seem 10 be wrr'nted given the good perlbrmancc of the UK's prestressed concrete bridges. The UK National nnx sets botb r.uo and r;nr to 1,0, although
a rclcvanL consideration rvas that thc verification criteria are not equivalent in EN 1992-2
and BS 5400 Prt 4 in terms of either the loading considered or the acceptance criteria fbr
stresses and cracks.

Thc values of r,,n and

r;ns

99

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

/l

t00

CHAPTER 5, STRUCTUML ANALYSIS

beam alone abote

t0l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Pg!!g :
Fositi

,'

ll.z x,

'{P!+Fttl4r

q:4Pt::

t02

:.

CHAPTER 5. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

,p'."u.*r

106
onlyl

75.4 Y
(nr,rcarL

315.7

x l0'

|shrin-k,Jge1 (ronnerarurer

(composilc)

16.95 MPa

This compressive stress is satisfactory as

it is less tban

the limit of 24MPa from

cracking should be considered in thssection analysis when verifying compression Iimirs.

A check would also generalll.' be requiled ol crack width in the dcck slah. but this is not
donc herc as Ihc deck slab is in global compression (although local moments from wheel
Ioad could cause overall tension in the reinforcement).
2

' '

l-azn-rnlo--a
I '4,7x
l"
= 4,76 x lo'o mma

\
Area=3.87rr05mm':\C--l

Y:'=

Area = 3 7

A.-4o3imm,

1_$;,*',"
\

. .:,,. ..
'
4re?

.,160

.:r:l:.'':Pre*b.rnr)nlv

,1

-q.zlx1o: m'::

. :-_*---

I t\

A".a$t,",",-2

-r--

,loun"

"o-o"n")'on

t03

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

5. I

l.

Analysis for some particular structural members

EC2 gives additional information on the analysis of flt slabs and shear walls in Annex I.
Most of this annex has little relevancc Lo bridpc desisr and is not discussed further in this
guide.

t04

CHAPTER 6

Ultimate limit states

This chapter discusses ultimate limit states (ULS) as covered in section 6

ofEN

1992-2 in lhc

following clauses:

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

llending with or without xial frce

Shear

Torsion
Punching
Design with strut-and-tie models
Auchorage and laps
Partially loaded areas

Fatigue
Meu-rbrane elements

l.

6.
.l.

l.

Cluuse 6.1
Clause 6.2

Claure 6.3
Clause 6.4
Clause 6.5
Claute 6.6
Clause 6.7
Clau,se 6.8
Claute 6.9

ULS bending with or without axial force

General (additional sub-section)

This section of the guidc deals with the design at ultimate limit state of members subject to
bending with or without axil force. It is split into the following additional sub-sections for
convenience:

.
.
.
.

Rcinlorced concrete beams

Prestressed concrctc beams
Reinfbrced concrete columns
Brittlc failure ofmembers with prestress

6, 1.2. Reinforced

Section
Section
Section
Section

6.1.3
6.1.4
6.1 .5

concrete beams (additional sub-section)

6.1.2.1. AssumDtions
2-1-llclause 6.1(2)P makes standard assumptions for the clcultion of ultimate

of resistance as follows:

(l)

6.1 .2

rnoments

Planc sections remain plane.

(z) Strain in bonded reinforcement, whether in tension or compression, is the same as the
strain in the concrete t the same level.
(3) Tensilc strength of t]le concrete is ignored.
(4) The stresses in the concrcte in compression are given by the design stress strain relationships discussed in section 3.1.7.
(5) The stresses in thc reinforcing steel are gilen by the design stfess strain rlationships discussed in section 3.2.7.
(6) The initial strain in prestressing is taken into account.

2-l-l/clouse
6.1

(2)P

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-l-l/clause

6.t(r)P

2-l-l/clouse
6.t (3)P

TO EN I992-2

Assumption (1), relating to lincar strains, is only appropriate for 'beamlike' behaviour
and does not apply to deep bems (see definition in 2-l-1,/clause 5.3.1) or lo local load
introduction, such as in prestressed end blocks or in thc vicinity of bearings. In these
situations the stresses nd strins vary in a complex manner and 2-1-l lclause 6.1(l)P
notes that shut-and-tie analysis is more appropriate, as discussed in section 6.5.
Local bond slip also means that the strains in reinforcement will not always exactly matcl.I
those in the surrounding concrete, but the ssumption of equal strains in (2) above is
adequate for dcsign.
2-I-I lcluuse 6.1t'-l)P describes the stress-strin curves to be used fbr concrete, reinforcenent and prestressing steel. The design stress strain curves for reinforcemcnt include one
rvith an inclined branch (rcpresenling strain hardening) with a limit on the ultimate strain.
While its use can give rise to smll saving in reinforcement in under-reinforced beams,
the calculations involve<l are nlore time-consumilg and are not suiti:d to hand calculations.
Computer software can be used to automate the process. For the purposes of developing
design equations and rvorked examples, the rest of this chapter considers only the reinforcement stress-strain curvc with a horjzortal top branch and no strain limit. The same principles, however. apply to the use of the inclined branch. The curves for prestressing also
includc one with an inclined blanch and its use is illustrated in Worked cxample 6- l-5 to illustrate the imprvement over the use of the curve with the horizontal plateau. Whereas use of
lhe curve with horizontal plateau tbl reinlbrcerlent leads to reinforced concrete bending
resistances similar Lo tbose from BS 5400 Part 4," use of the curve with horizontal plateau
lbr prestlessing leads to a lower bending resistance.
F or concrete, EC2 allows three dillrent stress strain relationships, as discussed in section
3.1 fthis guide and illustratcd in F-ig. 3.1-3. As was shown in section 3.1.7, the dilerences
between the thlee lternatives re very small and, in fact, the simple rectangular stress block
gencrally gives the greatest moment of resistance. This is unlike both BS 5400 Part 4 and
Model Code 90,'where the peak stress used in the rectangulr block was lower than that
ir.r the parabola-rectangle block. (.Moclel CodB 90 reduces the peak allowable stress in the
rectngulr block by a factor cquivalcnt to /'as used in 2-l-lTclause 6.5.) The design
equations developed in the following sections pply to all three concrete stress blocks bur
it is simplest and most eoonomic to use the simpler recLangular stress block, s illustrated

in Worked

example 6.1-1. The worked examples, however, generally use the parabolicrectangular stress block as it is more general.
6.1

.2.2.

Strain .ombotibility

The rLltimatc momenL resistanoe of a section can be determincd by using the strain compatibility method, by either algebraic or iterative approaches. An iterative approach is possible
using the following steps:

(l)

(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)

Guess a neutral axis depth and calculate the strains in the tension and compression
reinforcement by assuming a linear strain distribution nd strain of e",,2 (or e"ui if
not using the parabolic-rectangular stress stlain idealization) at the extremc fibre of
the concrete in compression.
Calculate ft'om the stress strain idealizations the steel stresses appropriate to the
calculated steel strains.
Calculate fiom the stress-strain idealizations the conclete stresses appropriate to the
strains associated with the assumed neutral axis depth.
Calculate the net tensile and compressive forces at the section- If these rue not equal,
adjusl thc neutral axis depth and retum to step (l).
When the net tensile force is equal to the net compressive force, tke moments about a
common point in the section to determine the ultimate moment of resistance-

The strain compatibility method described above is tedious lbr hand analysis. but must be

2-l-l/.louse
6.t (s)

r06

used for non-uniform scctions (or at leasf for sections which are non-uniform in the compression zone). This method is illushted in Worked example 6.1-4 for a flanged beam. A lurther
difficulty, in this casc for llanged beams, stems lrom the provisions o12-1-l/ claase 6.1( 5 ) and

CHAPTER

6. ULTIMATE LIMIT

STATES

Actual linal slrain

Compressive stins in flnge

---

limiling casss for sirin

l. Allowable maximum strain in flanges depending on strain distribution (e.3 and e"u3 used for
bilinear and rectangular stress block)
Fig. 6.l-

2-l-l lclause 6.1(6).'[he lbrmer requires the mean strain in prts of the section tvhich iue
fully in compression with approrimately concentric loading (such as Lhe flagcs of box
girders where the neutral axis is in the webs) to be limitcd to 5c2 or eca (s ppropriate).
'Approximately concenLric' is defined as e fh < 0.1, which is equivalent to a neutral axis at
a depth below top of flnge greater than 1.33/r for a flange of deplh /r. This statement is
simplification of the range of limiting strin distributions in 2-1-1/Fig. 6.1, ref'erenced by
2-1-llclause 6.1(6), which is of general application, (The simplitcation ol 2-l-l/clause
6.1(5) does not, however, simplify the resistancc calculation itscll.) Where prt hs zero
compressive strain at one face. the limiting sttin can still be taken as rcu2 or acu] as
appropriate for the stress block used. Where the part has equal comprcssive strains at
both faces, a reduced lirnit of e"2 or e"3 applies as appropriate, depending on the stl'ess

2-l-l/clouse
6.t (6)

strain idealization uscd-

The reduction in limiting strain for purc compression arises because the rel concrete
behaviour is such that the peak stress is reached t a strin pproximating to "2 (or 6":)
and then drops ofl before the final failure strain is obtained. Thus, lor pure compression.
pek load is obtained at approximately a.2, but for pure flexure the resistnce contrnues to
increase beyond thc altainment of this stlain. For intermedite cases of strain diagram,
the limiting strin needs to be obtained by intcrpolation betwecn these cases and this can
be donc by rolating the strain diagram bout the flxed pivot point, shown in Fig. 6.1-1.
The same applies for entire sections which are wholly in conpression. For a flange of thickness wholly in cornpression. this means limiting the sLrain Lo 5cl at a height of ht.21e.,,2 in
the flange. The simplificd rule in 2-1-liclause 6.1(5) limits the strain to e"2 at mid-height.
The need lbl this additional level of complexity for bridges is partly mitigted by the use of
the recommendcd value of a.":0.85 which compenstes for the drop-oll in strength at
increasing strain, as discusscd in section 3.1.6. While the theoretical neecl for this addirional
complexity can be explained as above, the practical need seems dubious and was not required
in BS 5400 Part 4.' Thc method is illustrated in Wolked example 6,1-4. For beans wjth stecl
that yields with the usul ssumption ofconcrete limiting stress ofcut or cu3, the effect f
this modification is tirpically negligible. Where the steel dos not yield, the effect can be a little
more significant. but srill usually relatively small. Where such calculation is requircd, it is
considerably simpler to perform with the rectangular strcss block.
For uniform sections (or at least uniform in the compressin zone), it is possible to use the
simplified design equations which are developed in the lbllowing sections.
6.1.2.3. Singly reinforced beoms ond siobs
Considcr tl.re singly reinforced rectangular beam illustrated in Fig. 6.1-2, with d : Urr.ll)A"
and l. : /""r acLing at a lever arrl r from the compression libre, where " is the
average stress in the concrete above the neutral axis at Lhe ultimate Limit state. f^, and B
are paramctcrs relaLing to the geornetry of the conctete stress block being used. Formulae
fbt' these are given in section 3.1.7 along with a tabulation oftheir valucs for varying concrete
slrcngths and stress strain idealizations. The failure strain shown in Fig. 6.1-2 ofa",2 is only
appropriate for the parabolic-reclangular block and should be replaced by cu3 for the

t07

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

(b) Forces/strcss blocks

(a) Section

(c) Slrains

Fig. 6.1-2. Singly reinforced rectangular beam at failur (using parabolic-rectangular concrete stress
block)

bilineal and rectngulr blocks. The equivlent diagram lbr the rectangular stress block is
shou'n in Fig.6.1-3.
Equtions are now developcd with reference to Fig.6.1-2. From moment equilibrium
(assuming the steel yields), taking moments about the centroid of the compressir.e force:
t..,.

M:F.z:"/:.A"z

(D6.1-1)

1s

Alternatively. taking moments but the centroid of the tensil force;

M:Fc._l\bxz

(D6,1-2)

For equilibrium:
l

4-4+

/1"x:1I!,4.
1t

which can bc rervritten as:

(D6.1-3)
|,,-^i,'

with

.,_4"

(D6, r-4)

l'rom lhe geometry of the stress strain diagrams:

z:d-3x

(D6.1-5)

Substituting this into equation (D6.l-2) gives:

/
,\
.Vl f",hrtJ 'tt'' - 1,,hxl | .J",)n
{l/
\
.0,
l. ,:-':,

t-

--

1.""""1
(a) Seciion

Fig,6.l-3.

t08

(b) Forces/stress blocks

(c) Slrains

Singly reinforced rectangulr bem at failure (using rectangular concrete stress block)

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIIYIT STATES

#- ^.i('-r)

(D6. r-6)

(f16.1-1) and (D6.1-6) can be used as design equtions for the section's ullimate moment
resistance. A check must, however, be tnade to ensure the strain in the reinfbrcetncnl is
sullicient to cause yielding as assuured.
t'rom the reinforcing steel stress strain idealization (refer to section 3.2):

.f*
and from the strain diagram in Fig. 6.l-2:
E.

/,t \
:..r{a
I)
-:!L(r/-n)
r
\Y ,/

(D6.1-7)

To ensure yielding:

.. -

r..,.r,r -+

(d ,\. /,r.
-"-:[,
-, ) 4.,.'0,

rvhich can be cxpressed

t.

a-/

as:

(D6.l -8)

/yr *1)
\r,E a.p /

should be replaced by a"u3 in equation (D6 l-8) if the rectangular or bilinear

concrete stress blocks are uscd.)
If .r/d does not satisfy eqution (D6.l-li) thcn the reinforcelncnt does not yicld and the
expressions in equations (D6.1-1) and (D6.1-3) are not valid, so neither is the resistance in
equation (D6.1-6). ln this case there re the following options:

(Note thal

e"u2

(1) increase lhc scction size to comply with cquation (D6.1-8);

(2) add compression reinforcemcnt (see section 6.1.24 on doubly reinlorced

beams) to
comply with equation (D6.1-8);
(3) use the strain-comptibility rnethod to cstablish actual reinforcement forcc and hence
moment resistance:
(4) conservatively takc the reinforcement strain from equation (D6.1-7) and the lcver alm
lrom cquation (D6.1-5) using the dcpth of compression zone' x, from equation (D6.1-3)
(determined assuming thc steel yields). so that fiom cquation (D6 l-1), M : A.E"t,z'

For the simple rectangular block, the above can be simplified by substituting for "' : l-/"a
\12 (from the expressions in soction 3.1 .7) in equatious (D6.1-3) and (D6 1-5) above
and ll

so that:

.,
M:A,.fraz with

_/ .
./",r1. \
::r1[1
ffi)

(D6.1-e)

and

-_

,,s/ya

(D6.1-lo)

bn.f"a

is still necessary to check that equation (D6.1-B) is satisted (but e",'2 should bc replaced
by e""j) in order to use equation (D6.1-9), as it assumes that the steel yields. The modified

It

equation is:

x,

->--t /rk
|l

\l\rs5iu '
--rII

\_

,\
/

t09

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

If the stcel does not yield, o^e of the above options needs to be consi<lcred. The last option
lsads to conservalively taking the moment resistance as:

M 6"2.;.2 uiLh : - ri (t --!SL)

t\'lc tDd /
\

(D6.1-l

1)

In equation (D6.1-l l), e, is dctermined from equation (D6.1-7) but substituring

6cu3 for e"u2.

The equations above are obviously more suited to analysing given sections rther than
designing a section to resist a given moment._For design purposes it is therefore convenient
to rearrange the equations. Il K",:MlbdrJau is dcfined and substituted into equation
(D6.1-6) then:

(D6.1-12)

".-;(' ';)-:-'G)'

wlrich can bc written s a quadratic equation (Jf/d)2

4i1K^,
/r\ 1+Vl| 4ilKa\
2iJ
\d/

(.xld) +

K*:0

wirh solutions:
(D6.

r-

13)

The lower root ofequation (D6.1-13) js the relevant one. Again, the ratio of x/r/ should he
checked against the limit in equation (D6.1-8) and the section designe<l from rearranging
equation (D6.1,1) ro give:
(D6.1-14)

with;:

11

IJ,r as befble from equation (D6.1-5) and

taken lrorn equation (D6.1,13).

m11e1t r1i1a-nce uslns

!o1!^1h^e

paraLofic-

iand^i"=1.
r6 056 MPa nd 6 -. o 416

::":*

.#:0.262
I" - I Ft ViTF:0.262

(and an irrerevanr
irrelevanr roor of 2.r4)
2.14)

;:5j#t :r':.1': jlu'o'

'[ 1",^ -\- /

iri-,in*1;*":ii

to {jnsure reinrorcemenL is vierding (/'1

- 500MPa'

5oo

an'lr rrom equarion tn6

r-5

\'

200- 0 416 x

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

)t-.'',

.l :,;: ::

,.:

r:::

6.1.2.4. Doubly reinforced rectongulor beoms

Where the tension zone is very beavily reinforced, for efficiency it can become necessary
to add compression reinforcement to reduce the depth ol the concrete compression zone
and thereb), allow the tcnsile reinfrcemenL to yield. This situation arises where the
ncutral axis depth exceeds the limit in (D6,l-8). It rnay also be necessary to analyse scctions
with known compression rcrforrement for their ultimate flexural rcsislance. Of note is
thc fact that EC2 uses the sme stress strain relationship for reinfbrcement in tension and
compression, unlike the relationships in BS 5400 part 4.,

|2

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

() Seclion

Fig. 6.

t-5.

(b) Forces,/slress blocks

(c) Strains

Doubly reinforced rectangular beam at failure with parabolic-rectangular stress block

Consider the doubly reinforced rectangular bcam illustrated in Fig. 6.1-5 with associated
strain and strss diagramsFor cquilibrium, assuming tht all reinforcement yields:

4 +rl :6,

-+

1^'tx+fut',:IYk,t,

therefore:
I -

T,x(A" ll)
'l* .l"uD
--_--;---

(D6.1-15)

or alternalively:

A,,: A,_ .l",bxl"

(D6.1-16)

J."r

Eqution (D6.1-16) can be used to deternjne the required compression reinforcement to

allow the tensile rcinforcement to yield, when x/d fbr l' alone exceeds the limjt given in
equarion (D6-1-8). In using equation (D6.1-16). the value ol x should first be reduced to
comply with the limit in equation (D6.1-8).
Equation (D6- l - l5) can be used to analyse sections with known reinfbrcen.rent x should be
checked gainst the limit given iu equalin (D6.1-8), as before, to ensure the reinforcement is
yielding. A further chcck is required to ensure that the compression reinforcement is also

vicldins:

el

es,yiera

=."",(t {) r#,

so that:

-rl

d,

(t _

(D6.r-r7)
c')

where:

^-

f"u

r,4e-:

(D6.1-18)

If the reinforcement does not f ield, then the ultimate resistance must be determined using
the strain compatibility method. An example is givcn in section 6.1.2.5.

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

.;+;062,
-

l.l5

'

200

101

x 0,0015

From cquation {D6.l-i7) lcrr compression reinlrcement to yield:

'
an
,^'u1;-,,j*-L-r32mm
and as .r

169.6 mm. rhe stcl yields,

Equation (D6.1-16) can rberelorc he used ro

to find rhe
the required area:

Therclore adopt 250 compression reinforcemenL ar 225mm

rnomenl of resistance is now found-

|4

c:enr

res (2t82mm2/m;, The

DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN

CHAPTER 6. ULTIIYATE LIIYIT STATES

|7

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

6.

TO EN I992-2

1.3. Prestressed concrete beams (additional sub-section)

6.1.3.

/.

Assumptions

The general assumptions tbr the design of prestressed conrete sections are the sme s
those for reinforced concrete. ln addition. 2-l-liclause 6,1(2)P lrquires that the initial
strain in prestressing tendons is taken into account whcn assessing Lhe ultimaLe rcsistance.
This 'prestrain' is the strain corlesponding to the design prestress force fter ll losses,
P6.,(-r) :1P-,,(x) lrom 2-l-l/clause 5.10.8(1). The prestrain is then taken into account in
the section bending resistance by shifting the origin of the design stress strain diagrams
lbr the prestressing Lcndons in section 3.3 by an amount corresponding to the prestrain,
For bonded prestressing, the change in strain in thc prestressing steel is assumed to bc the
same s the change in strain in the adjacent concrete. This ssumption is obviously not
valid fol uu-bonded tendons, which are discussed separately in section 6.1.3.4.
6.

L3.2. Stmin .ompotibility

The strain conpatibility method described for reinforccd concrctc in scction 6.1 .2.2 can also
be applied to prcstressed concrete, but the prestrin in the tendons should be dded to the
strain calculated from the strain diagran at failure to give a total strain. This is then used
to calculate the stress in the prestfessing steel from the stress strain design curve-

toIIOWrg properltcs:
Class Cl0./3? slab concrete.

.4r = l0 MPa

Clasr C40i50 bem concrete, ./.r - 40 M Pa

Parabofic concrete strss OistriUution rerefore e*2
Prcstressing srrands ( using properries trom

0.0!S and 5.2

EN t0138-1. Table 4):

no. l5 mm strands oI rvne Yl67057

I\Omlna l Olametef : I ).1 mm
Nominal cross-scclionnl
cross-scclionirl atrea
auea
139 mmr
- l39mmr
Cbaracteristic tensile strensrh"
Characteristic
strengh. /pr
/-, l670MPa
Characteristic value of maximLrm lorc
139 x 1670
21

|8

x 10

'=

2l2kN

0.00m

CHAPTER

6. ULTII'4ATE LIIYIT

STATES

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

t20

TO EN I992-2

CHAPTER 6, ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

6.1.3.3. Simolified concrete stress b/ock

Design of simple sections can be made easier by considering the siniplilied retngulr
concrete stress block in a similar manncr to rcilforccd bean]s.
6.1.3.4. Un-bonded ndons
2-1-1,/clause 5.10.1(3) requires that, generally, prestress should be included in the actio
combinations defined in EN 1990 as prt of the loading, and its effeots included in the
applicd internal mo[rer.rt and axial force.
The design ofprestressed concrete sections, where the prestressing tendons att not bondcd
to the concrete section, cannot be treated using the general rules above for bonded tendons
since the tendon strains do not incrcasc at the same rate as thc strain in the concrete at the
same level. 2-2lclause 6.1(l8.) allows increase in strain in external tendons to be considered
by assuming that the strain between fixed points is constant and oonsidcring the increse in
strain resulting from structural dcformalion betrveen thcsc fixed points. It should be noted
that deviators are not usually fixed pints, especially s they ollen have small deviation
angles which provide little h'ictional restraint. External post-tensioning is discussed in
section 5.10.7 of this guide.

2-2/clouse
6. t

(t 08)

6.1.4. Reinforced concrete columns (additional sub-section)

6.[.4.1. Assumltions
EC2 covers the design of Ieinforced concrete columns under the sane clauses as those for
bending design, since thc sanrc basic assumptions discusscd in section 6.1.2.1 apply. ECl2

t2l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Fig.

6.l.12.

Interaction diagram for typical reinfoTced column

defines thc failure ofconclete in compression by means ofa compressive strain limit, as seen
previously, oi scu, (or e"6). 2-l-l/clause 6.1(5), however, r'equires this limit to be adjusted
lrom e""1 (typically equl to 0.0035 for Class 50160 concrctc or lowcr), u'hcrc the section is

purely in flcxure or the neutral axis remins within the sectin under combined bending
and axial load. to e.2 (or a"3), which is typically 0.0020. lbl sections subjected to loading
whcrc the whole section is in uniform compression. For intermcdiate strain distributions,
the limiting strain diagram is determined iom the construction in Fig. 6.1-1. This rul
also applies lo parts o sections in comprcssion under axial loads (such as compression
flanges of box girclers, lbr example) as discussed tn 6.1.2.2.
From the limited calculations undertaken by the autl.rors. the calculated section strengths
for circular and rtctangular sections re usually relatively insensitive to variations in the
assumptions of ulLimate concrete strai[, Some caution is needed in assming tlut the
effeot is negligible where sections arc hcavily reinforced

in tension and lhe reinforcement

is

not expectcd to li ield.

2-l-l/.lause
6.t (4)

2-l-Ilchuse 6.1(1) dcfrnes minimum moments, rvhich should be considered fol column
dcsign. These are deJined by applying the axial loads at minimum eccentricities given by
the depth of section, ,4, divided by 30, but not less thn 20mm. The minimum bending
moments should be considcrcd about any axis, but often a nominal moment about a
ma.jor axis will have little effect n the resistance to a bending moment about the minor
axis nd can be ignored. Where columns are slender (see section 5.8.3), the additional
seqond-order moments developed musL bc alloqcd for in accordance with 2-1-1,/clauses
5.8.6, 5.8.7 or 5.8-8. In all cases, moments from irnperfections should be considered in
accordance with 2-2i cluse 5.2.
6.1

.4.2. Strain compotibility

A strain con.rpatibility approach (see section 6.1.2-2) can be adopted for any cross-section.
First, an rea of reinforcement must be assumed and a neutral axis depth stimated, The
extrerne fibre compressive strain is sct to cu2 (or e",3) and therefore the strains lhroughout

the section can be calculated. From these strains. the

stresses in the various levels of

reinlbrcement cn be obtained, and hence the axial load and n.rotlrent that the section can
resist- This procedure rl,ill simply give one slution of the coexisting axial load and
moment tht can be carricd simultaneously, as shown in Fig, 6,1-12.
Since it is usully desired to verifl, a particular combination of axial load and momenl,
further iteration is needetl to do this to tailor the internal stresses to Droduce the desired
combination of resistances. This is usually done so that either:

(1)
(2)

the moment resistance is determined for a given applicd axial force and it is verilied that
this moment rcsistance exceeds the coexisting applied moment, or
the applied moment and axjal force are increased pro rata together and it is verited that

thc load factor exceeds unity.

These methods are illustrated in Worked example 6.1-6.
Where. after this first iteration. parts ofthe section are shown to be wholly in compression,
the concrctc strain limit should be djusted, s described above, and the iteration process

t22

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

tbl

0.0035
1

|F:-r

L-JT
(bl

Plan

(c)Slra

(d)

Stresses

(e) Stress resultanls

Fig. 6.l- 13. Reinforced concrete column at failure

reFeated Lo obtain new stresses and coexisting resistnces to combintions of moment and
axial fbrce.
If the solution is deficient compared to the design values, the area ofreinforcement originally assurned must be n.rodified and the procedure (including iteration of the neutral axis
depth) repeated, This procedure is obviously Lcdious and it can bc seen that a computer is
required lor cfficient design of reinfbrced concrete clumns sub.jected to axial forces and
bending moments.
6. |

.4.j.

Axiol lood plus unioxiol bending

To illustrate the plinciples, for simplicity, thc following section devclops expressions only for
retangular concrele colurnns. As wilh beam design above, the equations still apply lbr
flanged beams where the neutral axis rcmains in the flange. In practice, computer programs
will bc rcquired to autornate the itefative strin-compatibility procedures involved br the
design of general sectionsOnly the case where the neutral axis remains wilhin the scction is considered here. The
strains. strcsses and stress resultants for failure l rectngular reinfbrced concrete
column are illustrated in Fig.6.l-13.
For equilibrium. 4 -,f i -,[,, thus:
-

f^,bx +

l:A'.+

J"A"

(D6.1-19)

and taking moments about the application of N (the column ceuLrcline) gives:

t4

'\
llt
. t/h
.\
/,
,1') ' J.A,l':
.r"( ., -.'r] , {rl{
\..
,/
\z"
,/
\1

-dl

rD6.l-20)

In the above expressions, tensile forces and stresses should be taken as negative..( and l.
should be calculated frm the strains implicd by the neutral axis dcpth x, and, where the
reinforcemenL strains are sullicient to cause yielding, / andior /, can be taken as ly,l but
again should observe the sign convention. .fo" alnd 3 are defined in section 3.1.7.
These equations are difficult to apply for the design of sections subjected to known axial
loads and bending moments, since l and,r are unknown. Thus, one design procedure is to
assume values fbr x (and hence/ and d) and ll, then calculate l. from equation (D6.1-19)
for a given N. Equation (D6.1-20) can then be used to check that the value of M is greater
than the applied moment. If M is less than tbe applied mornent, tbc procedure should be
repeated by lledng the assurned values of x and li. This procedure is illustrated in
Worked example 6.1-6.

t23

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

t24

TO EN I992-2

CHAPTER 6. ULTII'4ATE LIMIT STATES

:1i{t',-*r;;,:-;,-:',-,;
6.1

.4.4.

:'

Aaiol load plus bioxiol bending

geometry and reinforcement content is analysed rigorously using the

strin compatibility approach, for example, it is possible to construct interaction diagrams
relating failurc values of design axial force (Np,1) and moments (Mp6 and Msar) about
the major and minor axes respeotivcly. The shape of the diagram varies according to rhe
value of Npa in relalion to the full axial load carrying resistance, NR,l The shape of this
diagram is represented approximately in ECl2 for bisymmetric sections by the following

If a column of known

cxpression given in 2-l-liclause 5.8.9(4):

(r,,,\, /L*'\'.ro
\Mro,,/ \,11r..,,,/ -

2-r-ri().re)

where:

Mut,,

Mea:t

Mnar. Mnc"
d

are the design moments about the respective axes (including second-order
moments)
is the monrent re\irlancc about lhe respectire arc'
is thc exponent:
for circular and elliptical cross-sections 4 : 2.0
for reotangular cross-sections:

-iVE6/Nq1 0.1 0.1

.0 1.5

1.0
2.{)

with linear interpoltion for intermediate values. These stem from observations tht the interaction is linear near the balance point (NEd/NRd - 0-1)
and circular near thc squash load (Ir';u/N*o - 1 0)
r25

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

rv Ed

is the design value olaxial fbrce

is the design xil resistance of the section given by:
Nna:1",/ir * 1,./ya

where:

Ac
As

is the gross area of thc concrete section

is the arca of longitudinl reinforcement

This method is not suited to design as Nqa depends on the reinforcement. It Lherefore
has to be used to check the adequacy of sections with guessed reinlbrcement nd the
reinforcement then modited accordingly.
Section 5.8.9 of this guide provides furthcr guidance on appropriate imperfections to
consider lor biaxial bending, and details the methods which can be used to determine the
elicts of biaxial bending on slender elements. In particular, 2-l-l/,clause 5.8.9(2) requires
imperfections to be considered only in the direction in which they will hve the most
unfavourablc effect.
6.

.5. Brittle failure of members with prstress (additional sub-section)

Prestressed beoms generclly

2- 1-

2-2/clouse
6. t(t 09) (o) to
lc)

li clause 5.10.1(5)P requires tht prestresscd bearns should not fil in a brittle manner due

to corrosion or failure ol individual tendons. It is desirable for a beam to lirst exhibit

cracking, as a warning tht there is corrosion occurring. A potential problem arises where
tendons are corrodiug but the concrete rcmains uncracked. No sign of distress may be
pparent when the concrele compensates for the loss of prestrss through acting in
tenslon. llowevcr, if the concrete suddenly cracks, this tensile strength is permanently lost
and Lhe structure may fail suddenly if there is insulcient bending reserve in the remaining
tendons and reinforcement. For prestressed beams, this is a new requirement to UK
dcsigners. which will only influence the design of member.s where the cracking moment of
the unprcslressed section is a significant proportion of thc applied moment being checked.
This my occur where sections are designed with relatively little prestrcss compared with
the beam cross-section. Protection ginst this brittle failure can be chieved in one ol
three wys according to 2-2lclause 6.1(109) (a) to (c)..
(a) Ensure that the remining cables, after corrosion or filures have led to cracking, are
adequate to crry the frequent combination design moment

To do this chcck, the tendon area is hlpothetically reduced so that the calculated cracking
moment with the reduced area of tendons is lcss than or equal to tht frm the frequcnt
combinaLion of actions, as dcfined in EN 1990 for serviceability linit states. The cracking
moment should be based on the tensile stress, f"1-. For each extremc tension fibre of the
beam with section modulus Z, the moment at cracking, M, and the ptestress force, p, arc
related by:

PIA+PelZ-Mlz--.fct^

(D6.1-2r)

where e is the eccentricity ol the prestress and,4 is thc section cross-sectionl re.
The prestressing force required to make the beam crack at moment, M, is thus:

: (Mlz

J.,^)/(1lA +elz)

(D6.1-22)

The ultimate sLrength of the beam with the reduced tendon area, but using the material
factors for accidental situations. is then gain compared agairst the applied moment from
the fiequent combination of actions. This is illustrated in Worked example 6.1-7, When
calculating the ultimate moment resistance with the hypotheticlly reduced tendon
are, the resistance of any rcinforcement present may also be used. It is also permissible
to allow for moment redistibutjon to ad.iacnt areas in indetcrminate bridges when
checking the moment resistance of the sectin with thc rcduced tndon are. Redistribution

t26

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

of monent and

checks

of rotation capacity arl: discussed in

seclions 5.5 and 5.6

respectively.
The requirement to reduce the number oftendons until cracking results under thc frequent
combination of actions is intencletl lo ensure that cracking would become visible under

normal trafc loading conditions, and investigations and repair could then be iustigaled
quickly- It is slightly odd that the fi'equent combination is used both to dctermine the
reduced number of tendons and thcn to check the ultimte stlngth after cracking, :rs the
loading might increase in the intervening period between cracking and subsequent detcctjon
and remedial ction. However, the check is new to UK practice and the required loading
means it should rarely govcrn.
It is not made clear whether the requirement has to be met both before and afler long-term
losses. Meeting the requit'ement before long-term losses would be more onerous, as gleater
area of prestress would have lo bc discounted, but it is unlikely thal corrosion would occur
beforc long-term losses were substantilly complete, It is therelore recomme[ded l]crc that a
check only be made after long-term losses.
If equation (D6.1-22) is uscd to determine the prestress lbroe lo cause cracking at thc
momcnt- M, then the reduced plestress area. ,4nn.a, for cracking can be dctermined
accordingly as:

, -

"r,u*r

(M

lz -

oS11:1 1

.1",^)

gl4

(D6.1-23)

where ao is the stress in the teudons just prior lo cracking. If there is no reinforcement
considered (minimum reinforcement would also have to b present) then the ulLimate
resistance must stisfv:

lp,rul x ;, x lpo rr. 2 M

(D6.1-24)

wherc z" is the lever arm for the prestress t the ultimate limit state.
Frm equations (D6.1-23) and (D6.1-24), the moment lrom the frequent combination of
actions, M, musl cxceed a minimum vlue to void brittle fracture in the absencc of
reinforcement. thus:

M>
t
=

:r llA I tlz)
Jp.lk

(D6.1-2s)

This can be seen to be related mainly lo properties of the concrete section, the stress in the
renaining tcndons just prior to cracking and the prestress eccentricity. The total amount of
prestress does not ffect the behaviour other than through 2,, which will havc a limited rnge

(b) Minimum reiforcement

Brittle fiacture may also be avoided by cnsu ng that there is suflicient longitudinl reinlbrcemcnt provided to compenste fr the loss of resistance whcn the tensile strength of the
concrete is lost. This is achieved by providing a minimum area of reinforccment ccording
to 2-2lExpression (6.l0la). This reinforcement is not additional to requirements for
other effects and may be used in ultimte bending checks. This check u ill always produce
a requirement Ibr some leinforoement (unlike that in (a)), but avoids thc need to directly
quantify the changc in bending strength due to the loss of tendons from cotrosion;

M,",
:s/rl'

2-2i (6.101a)

where:
M""^

z.

is the cracking bending moment calculated assuming a recommended tensile

strength equl to It. t the extreme teusion fibre, ignoring the prcstressing.
This tensile strength is a nationally determined parameter.
is the lever arm t the ultimate limit state related to the reinforcing steel

t27

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

It is not clear whether, in calculating Lhe lever arn, the centfe f frce of the compression
lbr flexure should be derived ignoring the prestrcssing or including it. The latter is the
mst conservative, as a smallcr lever arm will result, and is consistenL with the idea of
reinlbrcement compensating for lost prestress- Either way, method (b) tends t be more
zone

conscrvative thn method (a).

The clause states that within joints of segmental precast elements, /1,n1 should be taken as
zcro. This leads to the conclusion that no minimum reinforcement is requir.ed lbr brittle frcture in prccast segmentl construcLion. This was intended because such rcjnforcenent could
not" in ny case, bc placed across thejoints. It was envisitged that no reinforcement should be
required since, if corrosion occurs, the joints $.ill open up and give waning of the problem.

However, this will not be true if the strength of the glue is significant; the gluc may be
stronger thn the parent concrete. If a designer fecls strongly that a check of brittle filure
should be made. method (a) could be used assuming the glue to havc the same tensile strength
as the conrete. However, ifthe check is not satisfied. the only measure tht can be taken is to
change the concrete cross-section!
2-Uclause

6.t(t t0)

Item (i) of l-2lclause 6.1(110) requires the reinforcement area from 2-2/Expression
(6.l0la) to be provided in all areas where tension occurs under the characteristic combination of actions, including the secondafy effects f prestress buL ignoring the primary

(isostatic) effects- lt is assumed that local loss of prestress at one sectin does not alter the
distribution of secondarl, prestress effects.
To ensure adequte ductility in the bridge when a section suddenly cracks,2-Zlclause
6.1(l l0) (iii) requires the minimum reinforcing steel area. 1,,-i", in the spans ofcontinuous
beams to extend to the supporLs of the span considered- The reasons for this are unclear. but
it is suggested here that it is intendcd to provide compression reinforcement to the bottom
flange in the adjacent section so that the llange does not firil in compression when
moment is shed from the span when cracking occurs. In principle, therefbre. the sane
should apply for reinforcement providcd in the top flange at supportsj tht is. this reinforce-

mcDt should be taken inlo the span to prevent compressive failure in the top flange.
Typically, in box girders or bcan.r and slab decks this will not be ncccssary as the top
flange is relatively very large. However, this would not be the case for half-through construction. where the top flange may be small or non-existent and it would then be logical to take
this reinforcement into the span. Additional care would be required with haunched sections
where more reinforcement would be needed in the span as the moment shed frm the
supFor[s gives a bigger flange force on a smal]er section.
Tlis continuation of reinforcement may, in any case, be avoided if, at the ultimte limit
statc, the resisting tensile force provided by the reinforcemcnt and prestressing steel at the
sectin at the supports, clculated u,ith charactedstic strengths
{, and,o.rr. respectively,
is less than the resisting compressive force ofthe botton] flange, accotding to 2-2i Expression
(6.102):

l,

ftx

I'pAplptrr

- t.bno",l,.

2-21(6.r02)

where:

l;.r,

4",

Ap

arc, respectively. the thickncss antl the width of the bottom flange of the box
grrder section
dcnote, respectively, the arca ofresisting and prestressing steel in the tensilc zone

at the ultimate limit state

is a nationally determined parameter with recommendcd value of

1.0

The above comment on similarly checking the span for redistribulion from the supports
also applies.

(c) Provide proven monitoring facility

If cxternal post-tensioning

is used, the cbles an readily be inspected fbr. signs of comosion

or lailurc so no further cntingcnqy in the design is required und(rr this clause. However, the
requirement of2-l-liclause 9.2.1.1(4) must still be met.

t28

CHAPTER 6, ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

f.

ggse (i!: Th9 frequ

:'-r4t.

t29

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

30.0

t30

CHAPTER

6. ULTIMATE LIMIT

STATES

Pretensioned becms

For pretensioned beams, nethods (a) and (b) above can be used, but method (b) tlay bc
applied without providing additional reinforcement if the check is modified. Since pretensioned strands al'e protected by concrete encasenent in thc same way as reinlbrcing
steel, it is pcrmitLed to apply 2-2iExpression (6.l0la) dircctly. with 1,.-;" plovided by the
pretensioning itself. The criterion is then simply tht the bending resistancc of the cracked
section exceeds the cracking moment of the section ignoring Lhe prestress. It seems illogical
that thc cracking n'lomcnL, M.cp, should hcrc bc calculated ignoring the prestress. However, it
does mean that the minimum steel are will usually be easily satisfied and since there have
been no experience of problems with pretensioned beams
this easily satisfied check is accepted.

in the UK, it is suggested that

For pretensioned members, 2-2lExpression (6.10Ia) should then be applied with some
nodificalions. In checking l.n,;,,, two altcrnatives are possible lbllorving 2-2lclause
6.1(110) (ii):

(a) All strands with a concrete cover greatel than certain specificd amount may be
included. EC2-2 suggests twice the minimum cover given in 2-l-llTable 4.3. but lhe
applicable cover is a nationally determined parameter. The National Annex is nt
available at the time of writing, but it is likely that the applicable cover will be chosen
so Lhat all sl.rands may be utilized and the critcrion will then never govern. /r,1 should
be replaced with /o.1p in 2-2lExpression (6.101a). The lever arm should be bsed on
the e1lctive strands.

(b) Where strands have stresses lower than 0-6/pl after

losses

in the charactcristic com-

bination, they can be considered regardless of cover but limiting their stress increase,

Ao,r. to the lesser of 0.4fp and 500MPa. 2-2,/Expression (6.101a) then becomcs
l,,n ;nfL + loAoo > Mnplt,.

6.2. Shear
This section deals with the design at ultimate limit state of members subject to shear. It is
split into the following sub-sections; the last is an additional sub-section that is not ptovided

in EN 1992-2:

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

General verification procedure mles

Menbers not requiring design sheal reinforcement
Mcmbcrs rcquiring dcsign sbcar rcinlorccmcnt
Shear between web and flanges of T-sections
Shear at the interface bet$,een concrete cast at different limes
Shear and transverse bending
Shear in precast concrete and composite construction

Section 6.2.1
Section 6.2-2
Section 6.2-3
Section 6.2.4
Section 6.2.5
Sectlon 6.2.6
Sectiot16.2.7

t3l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-l-l/clouse
6.2. t (t )P,

TO EN I992-2

6.2.1. General verification procedure rules

2-l -1 lclause 6,2.1( I )P. (2 ) and (3 ) dcfine the following general terms for

use

in shear design

(2) ond calculations:

(3)

Vra
/na,.
/ra.,
y'na
tr/j,1.-*

4"a
V,a

is the (ultimte) design shear force in the section considered resulting

external loading and prestressing (either bonded or unbonded)
is the design shcar resistance of the member without shear teinforcement
is Lhe design value

ofthe shear force, which can

fron.r

he sustained by the yiclding shcar

teinforcemcnt
is the design shear resistance of a member with shear reinforcement including the
components from inclined cmpressive and tensile chords
is the design value of the maximum shear force which can be sustained by the
menrber. lirnited by crushing ol rhc c,'mprcsriorr slruts
is, in members with inclined compression chords, the design value of the shear
component of the lorce in the compression alea

is, in members with inclined tensile chords. the dcsign value of the shear
component of the force in the tensile reinfbrcement

I - I/clause
6.2.t (2)

2-

2-l-l/clouse
6.2.t (3)

l- I /dause
6.2.t (4)

2-

2-l-l/clouse
6.2.r(s)

2-l-l/clause
6.2.t (6)

t12

The design ofreinforced concrete members lbr shear is usully crried out s check ftel
the flexural design and therefore hasic scction sizes and properties should already have been
chosen. For flangcd beams with thin webs. the mximum shear strength achievable, /p3."*,
may, however. need to be considcrcd at the initial sizing stage to ensur that web thicknesses
re great enough. It may also be beneficial to increase thc scction sizes and reducc tbc shcar
reinfbrcement contcnL for economic or buildability reasns.
2-1-llclaase 6.2.1(?) allows thc designer to take account ofthe vertical components ofthe
inclined tension and compression chord forces in the shear dcsign of a nrcmber with shear
reinfbrcement. These components. ,/ccd and tr/,3, are added to the shear resistance based
on the links. They should, in theory- be determincd from the actual chord forces obtained
ti'om the truss model and not the value of M lz frcm beam theory since the latter would

overestimate 2".6 and undcrcstimate y',d. It is not clear why the clause appears not to
llow accounL to be taken of the inclined chord lorces for mcmbers without shear rcinforccment. It should be noted that these components can lso reduce strength, notably in simply
supported suspended spans with arched soliLs.
The designer should be careful when considering these inclined chord forces in conjunction
wiLh inclined prestress, since the shear due to prestress is included within I/s,1 on the applied
ctions sidc of the equation according tr:2-1-llclause 6.2,1(3) and should not bc doublccounted. Often, the prestrcssing force forms the tension chord. The risk of double-counting
is compounded by 2-l-1,/clause 6.2.1(6), which dcducts the inclined chord conponents from
the applied sher when considering the web crushing limit. Cre should also be tken with
variable depth sections when a varying ncu[ral axis height has been modelled in the global
analysis. In this casc. the output shef compnents will then be perpendicular to this inclined
axis. The inclined chord forces should relate to a consistent axis.
2-I-l ldaase 6.2.1(1) reqlires only minimum shcar reinforcememt to be provided where
Zra ( Zra.". This is disqussed further in section 6.2.2.1 of this guide. Where l/sd > I/Rd..,
the concrete resistance /p6." is assumed to bc completely lost and 2-l-llclause 6.2.1(5)
requires the resistance to be taken as I/R.]. This differs from previous UK practice,v but is
more rational since the cracking needed to mobilize forces in shear reinlbrcement reduces
any contribuLion to the resistnce from the concrcLc- This does nol mean that the shear
resistances for a givcn bean.r will be less than that found to BS 5400 Part 4,n since
EN 1992 allows the sher truss anglc to bc varied, whereas BS 5400 Part 4 restricted the
truss angle to 45". Thjs usually leads to greater resistnce for a given link provision in
reinforced concrete bems,
2-1-1 lclause 6,2.1( 6) relates to the maximum shear stress that can be carried by the web.
This is limited by crushing of the web compression sffuts in the truss model. In calculating
the shcar for comparison ginst the crushing limit t/R,'.,,.,, the inclined chord con.rponents
tr/".1 and I/ta are this tjme included on the applied shear side of the equation, unlike in

CHAPTER 6. ULTIIYATE LIIYIT STATES

2-1-1/clausc 6.2.1(2) where they are on the resistance side, as they inliuence the stte ofstress
in the rveb.
The use of a truss model for shear design clearly shows tht the chord fbrces di{Icr from

thosc predicted by a flexural analysis, being greater than expectcd in the tension chord
and lower thn expected in the compression chord. 2-1-I lclause 6.?..f(Z) therefbte requires
the longitudinal tension reinfbrcement to mke llowance for this. This is discussed in sectin
6.2.3.1 of this guidc.
Where a member is predominantly subjected to uniform load, 2-I-I lclause 6.2.118./ pcrmit"
the design shear force to not be checked at a distance less than d from thc support, provided
that the link rcinforccnrcnt leeded r/ away is continuecl Lo thc support and web crushing
(/p,1.-,,*) is checked at the support. Ifthere are significant point loads applied within a disLance
/ of the support, they should be consideled using 2-l-l/clause 6.2.3(8).
Where a load is applicd ncar lhc bottom of a scction. 2-1-I lclause 6.2.1(9) teqres
sufiicient verticl reinfrcement to crry the lod to the tp fthe section, commonly referred
to as'suspension reinforcerlent', to be provided in addition to any reinforcement required to
resist shear. This is similar to thc rcquircmcnt for mcmbcrs with indirect support, discussed

2- l- I /douse

6.2. t (7)

2-l-l/clouse
6.2.t(8)

2-l-l/clouse
6.2.r (e)

further in section 9.2.5.

6.2.2. Members not requiring design shear reinforcement

This section is split into two additional sub-scctions dcaling with reinforced concrete (sectjon
6.2,2.1) and prestressed concrete (section 6.2.2.2).
6.2.2.

l.

Reinforced concrete members

Thc lormulac given by EC2 for the design of reinforced qoncrete members without shear
reinforcement are empirical and have been chosen to fit with the extensive test data. The
main characteristics governing the shear strength of members without shear reinforcemettt
re concrete strength, amount of longitudinal reinforcement in tension and absolute
values of section depths. The longitudinal reinforcement content contrihutes to the shear
reslstance rn two rvays:

(1) Directly by dowel ction.

(2) lndirectly by controlling crack widths.

These in turn influencc the amunt of shear that

cn be trnsferred across the cracks by aggregate interlock.

The nember depths have also been shown to have a signilicant influcnce on sheal strength
and EC2 takes accoLLnt of this by dcfining a depLh lactor, /r. giren by

r-r+,/49-:.0
\d

(D6.2-1)

where d is the effective depth to longitudinal tension reinfbrcement (in millimetres),

2-2lclaase 6.2.2(101) gives the following cxprcssion for calculating the shear strength
sections without shear reinforcement:

I/p6,":

(Cp6."ir(10

Op|f.tit

kp.r)b,,ct

of

2-2/clouse

6.2.2(t0t )

2-21(6.2.a)

where:

is the concret cylinder

Ja,
:1001
pr :

,4.1
,,
d

strength in MP
(D6.?-2)

is lhe area of longitudinal tensile reinforcement $hich extends a minimum of a

design anchorage length and an effective depth beyond the sectio considered
(as indicated in 2-l-liFig. 6.3)
is thc smallcst width of lhe cross-sectiou in thc tcnsile zone (see section 6.2-2-2).
Tests such as those in reference I I suggest that the use of lhe minimum width is
quiLc conscrvaLive
is the effective depth to tensile reinforcement

t33

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Nrl
A"
o"o

rs6/1" (in MPa)

is the axial lorcc in the cross-sectiou from the loading or from prestressing
is the gross concrete cross-sectional area

The values of Cpa. and /c1 may bc givcn in thc National Annex- EC2 recommends values
of 0.18ii," and 0.l5 respectively.
EC2 defines a minimun value of tr!1.. as:

: (r,n i,., -l k1o")b*d

where t-;. can also be found in the National
,.i. : 0.035r/2/ V2

2-2i(6.2 b)

tr/r<a."

Annex and is recommended

as;

2-2(6.3N)

Recent tests (reference 4) have indicated this minin.rum strength to be unconservative for
high strength concretes and those mde with limestone aggregate- The UK National Annex
is likely to set a limii to /l of 50 MPa for shear design by rvay of the nationally determined
paraneter in 2-21clause 1.1.2(102)P.
The increasc in shear resistance lbr axial load in the above expressions is greater than the

UK practice. Howcvcr, bccausc of thc gcncral form of 2-2,/Expression

(6.2-a) and 2-2iExpression (6.2.b), a reduction to resistance is obtained where there is a
tensile force- Axial tcnsion can be expected to reduce both dowel action and aggregate interlock. However. providing the membcr is appropriately dcsigncd for the axial tension, tests by
Regan '' showed only a very minor influence of axil tension on sher resistance, The EC2
expressions are thercfore consen ative. This conservatism was of concern to the drafLers ol
EN 1994-2. because deck slabs of composite bridges often have significant tension nd yet
there havc no1 been related problems with sheal lesistance in deck slabs. Clause 6.2.2.5(3)
of EN 1994-2 consequently rcduces lhe effecl of tensior on shear resistancc of deck slabs
in conposite bridges. This is discussed in reference 13. The same problem of conservatism
potentilly affects concrete box girdel bridges and bear and slab bridges.
Only externally applied loads (from prestress or external loads) should be considered when
applying 2-2ltxpressions (6.2,a) and (6.2,b). The influence ofimposed deformations (such as
those induced by shrinkage or ternperature effects) mal, be ignored. Indirect actions can bc
shed at the ultimate limit state and shrinkage effects, at least in part, are ls inevitably
included in tests thenselves.
increase in curfent

t34

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

t : .13.3 MPa (using rro =

,,Tj,
l. t.o f rhis sulat
\":::1j .-::::tv.:::t
- 8846.7mm) ._.i,. .,. r._. r::- _':.:tit'l
' bars = | | x r r: (32/2;r
::::-::: .:,:-':
rl|us Irorn equauojr. t L-ro,r-Jl:
: - . .. . : : . : : I : I :. , : , : , : : .. i:,: .. .' ':::
: thtlr.f!.rn:
'cti,rn

:':.
:::rffi
rcc.mmended,. gve
;as *.i;+t1'.-t'
;i
i,
-ffi,-:::
^i,;l?
.,.
:' I i li,
i*
From *',t'r:;j:i,.':
equation (D6.2-l
:.r. + seTa+ :r + fo$ :.l;4. ;.;,r;*; ; ;;r;i;"u.. l. .. I, ,,
:.,, ;. .,,.
I

):

r,

,,':"

-:-]^:"0

"

600

'(

'200

720

v I0rmm?

Behaviour close to supportt

'fhcrc has been extensive testing carried out which illustrates thal greater shear strengths
than those given by 2- I - I i Expression (6.2,a) can be obtined in members where the load is
applied close to the suppofi or in short membcrs. suqh as corbels. The increase in resistance,
for scctio[s closer to the support than approximately 2rl, occurs for two reasons:

.
.

a proporlion of the load is carried directly to the support by a compression strut;

the ngle of the shear faiJure plane is steepened from that obtained for a Joad applied
lurther fom the support.

In

current

UK practice (and earlier drafts of EN

1992-2 and

ENV 1992-l-l'.).

this

behaviour was accounLed for by introducing an enhancement factot ol kd/a, which was
applied to the concrete shear resistancc- au is the distance lrom Lhc support centreline t
Lhc face of the load. Testing suggests tht the value of is not the same fbr cases with
uniformly distribr.rted loads and thosc rviLh single or multiple concentrated loads. For
simply supported beams, k - 2 is ppropdate for unil'ormly distributed loads and k: 2.5
is appropriate for a single concentrated load, For continuous beams and concentrated
loads, t : 3 is applopriate. A value for li of 2 is therefore conservative for all loading types.
There arc vcry few tests for situations covering rnultiple loads. As a result, the final version
of EC2 removed the above enhanccmcnt factor from the resistance sidc of the equation and
introduced a reduction ftctor rn 2-1-llclause 6.2.2(6) o B - a,124. which is applied to the

2- I- I/clouse

6.2.2(6)

t35

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Resistnce = %orc x 2dl4,1

Usge = Pvjl(Y.oncd)
Shear check betlveen sLrpporl and nearest lod lo ENV 1992-1-1

Etfective shear

usage

1.5Pav1ld

t.sPavrl( y.oncd)

Shearcheck beween support and nearest load to EN 1992-1-1

Fig.6.2-1. Comparison of treatment of shear enhancement

in ENV 1992- | - | and

EN 1992-l-lforbeam

with span >> o"1 and d

shear contribution of individual loads to the totl sher, I's6. This is not equivalent to the
previous version. other than lbr cases where there is a single point load. This differcnce is
shown in Fig- 6.2-l lor the case ol a beam with span ) nu1 and 11, and where the basic
concrete resistance in the bsence f ny enhancement is 4onc. The current version of
EC2 docs not take account of the influence of steepening the shear failure plane, which
can, in effect, give enhancement for loads applied further than 2./ from the support.
For a, ! 0.5d, a, should be tken s 0.5d. The enhncement can only be used where the
longitudinl reinforcement is fulJy anchored at the suFport- Concrete corbels and halfjoints
are discussed further in Annex J of this guide. which details the special cases ol short shear
spans covcred by EC2-2 in its Annex J.
The approach of2-1-l/clause 6.2.2(6) does not fit tests for uniforrnly distribute.d loads, such
as those in reference 15. wlile the approach of enhancing the resistance side oI the equation
gives good greement. 2-1-l iclause 6.2.2(6) is more conseruative. It also significantly complicates the practicality of pplying support enhancement rules to bridge design with variable
load trains as it is necessary to isolate th location of all loads contributing to the sher
force. This is usually not convenient for load trains where load cases have been automatically
gencrated by software. For uniformly distributed loads, an integral has to be performed to
determine the reduced lzs,1. This problcm also allects pad foundation design, where successive
pcrimeters or shear lanes need to be considered. Notably, z-l-l/clause 6,4.4(2) for punching
lesistance ofbases uses thc old ENV 1992-1-l formulation with cnhancement t the resistance
which avoids the integral but contradicts section 6-2 of EN 1992-2.
2-I - l/clause 6.2.2(6) further limits the applied shear force (without reduction factors) to a
maximum 1

2-1-1(6.5)

0.5b*duf"a
where:

"-oo(r *)

is recommended

2-r-r(6 6N)

with l"L in MPa. i, is an empirically obtained efficiency factor which ccounts for the
crushing strcnglh of concrete struts at the ultimate limit state.

t36

CHAPTER 6. ULTII4ATE LII'1IT STATES

Minimum shear reinforcement

When no shear reini'orccment is required on the basis of the design calculations, n.fnimum
shear reinlbrcement should nevertheless be provided in accordalce with the detaiLing
requirements of 2-l-l/clause 9.2.2 for beams, 2-l-I,/clause 9-3.2 for slabs nd 2-1-l,/clause
9.5.3 fbr columns. It would be impractical to put links in flat slabs of bri<lge decks. 2-l-l/
clause 6.2.l(4) allows minimum reinforcement to bc omiLted from members where trnsverse
redistribution of loads is possible such as slabs (solid, ribbed or voided). For typical voided
slabs used in bridge deck applicalions, it is reconrmended here that minimum links are always
provided in accordance with 2-1-1lcluse 9.2.2; thcy wi1l, in any case, usually be needed for
the trnsverse Viercudeel behaviour of such deck.
6.2.2.2.

Prestressed

aonete members

Two types of shcar failure can occur in prestressed concrete beams. 'Shear flerure' failures
occur in regions of beams that are cracked in flexure and are covered in 2-2,/clausc
6.2.2(101). 'Shear tension' tilures occur in regions ol beams that are un-crcked in flexure
when the principal Lensilc s|Iess in the web reaches the concrete tensile strength. This is
covered by 2- l- I /clause 6.2.2(2).
Preshessd sections un-cracked in flexure

- shear tcnsion
2-1-l lclause 6.2.2(2) defrtes sections s un-cracked whcrc the maximurn flexurl tensile
stress is smaller than /i,r,o osh.. The maximum flexural tensile slress means the naximurn
tensile Iibre stress (i.e. including thc axial stress component as wcll as the bending
component). lt should also be noted tht the definition of /1,,1 in 2-l - l/Expression (6.4)
is taken from 2-1-1,/clausc 3.1.6(2) and therefore includes the o., factor. The <lerivation
of un-cracked section resistance should be consistent with this limit and should strictly
bc rr"t/lrp.e5/1". If the recommended value of 1.0 is adopted for {rd, there is no
lnconslstency.
The shear failure criterion for section with no shear rcinforcement ssumed in 2-1-1,/
cluse 6.2-2(2) is that Lhe principal tensile stress anywhere in the section exceeds the tensile
strength of the concrete, i6. (/16 is a positive number but the sign convention below uses

2-l-l/clouse
6.2.2(2)

limit is -d with this convention.)

Internally self-equilibriating s|resses from differential shrinkage and temperature may bc
ignored by implication s they do not featurc in 2-1- I i Expression (6.4).
Equating principal tensile stress to the tensile stength of the cncrete gives the follou'ing
compression as positive. so the approprite tensile

equation:

/cr

(o* *
_

o6*6)

wherc:

ocp

is the compressive stress due to axial loading or prestressing (after losses and
including appropriate partial saf'ety factors) at the level considered (in MPa,
compression taken as positive)

dbcnd

r
/nr."

I
b

is stress due to bending at the level considered (in MPa, compression taken as
positive)
is the applied shear stress, where r: VI.d...,1"2lIb (rhis is onl)' valid where the
cross-sectional properties are constnt long the beam)
is the sher resistance determined lrom the shear force rcquired to cause web
crcklng
is the second moment of area of the section
is the web width at the level being checked including allowances for ducls
is the trst moment of area of the concrete above the plane considered aboul the
cross-section centroid level (EC2 refcrs to tbis as ,!'when it relates to plne t
the centroidal level)

t37

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Substitution fbr

in the above leads to the fbllowing

expression

lbr

shear tension

resistance:

,,

tb
./"]1

(D6.2-3)

(.'"o *o*"a)-,a

Assuming the principal tensile stress occurs t the centroid of the section, dbena :0,
and introducing a fctor, n1, and substituting ,S for le.t, gives the following cxpression in
2- I -l /clause 6.2.2(2):

Ib*
,,
"n4,.: S

\,t, '" t-,1"

2-1-t l(6.4)

wllere;

rl
".

is a factor introduced to account for the transmission lengths in pretensined

construction
is the web width at the centroidal axis including allowances fbr ducts see sectjon
6.2-3.2 below. This definition differs from that in 2-2lclause 6.2.2(101). A further
slightly different definition is used in 2-l-1/clause 6.2.3

2-l-I,/clause 6.2.2(2) applies to'single-span members', but the leason for this rcstriction is
not clear, An cxpression similar to 2-1-llExpression (6.4) was used in BS 5400 Prt 4' for
the shear resistnce ofsections un-cracked in flexure. It was equally applicable to continuous
bcams. The limitation is not restdctive close to the internal supports of continuous beams
where the section is likcly to be cracked in llexure- It is, in an1' cse, unlikely that the
shear tension resistance would be adequte on its own to calry the shear at an internal
support, wbcrcupou its contribution would be lost and thc variable angle truss rnodel
would have to be used. There could, however, be econmy to be gained in using it near
conlraflexure regions of continuous beams, but this does not appear to be permitted.
'Single-span membcrs' could include thosc in fully integral bridges where end hogging
rnornents develop. If the method were to be used in this sitution, it would be logical to
permit its use in hogging zones of continuous construction. It is also possible that the
intention ws to restrict its use to 'one-way spanning' members because 2- I - I /Expression
(6.4) does not take account of stresses in a lransvr's direction. It is more likely that the
de was added to removi: somc conservatism for simply supported beams arising fiom the
use of the other shear rules.
In certajn scctions, such as I-beams, where lhe section width varies over height, the
raximum principl stress may occur at a level other thn at the centroidal axis. In such
cases, 2-l - I /clause 6.2.2(2) requires that the minimum value of shear rcsistance is determined
by calculating tr/p6." at various levels in the cross-section. In such cases the flexural strcss
term, .rbend, in equation (D6.2-3) above should be included while maintaining the o1 term
applied to the prestress, thus:

/nr. jl_ /,:,

roro,p I

(.D6.2-4)

oben,r r /c,,r

Other tcrms are defined above under equation (D6.2-3). For'I'sections and boxes, i is
often suficient t check the neutral axis and the web-flange junctions using equation
(D6.2-4). When inclined tendons are used, 2-l-l/clause 6.2.1(3) allows the vertical compo-

2- I- l /douse

6.2.2(3)

nent ofprestress at a scction to be included by adding (ifadvcrsc) or subtracting (ifbenecial)

the component fiom the applied shear force.
To ccount for behavjour close to supporls, 2J-I lclause 6.2,2(-1,) states tht the clculation ol shear resistnce according to 2- 1- l/Expression (6.4) is not required fbr sections thal
are nearer to the support than the point which is the interseotion ofthe elastic centroidal axis
and a line inclined from Lhc inner edge ol'the support at an angle of 45". The reduction to

shear lbrce allowed

in

2-l-11clause 6.2.2(6)

for

beams cracked

however, be applied wher using 2- l-l,/Expression (6.4).

t38

in

flexure should not.

CHAPTER

6. ULTIMATE LIMIT

STATES

Whcn, in continuous beams, the effects of imposed deformations arc ignored in flexural
design at ULS, thcrc is a case fol still considering such effects in the sher design s the

lailure may be non-ductile. This adtlitional complexity should rarely arise in practice
links will usually be required in bridge beams.

as

r39

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Prestressed sctions crcked in flexure

Thc dcsign of prestressed concrete sections cracked in flexure without designed shear
reinforcement is conducted as in section 6-2.2.1 above for reinfbt'ced concrcte. Bonded
prestress my, however, be included in the delinition of l"t according to 2-2,/clause
6.2.2(10l). The effective depth, d, is then bascd on a'weighted mean value'. This should
be based on the centroid of steel area- irresoective of strensth.

Minimum shear reinforcement

Minimum shear reinforcement should alwavs be nrovided

as discussed above

for reinforced

concrete.

6.2.3. Members requiring design shear reinforcement

This section is split into three additional sub-sections dcaling rvith reinforced concrete
(section 6-2.3.1). prestressed concrete (section 6.2.3-2) and segmental construction (section
6.2.3.3).
6.2,3.1

Reinforced concrete membe

In regions where I/s,1 > tr/R.1.., sullicient shear reinforcemenL should be provided to ensure
t'ed < ['Rd as slated in 2-1-liclause 6.2-1(5)- 2-2iclame 6.2.3 dopts the truss model
illustrated in Fig. 6.2-3 for the calculation of required shear reinfbrcement.
Consider the portion ofa member, of width b*, illustratcd in Fig- 6.2-4 for a genral truss
model with a compressive strut at an angle d to the beam axis perpendicular to the shcar force

r40

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

Line of concrete strui

"..i'i 1I
i

Fig.6,2-4,

Paruil lmeared truss model

for the use of inclined shr reinforcemenl

and shear reinforcen.rent inclined at an angle of cr (to the same axis). 2-l-liclause 9.2.2(l)
limits thc angle of the shear reinforcement to bc between 45" and 90'. 2-I-llclause
6.2.3(1) defines the web width to bc uscd in design calculations for members requiring
shear reinforcement as the minimum rveb width between the tension Jnd compression
chords. The shear resistance is obtained by considering vertical equilibrium on section A
A, a plane parallel to the line ol thc concrete strut folce. Since plane A A is parallel to
the concrete forcc. there is no vertical component of the sLrut force crossing the plane and
lhcrefore only the verticl components of lhe sbear reinforcemnt legs crossing plane A A
resist the applied shear force, ['.
The length of plane A-A is z/sin ti and the spacing along plane A A of the reinforcement
lcgs crossing the plane is s sin cr/sin(t? * cr); thcrefore the number oflcgs crossing the planc is
z sin(d + o)/.r sin d sir o. Therefore, using the design strength of the shear reinforcement of
fr,."61r*. the total verticl components of the forccs from the reinforcement crossing the
plane is given by .f,,.,11,,*(: sin(9 * rr)/.r sindsino) sina. Thus. vertical equilibrium on

2-l-l/clouse
6.2.3(r)

A A givcs:
-. A"* .. si ( + ,r)

section

'

.1 'J.rsrl

4.*

sin

(sin

,,.
.. ,,r"0

lJ

d co5

-cossino)

,,ind

= 3t,/y*a(cos.t + cot dsino)

TIis

gives the equation in 2-1-llclause 6.2.3(4) (.witlt

replaced

2-l-l/douse

with /p6,):

6.2.3(4)

/*a.:3r.1","a(cotd+cota)sinr
For vcrtical shear reinforcement, cx : 90", cot o :

2-l-l(6.13)
0, sin

I and 2- 1- I /Expression

(6.

l3)

simplifies to th expression rn 2-2lclause 6.2.i(103).

/na,,

- &;I'*a

cot o

2-Uclouse
6.2.3(r 03)

)-216.8)

Now consider vertical cquilibrium on section B B, a plane perpendicular to lhc line oflhe
concrete struL lorce- The applied shear force, I/, is now resisted partly by the vefiical
component of the concrete strul [orce and partly by the vertioal components of thc force
from the shear rcinforcement crossing plane B B.
The length ofplane B B is z/cos0 and thc spacing along plane ll B ofthe reinlbrcemcnt
legs crossing the plane is s sin o/cos(9 * o); therefole the number of legs crossing the plane is
; cos(d + .l)/.r sos d sin o. Therefbre, again using the design strength of the shear reinforcement of 6,.11,., the total vertical comFonents of the forces from the reinforcement crosstng
the plane is given by l,*j,4,* (: cos(d + cv)/s cos d sin o) sin r:r.

t4l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

The total concretc strut force,4, is given by { - .b*zlcos0

of this fnrce is { sin I : o"b*ztan?.
Thus vertical cquilibrium on section l3 B gives:

l,* . cos(d + r)
,.
n -1 /,uut
co-., I
- 4.s (co:0 cos n
, /'*d---

- .f

/y"a--le,-ts

o..b.-- t:tn

the vertical component

r'l

'insin<r)

tan0sin,,)

'.t

r:Ld

o.

rs:

tun d

- o"h*zItn0

' r,/y"a--sin,r(cot - tan) ocb,,:tan0

But

frotr

2-

l- 1/Exprcssion (6.13):

V
A,",
"
(cotd+cotn; .c -'Ywo-'-q
thercfore

V-.

a tan[t1-qh*zran

. {cot
(cot.^
d + cot.r)

SO

1.oao1o,"tl{cott?

c'rlor (coto-tanr

o,bn-tart0

and

-Ialr {/^lcot

trn

t/)

,".b* --(cor

u r cot n I

thus

rll|l'q.--..

(corp+cota)
l l + col'{/J

(D6.2-s)

For failure of the concrete strut by crushing. o"

71

a""r1/16 where;

is the strength reduction fctor for concrete crcked in shear. It is a nationally

determined parametel which Note 2 ro 2-2,/clause 6.2,3(103) recommends be
taken as z given by 2-l-liExpression (6.6N). If the design stress of the shear
reinforcement is limited to a maximum of 80% of the chracteristic vield
stress, fyk. Note 3 recornmends z1 be taken as:
0.6 for./l -< 60 MPa

or (0.9

oc*

2-2l(6.10.aN)

/lpl200) > 0.5 for /11 >

60 MPa

2-2l(6.10.bN)

This factor is discussed l'urther below.

is a fctor uscd to take account f comprcssion in the shear rea nd its value
may be given in the National Annex. 2-2,/clausc 6.2.3(103) recommends the

following values:
1.0

for non-prestressed structures

(l +a"o/,{a)

for 0 < o.o < 0.25Id

2-2l(6.1 1.aN)

1.25 foL 0.25 < o-- < 0,51..,

2.5(l

o"ol

f")

for 0.5/".1 < o"o

2-2l(6.11.bN)

1.016

2-2l(6.11.cN)

u'here a"o is the mean compressive stress (tnesured positive) in the coucrete. This
lactr is discussed lurther below.

t42

CHAPTER

6, ULTIMATE LIMIT

STATES

Thus substituting for o. in equation (D6.2-5) gives Lhc cxpression in 2-l-liclause 6.2 3(4):
2-

l- 1/(6.14)

This exprcssion cllectively gives the maximum shear tesistance of a section belore lailure
occurs due to clushing ofthe concrete struts and is therefore designted tr/s,i.,nu, in lhe codeFor practical ranges of axial load in prestressed members, the recommcnded values for n.*
gcnerally result in increasing the maximum shear stress liniit by up to 25%. If this is considered together with the recommended beneflt from r,lwhere the links are not fuJly stressed, the
raximum shear limiL can bc around twice that permitted by BS 5400 Part 4' and potentially
unsafe. Iiinclined links are used at 45', tr/p1..,, can approach four times the equivalcnt limit
in BS 5400 Part 4! .t"o, z1 and inclined links are discussed further belorv.
For bcams with vertical links. the uthors le unawar of test results which suggesl the
additional increase for crushing resistance given by "* is unsafe on its own. It is nt,
however, supported by lhe rulcs for mcmbrane elements in 2-2lclausc 6.109(103), where
compression reduces the maximum resistnce to shear, The physical model behind i,1 is
also hard to understand as it promotes the design of over-reinforced behaviour in shear,
which may invalidate the plastic assumptions behind the truss model which relies on t'otation
ol the rveb compression diagonals. The justilicatiou probably relates to limiting the tensile
enhancing the strut compression limit, as
discussed in soction 6-5.2 of this guide. In conjunction with the use of the upper valucs of
o.*, the EN 1992-2 results may become unsaf, particularly where the webs are designed to
be very slender becausc of thc high permissible stresses. Slender webs (with high height to
thickness ratio) may exhibit significant second-order out-of-plane bending effects which
would lead to tilure at shear forces less than the values based on uniform crushing. There
is limited test evidcncc herc and the UK Ntional Annex thereforc imposes an upper limit
on sher resistnce based on web slenderness to safeguard against this. z1 is also reduced.
For beams with inclined links, no test results are available to check the high predicted
valucs of tr/p4,.,u"- One result is available in refrence 12 but this failed prematurely below
the lod expected from EN 1992-2. It is clear, thereforc, that the reconmcnded values in
EN 1992-2 should be used rvith gret caution. The UK National Annex therelbre reduces
both r". (to 1.0) and 11 where inclined links are used.
Where webs carry signilicant transverse bending in addition to shear, these high shear
crushing resistances my nt be achievable due to the interaction of the compression lields
strains acting skew

to the struts and thcrcby

section 6.2,6 rel'ers.

Notwithstanding the above, the examples in this guide use the EN 1992-2 recomuended
values for o", and rr1, but with an upper lilnit of 1.0 imposed n.",.
For vertical shear reinforcen.renl, a:90" so cot.r::0 and 2- l - I /Expression (6.14)

simplics to:

rna.,,,r, c$..'!v--l

/Ld

cold

---:------------ Lr.sa$Z/'tl.J
/

;i

d\

uano: -/
"

giving the expression in 2-2lclause 6.2.3(103):

y'na.-u.

a"nb*zu1f"6

(cotd+tand)

2-21(6.e)

Additionl longitudinal reinforcement and the shill method

The design of the longitudinal reinforcement in the region cracked in flexure, or where shear
reinforcement is provided, is aflected by the shear design of members. 2-2lclaute 6.2.3(107)
requires additional longitudinal rcinforcement to be provided in certain regions over and
abovc that required for the flexural design, s discussed below.
The free bodl' ABD in Fig. 6.2-5 shows a portion of a smeared truss within a membet,
ilrcludinq both horizontal and vertical forces. As before. the compressive strut is chosen to

2-2/clquse
6.2.3(r 07)

r43

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

.1,I

.t...
...1
i...

i.
1..

'r.l

1...

Fig. 6.2-5. Free body diagram for truss analogy

t

at an angle

I to the horizontal and th shear reinfrcement is inclined at an angle

legs ol shcar reinforcement crossing the plne A-D is

of a. Again, the number of

-F

0)/r

sin d sin .

"sin(0
First, consider vertical equilibrium: I/

- I F,-, where Fve,' :

,F

sin o- Thus

.
| - f stno-:sinfd n) sin(A | .l)
ssmf./sin lsind

(D6.2-6)

Second. consider holizontal equilibrium: C

Z+

I.Fh.,,

z sin(d o)
_
_ Fz sin(d + ,,)
/ J /'COSO
- l |
-:COl
J Sln t^-sln a
.r sln {/

uhere fhor'

F cos

q. Thus
(D6 2-7)

{}

Finally- consider moment equilibriun about point A:

to' d
r \- rn.,,, ,/_
:
Therefore, substituting for I F"c., from equation (D6.2-6) and
M.

T=
.-

F.",,
1 \/_.*tr

(D6.2-7) gives:

+ (t) z cot 0 Fz sin(P + r'r)

+-cot(lrsind
Jslno
which simplifies to:
Fz sr10

F'6o;, from equation

o) ^
: +d
coLa)
l,r sln
-tcorpt
Substituting f liom equatin (D6.2-6) into equation
f'--2 rin{d

M -I:

(D6 2-8)
(D6.2-8) gives:

M:TzrvlGoto+cotq)
and rearranging gives:
Tz

Bl M

icot

- Vicotu:

Vz corl

rl(cotg

cot cr)

Vzcot0 is the bending moment al section CD (McD) therefore:

Tz: Mco+f

r:Ysp

(cotd

coto)

+t(ptg _ cor)

(D6.2-e)

hense thc longitudinal reinforcement at section CD should be designed for the force from the
bending moment at CD, M.o/;, plus V l2(,cot? cota). This is equivalent to designing for

an ellective bending moment of:

M : Mco +
where a,

144

va

cIo) : M(,D +
7(.cot? -

:0.5:(cot9

cot n).

Vj

(D6.2-10)

CHAPTER 6, ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

Equation (l)6.2-9) is the hasis of the design tensile force given in 2-2/clause 6.2.3(107):
Tensile force

Muo
z

A4o with

AF,6

:0.5t

sa(cotl

cota)

2-21(6.r8)

For ny section, Mr 1f z I LF.T should not be taken as greater than MEa,-,*/2, as implied by
the shift method below, where Ms6.."* is thc maximum mornent along the beam (for either
the sagging or hogging zones considered).
2-l-1,/clause 9.2.1-3(.2) allows an alternative nethod based on equation (D6.2-10). This is
lo shift lhc dcsign moment envelope horizontally by a distance .?L - 0-52(cot f, - cot r-v) as

shown in 2-l-liFig. 9.2, which effectively introduces the additional moment I/c1 in equation
(D6,2- l0), The longitudinal reinforcement is designed to lhis new effective moment envelope.
This is equivalent lo designing thc rcinlorcement at a sectin to resist only the real bending
moment at tht section, but t then conti[ue this reinforcement beyond tht section by the

a further shift may be required as discusscd under

the comments on 2-l-liclause 6.2.4(7). For members without sbcar reinforcement, the
value of a1 should be taken as the efIctive depth, d, at thc section considered, as indicated
in 2-l-l/Fig.6.3.
distance, ar. For flanged beams,

Behaviour for loads applied close to supports

Wherc a load is applied close to a support, speciflcally wirhin a distance of 2d from the
support,2-l-Ilclause 6.2,3(8) permits the contribution of that lod to producing the
shear force l/pa to be reduced by a factor, -a,l2d.'lhis is the same factor as for
members without shear reinforcement in 2-1-1icluse 6.2.2(6). The shear force calculated
in this way must satisfy the following condition:

Zft

6.2.3(8)

2-r-t l(6.19)

,4.*fr.6 sin cr

1.,,[.6

2-[- I /douse

of thc shcar rcinl'orcement crossing the inclined shear crack

between load and support. (Note tht this deflnilion of l,* difi'ers from that elsewhere,) For
loads close to supports, there clearly cannot be a free choice of strut angle within lhe range
allowed in 2-l-1/clause 6.2.3(2). Only the reinforcement within the central 0.754u should be
tken into ccount as shown in Fig. 6.2-6. This limitation is made because tests by Asin''
indicated that the links adjacent to both load and suppofi do not fully yield. The shear
crushing limit according to 2-l-\l'clause 6.2.2(6) should be checked without pplying the
factor 3 : a,l2d. This crushing limit is independent of strut angle.
This concept ofconsidering only the Iinks between the load and th support works only for
single loads. Where there re other loads contributing to the shear applied further than 2d
from the support, the shear design for these loads should be treated in accordance with
the remainder of thc clauses in section 6.2.3 of EC2. It would be illogical to constrin the
location fol link provision for these loads according to the location of the load nearest the
support. The link requirements from the two systems should then be added. The shear
crushing limit should simila y be performed by superposing lhe results from the two
systems. For most bridge applications, unless there is onc or more very heavy loads acting
within a distancc 2rl from the support which contributes a significant proportion of the
total shear, it will usually be sumcient to determine shear reinforcement solely on the basis
ofthe variable strut inclination n.rethod in 2-1-l/clause 6-2.3(3).

where

is the resistance

Fig. 6.2-6. Shear reinforcement in short

spans

t45

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

t46

TO EN I992-2

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

(b) Alterntively, cnsider links inclined

aL an angl.e

of45'.

and a srrut angle of 45".

Thus from 2- l- l,Expression 16.lzl):

tsna,.,*

n ,6*z11 /1.(cotd ' cot n)/(l

_ t.0 r
=

cot')

(cor45
x
400 r. t388.1 < 0.516 x 21.3 .-

-cor45) ,, 1^
l0 ,r
'l'i :;:;iai'x

6675.6 kN

ional Annex may

This is a vcry largc increarc in crushing resisla
resislance
nce and the UK Nat
National
reqtrict it as
,s.liccrrsr,ed
telt above.
ahove
restrict
discussed in the main tert
Realranging 2-l-I/Expression (6.|3) for reinforcemenl design gives

r'*.,
, -;(coto+col")s"r: /.*a
iin c
+

1::
;s -

(cot 0

cot o )

lhcrefirre

,t

ll A w l0l

+tffi:r're4mm2/mm
..-'.
.e4a:,]'.i4!
and using the same two legs ol [69 bars ar above (,4.w - 402 mm'
increascd from 200 mm ro 4Q2l Llq4 - 288 mm. say 2?5 mm. i.e.
links (inclined al 45") a{ 2?5 mm centres.

ir'tJH

"'11,i,_
-

rer melre width.

Shear at points of contrflexure

Ner t points ofconffaflexure, a problem arises in determinirg the value ofshear resistance
since the strength is dependent on the lever ar.In and area of longitudinal tensile reinfbrccment. It is therefore always necessary to check the maximum shear force cocxistent with a
sagging moment and the maximurn shear'lblce coxistent with a hogging moment when
designing shear reinforcemenl.
6.2.3.2. Prestressed concrete members

Ellective web rvidths

Prestressing ducts can reduce the shear crushing resistance of prcstressed members. In
calculation, the web width should therefore bcl reduccd to allow for the presence of ducts2-1-l lclsuse 6.2.3(6) deflnes values for such nominal web thicknesses as l'ollows:

- b. 0.5ta

l- I /clause
6.2.3(6)

For grouted ducts with a diameter, $ > b,18:.

,,,"-,

2-

2-l-r(6.r6)

t47

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Fig. 6,2-7. Strut-and-tie model for flow of web compression strut around

oucr

wherc d is the outel' diameter of the duct and ! ra is detcrmined aL thc most unfavourable
level where multiple ducts occur at the same level.

. For grouted metl

.

ducts with a diameter, < b*18, no reduction in web width is

required.
Fof non-grouted ducts, unbonded tendons and grouted plastic ducts:

b*,*. =

. t.zla

2-t-ri6.r7)

The 1.2 factor in lhe bove expression js used to account for the splitting of the concrete struts due to transverse tension. It may be reduced to 1.0 if'adequte trnsverse
reinfbrcement' is provided. This may be derived from a strut-and-tie model like that in

Frg.6.2-1. The reinforcement would typically need to be formed as closed links to

provide dequate anchorage.
The above expressions penalize the use of plastic ducts compred to steel ducts. Although
Lhe use of plastic ducts is ften prefcrabJc for durability reasons, the nominal web width
expressions favour the use of steel ducts as the webs can be mde thinner. This is sometimes
significant consideration for long-span post-tensioned bridges where the webs are sized on
the shear crusbing limit to keep ded weight to minimum- The reason for the cnservtive
view of the Eurocode is that, even if completely filled with grout, the duct itself must still be
stiflenough to Lransfer the force from the inclined comFression struts through its walls rather
than around the duct as in Fig. 6.2-1 . ECZ assumes that plastic ducts re not stiff enough to

be able to achieve this. This has not becn verified by tests and the authors are aware of
unpublished tests by a prestressing supplier which indicate virtualll' no difference between
lhe behaviour of grouted plastic and stecl ducts.
Sections cracked in flexure

The definition of crcked in flexure is discusscd in section 6.2.2.2. The resistances of prestressed beams lhat are cracked in flexure are conservatively predicted by 2-2/clause
6.2.2(10l), but it will be rare for such beams to not requile shear reinlbrcement. Once
shear reinforccment is required, the conctete contribution to resistance is lost and the
truss trodel of section 6.2.3 ol EC2 must be used. The design procedure is essentially the
same as for reinforced concrete, discussed bove, except that crushing resistance /p6'nu" is
influenced by thc axial stress from prestress through the fctr o.o in 2-27'clause
6.2.3{103). discussed in section 6.2.3.1 above.
Since prestress is treated in EC2 as an pplied force (2-l-l/clause 6-2.1(3) refers), any truss
models developed for shear design must include the effects of prestress forces applied at
anchoragcs and arising from tendon curvature. The inclined componenL of prestress oftcn
relieves the shear l'rom other imposed loads. For loads applied fter prestressing nd

t4a

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

contributing to the allowable lbrce in the tensile chords. This is th basis of 2-2lclause 6.2.3(1t7)
which allows bonded prestrcssing to bc considercd in calculation of the additional longi
tudinal tensile fbrce required for shear. (This means tht the fbrce need not nccessarily be
providcd by additjonal longitudinal reinforcement.) In so doing, the stress increase in
bonded tendons should be limited so that the total stress in tendon does not exceed iLs
design strength. The eilects of unbonded tendons should be trealed as applied forces
acting on thc bcanr (bascd on Lhe prestressing force after losscs), although stress increases
from overall structure deflection may be included in calculating these fbrces where thcy
have been determilled, Any additional tensile fbrce provided by unbondcd tendns my
losses, bonded tendons may be treted in the sme way s ordinary reinforcement,

2-Uclouse

6.2.3(107)

be considercd whcn applying 2-2/F.xpression (6.1Ii).

at different levels (draped or un-drapcd) together

use in thc shear equtions is not
obvious. The simplification of ,- : 0.9rl in 2-1-liclause 6.2.3( l) is restricted to reinforccd concrete sections without axial force and might not be conservative in othf]r situations. The simplest approach is to dclcrminc thc z value from Lhe analysis lor the cross-section bending
resistance, which usually precedes the design for shear. This is equivalent lo hasing the
lever arm on the centroid ol the steel force in the tensile zone. Thc additional tensile fbrce
of 2-2iclause 6.2.3(107) can thcn bc providcd by thc tcnsilc resistance that is spate alter carlying the design bending moment. The additional longitudinal fbrce should be proportioned
between the tenclons and the reinforcement in the ratio of their respective forces lion the
bending analysis so as to maintain the value of z used in the flexural design. lf thcrc is no
spare resistance. thn additional longitudinal reinlbrcement can be provided in the tensile

For members with prestressing tendo

wilh un-tensioned reinfbrcement, the lever artrr, ;, to

face-

The above is essentilly equivlent to the method proposed in the Notc to 2-2l'clause
6.2.3(107). where the shear strength of the merrber is calculated by considering the superposition ol two different truss models with dillerent geometry and two augles of concrete

strut to account for the leinlbrcement and draped prestressing lendons. This method is
subjcct to variation in thc National Annex and is illustrated in 2-2/Fig. 6.102N. Using
two angles of concrete strut leads to difficulties in interpreting the rules for l/p,1,1n*, both
in terms of the appropriate strut angle to use and the value of;. 2-2-llclause 6,2.3(107)
therefore recommends using a weighted mean value for t?. A weighting dccordrng to the
longitudinal force in each system leds to the sme result. as discussed above.
A further simplification, commonly used in prestress design, is to bse the bendiug ald
shear design n the prestressing tendons alone- The un-tensioned reitrlorucment can then
be taken into account in providing the additional longitudinal reiniorcement. Since the
centroid of the longitudinaL reinforcement is usually at a greter effective dplh than that
of the prestlessing tendons, this is conservative. The approach of considering only the
tcndons for thc llcxural design is olter used Lo simplily analysis, so that the reinfbrcement
provided can be used fr the trsional design and. in the case ofbox girders, lhc local flexural
desisn of deck slabs.

6.2-5"

t49

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

::a|451

r50

CHAPTER

6. ULTIMATE LIMIT

STATES

t5l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992"2

CHAPTER

6. ULTIIYATE LIIYIT

STATES

6.2. 3. 3. Segmental constfuction

In segmental construction where there is no bondcd prestressing in the tension chord, it is
possible fbr the joints betwcc[ segments to open once the decompression moment of the

section has been reached. The flnal ultimate moment may not be signilicantly higher than
the decompression moment. This depends primarily on:

.
.

in tbe prestressing tendons can incrcase as a result of the overaLl

slructural deflections (see section 5.10.8);
whether the lcver arm between tensile forcc and concrete collDrcssioD can increasc
significantly after decompression. This depends on the section geometry. For solid
rcclangular cross-sections, the incrcasc in lever arm can be large, approaching a limit
of twice that at decompression for low prestrcss ftrrce. For a box girdcr wilh vcry Lhin
whether the force

webs, the increase in lever arm

nay be very srnall as there

is

little yilable web compres-

sion concrete.

The depth to $bich the joint opens is governed by the depth of the tcxural conrprcssion
block. /r,"1, nd this in turn depends on the bve. This is shown in Fig. 6.2-9. 2-2lcluuse
6.2.3(109) requires that the prestressing force be assumed to rernain constant alTer
decompression, unless a detailed nlysis. such as lhat refeued lo abovc, has bccn donc.
Clearly, if prestress force increases have been considered in the flexural design. the same
must be done here to avoid apparent flcxural firilule. The opening of the joint intloduces
a reduced depth througb which the web sheff compression struts can pass.
Two checks ale necessary for a givcn con.rpression depth. /r-,1. Crushing ofthe web strts is

l-l/clouse
6.2.3(t09)

checked using 2-2iExpression (6.103) which rearrangcd is:

it..6" i,

1.1

(D6.2-11)

'EJ 'Gotd + tandl

To avoid filure local to the joint, shear reinforcement should be provided in the leduced
length, /lrcd cot d, adjacent to the joint as shown in Fig. 6.2-9 according to 2-2,/Expressior.r
(6,104):

,r", :

vr.t
h,.,r

Jy.,r

2-2i6.104)

coT 0

If either ol these checks cannot be satisfied, ir,."6 should be increased

prestressing force and thc check repeated,

by ilroreasing the

]*
/'

L]
Fig.6.2-9.

+l

Effect of ioint opening in precasr construction without bonded prestressing

t53

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

6.2.4. Shear betwen web and flanges of T-sections

Longitudinal shear
Z- I -

l/clouse

6.2.4(r)

2-l-l lclwse 6.2.4( 1l allows longitrLdinal shear in flanges to be checked using a truss model.
The check covers the crushing resistnce of the concrete struts and the tensile strength of
Lhe transverse reinforcement. Clause 6.2-4 applies to planes through the thickness of the
flange. It need not be applied to planes through the web at the web flange junction. If a
construction joint has been made between web and flangc, however, the similar provisions
of 2-1'1iclause 6.2.5 should bc chccked. Despite the reference to T-sections in the title of
the clause, the provisions also apply to other sections, such as boxes, on the basis of the
shear per web.

For comptibility with the web shear design and the design of additional longitudinal
reinlbrcement for shear, the flange fbrces should theoretically be determined considering
thc samc Lruss model. A typical truss model for the end of an end span is shown in
Fig. 6.2-10. This approach would differ from previous UK practice whcre the longitudinal
shear rvas determined from elastic cross-section analysis using beam theory and the transverse reinforcement placed accordingly, following the envelope of vertical shear force. It
can be seen ftom Fig. 6.2-10 that tlle tlansverse reinforcemcnt predicted by a truss rodel
of an 'l' beam does not follow the shear force envelope, but is displaced along thc beam
from the loction of peak shear.
2-2/clouse

6.2.4(t 03)

To avoid the need to draw out truss models lor cvcry loading sitution, the pragmatic simplification is made tn 2-2lclause 6.2.4fl/r3./ tht the verage force iucrease per metre my be
calculated over a length A-r, which should not be taken greatcr than half the distance
between the point of contraflexure and thc point of maximurn moment in each hog and
sag zone. This allows a certain amount of averaging out of the reinforccment from that
which would be produced by a detailed truss model. Howcver, where there are point
loads, thc lcngth -r should not bc takcn as greater thn the distance between thlr point
loads to avoid significantly underestimting the rate of change of llange force. Since
bridges are usually subject to significant point loads from vehicle axles, it appears that this
simplification u ill not usually he appropriate.
2-2,/clause 6.2.4(103) offers a further simplified method by which the longitudinal shear is
dctermincd dircctly from the vcrlical shear per web, I's6, in the same way as described in
section 6.2.5 below. The expression for shear flolv given between wcb and flange, I/s1/;, is
only correct where the flexural neutral axis lics at the web-flange junction, In general, the
shear flow between web and flange can be taken as BV;,1f z as discusscd in section 6.2,5
below, where in this case is the ratio of force jn lhc cffective flange to that in the whole

',,<r-------,.-1
Top llange (plan)

Bottom flange (plan)

Fig. 6,2-10. Truss model

t54

for'l'

beam

-------.;.1

CHAPTER

ba|

Fig. 6.2-l

l.

ll*

6. ULTIMATE LIMIT

STATES

batz

Definitions for shear flow calculation

compression or tension zone as appropriate. It is always conservative, however, to take the

shear flow as Vs6fz.
Clause 6.2.4 is, howevcr, concerned with the sher flow in the flange itself adjcent to the
web- Thc renainder of 2-2lcluse 6.2.4(103) allows a proportion of the flange lbrce to
be considered to remain within the tvidth of the web, such that the sher flow on a plane
A A, as in Fig. 6.2-11, is

, [/ra ., "tt,t

iJ

'-

b"f

and therefore the dcsign shear stress is given by:

,,uo

:11S * b".|
Zn

Oeft

(D6.2-12)

If the full ellctive flange width, ,eff, is not required to resist the bending momnt at the
section considered, i1 may be reduced to the actual width required when using equation
(D6.2-12) which cn lead to a grcater proportion of flange force remaining within the web
width and a large consequent feduction in Lransverse reinforcement at ULS. If this is
done, a check should be made of cracking at SLS, s rvide cracks may open before the
spread is limitecl. For SLS, the stresses in the lransverse reinfbrcenent should be determined
assuming spread over the lull flange ellective width. The elastic spread angle should be used
seclion 6.9 of this guide is relevanLIt will bc noled thai the above method of calculating shear stress lrom the vcrtica] shcar
lbrce envelope gives no infornation on where to plce the transverse reinforcement alng
the bcam. In clause 6.2.5 for design at corstruction joints, it is placetl according to the
shear frce envelope. Transverse reinforcement in flangcs has been positioned this way in
previous UK practice. To achicve greater compatibility with the location of transverse
reinfbrcemenl indicated by the ftuss model in Fig. 6.2-10, it would be possible to producc
a shifled envelope of transverse reinforcement in the same wy s fol longitudinl
reinlorcement as discussed in section 6.2.3.1. For tension flanges, 2-1-11Fig. 9.2 is
approprite and thc calculated transverse reinforcement provision could be extended
along the beam b.v a distance a1 to account for the rveb truss. It is recommended that the
provision is extended by .21 father than translated by a1 as it would be undesirablc to have
n trnsverse reinl-orcenent adjacent to supprts, as would result if reinforcement ws
detailed in accordnce with Fig. 6.2- 10.
The above usc ofbean theory al'oids the need to construcl truss modcls for cvery lod case. It
should also be noted that in indeterminate structures. the full truss model cannot be developed
wiLhout ar.r initial analysis using beam thcor), to first detenline the support reactious.
The tlansverse reinlorccment required per unit length, lrl/.rr. is calculated in accordance
with 2-1-l lclause 6.2.4(4).It follows sinrply from a smeared truss rrodel (where the struts
and ties are not discrete as in Fig, 6.2-10). Figure 6.2-12 shorvs a plan of an area ABCD
of a conclete flange, assumed to bc in longitudinal compression, with shear strss trEd and
transverse reinforcement lsr at spacing Jf. The shear lorcc pcr transverse bar is:

Fu:

r,sd/hs1

2-l-l/clouse
6.2.4(4)

(D6.2- 13)

t55

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

l+
f

-.-..

---------l- lB

lv{ --l .'lllo

-"\I
+''
f;. t....\t.

Fig.6.2-12.

1,"/
- e- lr/e"i"a,

Forces acting on flange element (plan)

actiDg on side AB ol the rectangle shown. It is transferred to side CD by a conoretc strut AC

t angle ,f to AB, and rvith edges that pss through the mid-points of AB, etc., as shown, so
that the width of the strut is s1 sin d1.
For cquilibrium at A. thc forcc in the strut is:

F:

F"

sec

(D6.2-14)

di

Substitutiug fiom equation (D6,2-13) into equation (D6.2-14) gives:

F"

ls6/r1.r1 scc d1

Taking the limiting stress in the strlrt of

tidth

s1

sin 01 to be z/;,r" where t,

gives the verilication for the strut as:

r.166/21q. sec

d1

which leads to
'".s

14s

0.6(l

- Ik/250)

sin0uf"6

Lhc cxprcssion

r,/"6 sin

in 2-l-liclause 6.2.4(4):

dy cos 01

2-\-t l(6.22)

For equilibrium at C, the force in the transverse bar BC is:

4 : fl. sin Pr -

f'v tan dr

Substituting fiom equation (D6,2- l3) gives:

F,

ttp4h1s1

tarfi

(D6 2-15)

If Lhe reinforccmcnt is strcsscd to its design strength /u1, eqution (D6.2-15) leads
expression in 2-l-liclause 6.2.4(4):

A ,,tlt>

2-l-I/clouse
6.2.4(6)

u111hf

cot$

to the

2-1-ll(6.21)

2- l- I /clause 6.2.4(4) limits the angle of spread, d;, to betwcen 26.5' nd 45" lbr compression flanges and 38.6'' to 45" for tension flangcs, unless more detailed modelling, such as a
nonlinear finite element nlysis tht can consider cracking of concrctc, is used.
When the shear stress is less than 40olu (a nationally determined prmeter) of the design
tensile stress. ,f,6, 2-I-l lclause 6.2.4(rt,) permits the concrete alone to carry the longitudinl
shear and no additional transverse reinforcement is requircd (other than minimum reinforcement). For a concrctc wilh cylindcr strength 40 MPa, this gives a lirniting stress of0.67 MPa.
For greater shear stress, the cncrete's resistance is lost completely as jn the main verlical

shear design.
It should be noted that interface shear should still be checked according to 2-1-I,/clause
6.2.5 rvhere thel'e are construction joints. Diffrent concrctc contributions re calculated
depending on the degrec of roughcning of the interfce. Fol a surface prepared by cxposing
aggregate, clssed s'rough' in 2-1-1/clause 6.2.5(2), the concrete contribution is 45% ofthe
design tensile stress, /",,1, which is a greater proportion than allowed here.
EN 1992-2 does not specify the distribution of the required transverse rcjnforcement
between the uppel and lower la,vers in the slab. It was a rcquirement of erly drafts of

t56

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

0.5
0

Fig. 6.2- 13. Total transverse reinforcemen! requirements for shear and transverse bending

EN 19S2-2 that the transverse l'einforcement provided should havc the same centre of
resistnce s the longitudinal force in thc slab. This requirement was removedJ presunably
because ii has been common practice t consider th shear rcsistance to be the sum of the

from the trvo layers. It should be noLcd that pplication of Annex MM of

EN 1992-2 would necessitate provision of transvetse leinfbrcemcnt rvith the same centre

resisLanccs

of resistance as the longitudinal force in the slab,

On the tension flange, the angle of spread ot thc compression strut into the flange requires
the longitudinal tension reinlorccment to be required 'eaflier' than expected from considerations of the web truss alone, as shown in Fig. 6.2-10- 2-I-l lclause 6,2.4( 7) requires ilccount
to be taken ofthis in determining the curtilment ofthe longitudinai reinforcemeni. This may
be actrieved by inLroducing a further shift ofe cotdf in the shift method described in sectlon
6.2- 3.1 of this guide. {:. is the distance of the longitudinal bar considered lrom the ed ge of thc

2-l-l/clouse
6.2.4(7)

web plus a distance ,,/4.

Flanges with combined longitudinal shear and transverse bending
Flanges fbrming deck slabs will atso usually be subjected to transverse bending from dead
and livc loads- The flange reinforcement needs to bc checked for its ability t carry both
in-plane shear and any ttansverse bending. A simplified mle fbr combining the reinforcemcnt
reqirements fron.r shcar and bending is given in 2-2lclause 6.2'4(105). This requires the

amount of transverse reinforcement to be lh greater of that required for longitudinal

shear alone (case (a)) and half Lhat required for longitudinal shear plus that required for
transverse bending (casc (b)). This rule is illustrated in Fig. 6.2-13, in u4rich '4..0'6 is the
total reinforcement required, and subscripts s and b reler to the reinl'orcement t'equired
for shear and bending, respecLively. The reinforcement provided should not be less than
the mirinr um requirements of 2- I - I iclause 9.2. L
Once again, EN 1992-2 does not spccify the disftibution of the required transverse
reinforcement between lhc upper and lorver layers in the slab. particularly wiLh respect to
the component due to sher. Clearly the reinforcemcnt must t least bc placed so as to
resist the transverse bending lromenL alone. The designer is left to decide where he r she
places the centre of gravity of the reinfrcement needed for shear' The intention of the
drafters rvas to distdbute the reinlorcenent as shown in Fig.6.2-14 for the two cases (a)
and (b) above, Use of 2-2/Annex MM would suggest that these combination rulcs are
optin.ristic and indeed they re not allowed for rveb design. Previous UK prctice in
BS 5400 Part 4'has, however, been to ignore any interaction in flangcs2-2iclause 6.2.4(105) also rcquires that the interaction betwecn bending and longitudinl
shear is chccked in the zone which is in compression under the transversc bending Compression from strut-and-tie action in thc flange resisting shear will add to that from
lransverse bending and can lead to crushing failure. It has previor.rsly been UK practice to
jgnore this interction but it can be unsafe to do so. To allow fbr the interaction, a simplified
approach is given, whereby the depth of flange required fbr compression in Lransverse
bending is deducted from rf when calculatiug thc crushing resistancc. This approach is
conservati\ because the directions of thc compressive stresses from bending and [rom
sher do not coincide. I1 th(r llange is indequate v'hen chccked according to the above
simplited approach, then the sandwich n.roclel ol2-2,/Annex MM can be used to check thc

2-2/clouse

6.2.4(r 0s)

t57

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Compression face:

ffi-'.'' il".'t--)-

uz

Case ()

Fig. 6.2-

4.

oo

Case {b)

Placemem f transverse reinforcement for cases (a) and (b)

compressions in the two outer lyers as discussed in Annex M of this guide- Thc reinforcement should also then be dcrived liom 2-21Annex MM, but this will generally exceed that
from the simple rules above.
It was not intended that the longitudinul compressive stress from the main beam bcnding

moment bc considered when determining the depth to bc ignored in shear calculation

according to 2-2iclause 6.2.4(105). It would, however, be consistent with thc cr"* tem.r in
2-2,i Expression (6.9) rvherc axial force is high. As a result, for.flanges with high compressivc
axial stress, 2-2l'Annex MM may not lead to a mote economic check of concrete crushing as
thc shear stress does interact with compression from both longitudinal and transvsrse
bending see discussion on 2-27Annex MM in this guide.

6.2.5. Shear at the interface between concrte cast at difierent times

Shear stresses cross construction joints between concrete elenents cast at different times
must be checkcd to ensure that the two concrete components act fully compositely, The
bending and shear designs of such members are based on this ssumprion. 2-l-l/clause
6.2,5 deals specificalll' with this interfce shear requirement, which must be considered in
2-

I-

I/clouse

6.2.5(t)

addilion t the requirements of 2-2iclause 6.2.4.

2-L-llclnuse 6.2.5(/) specilies tht the intcrlaces should be checked to ensurc thl
cfti I r]a6;, where t'g61 is thc design value of shear strcss in the interlc and oa61 is the
design shear resistance at the interfacc.
The applied design value ol shear stress is given by:
u51;

= pV6f

zb1

2-1-11(6.24)

where:

Ii
V1,a
;

is thc ratio of the longitudinal force in the new concrctc area and the total
Iongitudinal force either in the compression or the tension zone, both calculated
for the section considered
is the total vertical shear forcc for the section
ir lhe lever arm of the composite section
is the width ofthe intcrface shear plane (2-l-liFig. 6.8 gives examples)

2- 1- I /Expression (6.24) is intended to be used assurning all loads arc carried on the
composite section. which is compatible with the design approach lbr ultimate flexure. The
basic shear stress for design at the inlerface is related to the maximum longitudinal shear
stress aL the junction between compression and tension zones given by tr/6,1/:;. This
lbllows from consideration of equilibrium of the forces in cither the tension or compression
zone. The instantancous force is given by Msa/z so the change in force per unit length along
the beam (the shear flow), assuming that the lever arm, z, remains constnt, is given by:

(D6.2-16)

The shcar stress is then obtained by dividing by the thickness t the interfce to give:
,uo

158

V",

- ,

(D6.2-t1)

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

Fig. 6.2- 15. Determination of d

If the shear plane checkcd lies within either the compression or tension zoDes' the sher
stress from equation (D6.2-17) may be reduoed by the factor 3 abovc- It will always be
conservtive to take p:1.0 For flanged beams, much of the force is contained in the

flanges so coustruction joints at the underside of flange will typically have,llt 1.0. In
oLher cases, cn be obtained from the flexural design as shown in Fig. 6.2-15' tion thc
forces F1 and F2 (which arc shown with the flange in compression).
The qucstion arises as to wht to use lbr the lever arm, :. Strictly, the value of: should
reflect the stress block in the beam for the loading considered. In relity, this would be
time-consuming lo achieve and it $'ill generally be reasonable to use the same vahre ls
obtained from the ultimte bending resistance analysis, as shown in Fig. 6.2-15 For
cracked sections, the use of thc ultimate bending resistance lever arm will slightly overestimale thc actual lever rm t lower bending trroments. However, for other than very
heavily reinforced sections, this difference in lever arm will be small and is compensated
fbr by also basing thc value of d on the stress block for ultimate resistance.
The above represents a difference to previous UK practice, where the shear stress distdbution was based on the elastic dislribution on an uncracked section regardless offlexural stress
distribution. If a section remained uncracked in bending and elastic analysis was used to
determine the lever arm. theu the shcar stress determined liom 2- I - l/Expression (6 24)
lvould be the same as that from the nlysis for the uncracked shear resistance in 2-1-1i
clause 6.2-2.

A further point is that if the lcver arm used is not taken to be the sme as that lor the
calculaljons on flexural shear, it would then be possible to find that the maximum shear
stress ccording to this clause was exceedcd, while the check against /p6.n,n* fbr flexuraL
shear u'as satisfied.

The design sher resistance at the interface is based on the CEB Model Code
provisions and is given in 2-l-l,iclause 6.2.5(1) as:
r.,p6;

cjl,6

* pa, *

p/r,1(p sin a

cos

o) <

0.5u;f"6

906

2-l-l(6.25)

rvhere c and /r are faclors u'hich depend n the roughnss of the interlace
Recommended values in the absence of results hom tests ale given in 2-I-llclause
6.2.5(2 ) . OIheT factors are defined in 2-1- I i cLause 6.2.5(1). The first lerm in 2-l - l,/Expression
(6.25) relates to bond between the surfces and any mechanical interlock provided by
indcnting the surfaces, the second relates to friction across the interface under the action
of compressive siress, on, and thc third term reltes to the mechanical resistance ofreinforcement crossing the interfce. The reinforcement provided for sheat in accordance with clauses
6.2.1 Io 6.2.4 may be considered in Lhe reinforcement ratio p. The reinforcement docs not
need to be taken as that provided in addition to that nccded for ordinary shear.
In order to allow the practical placcment of reinfrcement across the interface in bands of

decreasing longiLudinaL sprcing. 2-1-llckruse 6.2,5(3) allows a stepped distribution of

rcinforcement to be used by averaging the shear stress over a given lcngth of the member
corresponcling to the length of band chosen. This is illustrated in Worked example 6.2-8.

2-l'l/clouse
6.2.5(2)

2-l-l/clouse
6.2.s(3)

t59

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

No guidance

is given as to by how much the local shear stress may exceed the locl clulated

A rcasonable approach would be to allow the shear stress to exceed the resistance
locally by l0%, providcd that the ttl resistance within the band ws equal to or grcater
than the total longitudinal shear in the same length_ This would be consistent with the
design of shear connctors in EN 1994-2.
Where interfce shear is checked under dynamic or latigue loads,2-2lclause 6.2.5(I0S)
requires that the roughness coefficjent values, c, are tken as zero lo account for potential
detcrioration of the concrete component of resistance across the interface under cyclic
reslstance.

2-2/clause

6.2.s(t0s)

loading.

6.2.6. Shear and transverse bending

In wehs, particularly those of box girders, transverse bending moments can led to reductions in the maximum permissiblc coexistent sher force because the compressive stress
llclds from sher and from transverse bending have to be combined. The two stress elds
do not, hwever, fully add because they ct t different angles. In the UK it has been
common lo design reinforcement in wcbs for the combined ction of transverse bending
and shear, but not to chcck the concrete itself for the combined effect. The lower crushing
limit in shear used in the UK made this a reasonable approximation, but it is potentially
unsafe if a less conservative (and more realistic) crushing strength is used2-2,iclause 6.2.106 formally requires consideration olthe above shear moment interaction,
but ifthe web shear force according to clause 6.2 is less than 20% ot tr/qd ..x or the transvefse

moment is less than 10% of M11,1,-,,*, the interaction does not need to be considered- Mp6.,n""
is defined as the maximum web resistance to trnsverse bcnding. The subscript ,max' might
suggest that this is the maximum obtainable bending resistance if the web wcre to be heavily
over-reinforced. It was, however, intended to be thc actual web bending resistnce in the
absence of shcar, even though thc former could be considered more relevant fot the crushing
check. These criteria are unlikely to be satisfie<l for. box girders, but the allowance for
coexisting n.roment will often be sulncient to negate the need for a check of typical beam
and slab bridges. Wrere the interaction has to be considered. 2-2tAnnex MM can be used.

6.2.7. Shear in precast concrete and composite construction

(additional sub-section)
EN 1992-2 does not directly cover the vcrtical shear design ofcomposite construction, such
s pretensioned beams madc composite with n in situ deck slab. The design of members
rt:quiring designed shear reinforcement can be carried out in ccordance with 2-2lclause
6.2.3- For nembers not requiring designed shear reinforcement, which will not be very
common, 2-2i'clause 6,2.2 is applicable but the provisions ol2-l-t,/clause 6.2.2(2) for shear
tcnsion l'esistnce nced some interpretation.
Prccst pretensioned beam mad composite with in situ deck slah
As discussed in section 6-2.2.2 of this guide, the un-cracked shear resistance should be determined by limiting the principal tensile stress to /.,1. While the ccntroid of the composite
section nlay often be critical, the limit applies cqually at all levels within the section,
which should be checked accordingly, In practice, it is usually sufficient to check the composite centroid and other significant lcvels of change in section (the wcb flange junctions, for
example).
The shear force ( I/"1) due to self-weight and the lods acting on Lhe precast section alone
produces a sher stress distribution, as shown in Fig. 6.2-16(b). The shear stress produced by
,/cl in the precast member at the level consideled is rs. Figure 6.2-16(c) shows the sher stress
distribution in the composite member with the addition f the second stage shear force ( /"2)
acting on the compositc section. The shear stress at the same level under this loading case is
rj. Figure 6.2-16(d) shows the total shear stfess distribution given by r" + rl,
I f the stress (compression taken positive) at the level checked due to the build-up of stress
from loads acting on the beam alone (including prestress) and on the conposite section (with

t60

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIIYIT STATES

(b) Shear siress du

io loads on precasl

(c) Shear stross due

(d) Total shear stress

to additionl loads
on composue oeam

Fig. 6.2- 16. Shear stress distribution in a composite beam and slab section

ech load component multiplied by appropriate partial satty factors and .]1 considered fbr
the prestress component) is o,n,, then the most tensile principal stress at this level is givcn by:
otot

+ (r, + rj)2

This stress should not exceed the /.,,1 tensile limit, hence:

_ ./c(1
s _

otot
2

(?)

n,

**,'

which reananges to:

.41a

.,ao",

1s

However, fbl unilbrm members;

I v.2 / A.a\
4 | 1/
l"Z is the flrst moment of area of the excluded area above and about the plne being
checked and 1 is the second momelt of area, both relating to the composite section sec
section 6.2.2.2 for definitions. Thus:

r.r'here

,,t:+( \,t:. - ,.*-

(D6.2-ln)

^)

with

4r / lo.lo" \
": b \-1^ /
where,4pczpc is the first moment ofrea ofthe excluded area above and about the plne being
checked and 10. is the second moment of area, both relating to the precast beam alone.

The total shear resistance ol the section is thus given by:

Vs6."-V"tlV.2

(D6.2-1e)

I/"2 could be negative, representing cracking of the precast beam section before being made
composite with the deck slab, In this case, the shear tension rcsistance is inadequate even to
carry the shear imposed on the precast beam. The procedure is illustl'ated in Worked example
6.2-7.

Following the comn.rents madc on 2-1-l/clause 6.2-2(2), this pproach is valid for sections
subjected t saggirg moments but it is not cler if it is permitted for hogging moments, even
though logically it should be. If it wcrc to bc applied to hogging regions, the in situ flange
should be considered to be ucked and onlv the reinforcement considered in the section
DIODeftles.

t6l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

The cornments made in section 6.2.2.2 above, regarding neglect of impsed deformations,
also apply to conrposite sections. Therc is a further complication in composite tnembers as
the plimry effects of differential temperture, differential shrinkage and differential crecp
cause looked-in self-equilibriating stresses through the section depth. Since 2-l-liExpression
(6.4) effectively ignores such effects for differential tempcraturc, througb iLs definition of

o"n, one could rgue that all self-equilibriating stresses in composite cnstructin from
differcntial temperatule, shrinkage and crcep, could be neglected by analogy,

Wo-rked- example 6.2-7: Pretensioned concrete 'H' beam with composhe

deck slab
The composire'M' bcam from Worked example 6.1-5 forms part of a simply ruppon"d
deck. The shear resistance is det rmined under the lbllowing internal aclions:

t/*
.--- = 73 kN
' EU Pklas'
/td.composite

Mra.o.".u.,

Mu
frra

ccnposirc

"o-po"i,"

! y,.., - rsz I r.r

284kN
=
I ""
490

Nm

8lo kNm
k Nm
= 6lU

'l
\

u.o

l3tokNm (saggingl

Summary olsection properties based on the cross-sgction in Fig. 6.1-10:

t62

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIIYIT STATES

rr_l
--

.lt, \
A-Z\1--

thus
,^9

"l --545r' l0'x 160 r,ft.tdl, lt5 ,. tn6 ^

':

rddt

r=393kN
^l.tt,-o.tglr xl0

ahl
nra.oer nnit
(b) J-tr|I
Clreck ol
at tha
the r^n
top ^f
of tha
lbe precast
unit
The check at the composite cenlroid level above is in this casc only l6 mm from tbe
top of the l60mm-widc weh.:ro no further chcck will he made at tbe tDp of the wch.
Stress t top of precast unit due to the moment rcting on ihe beam alone

. /Rn0
:490x10"x'--"
l1 r\1
2J.()2

x
.

10"

Stress at top oI precast unir due to the momenr actin on tbe composite secon

t0 z t06
106 ..
\
= I8t0

(800 --1?4)

':n*#

'r .: . Slress itop f'precasl.unii

4.85MPa
M pa [comprcssion)
fcomnrcssion)
= 4.85
due to

prestress

1$
2680 x,. r0r x 1rou iro) x
-'rXJ,l +, ?680
!10;2
23.Q1 x l\r
'",
:'"-'

:::: :::
-4.30MFa (ten,ion)

Therefore tolal slress al ttre u,rderside of- the top slab lo be used in equation
(D6.2-18) is /'ror -= 10.4't - 4.85 - 4.30 - l0.98MPa.
10.98 MPa.
The s!e11lne.ss.at the top.ofthe precast unit from she:r ac'ting,on the precasi beam
.

siiU .skilt i .:crdSi{ the

:b:

tJ

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

:3!0j:*

t64

CHAPTER 6. ULTIIYATE LII'4IT STATES

r65

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

6.3. Torsion
This section deals with the design at ultimte limit state of members subject to torsion. It is

split inlo the following sub-sections:

.
.
.
.

General
Design procedure
Warping torsion

Torsiou in slabs (additional sub-section)

Section
Section
Section
Section

6.3.1

6--l.2
6.3.3
6-3.1

6.3.1. General
Torsion does not usually determine the size of bridge membcrs and can usually therefore be
checked after the flexural design has been cornpleted. This is a convenient approach as
frequently the maximum torsional design moment will not coexist with the mximum
flexural moment and shcar force, so Lhcre will often be excess reinfrcement when considering the maximum torsional moment.
ln some instances. the equilibrium of the structure depends on torsion. Typicl examples
include box girders or beams curved in plan. Such trsion is smetimes called 'equilibrium
torsion'and it must be considered in the ultimate limit state design. ln box girders, it ma1,
also bc nccessary to check webs for the combination of shcar and torsion at the serviceability

2-l-l/clouse
6.3.

r(t )

2-l-l/clouse
6.3. | (2)

limit state in accordance with 2-2,/clause 7.3.1(110).

In other cases. in statically indeterminate structures, torsion may arise from considetation
of compatibility with thc rcst of thc sLructure only. This is sometimes called 'compatibility
torsion', In such cases, it is then possible to neglect torsional stilress in the analysis at the
ultimatc limit state and to carry the additional effects causcd by neglecting torsion by
some other means. Before doing this, it is essentil to ensre that torsion plays only a
n.fnor part in the behaviour of the bridge to prevent excessive cracking.
This distinction bctwecn compalibility Lorsion and equilibrium torsion is the subject of
2-1-llclause 6,3.1(1) and 2-1-llclausc 6.3.1(2). Where compatibility torsion js neglected,
2-1-llclause 6.3.1(2) requires a minimum reinforccnenl to be provided, in accordance
rvith sections 7.3 and 9.2 of EN 1992-1-l as modified bv EN 1992-2.
In cases where torsional stiffness is considered in analysis, it is important to evlute it
realistically. Decks with discrete beams, such as the M beams in Worked example 6.3-2,
have small torsional resistance and would crack under a relatively small torque. According
Lo Model Code 90,6 the cracked stiffness in torsion is typically only about a qurter of the
uncracked value and this would signilicantly reduce any torque attracted to the beams
once they had cracked.

When discussing torsion, a further distinction needs to be made between St Venant

torsion, circulatory torsion and warping torsion. St Venant torsjon arises due to the
closed flow of shcar stresses around the perimcter of a cross-section. The term 'St Venant
torsion' is usually used to cover hoth a closed flow of shear around a closed hollow
scclion such as a box girder, referred to as circulatory torsior, and also a similar flow
around the perimeter of an open section. In EN 1992, a closed flow of shear around a
hollow section is referred to as 'circulatory torsion' and a closed flow of shear around an
open or solid section is rcfcrred to as 'St Venant torsion'. Considertion of circulatory
torsion l'orms the bsis of the rules in 2-2,/clause 6,3.2. Warping torsion arises from in
planc bcnding of individual walls when there is restraint to longjtudinal deformtions,
such as might occur in an'I'bcam. The total applied torque has to be carried by either or
a combination of these two mechanisms, Warping torsion is discussed in seclion 6.3.3 of

2-l-l/clouse
6.3. t (3)

t66

this guide, together wiLh guidance on how to apportion torsion between the two rnechanisms.
The circulatory torsional resistance covered in 2-2iclause 6,3.2 is calculated on the basis of
thin-walled closed seotions, in which equilibrium is satisfied by a closed shear flow, even
where sections are open 2-l-I lclause 6.3.1(3). The provisions of2-1-17clause 6.3,1(3) to
(5) regarding torsion calculation fbl open flanged sections is discussed in section 6.3.2 of
this guide, after the basic method has heen explained.

CHAPTER 6. ULTII4ATE LII4IT STATES

6.3.2. Design procedure

with circulatory torsion. The torsional resistanoe of secLions may be
calculated on the bsis of a thin-walled closed scction, cven jf Lhe section is actually solid.
For solid members. the section is idealized as a thin-walled section with a chosen effective
2-21clause 6.3.2 deals

wall thickness as discussed bclow. Figure 6.3-l shows a generalized seclion with an idealized
thin wall.
Thc lollowing definitions in 2-l-llclause 6.3.2(l) are required to develop the rules for
torsin:

lk
lt i
ter i
I
tr
zi

2-l-l/clause
6.3.2(t)

the area enclosed by thc ccntreline in Fig. 6.3-1

the shear stress in wll I
the effectjvc thickness of wall i discussed below
the area within the outer surfacc as shown in Fig. 6.3-l
the outer circumt'erence of the cross-section
is the side length of wall i defured by the distance between the interseclion points with
the adiacent wlls
is
is
is
is
is

The efl'ectiv thickness, teri, may be varied to optimize the torsionl resistance. It can be
made equal ro ,{i u, but not less than twice the distnce from edge of seotion to ccntre of
longitudinal reinforcement- l,/r reprcscnts a thickness which gives somervhere clse to the
peak crushing resistance s discussed later in this section- The ltter requirement ensures
that the centrelinc of the wall, and hence the line of action of the compression struts, does
not lie outside the longitudinal reinforccmcnt. These requirements can lead to difficrilties
of intcrprelation with thin solid sections, where the minimum permissible effective thickness
rnay exceed both ,47rr and the pl.rysical half-thickness as seen in Worked cxample 6.3-2. For
hollow sections, t"r.; should obviously not exceed the actual wall thickness. If t"; is made as
small as possible (i.e. not less than trvice the distance from edge of seclion to centre of
longitudinal reinforcement), the resistancc based on reinforcemcnt will be maximized and
the shear force to be carried in wll is minimized. However. smll thickness will mean
that the limiting torque based on the concrete crushing resistanc is reduccd. This is
illustrted lter in Fig. 6.3-3.
Reinforcement requirements

Following the above principles, the following dcsign rulcs for reinfrcement may

be

derived-

From 2-1-liExpression (6.26), the Lorquc is obtajned

as:

TEd:2Aktit)

(D6.3-l)

where n.ileri is the sher flw around the perimctcr which is a constant. The shear fbrce in
cacb wall, trzp,1,;, is given by 2- l- I /Expression (6.27) s fllows:
VB4.;

2-t-tl(6.21)

n,;t6,iz;

Surlace def ining perimeter,

Fig. 6.3-

l.

General section illustrating deflnitions

t67

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Consequently, eliminating ir.it"fi using eqution (D6.3-l) and 2- I - I /Expression (6.27) gives:
Y

u.rl,i

- ;-T

(D6.3-2)

zi

It is nott;d that Model Code 906 includes an additional shape-related model faotor in equation
(D6.3-2), rvhich increascs Lhe shear force for a square section by 337o from the value obtained
according to equation (D6.3-2). The multiplication factor given for rectangular shapes was
I I (.1 - 0.25b I d), where d was the greatest section dimension and b the least. Circular sections
had a model factor funity. Some caution is therefore advised with stressing square shapes close
to thcir limil. in torsion, although this is seldom likely to adse in practic.
The individual walls of the box are then designed for the shear forcc in equation (D6.3-2).
Equating the above to the sher resistance from 2- 1- 1/Expression (6.8) for vertical links, but
adopting lhc same definition of z; as above as a simplification. gives;

-Y Ed,t

Tru .,
zi: ^ z,_/ra c.rt A
- -i
Lat"

which leads to the following transverse reinforcement requirement fbr each wall:

A*
Tu
s, l.{ofo cor d
2-Uclouse
6.3.2(r 02)

2-Uclouse

6.3.2(t 03)

t!-,o J-JJ

where,4", is the area oftransverse reinforcement in the thickness tefi, provided at a spacing of
.r,. The limits on strut angle, , are the same as those lbr the shear design.
According to ?-2/claase 6.3.2(102), iftorsion is combined with shear, the sme vlue ofd
should be taken lbr both checks and the reinforcement requirements added, including any
reinforcement lor other effects. It is also possible, as may be desirable for box girders, to
add the shear force obtained from equation (D6.3-2). with,41 based on the actual wall thickncss, directly to that from flexural shear and design each wall for the resulting shear directly.
The shear check is Lhen carried out as described in section 6.2 olthis guide for the total sher,

where tr/s,1 : /,n"- + 4*,i.".

2-2ldause 6,1,2(103) gives a similar equation fbr the area of longitudinal reinforcemcnt
required:

r'4'r/tc
trs
where

tlsl

1," .oL a
ZAy-"--

is the

2-2l(6.28)

toll longitudinal reinlbrcement required for torsion and zk is the perimeter

of the area 11, The longitudinal reinforcement generally has to be distributed uniformly
along cach wall, except tbr small sections whele bars may be concentrated at corners, so
an alterntive statemcnt oi 2-2,/Expression (6.28) for each wall is:

:ffi'''

ter i, provided at a spacing

The need for uniform distribution of reinforcement was demonstrted through tests
carried out by Chalioris.lT These showed that failure to distribute longitudinal reinforcement
evenly around the perimeter reduces the torsional resistance.
The above reinforcement requirements are dditive to those for bending and shear in tension
zones. Bonded prestressing stecl may be considered to contribute to this rejnforcement, providing the stress increse in the Frestrssing steel is limited to 500 MPa. In zones of longitudinal
compression (as produced in a flange due to flexure. fbr erample), the longitudinal reinforcement for torsion can be reduced in proportion to the availablc compressive force. No guidance
is givcn on what extelt ofcompression zone should be considered, so it is rcommended that
a depth equal to twice thc cover to the torsion links be considered, as was used in BS 5400
Part 4.' This could be taken at each face of a flange in the case of box girders.
2-1J lclause 6.J.2(5) effectively allows some torsion to be carried withouL designed
torsional reinforcement- Under Lorsion alonc. if the torsional shear stress is less than the

where 1,1 is the area of longitudinal reinforcement in the thickness

of

2-l-l/clouse
6.3.2(s)

t68

(D6.3-4)

s1.

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

design tensile stress rd. then only minimum reinforcement is required, The lirniting torsion
liom equation (D6.3-1) is thereforc;
'r
11f
,Rd(-udklc,d,efrnin

(D6.3-s)

rvhere l.i..1n is the minimum wall thickness.

In the Fresencc of shear, 2-l-liclause 6.3.2(5) provides an interctin, for approximately
rectangulal sections, to determinc whether designed reintbrcemnt is neccssary:
TElT l.d,c + I/Ed/ I/R,1,"

<

2-l- l(6.3 r)

1.0

where I/q6,. is the shear resislance without designed reinforcement according to 2-l-1,/clause
6.2-2. For box girders" the torsionl shear and verLical shear can bc summed for each wall as
described above and no dcsigned reinforcement need be provided ifthe total shear is less tlan

Crushing limit for combined shear and torsion

According to 2-2lcluuse 6.3.2(104). t'vvo methods of combining shear and torsion (both
essentially the same) are to be used. The flrst applies to solid sections nd is simple
linear addition of the torsion and shear usages, again assuming the same value of
comnressive strut ansle d for both effects:

Tza
l ac,n',*

vro -,n
/na..u"

2-Uclouse

6.3.2(t 04)

2-2i(6.29)

where Iq,r,.u* :2zcr..*./.alrl.r'isindcos from 2-2,/Expression (6-30) and

I/Rd

m,

is

the

limiting shear for wcb crushing, as discussed in section 6.2 of this guide. Other symbols
are also defined in section 6.2- The combination of torsion and shear within thc ellective
walls of a solid section is illustfated in Fig. 6.3-2. Strictly, 2-2i Expression (6.29) should be
checked for each effective wall if their thicknesses differ. as TR.1.-n, then varies depending
on which wall is considered, or if there is a transverse shear forcc in addition to a verticl
shear force. When used in this way, 2-2lExpression (6.29) could be pplied to the individual
walls of box girders.
Thc interaction of torsion and compressive axial load on crushing resistnce is covered by

the fctr o.* in 2-2,/Expression (6.30) (as discussed in section 6.2 of this guide), which
should be based on lhe average comprcssive stress in the wall. This would typically be
applicablc to the bottom flange ofcontinuous beams at supports. The value of crcc applicable
to /;d in the definition of o"* is recommended here to be taken as 1.0, following the
<liscussion in section 3,1.6 of this guide. The valuc frnally proposcd in the National Annex
will, howcver. need to be obselIed. Although it appears that the torsinal resistance could
be seriously reduced in hogging zones due to the bottom flange compression, ",u need nol
be calculated at locations nerer thn 0.5r/cotd to tbe edge of the support according to
2-2/clause 6.2.3(103). Consequently, maximum compression from bending will not generally
be fully combined with the torsional shear stress, although this benefit will bc less lor
haunchcd beams.
The second method of combination of shear and torsion, applicable to box girders, is to
add the shear fbrce obtained from torsion according to equation (D6.3-2) directly to that

Torsion

Shear

Tolal

Fig. 6.3-2. Combination of shear stresss within lhe effective rhickness of a lolid sction

t69

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Fig. 6.3-3. Variation of fq6

-", with turi for

square section according

to

2-2lExpression (6.29)

from shear and check each wall for the resulting shear directly. The shear web crushing check
is then carried out, as described in section 6.2 of this guide.
The crushing resistance of solid sections based upon the Lhjn-walled anlogy becomes
conservative where the effective thickness of the wall is a significant fraction of the available
concrete section half'-width. This is illustrted by considering a square seqlin of side d- If
1"11 is taken as A fu - O.25d and = 45", the maximum torque
.that can be carried acting
x
alone from 2-2lExpression (6.29) is Ip6.
/"*/.a
0,141d'.
If l"r1 is taken as 0.5d,
".,"*
the maxin.rum physical width available, Inr..u":
un.*.1"1 x 0.125d'. The greatest torque
using 2-2lExpression (6-29) occurs if tef,i is taken as 0.33d, whereupon Zx.a, -* ua"*J,7 x 0,148dr. The torque according to 2-2,/Expression (6.29) varies with cfft:ctive
thickncss, as shown in Fig. 6.3-3, where /12 rcpresents the maximum physically available
wall thickness. It can be seen that utilizing this full available thickness does not give the
greatest reslstance.
If the theoretical maximum plastic torque is derived by integration of inflnitesimlly thinwalled sections, as in Fig. 6.3-4, each with sher stress rru* : vt"*.1.u f 2, over the whole cross_-

is 7p.1. -,^ :2r",^, .ff|'z Qh)2 dh : uacwfca x 0.16':' ttr

and the above anomaly docs nt arise. For a general truss angle, d. this resistance becomes
Ina,-0": za"'.l".1sin dcos 0 x /'/3.
secLion. fhe nraximum torque allowed

Workcd example 6.3-2 illustrates this problem, where the minimum vlue of /eri as
permitted by 2-l-l/clause 6.3.2(1) actually exceeds the available half width. For crushing
rcsistance, it is suggested here that wher tei.i exceeds the available half width, either:

.
.

the plastic lorque resistance above could be used, which more generally for a rectangle of
greatest dimension d and least dimension b can be obtained from the sand heap analogy
ar IR1 ,,,,, - i,o.* /.,1 sin d cos glb' d b 1 3) 112, or
leri could be based on cither th actual available hall width or l1a.

Open sections

2-l-l/douse
6.3. r (3)

2-1-llclause 6,J..1(J/ allows open flanged sections, such as T-sections, to be divided into a
series of component rectangles, each of which is modelled as an equivalent thin-wlled
section. nd the total torsional resistance taken as the sum fthe resistnces of the individual
elen.rents. This sub-division should be done so as to maximize the total torsional stiffness
derived for the overall scction. Tbe un-crackcd torsional stiffness, 1"*, of a component

F T:=11

Itl-nt |,
I FI--J|

i-il

tl

Fig. 6.3-4. ldealization of solid square section into thin-walled sections

t70

CHAPTER 6, ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

Table 6.3-1. Value ofk for

t.0

use in equation (D6.3-6)

0. t41
0. r53

t.7

0.

t.3

0.t77
0.t87

t.1

t65

t.5
LS
2.0

0.

t96

4-0

0.28

0.2 t8

5.0

0.29

0.729

7.5

0.305

2.5

0-250

t0.0

0.3 t2

3.0

0.263

0_333

recranglc ma) hc delermined frorn:

1.,

r-""il'

(D6.3-6)

where bmax and ,nin are the length of the longer nd shorter sides respectively. fr depends on

the shape and is determincd as follows:

':ll' oo:ff(r #--J]

(D6.3-7)

Some prticulal values re given in Table 6.3-1.

2-l-I lclause 6.-1.1(4) requires the share of the total design torsional momcnt acting on
each component fectngle to be based on its percentage conl bution to the totl uncrcked
torsional stiffness. Each sub-section my then be designed seprtely in accordance with
2-1-llclause 6.i./fJ). This proceclure is illustrated in Worked example 6.3-2.

2-l-l/clouse
6.3.t (4)

2-l-l/clouse
6.3. t (5)

Segmental construction
Special care is needed with precast segmental box design rvhere there is no intcrnally bonded
presiress or reinfbrcement crossing the joints- Box girders can srry torsional loading of a
type shown in F'ig. 6.105 of EN 1992-2 as a combination of pure torsion (shown as 'A' in
the figure) and distortin (shown as 'B' in thc figure). Thc pure torsin is carried by a
closed llow of shear around the box perimeter (circulatory torsion). If cracks open up t
the joints thrugh the thickness of Lhc flanges and the shear keys cannot carr)' this circultory
torsional shear, the box becomes, in effect, an open section. Open sections are considerably
less stiff and strong in torsion than closed sections and both the pure torsional and distortioml effects have t be substantially carried by a warping of the box webs, as illustrated
in lr'ig. 6.105 of EN 1992-2. (The circulatory torsionl mechanism shown as 'C' in thc
Fig. is a very weak means of resisting the torsion and hence the warping mechanisrn prevails.)
2-2lclause 6.3,21(106) requires the design for the resulting web effects to be carried out in
accordancc wilh Annexes LL and MM of EC2-2. The uses of these Annexes are discussed
in the respective sections of this guide.

Z-2/clouse 6.3.U

(t 06)

6.3.3. Warping torsion

The distinction betwcen St Venant and warping torsion is discussed in section 6.3-1 of this
guide. The total pplied torque hs to be carried by either or a cmbination of these two
mechanisms. For close<l box beams and solid sections, warping torsion may be ignored at
the ultimte limit state according to 2-I-llclause 6.J.3(1) since thc warping torsion is not
itself necessary for equilibrium. It is then, however, necessary fbr the torsion to be
equilibriated entirely by St Venant torsion (referred to as circulatory Lorsion in EN 1992-2
when applied to hollow sections).
For open sections. warping could again be ignored at the ultimate limit stte. but it can be
an emcient method of carrying torsion (whcrc lhe span for transverse bending of individual
walls is short due to restraint at intermediate or support diaphragms). In this situation, 2-1-l/
claase 6.3.3(2) essentially recommcnds that a spaceframe analysis is carried out to determine
the distribution of torsion between the two mechanisms. An example idelization fbr an'I'
beam is shown in Fig. 6.3-5. The design ofindividual walls would then be carricd out lor the

2-l-l/clause
6.3.3(t )

2-l-l/clouse
6.3.3(2)

t7l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Transverse bending lnertia

of llange and St Venant
lorsional inerlia of ilange only

Transverse bending lnertia ol

web and venical area ol web on/y

Longiludinal area and inertia of entire

main beam. St Vennl torsional nerlia of
web and lEnsverse bending inedia oJ web

Fig, 6.3-5. Typical idealization of a beam for spaceframe analysis

bending, shear. torsion nd axial forces determined thelein. Alternatively, texts such
rel-crcncc I IJ could be used to determine the stresses liom torsior.r.

as

6.3.4. Torsion in slabs (additional sub-section)

'fhc rulcs on torsion in this section do not apply to slabs. Torsion in slabs is carried by a
mdiflcation to thc nronrcnt field caused by thc prcscncc ol the twisting moments, in addition
to the bending moments in t$,o rthogonl directions. In the UK. this has been tradilionally
achievcrl in dcsign by using the Wood Amer equations,re'20 which combine the twisting
lroments with flexural moments into'rcinftrrcement moments'to optimize the amount of
reinlblcement needed lbr prticulr moment f,eld. This is a special case of more general
moment ficld cqualions which may be benehoial in assessmcnt, such as those in reference
21. These methods could still be used with EC2 see the further discussion in section 6-9
of this guide. An alternative method, more directly in compliance wilh EN 1992, would be
to use the rules in 2-2lAnnex LL.

t72

CHAPTER

6. ULTIMATE LIMIT

STATES

:'..

.deik sl,rb .as

ol prestresslng to feducrng lorgrtudrnal rernlorce1enl requrl.emenls

rs

,t;l.o;j,.0",,o"
Ar a first slen.

rhe elaslic torsional inertia ofeach constiluenl rectangle is evalualed

according to equations (D6.J-61 and {D6.3-7; as follows:

Dcck slab:

i,-

-.

j x 0.300

< 1000

160r

6.144

108

mma

(Nore the inirial -half rcrm as lhe deck slab acrs in two directions.)

Top llange:

i,,

-- 0.204

400

x 25d

1.273

J;:: 1:l:::":T:,

Borrom flangc:

/"*

Totrl torsional inerlia

The trq$e

.<

0.292

'

is tlre sum

s50

l0o rnnra

-r ::

t' l85r-

1.759

lOemma

terque
olthc
l0'mmo.
mm4. The torque
ofrhc above
above . 3.967 x l0e

iE

shared as

'48 -

t73

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Top flange:
Ta-ke the-eflective

as firsr catcularion. Consequenrty:

;-:t#t.4,r
t,r:Alu:7,
41,': e1u:Vfl

Web;

Try

x
k;-lo:ffi-s+*'
,:
315

160

;il;; ;;; i:;l;ttr*,*,",,,

""u'.

"'l' *.
.

:1,
t74

l-O

::''.'

CHAPTER

6. ULTIMATE LIMIT

STATES

*
160

::::::\
250

:
185

1_'.,.r.-

i::;: :: l:.:
:."".",.

6.4. Punching

lt

is

split into the

General
Load distribution and basic control perimeter
Punching shear calculation
Punching shear rcsistance of slabs and bases without shear reinfbrcement
Punching shear resistance of slabs and bases with shear reinforcement

Section 6.4.1
Section 6.4.2
Se(tion 6.4.3
Sectiqn 6.4.4
Section 6.4.5
Section 6-1.6

This section deals with punching shear in slabs including foundations.

following sub-sections
:

.
.
.
.
.
.

Pile caps (additional sub-section)

There are no modifications lo the gcneral rules of EN 1992-

l-l

givcn in EN 1992-2.

6.4.l. General
Punching shear is a local shear failure around concentrated loads on slabs. 2'l-llclause
6,4.1(t)P states tht the punching shear rules essentiaLly only cover solid slabs and
cmplement the flexural shear rules ir 2-2/clause 6.2. 2-1-llclause 6.4.1(2)P calls the area
on which a concentrated load cts,'the loaded area', ltn",1. The most cormon situations
where the punching shear rules are relevant in hridge applications arc in the design of pile
caps. pad footings and deck slabs subjected to local wheel loads.

2- l -

l/clouse

6.4.t (t)P

2-l-l/clouse
6.4. t (2)P

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Fig.6.4-1.

Typical basic control perimeters

The remainder of 2- I - Iiclause 6.4.I defines general mles including identilying appropriate
verification models and the perimeters on which Lo check punching shear. These general rules
are covered in greater detail in the following sections of this guide.

6.4.2, Load distribution and basic control perimeter

2-l-1,/clouse

6.4.2(t)
2-I-l/clause
6.4.2(2)

Punching shear failures occur ol perimeters within the slab surrounding the loaded area and
have the form of truncated cones through the depth of the consrete slab. It should be noted
that the specified perimeters in the code arc not intended to coincide with actual failure
surfaces rvhich occur in tests. The'basic control perimeter' was chosen so that the allowable
design shear stress values could be taken to be the same as fot the flexural shear design.
2-1-I lclause 6.4.2(1) defines the basic control perimeter, tr1, which may 'normlly' be

tken to be at a distnce of 2d from the loaded area and is constructed to minimize its
length. The word 'normally' is used because of the exception identifled rn 2-l-llclause
6.4.2(2), where the concent.rated lbrce is opposed by onc or more reactions within the
control perimeler. This leads to thc necessity to check perimeters inside 221, as in 2-l-l/
clause 6,4.4(2). Typical basic perimeters are ilLusrrated in Fig, 6.4-1, It is often the cse
that at the top of a column, in a pile cap or in the vicinitl' of concentrated wheel loads,
the slab reinforcement is different in the two reinforcement directions. The effective depths
lo the reinforcement will also be diflerent in each direction. A nroblem then arises as to
what arca of reinfbrcement and what effective depth to use in the ca lculation of the punching
shear resistance- The effective depth is also uscd to detennine the criticl perimeter geometry.
As a simplification, EC2 allows the designer to use the rooted average of the percentage
reinfofcement areas (see section 6.4.4) and Lhe average of the effective depths in calculation
2-l-llExpression (6.32). This could be inappropriate for highly elongated loaded areas

2-l-l/clouse
6.4.2(3)

2-l-l/clouse
6.4.2(4)

2-l-l/clouse
6.4.2(5)

where thc reinforcement in one direction dominates.

2-1-llclause 6.4,2(3) defines reductions to the length of the control perimeter for loaded
areas close to openings in the slab. More common for bridge applications are situations
where loaded arcas are close to the edges of a slab or a corner. For such situtions, ?-,1-1/
clause 6,4.2(4) requires thc control perimeters illustrated in Fig. 6.4-2 to be used if the

lengths re smaller than those obtajned from the basic perimeters defined above. Where
the load is within d of a free edge, 2-1-I lclause 6.4.2(5) rcqnftes the edge ofthe slab to bc
propcrly closed off by reinforcement (with U-brs for examp)e).

Fig. 6.4-2. Control perimeters tor loads close to slab edges or corners

CHAPTER

6. ULTIIYATE LIMIT

Where the depth of a slab varies uniformly (as in 2-l-l/Fig. 6.16). the effective deplh is
determined by considering the depth of concrete tbrough which the shear plane psses.
2-1-llclause 6,4.2(6) thcrelore allows the effective depth to be based on tht t the face of
the loaded area in 2-1-1iFig.6.16. Where it is necessary to check perimeters other lhan
the bsic control perimeter (for example. beoause of soil pressure rcting n lhe revelse
side of the slab. as noted in thc comments to 2-l-l/cluse 6.Z.aQ\, 2-l-I lckuse 6.4'2(7)
requires the perimeters to have the same shape s the basic one.
If the section depth varies in steps (as in 2- l- li Fig. 6.18) rather thn unifbrnrly, the assumption for efl'ective depth above may be invalid as failure may ccur either in thc deeper section or
outside it in the shallower section. ?-,1- I lclauses 6.4.2(8 ) to f71) are relevant to this case. They
cover the special case ofslabs with circular or rectangular column heads, wherc there is a local
deepening ol the slab (or local widening fthe column) at the top of the column. In such oases,
two control perimeters may need to be checked, as indicated in 2-l-1/Fig.6.18 one within the
local slab thickening (with punching through an increased slb thickness) and one outside it
(with punching through the smaller slab thickness).

STATES

2-l-l/clouse
6.4.2(6)

2-l-l/clouse
6.4.2(7)

2-l-l/douses
6.4.2(8) to

(t I)

6.4.3. Punching shear calculation

2-1-l lclause 6,4.3( 1)P defincs the lollowing generl sher stresses for use in punching shear
design calculations:

't,Ed
rR,l.c

is the tlesign shear stress lor the perimeter considered

is the design value (along the control section considered) of the punching shear
l'esistance of a slab without punching shear reinforcement

?nd.".

is thc dcsign value (along the contol section considered) of the punching shear
resistance of a slab with punching shear rcinforcement
is the design value ofthe maximum punching shear resistance along the control

op1."*

2-l-l/clouse
6.4.3(t )P

section considered

2-1-llclause 6,4.3(2J rcquircs checks ofpunching to be carried out at the perimeter oithe
loaded area (against up6..o" defined in 2-l-1,/clause 6.4.5(3)) and on other perimcters, s
discussed in sections 6.4.4 and 6.4.5. Tests have shown that punching shear resistance can
be significantly reduced in the presence of coexisting bending moment, MEl, transmilLcd
to the slb. To allow for the adverse effect of moment, which gives rise to a non-uniform
distribution of shear around Lhe control perimeter, 2-1-Ilclause 6,1.3(3) Erves the design
shear stress to be used in punching shear calculations as:
ur,t

.. vBa

2-l-l/clouse
6.4.3(2)

2-l-l/clause
6.4.3(3)

2-r-r(6.38)

ul

where:

Vp1
r.4
d

lj

is the ultimate design punching shear force resulting from external loading
is the length of the control perimeter uncler consideration
is the average elleclivc dc'pth ofthe slab which, as discussed above, may be taken as
(4 + d,)l2 (where d, nd are the effective depths of the teinfbrcement in the
y- and z-directions of the control section respectively)
is a factor used to include for the effects of eccentric loads and bending moments

Essentially, the design shear sLrcss in 2-1-

vn
-Vta : ----;
uea- D
+ al'M
u-tl

1i

Expression (6.38) is:

Ed

where 'uy.s6 is the additional shear stress from the bending moment Msd. This lcads to the

result that:

3:l+L^ulBdud
/Ed

(D6.4-l)

177

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

IfaplasticsLrcssdistribution,suchasthatin2-l-liFig.6.lg,isusedtoclculate^oMEd,it
is found that:

Mr,t
where lrlj: fi" eld/isdefinedin2-l-liExpression(6.40)asli'le d/fortherl perimeter nd
is a summation of the momenrs of the control perimeter lengths d/ about the axis of bending,
with all ollsets. a, taken s positivc. Substitutiou for Auy.s,1 in equtin (D6-4-l) produces:

,a-1 , Mea Il'

'

vel

W;

(D6.4-2)

The exprcssion for p in EC2 is givcn in 2- 1- l,/Expression (6.39). It differs from equarion
(D6.4-2) in that it is wdtten for perimeter at (although, for column bases, it applies to
other perineters when suhstiLurion is made for the relevant u1 and. Wi in place of a1 and
W\
see Worked exan.rple 6.4.1) and an additional fctor. has been introduced:

3:

4 pMea

ut

Vra Wt

2-t -t l(.6.39)

where:

rl
/r

is thc length of the basic control perimeter

is a coeflicienL dependent on the fti between thc column dimensions (c1 and c2);
its value is function of the proportions olthe unbalnced moment transmitted by
uneven shear and bv bending and torsion. Suitable values are tabulated in 2-1-1i

Table 6.1

MEd is the ultimate

Wt

design moment trarsmitted to the slab and coexistent with the

punching shear fbrce
: Ji[' )e At and corresponds to plstic distribution of shear slress produced in
rcsisting a moment, as sbown in 2-l-1iFig. 6.19 and discussed above. Its solution
is presentcd for rectangular columns and indirectly for circular columns in 2-1-11
Expressions (6.41) ancl (6.42) respectively.

2-l-l/douses
6.4.3(4) to (6)

The factor p is relevant to all cases where the punching force is transferred to the slab
through a monolithic comrection trnsmitting moments. In bridges this would include pier
to pilecap connections and integral column to deck slab connections. It would not be rclevant
to wheel loads on slabs, although the shear from such a wheel load can be unevenly distributcd around the control perimeter when the wheel lod is adjaccnt to a support. In this case,
the uneven shear distribution shoukl be considered thlough n additional check of ilcxural
shear in a similar way to that discussed in section 6.4-6 for pile caps.
2-lJ lclauses 6,4.3(4) to (6) provide some simplified ltematives to full calculation o[ d
fi'om 2- 1-l/Exprcssion (6,39). They will rarcly be applicable to bridge design.
Where a concentrated load is applied close to support (such as a wheel load adjacent to a

2-l-l/clouse
6.4.3(7)

t78

diaphragm or a pile load adjacent to a column), the concept of shear enhancement is

incompatible with a check ofpunching shear resistancc based on the entire contr(ll perimeter.
In this case, shear is unevcnly distributed around the perimeter and it woul<l be unsafe to
allow for a lurther erhancement by rcducing the shear Ibrce in accordance with 2-l-ll
clause 6.2.2(6). In such circumstances, the contrl section should be checked without
enhncement in accordance with 2-l-l lclause 6.4.3(7). No guidance is given on the
definition of this control perimeter. It is possible to rcduce the control perimeter to avoid
the support. Although this wiil result in a lower punching shear resistancc tharr that based
on the basic control perimeter'. the reduction may be appropriate since the she will be
conccntrated on the part of the perimeter adjacent to the support. An additional check of
flexural shear sl.rould always be perftrrmed in such cases, but this time taking account of
shear enhancement for support proximity where appropriate.
This grey are between 'punching' shear nd 'flexural' shear leads, in particular, to
problems in pile cap design. Some suggestions are made in section 6.4.6 of this guide.

CHAPTER 6. ULTIIYATE LII'4IT STATES

Whcrc the applied punching shear force is in a foundation slab,2-1-l lchuse 6.4.3(8) allorvs
the force to be reduced by the fvurable ction of the soil but the provisions of 2-l-1,/clause
6.4.2(2), regarding the check ol several perimeters, then apply. Similarly, 2'1'l lclause
6.4.3(9) allows the appJicd shcar l'orce to be reduced by the favourable action of any Yertical
components of inclined prestuessing tendons crossing th control section where lelevant.

6.4.4. Punching shar resistance of slabs and bases without

shear reinforcement
The expression for punching sher resistance lbr slabs wilhout shear reinfbrcemenl in
2-I-llclause 6.4,1(I) rs similar in lbrm to that for thc llcxural sheal design of beams in

2-l-l/clouse
6.4.3(8)

2-l-l/clouse
6.4.3(9)

2-

rp6,"

l- I ldause
6.4.4(t )

2-l-l/clause 6.2.2:
Cp6,.(100

AItl3 +

k1o,o

2-t-t

> (t-1, + 0.10o*)

(.4'7

where:

: | + \/ (200 /d) (with d in millimetres)

P1: J P1t 14' <

pty,

pt

0.02

relate to the bonded tension steel in the y- and z-directions respectively. The
valucs should be calculated as mean values taking into accoLrnt slab width
equal to the loaded area or column width plus 3d each side
should be taken as the averagc cffcctive depth obtained in each orthognal
direction from 2- l-1i Expression (6.32)

- (o", + o",) l2 (in MPa, positive for compression)

o"u, o"" arc thc normal concrete stresses from lngitudinal fbrces in the critical section in
o.o

the y- nd z-directions respectively (in MPa, comprcssion taken as positive)

Other terms have lhe same definitions as in 2-l-liclause 6.2.2.

The values of Cp4.", u-1n and L may be given in the Natior.ral Annex. EC2 recolr.rmends
values of 0,l8/i," and 0.10 (compared to 0.15 for flcxural shear) for these respectively for
punching shcar- The value of ln,i,., is recommended t be the same as for flexural shear.
In general. the punching shear resistance for a slab shoukl bc assessed for the basic control
section discussed in section 6.4.2 using 2-1-1,i Expression (6.47) and at the pedmeter ofthe
loaded area against rp6.-u* defined in 2-1-1/clause 6.4.5(3).2-1-llclause 6.4.4(2). however,
requires tht the punching shear resistance of column bases be verifled at control pc meters
witllin the 2d periphery of thc column and the lowest value taken. This is because the angle of
the punching cone my be steeper in this situation due to the favourable reaction fiom the
soil. A check of punchiug on the basic perimeter ignoring the relieving forcc from the soil
would be conscrvativc. C)n any given perimetet, and in the abscnce of transmitted
morot, ugd is as follows:
uv1

with
whcrc

Vvl

,,",1

I/s,1,."d

2-r

f ud

i/sa

2-

l- I /dause
6.4.4(2)

-1(6.49)

2-l-r(6.48)

l/ru

trs4 is the column load and Zs1 is the net upu/ard lbrce

considered (i.e, upward pressule

within the control perimeter

liom the soil calculalcd excluding the self-weight of the

base).

For steeper sher planes. an enhancement ofthe basic resistancc to 2-1-1/Expression (6.47)
is applicable, whereupon the resistance becomes:
trp,1

cp6,"/e(1oop t.T.o)t'',

2j

r,,n,,

r4

where a is the clistancc from thc periphery of the column to the control

2-l-1(6.50)

pc

meter considered

This formulation for shear enhancement. where the rcsistance is enhanced, is at odds with
that for flexural shear. whcre thc shcar itself is reduced. This is discussed in section 6.2.2.1
of this suide.

t79

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

For most bases. column axial load will be accompanied by some bending moment (due to
moment fixity at deck lcvel or horizontal forces pplied to the column top through bearings)In such cases. an increase in the dcsign shear stress to account lbr uneven shear distribution
around the control perimeter is necessary- 2- 1- l,/Expression (6.51) is providcd to do this and
iL is equivalent to 2- 1- 1/Expression (6.38) fol cases whele there is no recting sil pressure:
/ea..".r l, ,- Mro
^.
"J
' Ed ,d
l' -" v.d*d Iu)
2- I -

2- l

-l (6.51)

1/Expression (6.51) contains n equiylent term to thc tcrm

1.

lvfEd

Vu

Wt

in

2- 1- l lExprcssion (6.39), but with tr/s6 replaced by I/p6 ,.6. It would be logical to allow Msd
to srilarly be replaced wilh a reduced value allowing for the soil pressure, but this is consenatively (and probably unintentionally) not done in 2- 1- I /Expression (6.51). ut and Wr
are also replaced by I and tr42 which relate to the actual pcrimeter being checked.

i*

-,'

I80

glYeg

tt
tt

It
| l, .:
---1

500

I
I
I

CHAPTER

6, ULTIMATE LIMIT

STATES

t8l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

-- 2.41 \{Pa

-,,, tberefore..okay
: i.-:.'lr:.1- l.:'..., :.:.....::,1::::':::.:::i
The loundation should. also be checked for flexural shear. From 2-l-l-'clause 6.2.1(8).
planes nearcr than d need nol be checked where there is approxJmarely umform load.
so rhe resistance will be checked
f1 a sgctlgn;q1{ iletlCri irqry.,i* iqi9l:qiq t:::. t:

t82

un

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

6.4.5. Punching shear resistance of slabs and bases with shear reinforcement
Where ts,1 exceeds the vlue of

'L'R,l.c

fr the perimeter considered, usually the basic pcrimeter

a1, punching shear

reinforcenent is required in accordance with 2-1-11clause 6.4.5 and three

zones are required to be chcckcd:

.
.
.

the zone immediately adjaccnt to thc loaded area (against the she crushing limii);
the zone in rvhich the shear reinforcement is plced;
thc zonc outside the shear reinfbrcenent. 2-l-1,/clause 6.4.5(4) i[cludes a delinition for an
outer perimeter where the concrete resistancc alone is sullcient for the punching shear
and shear reinforcement hs to be provided within this zone as discussed bclow.

Where shear reinfolcement is required, the following eqution is defined in 2-l-I lclause
1 ) lo calculate the punching shear resistance of slabs or column bases:

6,4.5(

r.,p6..,

0.?5,p4."

+ ls

(4),r,"f,".r(*)'- "

2-l-l/clouse
6.4.5(t)

2-l-1(6.52)

where:

1,,"
s,
..a,"r

is the area of one perimeter of sher reinforcement around the column or loaded
area accortling to 2-l-liFig. 6.22
is the rdil spacing ofperimeters of shear reinforcement
is the effective design strength of the punching shear reinlorcement allowing for
anchoragc cffrcicncy : 250 | 0.25d ./y.a (in MPa) with d taken, as befbre, as
-<
the verge effective depth (in millimetres)
is the angle between the shear reinfbrcement and the planc of the slab

2-1-l iExpression (6.52) diflrs fionl the fornulae for flexural shear in that a concrete terrn ls
added to a shear reinforcment term- However, 2-l -1,/Expression (6.52) does not fully combine
the concrete resistance and the link resistance h the 2d pedmeter. Thc reasons for this re
cntircly tcst-based. The 0.75 factor t)n the conorete term represents a reduced concrete contribution as one might expect when reinforcement is yielding with the associated in.rplicd concrete
oracking and defomation. The use of L5d rather than 2,1is also needcd for adequte clibration with test results and reflects observations that shear reinforcement at the ends of shear
planes is less eff'ective. It doesn't imply steeper failure plane. The reduced shear reinforcement
strcngth- wd.ci. is a furlher anchorage elTiciency factor affecting shaUower slabs.
The above expression has been presented assuming a constnt area of shear reinforccment

area Fig. 6.4-4 refers. Irr bridges,

reinl'orcement is not usually placed like this, but rather on an orthogonl rectangular grid,
coinciding with horizontal reinforcement rrangements. This is a necessity where moving
loads are to be catered for. Such arrangements inevitably lead to thc area of reinforcement
on each perimeter moving away liom the loaded

increasing on successive perimeters away from the loaded area. One solution is Lo apply
2- I - I iExpression (6.52) by considering only the reinfbrcement bars lhat are located s.in
Fig. 6-a-a(h) and ignoring olhcr rein[orceruent providcd between the arms of the crucilbrm
shape (which would increase the reinfrcement area on successive perimeters mor ing away
from the loaded area). There would be no need to reduce the effective concrete perimeter
as indicatcd in Fig. 6.4-a(b) if additional reinforcemenl wcre so placed to reduce the
circumferential spacing. An lterntive, less conservative, approach is given later.
The control perimeter at u,hich shear reinforcement is not required (aor,, or r.iu,,, in
"1
Fig. 6.4-4) is defined in 2-1-l lclause 6.4.5(4, as the perimeter lvhete the concrete resistance
alone is suflicient to resist the aDlied shear stress:
,ur.ei

,, vxa ,
: P
?'Rd,c4

with oq6." from

2- 1-

2-

l- l /douse
6.4.s(4)

2- 1-1i (6.54)

I,/Expression (6.47).

The outermost perimeter ofshear reinforcement should be plced at a distance not grcater
than t/ : l.5d (which may be varied in the National Annex) withir this oter perimetel (as
illustrated in Fig,6.4-4) to ensure an inclined failure plane cnnot develop within this

t83

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

(oJ-------'-

t2

-- .-'\
(a) Perlmeter

(b) Peimeter uo(l r where

circumJerential spacing exceeds 2d

uour

Fig.6.4-4. Control perimeters

adlacent

to

loaded area wirh shear reinforcement

pefllnetef ver a radial distance of 2d without passing through set of shear reinforcement
legs. If the perimeter ,our or aor cf is less than 3.0d from the face of the loaded area, shear
reinforcemenl should, however, still be provided out t t lest perimeter 1.5d from the
lace of the loaded area such that the required resistance accordhg to 2- 1- I /Expression
(6.52) can be achieved. According to 2-1-liFig. 9.10, thc innermst perimeter ol shear
reinfrcement should not be placed nearer thn 0.3d to the face of the loaded area. This is
similar to the reson for pulting reinforcement in the middle 0.75a, of a shear span, as
discusscd under clause 6.2.3(8). The radial spacing ol reinforcement should also not
exceed 0.75d in accordance with 2-l-llclause 9,4.3(li.
Because of the difficulties with matching availablc reinforcement

t perimcters for rcal

reinforcement layouts and conti:ol perimeter shapes, an alterntive pproch is proposed
here rvhich allows successive control perimeters to be checked if necessary. In general, shear
failure is deemed to occul over a radial distance of 2/- Consequcntly, lo enhance resistance,
shear reinforcement of area 11*" should be placed within n re enclosed between the
control perimetef chosen and one 2d inside it. To correspond to the 1.5d in 2- I - l,/Expression
(6.52), it is desirable to consider nly the reinforcement within a radial band of 1.5d. To
comply with the need to consider only reirforcement further thn 0.3d liorn the loaded
pcrimeter, only reinforcement further than 0-3d from the inner pcrimcter should be
considered. Consequently, only reinforcement frther than 0.2d inside the control perimeter
should be included. These two limits arc consistent with the fact tht rein[orcement at each
end ol' a failure plane is unlikely to be fully effective. This reinforcement zne is shown in
Fig.6,4-5.

Reinforcemenl ) Isw to include

for check on perimeter !i

u (between

Fig. 6.4-5. Reinforcement

t84

lA,*

to

include in check

to

equation (D6-4-3)

and uout

CHAPTER 6. ULTIIYATE LII4IT STATES

I[ the above method is fbllowed, successive perimeters, a1, between the basic control
pedmeter al 2d a\d. the perimeter a.,u, are checked to ensure that the reinforcement in
each 2d zone bove satisfies:
(LrE6

\- .r

0.75r,p1")rr;,.1

(D6.4-3)

It will be noted tht if the abovc is applied to the control perinreter L 2d, the same total
reinforcement requirement as in 2-1- l i Expression (6.52) is produced. If it is pplied t the
perimeter uot, some reinforcement requilment will still be predicted because of the 0.75
fctor on up6.. in equation (D6.4-3). This is unfortunate, but as long as reinforcement is
rletailed so that it is stopped no further than l.5d inside the perimeter &oui s required by
2-1-1/clause 6.4.5(4), some reinforcement will be available for this check.
Maximum punching shcar stress
2-1-I lchuse 6.4.5(3) reguires the shear stfess at ny section to be less than t1,1."". This
check is equally applicable to scctions with or without shear reinforccmsnt, but is only
likely to be critical in slabs with shear reinforcement. Clearly, the most critical sction to

check is the column perimeter

2-I-l/clouse
6.4.5(3)

or the perimeter of the loaded area (and 2-l-llclause

6.4.5(3) includes specific &0 vlues for the special cases close to slab edges or corners).
?.,Rd nrx may be given in the National Annex but the recommended value in 2-l-liclause
6.4.5(3) is rd.max :0.5r,/11; the same as lor flerural shear design in 2-1-1/clause 6.2.2(6).

6.4.6. Pile caps (additional sub-section)

EN 1992-2 provides no specifio guidance for checking punching shear in pile caps. The
general lules can be applied t pile caps where thc cdgcs of the piles are located further
than 2d fron.r the pier face, but this situation is rare in prctice. In other cases, a lot of
interprettion is required. Thc revised thinking on shear enhancement in Lhc final drafting
of ECl2, discussed in section 6.2.2.1, hs made matters more complicated. Some suggestions
are made below and in Worked exan.rple 6,4-2.
Where pile edges are closer to the piers than 2r1, somc ofthc shear force will be transmitted
direcLly into the support by way of a strutting action. The basic punching perimeter cannoL
be constructed without encompassing a part of the support perimctcr (a) in Fig. 6.4-6.
2-l-l,/clause 6.4.2(2) rquires reduced perimeters to be checked, such tht the suppolt reaction is excluded, suggesting aperineter like that oftype (b) in Fig.6.4-6.2-1-l1clause 6.4.3(7)
does nol llw ny enhancement to be taken on such perimeters. On lhc onc hand, it would
not be rasonable to enhance resistance for support proximity on the whole of such a punching perimeter without making reductions to the ellectiveness of other parts oj Lhe pcrimeter,
as the shear will be unevenly distributed around that perimeter. On the other hand, some
degree of cnhancement must take place because the filure surfce is, at least locall1,.
steepened

by the

presence

(d) Flexural shear plane

actoss cp

of

Lhe support and sorne

o_o

load can strut directly into the

(b) Reduced dmeter

(a) 2d perimeter

(c) Flexural shear plane

Fig. 6.4-6. Corner pile wirhin 2d of a cotumn

base

t85

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

support. In the limit. if rhe pile is very close to the pier face. the load r.ill transfer straight
between support and pile in con.rpression and the very short perimeter oftype (b) may underestimate resistance if enhancement is not permitted.
The abovc problems sterl from the subjective distinction between 'punching' and'flexural'
shear. It is arguable that the above situation is more of a flexural shear problem. The following procedure is thelelbre proposed:

First, a lilure plane of type (d) in Fig. 6.4-6, extending the full width of the pile cap,
should be chccked for flexural shear. A method considering shear cnhancement of the
concrete resistnce over the sections where reinforcement crosses the pile head as in
Worked example 6.4-2 is recommended.
Second, axial loads lrom corner piles can be checkerl for punching at the pile lce to
check the maximum shear stress nd ginst the minimum resistance liom:
(i) punching at a 2d perimeter (without support enhancement) ignoring thc presence of
the support, nd;
(ii) a diagonal flexural shear plane at the edge of the pile of type (c) in Fig. 6.4-6, which
rvs the approach uscd in US 5400 Part 4.' A method considering shear enhancement of the concrete resistnce over the pile head as in Worked example 6.4-2 is
rccommer-rded.

Chcck (i) will generally be less critical than check (ii).

For all of the checks ahovc. where support proximity is included to enhnce part of the
shear resistance, it is suggested here tht, in keeping with current UK practice, a, is taken
to be the distance between the face of a column or wall and the nearcr edge of the piles
plus 20% of the pile diameter.
This approach is pulsued in Worked exarnple 6.4-2.

'
r

: :::::::,II

:::

,"

: ::: :: ::: ::: l.:: : :::: :;I;

,..11Y,j Yl

!&o=uoo'
L+;-Ir

L-d

L-jd

Sction

Fis.6.4-7.*.,*..."0.::iu,o"#

t86

(Alldlmen$lons in mm)
(rdrmensronsinmm)

CHAPTER

6. ULTII4ATE LIMIT

STATES

t87

DESIGNER5' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

nul*19*

t88

,"f'n: 'n:il

CHAPTER 6. ULTIIYATE LIMIT STATES

"

:*

shear

t: **'

,r, o,.***'

"n."r

s'Lress

rimi'i:

I.,Jt-:i ffi':':;:''um

r.r"r,

the corner pilc is checked

,,"_r-,]l"r,*"0 in Fig. 6.4-9 below):

ffi

*Et{-H;
-

Fig. 6.4-9.

'

r,"**,.n*.

H, ,^;:l
il*

*-Hffi.t']" '*

Or". u..or, .on"".

"'""'

:,":,:'""

-,t,'

"rt

hogonar directions; thercfore'4,

3272 mm) im

,"T

t89

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

",-.
"^"*.i1

-:l':-:i-ij
#i*mnit'

ii] -''o
"*- ""'

the contribution from

;0"'t, n"r. laken as the

x t0'- ?14.8 *t{_

;"-":-:
, --'-1500:"li'"*
t760**,
"*
434 s singo
^,

..' .::

t90

:"

"
""hancins

the concrete resisrau:

parts of the section onlv'

the enhanced prts
only.

CHAPTER 6. ULTII.IATE LI4IT STATES

Required area per leg is rherefore 1760127 -65 mmz 1i.e. use

l0$

legs)

(4) Punching shear on a ?d perjmerer. as illustratcd in Fig. 6.4- I I ' is checked ignoring
enhancement fior ptoximity to lhc column as required by 2-l-l/cluse 6.4.3(7). lTfis is
the oniy punching shear plane explicitly covered in EC2 ) The perimeter is not.
however- reduced to exclude lhe ootumn load as required in 2-l-llcluse 6.4 2(2). as
this is effectively checkcd io (3) abve by way oi a flexural shear plane.
.

,"tf-

r------+.-1;-<..-

525mm rhererorc

niri:':ll*i',,".:1'Ll'*t*

'i :

:;ii

,:: :l

21

- 2 x 5r5 = r050mm

a conhined perimeter sttquld lso be checkcd

l,*o -

,,,

r,
,::,t,l;^*;;
-t,e^)r"*r,o-,i,u.rr,,";;
"*.;; :':-'''.
rro''

n ,oo --

"0

2842 mm

r-,

':,=T. '*-qi#-'l

j=i ;-*6oe
r9l

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

i..-##:'_':"^::l"''
k:1+
*,ffi:,1,,,,-0,.,*,,
."l
A : V V,UUOT'Y )/ I,.UUOJ :

.'.'-lr.

,,.

:1; I lil"lllJ:; ,:::,",ill-.;,iili

Calculate aur, .the perimeler where the concrele resistance alone is sumcbn[:

,..

:,,,*1&

#: ffi]$/ M)-

=,*, -

rrun

*,

This represerts a perimerc'r oi [5269 2

x 4l2q 50012- 2595mm, i.e. 4.
instead of 2.t/. Links should extend to 4.94d - l.5d :3.44d. Clearly. {his is bynd
edge o[ the pile cap and is therefore nor
not meaningful; lhe links provided
therel
F;yided wilt iherefore
be exrended rhroughout rhe width of the pile cap.
2-l- | /Expression (6.52) rs,used Lo nnA.rh; required punching- shea
reinforcernent:
shearr rei
n forcern en'i :

* *''

_":,'.,r'":ffi
-

it

#",fr

p# ;:;; i - --_*,

-h'",,',,,,ffi

:: :"
. *-*

MPa as

req

uired

::

d,,ilrffi ;ln

'ilff+illi:::,::;:::i:'
ua6.",

"

-.0.75 x 0.54?-'
0.54?-, rt

r ffi x6 x r x St rrffi

( e'Io

nks

x sineO

"

*,,*.0,, -,

r''li'' n"*"*

l.Ol9Mpa

-i'*,1'"i:l,:i"ir,l,llTTiil;T;"",,",
ffJliriltr*1ii;r;t*t,,tit^
Fs
n.c idt]lllhl
*-;l$-rr:Gri;;'-.,ltYt:;Mrk4)ff

csc,1!ra,

ln regrons

t92

r,,

indicrd

f '7,f--=--rc-l1i:1

f;";ffiy#:l"1,'llr*

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE

,1IT STATES

6.5. Design with strut-and-tie models

6.5.l. General
Section 5.6.4 of this guide provides general background to the use f strut-and-tie rules
and the circumstances when they should be used, such s in the case o[ non-linear strin
distribution identilied by 2-1-Ilclause 6,5.1(1)P. EN 1992-2 makes no mendment to the
strut-and-Li rulcs in EN 1992, othcr rhan possibly indirectly through the National Annex

2-l-l/clouse
6.s. t (t)P

definition of /"1.

6.5.2. Struts
The allorvable compressive stress tht a concrete strut cn carry is strongJy affected by its
multiaxial state of stress. Transvelse compression is beneficial (particularly if acting in
both trasvcrsc dirccLions, as in thc partially loaded area effect discussed in scction 6.7),
while transverse tension reduces the concrete's compressive resistance. The reduction in
limiting compressive stress is worse where the tension is not perpendicular to the com-

pression stmt, as this leads to crcks tht re not parallel to thc direction of the
compression so that th compressive force has to transfer across the cracks in shear.
Quantifying thc cffccts of Lransvcrse tension is difficult- Section 5.6 of the AASHT'O
LRFD Briclge Design SpeciJtcationrr2 relrtes the compressive slrcngth to the principal
tensile strain and its direction relative to the direction of compression. However, Lhis
Lcnsile strain is not always readily available. EC2 therefore gives two simplified and consetvative limits for allowable compressive stress in 2-l-llclause 6.5.2(1) ar'd 2-l-Ilclause
6..i.2(2J as follows.

(i)

2-l-l/clause
6.s.2(t)
2-l-l/clause
6.s.2(2)

Transrerse stress is zero or compressire

uRJ.mr'\

2-

JLJ

This value should give

Lhe same

limiting stress as thaL for a compression chord of

L-

l(6.55)

a beam so

the vlue of /"a should be taken s that for compression in 2-2,iclause 1.1.6, i.e.
/la :0.854r/r" witl.r o"":0.1i5 recommended. Il will not often be possible to usc this
limit as transverse tension can occur simply by the bulging of a comprcssion strut between
nodes. as shown in Figs 6.5-1 and 6.5-2. Higher limiting stresses could, however, be lkcn
in areas of triaxial comnression. as discussed in 2-1-liclause 3.1.9.

r93

TO EN I992-2

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

(ii)

Transverse stress is tensile nd concrete is cracked

dra.n u"

0.6r:'4a

2- 1-

r(6.56)

l/'is a

nationally determined parameter whose value is recomnrcnded to be

/"a/250. This limit has two n.rain significances. First, it coresponds approximtely
to the minimum stress t which vertical cracking is expected to occur in an un-reinlbrred
stlut with the scometry of that in Fig. 6.5-1. The actual cracking strcss dcpends on Lhc
geometry of the load and thc supporting member, as discussed in section 6.7 of this guide,
and can be highr than the value in 2- I - 1 Exprcssion (6.56), as illustrated in Fig.6.7-3.
Second, the limit correspol]ds to th same limiting stress s tht for a compression strut in
where

: 1

r.,'

a wcb under shear awal' lrom the supporls, where link reinforcement carries tensile lbrces
across the comprcssion band. It is therefore important that the lactor occ (which is intendcd
to apply to beam-tolumn bending and compression checks only) is given the same vlue in

2- l - l ,/Expression (6,56) as for shear design- tt is reqommended here, therefore, that

.l"d: J"rll" is used in 2- l- l/Expt'ession (6.56), as it is envisaged that a." will be made

equal to unity lbr shear design, i.e. op6 n,,* :0.6(l - f.k 1250).l"kl1.
The limit in 2- I - I /Explession (6.56) covers the more detrimcntal skew cracking, so it will
be-conseryative for cases where cracks are actually parallel to the cmpression. Schlich el
zr1.' reconrmend a higher limit of id:0.68/r/.,c (which in.rplicitly includes a factor of
0.85 for sustained Joading sinilar to r,r""). where the tensile forces are perpendicular to the
compression struts. The same limit is recommended therein fbr nodes with one membet in
tension (CCT node). as shorn in Fig. 6.5-a(b). The cquivalent node limit in EC2 is given
by 2- l- l,/Expression (6.61) which gives a lirniting stress, this time incorporating rrcc :0.85,

ol

R,r,n,",

- 0.852'y1 - 0.85(l - kl250)

x O.ssL1/1

: a.ll(l

f.l?s}')J.l^y.

In summary, the limit in 2- 1- I i Expression (6.56) does not distinguish between perpendicular cracking and skew cracking or bctwecn applied transverse tensile forces that are carded
by reinforcement, aml those which rise purely from an elastic bulging (spreading) of thc
struts between nodes as in Figs 6.5-1 and 6.5-2, In the latter case, the complessive stress
should hc chccked in the neck regionThe limit in 2- 1 - 1 /Expression (6.56) lso does not ccount for the actual magnitude of
lensile strain, which is also rclevant. Essentiall),, it relates to a safe lolver-bound stress that
can be assumcd 1or all compression struts, whether reinforccd or un-rcinforced transversely,
providing the strut-and-tic idealization does not depart signiflcntly from elastic stress
tra.lectories- In reality. dill'erent limits would appJy in dillercnt situations and the following
are suggested here, providing tl.rat the reinlbrcement yield strength does nt exceed 500 MP:

(a) Applied transverse tension

(cracked) and reinforced transversely, both perpendicular to

the strut:

op6,,""*:0.72(1

l1250).f"kl^i, s for a CCT node

(b) Applicd

hansverse tension (cracked) and rcinforced transversely. either or both skew to

the strut:
aqa.n*x

(c)

: 0.60(l ftr 1250) J.l^1.

Transverse tension resulting from spread of Joad only but unreinforced transversely or

reinforced by skeu, reinforcerlent:

op1,.o"

:0.60(1

f"k 1250) j,kl1.

or higher value derived allorving for thc concrete tensile strength in accordance rvith
Fig. 6.?-3 up to a liniting value of
.'Rd.mx

t94

0-12(l

l" l?sl)J"y/1"

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

Benefit will only arise fbr certain strut geometries and lhc lowest limit with varying
gcometry (bascd on transvcrsc cracking and not usualll' final failure) is close to

ora,.u.

(d)

- 0.60(l

.fck l2s0).l ck / 1c

The tensile strength of concrete should only be used to derive a higher strength if thc
concrete will not be cracked under other actions during the lit of the structure.
Transverse tensiol resulting liom spread of load only and reinforced transversely
perpendicular to tht: struL:
oRd.mr

0 60(t

fckl2s}) fckl

^ic

or higher value governed by the resistance of thc lransvcrse ties (see section 6.5.3) up to a

limiting

vaLue

or,r.-,,

ol

- 0.72(l J*1250).1.lt,

A higher limit could be obtained using the partially loaded arca methd discussed itr
section 6.7, where the node at the enrl of the struL is triaxialll' constrained.

It can be seen tiom the above that there ale difliculties in applf ing the strut rules consislently. Howcvcr, thc comprcssivc limit of op,1n u" : 0.6v'ia can be used conservaLively in all
the bove cases with trnsverse tension unless speci{ic rules elsewhcre can be used to allow
higher linits. These include the rules for partially loadcd areas and tbr maximum shear
stress in members loaded close to supports. This recognition is the basis of 2-l-llclause
6.J.?(J/, which allows ref'erence to be made to 2-l-1,/clause 6.2.2 and.6.2.3 for the design
of men.rbers with short shear span. AnoLhcr good illustration is the cotltpression limit for
a flanged beam in bending. Strictly, s trnsvetse tension develops in a compression flange
due to the spread of load across the flange, the lower limit of 2-1-liExpression (6.56)
should bc used for the flange. However, experience shows tht th limit in 2- 1 - 1 /Expression
(6.55) is the correct one. When the limit in 2- I - l/Erpression (6.56) is used for the design of
struts, it is unlikely thaL the nodes will ever govcrn the design.
Finally, the compression limits in 2-1-licluse 6-5.2 assume that the strut-and-tie model
approximately lbllows the flow of lbrce liom an un-crackcd elastic nalysis, Tests havc
shou'n in somc cascs (rcfcrcncc 8) that lower limits are applicable if the anglc of concrete
struts departs significntly from their un-clacked elastic directions. 'Ihis reduction is taken
into account in the compressior lirnit in the mcmbranc rules of 2-2/clause 6.109. However,
it is re-emphasized tht testing has also shown in other cses that quite large departures
from the elastic stress traiectories can be tolerated without reduction to the crushing
rcsistancc the shear rules of 2-1-1/clause 6.2-3 nrovide one such instance.

2-l-l/douse
6.s.2(3)

6.5.3. Ties
Reinforcement ties may be used up to their design yield sLrength, ./r,a, at ttre ultinaLe limit
state and must be adequately anchored at nodes. A reduced stress limil is applicable for
the serviceability limit state to control cracks in accordance with 2-l-liclause 7.3.1(8).
Prestressing steel nay be similarly utilized. Ties may bc discrete (s in the case of bottom
reinforcement in a pilecap) or smeared (as in the case of transverse tension in the bursting
zone adiacent to a concentrated load). Where ties are sn.rearcd, they should be distributed
over the length of tension zone arising from the curved compression sttcss trajectories. as
illustrated in Fig. 6.5- L
Fornrulae for tie forces are given in 2-1-llclause 6.5,3(3) lor the two sitnple cases ol a
'partial discontinuity' and a'full discontinuity'. These are sometimes rclerred to as'bottle'
distributions due to the bulging of the compression ficld from a neck region. The partial
discontinuity is discussed in greater detail in section 6.7 of this guide. The strut-and-tie
model shown in Fig. 6.5-l can easily be shown to produce the tension force given in 2-l-1l
Expression (6.58). thus:

1b-a-

2- 1-

2-l-l/clause
6.s.3(3)

l/(6.58)

t95

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

,l

;,,
I

_0.3b

Stress ljectories

Slrut-and-lie diagram

Fig. 6.5-1. Paftil disconrinuity

For the full discontinuity as in Fig, 6,5-2, a similar tension is prduced ccording t 2-l
Expression (6.59), thus:

':if'-

oi-,)F

li

2-l - 1(6.5e)

It is generlly not safc to ignore this transverse tension and design the strut based on the 'a'
dimension to a stress of /L1, ignoring Lhe spread of load, as discussed in section 6.7. This is
besause the hansverse tension nd associated cracking can lead Lo prcmature compression
failure unless it is resisted by either reintbrcement ol the tensile strength of the concrete.
A method is given for calculating lhe strul resistance without transverse reinforcerlent in
section 6.7 of this guide, It is bsed n the tensile resistance of the concrete and a partial
discontinuity, but it could easily be modified fbr the full discontinuity case above,

6.5.4. Nodes
A node is a volume of concrete containing the intersections of the struts and ties. Its
dinensions are determined from the geometry ol the struts, ties and external forces.
Nodes may be smeared or concentlted in the sme way as ties above. 2-1-llclause 6-5.4
gives liniting stresses, rRd.max, bascd on the greatest comptessive stress liaming into the
node for thrcc diflrent types of concentrted nodes discussed below. The compressive
resistance of nodes is also allcted by bands of tension passing through them as discussed
for struts. Smeared nodes generalll, rcquire no check of concrete stress, but anchorage of
bd = Hl2 + a.65a (<t . tsH)

li
TI

Fig. 6.5-2. Full discontinuity

t96

].-

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LII'1IT STATES

Fig. 6.5-3. Nodes under concentrated loads

bars should slill be checked, 2-I-I lclause 6.5.4(2)P requiles that nodes must always be
detiled so that they are in equilibrium. T use the stress limits in 2-l-liclause 6.5.4,
nodes must always be detailed without eccentricities.
According to 2-l-l ltlaase 6,5,4(1)P, the rules fol nodes should also be applied to the
velilication of bearing stresses at concentrated loads in members where the stlut-and-tie
rules have not been used elservhere in the member design. This can, however, potentially
led t incompatibiliry. A typical example occurs in n]embers whcrc the shear design has
been perlbnned using the rules of section 6.2- Il the strut-and-tie nde limits were applied
to check web orushing for loads applied ner to supports as in Fig. 6.5-3, they would
often give lower maximum shear resistancc than thc shear ruJes. (Where there are shear
links. Fig. 6.5-3 does not allow for some dditionl steeper compressior struts which
would develop, allo"r,ing some load to be suspended b1, links to thc top of the section
again and then caffied back to the supports on ftuther steep compression struts.) In this
instancc. the node rules could be applied to the bearing sulfces of the nodes only, on the
bsis tht the shear design itself has bccn valiclated by Lesting.
The following cases are covered by 2-1-llclause 6.5.4(4):

(a) Alt

-"* -

kr

t/'/;d

6.s.4(2)P

2-l-I/clouse
6.5.4(t)P

2-l-[/clouse
6.s.4(4)

members t a node re in compression (CCC node)

oR,r

2-I-l/clouse

2- l

1(6.60)

rvhcre /r1 is a nationally detendned parametel whose recommended r,alue i; l-0 and z' is
as defined in section 6.5.2 abovc. The node region is assumed to be limited by a polygon
with sides typically, although not necessarily, t right ngles to th strut directions- This

type of node can occur, lor example, at bean internal supports and at the compression
faces of tiame corners with closing moment (Fig. 5.6-6(a)). For nodes comprisirg three
comprcssion struts (as in Fig. 6.5-4(a)), a useful guide to sizing the node is lo assume tht
the node boundaries are pcrpcndicular to the struts and thaL hydrostatic pressure exists.

Thisleadstodimensionswith4d.L/ar:F,a.2fu2:{6,3/a3,assuggestedin2-1-llcl&ase
6.5.4(8). Il is not necessary to achieve this hydrostatic state and generally a ratio of
stresses on djcent faces of a nodc ol only 0.5 ujll still bc satisf:rctory. Dimensioning
of the node can therelbre be rnodified to suit. Grete1 departures liom hydrostatic
conditions will, howcvcr, reduce the allowable stress limit from that given above.
To constlr.rct nodes t intemal supports, as in Fig. 6.5-4(a), the two short vertical
struts going down to the bearing plate must obviously have a centre of gravily at the
position of the actual bearing reaction. It r.r'ill usually only be necessary to check the
bearing pressure on each node face. However, if there are additional struts passing
through the node horizontally (as Lhcre would be at internal supports), the stress on a
vertical section through the nodes should lso be checked. Some enhancenrenl may
additionally be madc for the cffects of triaxial corrpression, as discussed below,
whether produced by confining reinforcement or applied stress. (The partially loadd
arca case discussed in section 6.7 of this guide is one such example.)

2-l-l/clause
6.5.4(8)

t97

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

(b) One member at node in tensiott, others in compression (CCT node)

dRd.nrar

: ra2l Jrcd

2-1-r (6.61)

where /r2 is a nalionally detenr.fned parameter whose recommcnded value is 0.85. This

2-l-l/clouse
6.5.4(7)

type of node cn oacur at end supports or in deep beams as in Fig. 5.6-6(c). The
reinforcement rrrust be fully anchored from the start of the node. as shown (i.e. where
the compressivc strcss trajectories of a slrut 6rst intersect the anchored bar).2-1-Il
clause 6.5.4(7) requires the bar to extend over the entire node length, but the reinforcemcnt may also be anchored behind the node if the anchorage lengLh exceeds the node

olbond stresses and

in the node. A higher stress could therefore be iustified wherc the bar
is anchored by an cnd p]ate behild thc nodc. Thc height of the node is f,xed as
shown, Ifsn is not fixed by proximity to the edge ofthe member, a reasonable dimension
length- 2- 1- I /Expression (6.61) makcs allowance for development
hence cracking

would be 6 bar diameters as permitted in reference 22. The reinforcement should preferably be distributed over the hcighL of the node, whish has the benet of maximizing the
width, a1, ofthe incoming strut. 2-1-llcluse 6.5.4(5) also allows an increase in the allowable concrcte stress of l0o/o to be taken where the reinforcement is distributed in multiole
layers over the node height.

(c) Two members t node in tension formed by bent br, others ill comprcssion (CTT node)

osa,^r*: kju'J"a

2-t-1i(6.62)

where k1 is a nationally determined parameter whose recomrnended value is 0.75. This

type of node is illustrated in Fig. 6.5-4(c). lf the compression shut does nt bisect the
bend equally, some force is also transmitted to the reinforcement through concrete
bond. tn addition to the above check, the bearing stress on the concrete inside the
bend should also be checked in accordance with 2-1-l iclause 8.3.
It is recommended here tht.rcc is taken as 0.85 in (a) to (c) above for compatibility
with thc strut limits above and therefbre /ia -0.85/ir/f"; a National Annex may,
however, direct otherwise. Thc increasing reduction to allowable stress at nodes with

increasing tension reinforcement in (a) to (c) is again due to the detrimental effecl
Check slresses on a venical plane also
il olher hizontal slruts psent

sl]

Anchorage length
rra t

i-----

+, " \,,

ilf=

(cl
Fig. 6.5-4. Different types of nodes

I98

o[

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

transverse tensile strain on limiting compressive stress. If prestressing steel was used to
fornr ties, such that decompression did not occur, no such reduction would bc required.

In accordance wrth 2-1-llclause 6.5.4(5), the ahovc design compressive stresses can be
increased by 107o wherc any of the following apply:

.
.
.

2-[-l/clouse
6.s.4(5)

triaxial compression is assured;

all angles between struts and ties are >55.;
the stresses applicd at supports or at point loads re uniform, and the node is confined by
stirrups, although no criteria arc given for theil design. The rules Ibr confined concrete in
2-1-liclause 3.1.9 could be used rvith sulficient reinforcement providcd ro get a l0o/o
increase in concrte resistance, Care woBld be required in detailing the conflning
reinlbrcement so that it was cllcctive;
thc rcinforcement is arranged in multiple laycrs;
the node is reliably confined by means of bering rrangement or friction. although no
criteria are given fr the degrcc of restraint required.

.
.
If

the node resistances are enhanccd as above, the struts themselves will usually govern so
there will ofrcn b little benett in invoking these recommcndarions.
Additionally, ?-1-l lclause 6,5.4(6) allows triaxially compressed nodes to be checked using
a limiting stress based on the confined strcngLh, /1p when checking each dircction, subject
".
to aq4.m., < kqr' .1"a, where ka is a nationally determined
parameter whose recommended
value is 3.0. This is equivlent to using the rules 1br partially loaded areas, where the triaxial
comprcssed state arises liom ring tension in the surrounding concretc, as discussed in section
6.7. It would therefore sccm reasonable to use the rules for prtially loaded areas to determine n.raximum allowble pressures at supports where there is no applied transvcrse
tension (Fig. 6.5-4(a)) and where the compression spreads in both trnsverse directions,
provided that the bulging compression struts are reinforced according to 2- 1-liExpression
(6.58) or 2- 1-l /Explession (6.59).

2-l-l/clause
6.5.4(6)

rwi

ltow

11;tl'latr11

::StrutA=?1

::

,ff,ri 9:1S
:,13..?
':. :Tiq
:TisP=:1.21
,,

t99

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

}!ssiv. lisiit.' due {:

ia,
LT,

200

CHAPTER

6, ULTIMATE LIMIT

STATES

6.6. Anchorage and laps

The dcsign of laps and anchorage length are discussed in dctail in Chapter 9 of this guide.

6.7. Partially loaded areas

Thc rules in this section apply typicll! to bearing zoncs on both superstmctures nd substructures, but thcir derivation is based on a single bearing on a column where the axial
stress simply spreads out over the column area. The rules for nodes jn scction 6.5.4 are
also relevant to bearing areas, The compression resistance is gorerned by the lesser of the
local crushing strength of thc concrete and the stl'ength of reinlbrcement resisting the transverse tensile (bursting) forces generated by transvcrse load dispersal- 2-1-I lclause 6.7(1)P
requires both mcchanisn.rs to be considered. The regions where these two failure mechanisms
can occur ate shown in

Fig.6.7-l lora typical solid column. Subsequent discussions relate

2-l-l/clouse
6.7(t)P

Lo

this case.

Crushing and spalling

For a uuifbrtlly distributed load -Fp6u acting on an area 1"1 as shown in Fig. 6.7-2, the
resistance is detcrmined lron 2-l-llclause 6.7(2):
F*o"

- A.o.l^JA"r/A, !

2-l-l/clouse
6.7

3,07.1a.6

(2)

z-t-rirc.63)

where:

,{co is thc loadetl area

201

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Cfushing/spalling

-,

L.l

t/
-.*l\\

Stress

Fig.6.7-1.

traiectories

Transverse

j05b

Tl

t|

I \ Burslrnq
I-

stresses

0.3b

Slruland-iie diagram

Stress {leld under concentrated load

,4"1 is the design distribution area which must be centred on the arca .4c0 and be similar in
shape- This arca must remain wiLhin the physical concrete section, which may limit
the area for a load near n edge as shown in Fig. 6,7-2,

Conpliance with the above limiting force prevents spalling near the loaded face caused by
transverse expansion ofLhe compressed qoncrctc core. The form of2-1-liExpression (6.63) is
derived from considertins of the confinement provided to the cor by the surrounding
concrete, whose perimeter is defined by 2 and d2 in Fig. 6.7-2. The surrounding area
resists transvcrsc expansion of the core by acting in 'ring' tension at its tensile resistance
just prior to spalling. This ring tension cuses a triaxial stress state and the cnhanced
comprcssive strength for confined concrete in 2-l-llclausc 3.1.9 becomes applicable. There
is no benefit from this effect if the loaded area has a smaller dimension than the loaded
elenent in one direction only, as the ring tension cannoi then develop. It also follows that
pressures higher than /"6 /1.1/,4. coul<J bc pcrmitted il
conflning reinforcement
"ulcient
or ring plestressing were placed near the lded face.
In addition to restraint liom ring tension or confining reinforccment, sme further
restraint occurs from shear stress resisting splitting on the surface A1. Model Code 90
gives an approximte derivatin of 2- 1- I/Expression (6.63) based on the principles above
and making qualitative allowance for this shear stress.
The distribution of load should be such that djacent areas, ,4"L, do not overlap. The
distribution should also not exceed lH;2V. This leads ro the requirement tht the vailble
height, , over which the distribution occurs must be greater than both (2 b1) and
(dt /1). The upper linits given on 2 and d2 onl1, apply for this crushing check and are
there to produce the limiting strcngth of FRdu < 3.0:f cdAco.

Load near an edge (plan)

h > \b.'

202

- bl

ancl >ldz

dt)

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

The valuc o[ Fq4, should be reduced in accordance wjtb 2-I -I lclaase 6.7 ( 3 ) if the load is not
l.n or ifhigh shear forces exist. Ifthe load is not uniform, the
bearing pressure check could be based on Lhe peak pressure. No guidance is given on lhe effects
ofshear, but shear force could reasonably be ignored ifit is less than 10% ofthe vertical force,
which is cnsistent with 2-l-11clause 10.9.4.3 which deals with precast elements, For'higher

uniformly distributed on the area

2-l-l/clouse
6 7(3)

shcar, the vetor resultnt, i1r, of the shear force, F1, and the vertical forcc, F", could be
used in the bearing check. as recommended in Mo,ltl CoJt 90. according to:

,'TH

(D6.7-

l)

This shcar foroe would have to be tied into the surrounding strucLure by tie reinforcement t
the loaded face.
It may be tempting to assumc no distribution ofload and set lco equal to 1"1, whereupon
thc bearing resistance becomes l"p4u : A"rt-f"a. Many UK designers have in the past
effectively taken this as the lin.fting pressure where bursting reinforcement has not been
provided. However, a check ofreinforccment is strictly still required for bursLing as discusscd
below sincc the transverse splad of lod in un-reinforced concrete leads to crcking when
the concrete's tensile strength is reached, and this can give ris to premature failure at
stresses less than ./;,1. No guidnce is given in EC2 on bearing prcssure in the absense of
ny suitably placcd reinforcement, The bearing pressure cor.rld safely be limited to
dR,r.max:0 6(l - /;k/250)I1/'i; as discussed in section 6,5 of this guide, or the tesilc
resistance oi lhe concrete could be considered to increase resistance s discussed below.
For piers with geometry such that the load has to spread in one direction only, it is likely
thal the ninimum perimeter reinforcement would give a reasonable bursting resistance
and hence a limiting bearing pressure in excess of0.6(1 - f"yl250)J"y11..
The rules for nodes, as discussed in scction 6.5.4 of this guide, may also apply in cascs other
than this simple column case and is illustrted in both Worked examples 6.5-l and 6.7-1.

Bursting
Thc tcnsile forces generated by the trnsverse spread ol load can be resisted as shown in the
strut-nd-tie model in Fig. 6.7-1. The depth over which stlesses become unifbrm can be taken
equal to the dimension , which in this case is the width of the sction, or twice the distance
from centrc of load to a free edge in the direction considered for eccenic loads.
The strut-nd-tie model shown produces a tension force as fbllows:

t h,n

2-l-1(6.58)

where 'F is the applied vertical forcc. This tension needs to be calculated for bolh transvcrsc
directions and reinfbrcement detailed accordingly. Where the load spreds out from an
applied load but tapers back into another node without sp.reading to th lull cross-section
in between, the tension in 2- 1- 1,/Expression (6.58) should be replaced by thc slightly modied
expression for a 'full discontinuity' as given in 2- I - l/Expression (6.59) in section 6.5 of this
guide, Worked example 6.7'1 illustrates the use of this expression.
EC2 gives no guidance where there is no (or insuflicienL) reinforcement t resist this tie
force- Motlel Corlc 906 pcrmits the force to be resisted by the concrete tensile resistance.
For the case shown in Fig. 6.7- l, this would lead to a concrete tensile resistance of:

T^* :0.6b ' L' ha

(D6.7-2)

and a Iimiting bcuring reaction of:

2.4b2.

L. J.d

b-a

(D6.7-3)

where L is the length of the loaded rea perpendicular to the side a, 0.6 is the height of the
tnsile zone in Fig. 6.7- I and f",6 is the design tensile strength oi the concrete. The limifing

203

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

______________ o.ssf"kr"

Appfoximately
0.6(1

U2s)f.kt^t.

bla

Fig. 6.7-3. Allowable bearing stress for 40l'4Pa unreinforced concrete allowing for nsile strenSth
bearing prcssurc thcn becomes:

(D6.7-4)
Equatin (D6.7-4) needs to be applied in both perpendicular directions and thc lowest resistanc taken. Figure 6.7-3 shorvs equation (D6.7-4) plotted for a concrete with 40 MPa cylinder
strength which has ,{.,0 - L42 MPa (inctuding act : 0.85, s this is a case of sustaincd comprrssion). The minimum strength, based on transvene cracking, occurs at a//r - 2.0 where
the predictetl allowable stress is very close to oa6.,,,,* :0.6(l - ik/250)/"1/1 lbr a strut
with transverse tension in accordance with 2-1-l iclause 6.5.2, The real failure load observed
in tests on tlis conliguration is usually greater than the derived value based on crcking.
Equation (D6.7-4) can also be applied to individual bulging compression struts belween
nodes, s discussed in section 6.5.2 of this guide, where limits on the allorvable compression
are suggested. lt would not be appropriate to use this method of allowing for the tensile strength
ofthe concrete where the concrcLc is cxpected to be cracked from other effects, such as flexure.
ln this case, the bearing stless should be limited to aq,1.,n"" = 0.6(1 - Ik/250):f"r/l- as
discussed above, for cascs whcrc therc is no appropriate reinforcement,
Where the load is eccenffic to the supporting afea. lurther strut-and-tic idealization would
hc ncccssary to dislribute the stresses Lo their values remote from the loaded end, using the
methods discussed in section 6.5 of this guide. Similarly, alternative strut-and-tie solutions
will have to be developed where the section remote from the applied load is nt the sme
as at the loaded end. This might, for cxample, occur in hollow piers made solid at thc rop
only as in Fig. 6.7-4. In this case, the lod has to spread out to the pier walls lor equilibrium
so reinforccmcnl must be provided at the tic location shown. The bearing resistance may

Fig. 6.7-4. Sru!-and-lie system for hollow pier with solid top

204

CHAPTER

6. ULTIMATE LII4IT

then effectively be govenrcd by tbc compression limit for individual bulging compression
struls. as discussed in section 6-5. if they are nt themselves reiuforccd transversely, 01' bJ
the nodes thenselves. Mole complex geometries, such as those in Worked examples 6-5.1
and 6.7-1. will generally rcquirc a chcck ol the struts and nodes.
2-2lclwse 6.7(105,) mkes reference to EN 1992 Annex J lbr further guidance on bddge
bearing areas. 2-2iclause J-104 coniirms that 2-l-1r'clauses 6.5 and 6.7 are lelevant lo the
design o[ bcaring arcas and adds some requirements on edge distances and high strength
concrete. These are discussed in Annex J of this euide.

.irtgs, .The load

STATES

2-2/clouse

6.7(r0s)

in each beari

strength of
The overall strul-nd-tie idealizarjon is shown in Fig. 6.7-5.

srrrgthr f 30 !4Ba.anr1.ie

Bearing pressure at node I

Node I is a CCT node accortiing to 2-l-l clausc 6.5.4(4Xb) with timiting stre
rnano* - k'J"a- 085r rl- 10/250) r 0.85 x J0/1.5 -l?.72M,Pa. This couLr
i*i"ii"A tv i",^ to l+ ln'lpa in accordance with 2-l-l'clause 6.5.4(51 as t}re angle
between srrut-and-tie is greater than 55". Thc partially loaded area rulei; cannot be directly
h*. due ro the presence of Tie I passing through the node, generating tensilc

:11:d
strss.

Thc applic.rl srrcss ar lhc bearing surface .11.5.{ 106/i1200''800) - Il.98MPa

< I2.?2 Mi'a so OK. The sftess at rh; node edge Ineeling sLrul A must also be checkcd.

The applied stress

-.

. , '|

'4

.;

.,lnu

-^" i,.i... '

: i

. ll:l::....,'..'

so OK

205

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

e x dllectron:

-l

{1.8

0.8r
8

t.5

t.60 MN

<

206

.1

-u

CHAPTER

6. ULTIIYATE LIMIT

STATES

iri.I]i{ lol

-d

PLAN

e 1 -

11 no.

tl

.8 m

25t)

72G.,Boommlffi

trffiL
I *'= i

--l

'L

\,'';-.",

I 1..*

r ][*

rr E or^.^-,,^- and
-^-]-resulng
- .,.,^^ reinforcement
-^i^r^-----^r
(excluding 9-?/^nnav
2-2lAnnexJJl
2-2lAnnex
dispelsal ,--.u,*hd
ditpergal
Flg. l6.7-5.
:inforcement {-^from *-u
load ,,.^-'^.,
Pier -*..
cross-sction
requirements) for Worked example 6.7-l

207

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

6.8. Fatigue
This section covers the rules given in sectin 6.8 of EC2-2. Guidance on damage equivalent
stress calculation is given in the comnentary on 2-2,/Annex NN.

2-2/clause
6.8. | (t 02)

6.8.l. Verification conditions

Throughout the lifc of a bridge, constant rod or rail trallic loading will produce
largc nunbers of repetitive loading cycles in bridge elements. Both steel (reinforcing and
presffessing) and concrete components which are sub.jccted lo large numbers of repetitive
loading cycles can become susceptible to fatigue damage. As a consequence, 2-2lclaase
6.8.1(102) requires that fatigue asscssment is undertaken lbr structures and structural
components which are sub.iected to regulf load cycles- Somc cxccptions, where
fatigue verilication is generally unnecessary, are provided in the note to tht cluse s
follorvs:

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Footbridges, cxcept those components very sensitive to wind action. The ll.rost con.rmon
cause of wind-induced laLigue is vortex shedding. EN 1991-1-4 covers wind-indused
fatigue.

Buried arch and frane structures with minimum earth cover of l.0m (road bridges) or
l.5m (railway bridges). This assumes a certain amount of arching of the soil, which
suggests that span should lso be relevant.
Foundtions.
Piers iurd columns not rigidly connected to bridge superstructures. 'Rigid' in this context
is intendcd to refer to moment connection as pinned connections will not usually lead to
cycles of signicant livc. load stress range.
Retaining walls of embankments for roads ard railways.
Abutments which are not rigidly connected to bridge superstructures (with the exception

of the slabs of hollow abutments).

Prestressing and reinforcing steel in regions where, under the frequent combination of
actions nd P (presumably P.;"1), only compressive stresses occur at the extrcme
concrete tbres. This is because the sirain and hence stress range in the steel is typically
smalL while the collcrete remins in compression.

The National Annex may give other rules.

6.8.2. Internal forces and stresses for fatigue verification

2-l-l/clquse
6.8.2(r)P
I- l /douse
6.8.2(2)P
2-

2-l-l/clouse
6.8.2(3)

2-1-l lclause 6,8,2(1)P requifes stresses to be calculated assuming cracked concrete sections,
neglecting the tensile strength of the concfete. Shear lag should be taken into account wherc
relevant (2-l-1,/clause 5.3.2.1 relers). 2-1-llclause 6.8.2(2)P additionally requires the eflect
of different bond bchaviour of prestressing nd reinforcing steel to be taken into account
in the calculation of reinforcemenl stress. This results in an increase in sttess in the reinfofcing steel lrom that calculated using a crcked elastic cross-section analysis by a factor, 4,
given in 2-1- 1i Expression (6.64).
2-IJ lclause 6.8,2(3) requires fatiguc vcrification to be undertaken for the design of shear
reinforcement, which is a new check for UK prctice. Steel forces are calculated from the
truss analogy using a compressive strut angle ol d1",, For fatigue clculation, it is imprtnt
to use a realistic estimat of the stress range- It is thcrefore appropriate that this angle is
taken greater thn that assumed fol the ultimte limit stte design (within the angular
limits of 2-l-llclause 6.2.3(2), since the latter is the angle at the ultimare limit state fter
a certain mount of plastic redistribution has taken place to reduce the stress in the links
and to use them optimally. As a result, dfiL rnay be taken as:
tandio,

: y\alO < t-O

2-l- li(6.6s)

where 0 is the angle of concrete compression struts to thc bcam axis assumed in the ultimate
limit rtate sheal'design. For shear reinforcement inclined at an angle.r to the horizontal, the

208

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

'lvlean' stress level

lrom non-cyclic loads

Compression

Fig. 6.8-

Stress ranges

for reinforcement fatigue verification

caused by sme cyclic action at differenl

mean stress levels

steel lbrce can be determined by rearranging 2-

/,.;(cot
where

I-

l7'Expression (6.13). thus:

AI/.s
i cot o) sin n

(D6.8-1)

d6,,

is the rhear force range

6.8.3. Combination of actions

Thc calculalion of thc strcss rangcs for latiguc vcrilication to ECz requires the appJied load
to be divided into non-cyclic and fatigue-inducing cyclic action effects. The basic combination of the non-cyclic load is defined by Expressions (6.66) and (6.67) of EN 1992- l-l and is
equivalent to the deflnition ofthe lrequent combination for the serviceability limit state. The
cyclic action is then combined with the unfavourable non-cyclic action to determine the
strcss ranges 2-l-li Expressions (6.68) and (6.69) rcfer.
The non-cyclic ction gives a men stress level upon which the cyclic part of the ction
effect is superimposed, as illustrated in Fig. 6.8- I for reinforcement. Men stress is important
as it determines whether the sign of the stress in an element reverses in the course of a cycle
of loading. In Fig. 6.8-1, the reinforcement stress range fbr a given cyclic action is less fbr
the smaller tensile mean stress as part of the cyclic loading then causes compression in lhc
concrete, which reduces the stress in the reinforcement for that part of the cycle.

6.8.4. Verification procedure for reinforcing and prestressing steel

The number of cycles to fatigue failure of a steel compnent is a function ol the stress
that each loading cycle induces in the component aud the type of component. Since the
relationship of stress range (Ao) to the number of cycles to lailure (N) is exponential, thc
relationship is normally plotted graphically in the form of a logAo logN curve. These
types of curve are comraonly rerred to as S N curves.

2-I-l lclause 6.8.4(I

a1lows the damage produced by cycles

of a single stress range of

N curves for reinforcing

amplitude o to be determined by using the corresponding S

2-l-l/clouse
6.e.4(t)

and prestressing steel. The lbrm of these curves is illustrated in Fig. 6.8-2 for reinlbrcement;
the diagram for prestressing steel is simiLar, using 0.1 % prof stress in place of yicld stress,

rog lyk

N,

tog N

Fig, 6.8-2. Characteristic fatigue strength curve (S-N curve) for reinforcing steel

209

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

Recotnmended values dcfining the appropriate S N curve geometry for the steel component

under consideration are given in 2-1-l/Tables 6.3N and 6.4N for reinforcenent and prestressing stecl rcspectively. The recommended prameters therein may be modified in the

National Annex.
2-l-liclause 6.8.4(l) and also 2-1-l7clause 2.4.2.3()\ require a partial factor. 1p 6",, to bc
applied to ll fatigue loads when calculating th stress range. The vlue for 1F rr is deflned
in thc National Annex and is recommendcd by tsC2 to be Laken as 1.0. The resisting stress
range at N" cyclcs, 4o1"1. given in 2-l-liTables 6.3N and 6.4N- also has to be divided by
Lhe natelial partial safety factor 16.,. The recommended value for 1s rrr from 2-l-lT,clause
2-l-1,/clouse
6.8.4(2)

2.4.1.411; is 1.15.
In real fatigue assessnent situations fbr concrete bridge design, there will be more than one
sfrcss range actlng on the steel elemcnt throughout its de sign life. 2-I-l lclaase 6.8.4(2 ) allows
multiple amplitudes to be treted by using a linear cumulative damagc calculation, known as

the Palmeren-Miner sunrmation:

,*:Iffi.'o

2-r-t l(6.70)

where:

r(o;)

is the applied nunber of oycles lbr a stress range of Ao,

N(Ao1) is the resisting number of cycles for a strcss rangc of Ao;, i.e. the number of

loading cycles to ltigue failure

For most bridges, thc above is a complex calculation becuse the stress in ech component
usually varies due to the random passage of vehicles from a spectrurn. Details on a road or
ril bridge could be assessed using the bove procedure if the loading regime is known at
design. This includes the weight and number of every type of vehicle tht will use each
lane or track of the bridge throughoul its design life. and the correlation between loading
in each lane or track. ln the majority of cses this would require lengthy calculations.
As an alternative to the use of2-1-liExpression (6.70).2-l-liclause 6,8.5 allows the use of
simplified faLigue Load Models 3 and 71. from EN 1991-2. lor road and rail bridges rcspcctively, in order to reduce Lhe complexity of the latigue assessment calcultin- It is ssumed
that the fictitious vehicle/train aloDe causes the fatigue damage. The calculatd stress from
the vehicle is then adiusted by fctors to give a single stress range which. for N* cycles,
causes the sme dmage as the actual tlalic dudng the bridge's lifetime. This is called the
'damag equivalent stress' and is discussed in scction 6-8.5.
2-l-l/clouse
6.8.4(3)

2-l-l/clouse
6.8.4(s)

2-Uclouse
6.8.4(r 07)

2-I-llclause 6.8.4(-l) requires that. where prestressing or reinforcing steel is exposed to

latigue loads, the calculted stresses shall not cxceed the design yield strength of the steel
as EC2 does not cover cyclic plasticity.
2-1-l lclause 6.8.4(5) relates to assessment of existing structures, which is strictly outside
the scope of EC2, so its inclusion is curious. [ts rclercnce to corrosion is not explicit about
either the degree of corrosion or its nature (e.g. general or pitting), so a single vlue of
stress cxponent to cover ll situations is dubious. Nevertheless, it was not intended that
any such allowanc for corrosion be made in new design.
2-2lclause 6.8.4(107,) permits no latigue check to be conducted lbr external and unbonded
tendons lying rvithin the depth f the concrete scction. This is because the strain, and hence
stress, vritin undcr scrvice loads is srnall in such tendons. Consideration should be given
to fatigue in external tendons which arc outside the depth of the structure (such as in xtradosed bridges) as the fluctuation in stress might be more signilicant here. This situation is
coverecl by EN l99l-l-11-

2-

6.8.5. Verification using damage equivalent stress range

2-l-l/clouse

In the damage equivalent strcss range nethod, described by 2-l-llclause 6.8.5(1) d 2-I-11
clause 6.8.5(2). the real operational loading is represcnted by N" cycles of an equivalent
single amplitude stress range, Ao,,..,(N-), which cuses the same damage as the actual

l- l /douse
6.8.5(t )
6.8.5(2)

2r0

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

trmc during the bridge's liferime. This stress range may be calculated for reinfbrcing or
prestressing steel using 2-2iAnnex NN, as illustrated in Worked example 6.8-1.2-1-l/
clause 6.8.5(3) contains a verification formula for reinforcing steel, prcsLressing steel and
snlicins devices:
1p,6",

Ao.

"0,

N- )

whcrc:

2-1-t l(6

2-l-l/clouse
6.8.s(3)

7r)

-.*P

Ao""o,(N-)

is the appropriate damage equivalent stress range (converted ro

Aoq.1(N")

from 2-2iAnnex NN
is the resisting stress range limil at ,\'' cycles from the approprialc S N
curves given in 2-1-1/Tables 6.3N or 6.4N

N- cycles)

2-1-llExpression (6.?1) does not coyer concrete fatigue vetification. 2-2,/Annex NN3,2
provides a damage equivalent verillcation for concrete in railway bridges, but there is no
similar verilication for highway bridges. For highway bridges, concrete can be verified
using the methods in 2-2iclause 6.8.7, as illustrated il] Wolked example 6.8-2.

2tl

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

6.8.6. Other verification methods

2- I- I/clouse

6.e.6(t)

2t2

2-1-liclause 6.8.6(l) and (2) give alternative rules for fatiguc vcrilications ofrcinforcing and
prestressing steel componcnts. These methods are intended as an lterntive to checking
fatigue rcsjstance using 2-1-11'clauses 6.8.4 or 6.8.5.
2-1-I lclause 6.8.6( /) allows the lhtigue pelformance of reinforcement or prestressing steel
to be deemed satisfactory ilthe stress range under the frequent cyclic load combined witll the

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

basic combination is less thn l for unwelded reinforcement or r for rvelded reinforcenlent.
The values ofkl and A: my be given in the Ntional Annex and ECl2 recommends Laking
valucs of 70 MPa and 35 MPa respectively. The meaning of 'fi'equent cyclic loading' is not

it

implies a calculation based on the fatjgue load models in EN l99l-2.

Assumrg this to be the case, it will usually be preferable to perfonn a damage equivalcnt
stress calculation using 2-2iAnnex NN as this also uses the latigue load models of
EN lSSl-2 rnd uill lerLd lo a more economic anrwcr.
2-1-l lclause 6.8.6(2) allows the stress range altelnatively to be calculated directly hom the
frequent load combination to avoid thc need Lo calculate slrcss ranges from fatigue load
rlodels or directly from traffic dta. However, the recommended allorvable stress ranges
abovc would mean that elellents would rarely pass such a check.
Where welded joints or splicing dcviccs arc uscd in prcstressed concrete construction,
2-1-llclaase 6.8.6(37 requires tht no tension exists in the cncrete section within 200mm
of thc pres|Iessing tendons or reinforcing steel under the Irequent load combination when
a reduction factor of k3 is applicd to thc meal valuc ol thc prestressing folce. The value
of /<1 is de{ined in the National Annex. EC2 recommends taking a value of 0.9. This
valuc is incrcascd to 1.0 in the UK's National Annex (in the same manner as rr.,o and r1,,i
in 2-1-llcluse 5.10.9) to limit the number of load cascs to be cnsidered for SLS and
fatigue design. The critedon ensufes that the stress range for such details is kcpt small for
the mjority of cycles since the concrclc will gcncrally rcmain in compression.
explained but

6.8.7. Yerification of concrete under compression or shear

Thc gcncral fatigue verification procedure for conclete gtrvet ft 2-2lchuse 6.8.7(10l)
requires a cumultive damage summation, like that jn 2-l-li'cluse 6.8.4, to be carried out
using trafic data. For rail bridges, this lengthy calculation can be avojdcd b)' using the
sirnplified damage equivalcnL strcss vcrifiqation ol 2-2iAucx NN.3-2. Neither the Annex
nor 2-2lclause 6,8.7(l0l) itself, however, gives appropriate dt for road bddges.
As a simplcr alternaLive, 2-1-llclause 6.8.7(2) gives a conservaLivc verification based on

/.d l?it

/.d

2-2/clouse

6.8.7(r0 t)

2-l-l/clouse

2-1-r i(.6.1',t)
50

MP or 0-8 for

ik > 50MPa, where:

tion (compression measured as positive)

is the minimum compressive stress LLnder the ftequent lad combination at Lhe
same fibre where oc.mar occurs. o. -1n should be taken as 0 ifnegalive (in tension)
is thc concrele design fatigue compressive strength defincd in the code s:

./"a.r",

6.8.6(3)

is the maximum compressive stress at a libre under the frequent load combina-

dc.min

.fa,a,

2-l-l/clouse

ft

but limited to 0.9 for /;k <

dc.max

6.8.6(2)

6.8.7(2)

the non-cyclic loading used for the static design:

9i,r{ < q.5 + 0.45 "-.-i"

2-l-l/clouse

A*(t r')./,, (

2-2i6.76)

-&)

where:

k]

is a coeilicient delined in the National Annex and is recommendcd by EC2 to be

taken as 0.85

,3""(fu) is the coeflicient for cncrete strength at first cyclic loading from 2-l-l/clause
3.1.2(6)

l0

is the ge of the concrete in days upon flrst cyclic loading, i.e. the age

t which live

load is first applied

-4a

is the dcsign comprcssive strength ofconcrete. A value for o". of 1.0 is intended
to be used here in conjunction with 1 : 0.85, asrperformsa similar luncLion of

accounling for sustained loading

For concrcte road bridgcs, this allerlative concrele faLiguc verification is unlikely to
govern design, other thn possibly for very short spans where the majority of thc concrete

213

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-l-l/clouse
6.8.7(3)

TO EN I992-2

stress is produced by live load. It will therefbre generally be appropdate Lo usc this simplified
check. No gr.ridance is given on thc calculaLion ol the concrete stresses: ignoring concrete in
tcnsion will be a conservative assumption.
2-I-llclquse 6.8.7(3J permits thc abovc simplified verification ofconcrete to be applied to
the compression stl'uts of members subjected to shear and requiring shear reinforcenent.
Since the comprcssion struts have transverse tension passing through lhcm (see discnssions
in section 6.5 of this guide), /161o, has to be reduced by the factr r,, defined in 2-l-liclause
6.2.2(6), and rhe verification becomes:

o.;'",,*

u|at,t:tt

0,5

0.45

o"_.."'n

(D6.8-2)

u.lctt.tat

The stresses o".-n* and o.,min cn be clculated for reinforced concrete beams, with shear

reinforcement inclincd aL an angle

obtained by re-arranging

2- l -

|i

a to the horizontal, from the lollowing

expression

Expression (6.14):

/ l+eolld \
*,: \cot 4 + cot o/
/Fd

(D6.8-3)

I/66 is thc rclevant shear force under the liequent load combination ancl the other symbols

2-l-l/douse
6.e.7H

are defined in 2-1-1,/clause 6.2-3. Thc concrcte stress increases with reducing strut ngle d so.
in this case. it is conservative to base 0 on its ULS value in the above calculation rather than
the larger angle rll", from 2- l - l /Expression (6.65)For members subjected to shear but not requiring shear reinforcement. 2-1-1/ clause 6,8.7(4)
provides the iollowing expressions for assuming satisfactory ftigue resistance in shear:

ro, -fn
''" , 0, /' '' ' '*l rLd,rno
l/Ro,,

but limited to 0.9 for

or-

fo,

t/-.
'Ed'"'
'fd,m'\

.1"1

o.s

o.+s

{f0"

"

2-r-11(6.'78)

l/Rd."

< 50 MPa or 0.8 for /"1 >

r'
t/-. I

50

MPa:

'#,*

- r-) ,,!-"'ro:
lrRd.

2-1,11(6.7e)

'Rd.

where:

/s..*
/s6.n;,

y'ra."

of thc maximum applied shear force under the frequent load

combination
is thc design value ol the minimum applied shear force under thc frequent load
combination in the cross-section, where tr/Ed,,','x ccurs
is the design value

is the design shear resistance lrom 2-2,/Expression (6.2.a)

:s!tess).1-.,

!!G:'!ru'l) : 4,t

2t4

ln
.'.

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

Since the maximum and minimum fihrc stresses under the frcquenr load combinarion
have becn calcLilated. 2- l-llExpression (6.77) must be satisfred:

,.-*.
'4a

i'' {o.s-o+s;"
Io.o rol.7* < 5o MPa
.i.i . i...:

: ,:,.

wherC;
from 2-2lFxnrcssion (6.76t:

1.,r.,",

rl*(ro)/.a (l

...-.tt

f,kl250) with

I ,,:.-:

0.85 (recorn-

mended r alue.1.
It is conservatively assumed here rhat construcon tralc uscs the hrid from an age of
r*. r, first cyclic loadiug is r0 7 dys. Cenerally, Joad would not be applied

Irdl;tn"

From 2-1-llclause 3.1.2(6):

s

i*{r)

- cxp(r{i /till

- 0.25 for rapid hardening, normal slrcngth cemcnt and from 2-l-llclause 3.1.ff I ):
1^.' ctuf,y/t, - 1.0 x 35/1.5 = 23.11 MP.t

ltaking o."

1.0

for

fa

rigue as discussed in the main texlJ-

Thcreforc

L.(7) =

exp(0.25

" tt t/QW)t - o.t'tts

and
/"6.1;1

0.85 x 0.7788

23.31

(l

35/250)

- ll,lMPa

The final checks are therefore as follows:

(l)

Sagging section:
o,

(2)

^"*/J,,t.t,,

4.0/11.3=o..ro

This is < 0.9 and < 0.5 + 0.45.'cnin/,fr - 0.5 +0.45 r I.0/13.3 = 0.51 as
required. Thcrcfore. the saggjng sectiol rt mid-span has adequate fatigue re.;istancc.
Hogging secdon:

o,..n / f,a rut: a 5/I 3 3 - tr'34

Tfus

is

J 0.9 and S 0.5 - 0.45o.6"/ /"1rar - 0.5 r 0.15 .

O.7

/13.3 0.52 as

required. Therefore. the hogging section at an intermediate suppofl bas adeguate

fatigue rcsistance.

6.9. Membrane elements

A

problem encountcrcd when using lineiu elastic finite element techniques to analyse
concrete bridges is that the results produccd are usually in the form of stresses, while the
code resista[ce rules are presented in terms of stress resultants, such as shear folce and
bending moment. 'fhis applies to the rules for bending and shear gir,'en in sections 6.1 and
6.2 respectively of EC2. The rules for mcmbranc eler'ncnts presented in 2-2lclause
6.109(10l) provide a way of designing directly from the stresses produced by a trvodiurensional linear elastio finite element nrodel. The sign convention for stresses in 2-2i'
clause 6-109 is shorvn in Fig. 6.9-1. The rr.rles re lso intended fol use with elements
under out-of-plane bending and torsion iD coniunction with the sanrlwich model of Annex
LL. Annex MM gives specic recommendations lor thc dcsign of box girder webs in shear
and transverse bcncliug.
It should be noted tht the use of these mc'rnbrane rules rvherc other member resistnce
formulae coukl be used (such as the sher model in section 6.2) will generally lead to a

2-2/douse
6.

t0e(t 0t)

2t5

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

ta",

| '*"

l-

rf;
t

Fig, 6.9-1, Sign convention used in membrane rules

2-2,/clouse

6.t09(r02)

lower calculated resistance. This is because the membrane rules do not consider plastic
redistribution within the cross-section or allow for the beneficial results of physical testing
used specifically to derive the other member resistance rulcs.
To design the reinforcement and check the concrete compressive stresses,2-Z/c/czre
6.109( 102 ) requies a lower-bound solution, based on the lower-bound thcorem ofplasticity,
to be used.2-2,/Annex F gives equations for designing the reinforcement. Unfbfiunately,
the sign convention for direct stress in Annex F differs from that in 2-2,/clause 6.109 and
Fig. 6.9-l (as compression is taken as posilive in Annex F but negative in 2-2/clause
6,109). The general equations (F.8) to (F.10) of Annex F re therefole reproduced below
wilh a n.rodification to make them comDatible with Fie. 6.9-l:

:
pyo"y :
o.,1 :
p,crs"

<

p",/ya,^

(D6.9-l)

ltir,yl tan0 a op1, !

l46,rl(tang+ cotd)

pyfya-y

(D6.9-2)

116r"yl

cot

I+

"s,r,

rcdrna,(

(D6.e-3)

p.o, and'/ya are the reinforcenent ratio, reinforcement slress and reinforcement

2-2/clouse

6.t09(t03)

2t6

design

yield stress in each direction respectively. l is the angle of the assumed plastic compression
field to thc x-axis. o",1..u, is the maxirlum compressive stress in thc concrete stress field.
Significant limitations of Annex F and the above expressions are that the reinibrcement
must be aligned with the X and Y directions in the analysis model (although it is possible
to rotte the output sLrcss field to align with lhe rcinforcement using Mohr's circle) and
the reinlbrcement must not be skew. In the ltter case, eilher the expressions need to be
modificd or analogous lower-bound methods used. A modified sel of equations for skew
reinforcement is presented beneath Worked example 6-9-l . Where it is required to design
reinfbrcement lbr moment fields in slabs with or without skew reinfbrcement and without
a net in plne axial force or shcar forcc, mcthods srLch as those in references 19, 20 and 2l
qould be used. plovided a check on the concrete compression lield discussed below can be
included as neccssary.
2-2lAnnex F gives versions ofthc above, by way ofits expressions (F.2) to (F.7), which are
optimized to mirimize the reinforcement provision (taking tan0: I if thc greatest compressive stress is less in magnitude than the shear stress or tan9: l"oa*r/osa,] othenvise).
Urfortunately, these optimized equtiotrs are often not valid according to the rulcs in 2-2/
cluse 6.109, as the optimized angle may lie outsjdc the allowable limits below.
Since concrete hs limited ductility, it is not possible to indiscriminately apply the lowerbound theorerr of plasticity and therefore limits are set rn 2-2lclause 6,109(103) on the
deviation of the assumed plastic compression fiekl direction at angle . lrom the angle "1
ol the un-cracked elastic principal compressive stess direction. (This is similar to thc
qr.ralitative requiremcnts for strut-an<1-tie idealizalion discusscd in section 6.5 of this
guide.) Both angles are measured frm the x-axis. If both principal stresses are tensile, thc

CHAPTER 6. ULTIT4ATE LIIYIT STATES

least tensile of these principal sLrcsses is chosen to define 9"1.

d"1 can be calculated fi'om

texlbook forrrulae or from Mohr's circlc, as illustrated in Worked exan.rple 6.9-1. At the
ultimte limit state, tl "ll is limited to 15' by 2-2,rclause 6.109(103). In addition, the allowable concrete stress reduces with dcparture ofthe plastic compression lield direction from the

elastic principal conpressive stress direction- This is again, in principle. consistcnt with much
ofthe various sources ofadvice available on strut-nd-tie modelling. although the magnitude
of the reduction in strength in EC2-2 is vcry severe.
The limitations on angle of compression fields does, howcvcr, sometimes lead to conflict
with other fesistnce models in EC2-2, such as the sher truss model in section 6,2, whele
the allowable limit of cot0: 2.5 corresponds to f) - 0"11: 23.2' at the neutral axis. where
only shear sLress is present, In this case, shear tests show no varialjon in the concrete crushing
strength with ngle. The limitations on angle and the use of d : 0"r lead to other anomalies,
as illustrated in Worked example 6.9- I - ln general, established lesistance models sl.rould be
used in prefercnce to the nembrane rules rvhere both options are possible.
The calculated compressive stress according to equation (D6.9-3) should not exceed a limit
which depends on the calculated elastic principal stresses and the assumcd dircction of the
compressive stress ficld. EC2-2 identifies three limiting situations. In all cases, o"" : 1.0 in
the detnition of /; for compatibiliLy with the case of direct sustained compression given
in 2-2,i{rLause 3.1.6 and the shear crushing limit of 2-2iclause 6.2:

(a) For uniaxial or biaxial

compression and shear,

ifthe maximum and minimum principal

stresses from elastic analysis o1 and o2, respectively, are both conpressive, the maximum

allowable compression in the concrete stress eld is:

^^-or,lmd\-u.)/.d-

t +1.80o

2-2i(6.tt0)

lt+)"

wherc .a:o^2/dr. This will pply if both o66, and os;u are compressive and
ogd*ogdi, 2 fa,,y. Nn rcinlorcement is then needed, as idntilied by 2-l-liAnnex
F-1(3). The design compfessive stress in this case is the naxitrum principal compressive
stress, as equation (D6.9-3) will not be applicable.
(b) lf at least one principl stress is in tension and the stresses in the reinforcement determined from equations (D6,9-1) nd (D6.9-2) rvith 0:4er are both less than or equal
to yield, the maximum allowable compression in the conclete stress lield varies with
the reinforcement stress s fllows:
ocam.rx

./.a

|.l

10.85 ;Jrd(0.85
L

")l

2-2irc.tID

where a, is the maximum tensile stress in the reinfrcement and z:0.6(1 J;k1250).
The allowable compressivc stress therefore valies from 0,85/1,1, lvhere there is no
tcnsion across the compression band (which is consistent with thc allouable stress of
0.85Ik/1.5 in the design of rrembers in bending and axial load) to r/",r for members

where there is yield tension in thc reinforcenent crossing the compression band
(which is consistent with the allorvable compressive stress of /.4d in the design of
members in shear).

(c) Ifthe reinforcement

is designed using equations (D6.9-1) and (D6.9-2) with d

maximum allowable compression in the conctete stress field is:

o"6.*

: z./la(l

0.0321d 0"rl)

6"r, the

2-2i(6.rt2)

This reduction is very severe and will give more consen/ative results than the shear truss
model ol2-2icJause 6.2, where the allowble stress can effectively always be taken s //;d
regardless of strut anglc. When departing from the elstic compression angle, no provision is made fbr increasing the compression limit iD 2-2,/Expression (6.1l2) when the
reinfrcement is not lulJy utilized.

In summary, if reinforcement is dcsigned using d : d.1 and is fully stressed, the compression Umit is z/16. If it is necessary to depart from g: d"r to producc the desired distribution

2t7

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

of reinforcement then the compression limit will be less than r.,/.,1. lt is always therefore
necessary to calculate d.1 to determine which compression limit applies. The use and limitations ofthsse mcmbranc rules is jllustratcd in Worked example 6.9-1. Their use in the design
of webs in shear and transverse bending is covered in Annex M of this guide-

i.7?1,431nerclo:
rrr (.1

F 6'ru'

vJi

x:.

2t8

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

Assuming lhe reinl"orcement is ro be designed to be lully stressed by providing the

reinforcement ratio above, then tlre allowable concrete stress lrom 2-2iExpression

(6.l l

ll

is:

=uf.a-0.6(

ncanax

l- qol250txP
- I.J

13.44MPa

<

24.1MPa

so t he concf,ete compression rcsistance ir-not adequate. There

improve

(a) If

I"he

re three possibilities fo

concreLe lerifi cstioB:

the reinforcmenL quanLity ir increased so that ils stress reduces. tbe concrele

rclistance lrom 2-2,Expression (6. | | l) increascc bul it cannot increa'e beyonrl:

oc'l;

40

.',,,:,:':;;::;'

2t9

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

c,r

ma"

l^l
1u

lo.rs
i" lo.ss ")
/i.,r
|

- 0.85 -

0.85

401 | .5

.l

22.67 MPa

The concrete is therefore adequate as expected.

(4) Lniarial tension

Assume the follou ing stresses are obtained:

".*

220

_:I:,

a6, -

MPa

rs,1^,

MPa

>

20 M Pa

CHAPTER 6- ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

2-2/clouse
F. t

.J

(t 04)

JJ

The correct solution is thcn yiclticd. This example is only intcnded t highlighl tbe
prohlcms thaL can occ.ur b5 sticling rigidly lo t}e elaslic compression ang.lc. which
might occur where spreadsheels are uscd lo aulomte calculations for example.
The cxamplc of zcro rhear stress my seent arficial. bul a similr procedurc of
departing lronl the ehstic angle is required iI thc above example is repeated with a
small lalue c'f shear rtrcss.
(5) tiniatial tension (repeated with tension in tbe Y direction)
Assume {he lollowing stresses are obtainetl;
o1a,

0 MPa

:-:ii

221

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

.. ..x.

i:;;:;;
'l::-..:.

//-ro./4\
i ',r \r
| , *r

""",=l

\ vl,.\
r;
61 =

t
oz-z.u

| \\,/
I l-.>o

-Ai

V-*.

\\\

1,.*

--i---=--t/
I

rF4{,

\*zt':\,

:':::l:
:::.:: :l I

llt1

,""*V-'*o,
'. ---l

'K_/

,;;;;*;;*;;*;;;',,
(c)

(d)

:.

..i:r,trl,:l

Skew reinforcement

It

is possible to derive similar expressions to equatioos (D6.9-l) to (D6,9-3) for cases with
skew reinfolcemenl. Such cxpressions have been presented by Bcrlagnoli, G., Carbone,
V.L, Giordano, L. and Mancini, G. Unfortunately, their expressions as presented t the
C.I- Pren.rier Congress on 1 2 July 2003 in Milan entitled '2nd Intcmational Speciality
Conference on the Conceptul Approach to Structural Design' contined typographical
mistake and cnnot therefore be referenced. They are reproduced below with moditctions
to crrect the error and to mke the notation compatible with EN 1992. The sign convention
is shown in Fig. 6.9-3.

**
.

".,,

W
Fig. 6.9-3. Sign convenlion for membrane rules with skew reinforcemenr

222

CHAPTER 6. ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES

Po"' P'o ' .rcd

rFdx sin d

cos,6

odv cos d

sin(
o66" sin d sin o

oEdx

iEdxy

sin B +

-.rlcos(',

TEdxy

cos(0 + B)

* oEdv cos d cos.l + lEo*u sin(t/ + cr)

co,0 41co.(o ,1

tr0

(D6.9-4)

31

- pc,s.cos(d o)AT+p,o,rsin19 61-Il!

(D6,9-5)
(D6.9-6)

In using the above equations, it is vital that the sign convention for the angles and
stresses in Fig. 6.9-3 (anti-clockwise positive) is observed and that the directior of the
plastic compression Iield, 0, is taken to be ir Lhe same X, Y quadraut as thc angle of the
principal compressive stress in the un-cracked state, d"l, The former is not required in
equtions (D6.9-l) to (D6.9-3), where d is alrvays taken as positive because of Lhe mod
sign introduced on the shear stress Lcrms.

223

CHAPTER 7

Serviceability limit states

This chapter deals with lhe design at service lir.nit states of rnembers as covered in section 7

of EN 1992-2 in the followins clauses:

.
.
.
.

7.I

General

C leuse

Stress limitation

Clause 7.2

Crack control
Deflection control

( ldust

/ -J

Clause 7.4

An additional section 7.5 is included to discuss eady thermal cracking.

7. 1. General
EN 1992-2section 7 covers only the three serviceability limit states relaLing to cluse 7.2 to
7.4 above. 2-l-llclause 7.1(1)P notes that other serviceability limit sttes 'may be of
importance'. EN 1990/A2.4 is relevant in this respect. It covers partial factors, seryiceability
criteria, design situations, comfbrt criteria, detbrmations of railway bridges and criteria for

2-

l-

l/clouse

7.t(t)P

the safety of rail tralllc- Most of its provisions are qualitative but some recommended values
are given in various Ntes, s guidance for National Annexes.
EN 1990 is of general relevance. From clause 6,5.3 of EN 1990, the rlevant cmbintion
of actions for serr.iceability limit states is 'normally' either the characteristic, frequent, or
quasipernanent combination. These are all used in EC2-2 and the gcneral forms of these

combinations, togethcr with examples of use, are given in Table 7.1, but refrence to
section 2 and Annex A2 of EN 1990 is recommended for a detailed explanation of the
expressions and terms. Specific rules for the combinations of actions (e.g. ctions that
need not be considered together), recommended sombination factors and partial safcty
factors for bridge design are also specified in Annex A2 of EN 1990. Sectjon 2 of this
guide gives i-urther commentary on the basis of design and lhe use of prlil factors and
combintions of actions.
The general expressions in Table 7.1 have been simplilied assuming that partial fctors of
1.0 are used throughout lor all actions at the scrviccability limit stte, s recommended in
Annex A2 of EN 1990, but they may be varied in the Ntional Annex.
Appropriate methods of global analysis for determining design action effects re discussed
in detail in section 5. For serviceability limit state verification, the global analysis may be
either elastic without redistribution (clause 5.4) or non-linear (clause 5.7). Elstic globl
analysis is most commonly used and it is not normally then necessary to considsr the
effects of cracking within it section 5.4 refrs.
2-I-llcluse 7.1(2) permtts an un-cracked concrete crss-section to be assuned for
stress nd deflection calculation provided tht the flexurl tensile stress undcr the relevant
qombination of actions considered does not exceed .t."n. .,[t."n may be tken as either l;rn

2-l-l/clquse
7.

r(2)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Table

7.l.

Combinations of actins for serviceability limit states

Combination

General expression

Characteristic

Combination of acrions wirh a fixed (small) probbiliry

of being exceeded durint normal opration within the
structure's design life, e.E. combintion eppropriate to
checks on stress in reinforcement as it is undesirable
for inelstic deformation of reinforcemenr ro occur ar
ny time during the service life.

lG1; +P*Q4r *Ido.,Qt,

Frequent

Combination of actions with afixed probability of being

exceeded durint a reference period of a few week,
e.g. combination used for checks of cracking and
decompression in prestressed bridges with bonded
tendons.

tGkJ +

4r.rQr.,r

*I4,,,Q0,,

Qusi-

Combination of actions expected !o be exceeded

approximately 50% ofthe time, i.e. a rime-bsed mean.
For example, combination appropriate to crack width
checks in reinforced concrete members on the basis
that durability is influenced by verage crckwidths, nor
the worst crack width ever experienced-

ry'2

* E 2.,Q1.,

Permanent

G,;

|Qp.|

or./"t .n but should be consistent with the vah.re used in the calculation of minimum tension
reinfbrcement (see section 7.3)- For the purpose of calculating crack widths and tension stiffening effects, /1,. should be used

7.2. Stress limitation

in bridges are limited to ensure that under normal condiLions of use, assumptions
made in design models (e.g. linear-elastic behaviour) remin valid, nd to void deterioration
such as the spalling olconcrcte or excessive cracking leading to a reduction ofdurability. For
persistent design situations, it is usual to check stresses soon aftcr thc opening of the bridge to
traffic, rvhen little crccp has occurred, and also at a later time when cleep and shdnkage are
SLrcsses

substantially complete. This aliects the loss of FrcsLress in pretressed structurils and the
modular rtio for strcss and crack width calculation in reinforced concrete structures, It
may be necessary to include part of the long-tijrm shrinkage effects in the first check,
because up to half of the long-term shdnkage can occur in the fust 3 months fter the end
of curing of the concrete. Calculation of an effective concrete modulus allowing for creep
is discussed below.
2-

l- I /dause

7.2(t )P

2-2/douse

7.2(t02)

2-I-llclnase 7.2(1)P regui.res compressive stresses in the concrete to be limited to avoid

longitudinal cracking, micro-cracking or exccssivc creep. The trst two can lead to a reduction
ofdurabifity. 2-2lclause 7.2(102) add,resses longitudinl cmcking by requiring the stress level
undel the chrcteristic combination of actions to not exceed a limiting value of t1llp (for
areas with exposure classes of XD, XF or XS), where fr1 is a nationalJy dctermined parameter
with recmmended value of 0.6. The clause identifies tht the limit cn be increased where
specific measures rc tken, such as increasing the cover to reinforcement (from the
minimum values discussed in section 4) or by providing confinement by transverse reinforcement. The improvement fim confining rcinforcement is quantified as an increase in allowable
stress of l0o, but this may be varied in the Ntionl Annex. The design ofthis reinforcement
is not covered hy EC2-2, but ihe strut-and-lie rules in 2-27clause 6.5 and discussions in section
6.5 of this guide are relevant. Such reinforcen.rent would need to operate at low stresses to have
any significant effcct in limiting the rvidth of compression-induced cracks.
Micro-cracking typically begins to develop in concrete where the compressive stress
exceeds approximately 70% of the cmpressive strength. Given the limits above to control
longitudiflal cracking, no further criteria are given to control micro-clacking.

CHAPTER 7. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES

Fig.7.l.

Notarion for a rectangular beam

2-1-l lclause 7,2( 3 ) addresses nonlinear creep s covered by 2-2/clause 3.I .4(4). It requires
nor.r-linear creep to be considered where the stress under the quasi-permanent combination of'
ctions exceeds 1jly, where 2 is a nationally determined parameter with recommended
value of0.45. 2-2iclause 3.1.4(4) gives the same limiting stress, but it is not subject to ntional
variation in that clause so must bc deemcd [o takc prccedence.
2-I-llclause 7,2(4)P rcqtrnes stresses in reinforcement and prestressing stcel to be limited

2-l-l/clause

to ensurc inelastic defomations of the steel are avoided under serviceability loads, which

7.2(4)P

could result in excessive concrete crack widths and invalidate the assumptions on which the
calculations within EC2 for cracking and deflections are based. 2-1-l ldause 2.2/5) requires
that th(] tcnsilc strcss in reinforcement under the characteristic combination of actions does
not exceed k3/r1. Where the stress is caused by imposed deformations, lhe tensile stress
should not exceed kaf,. although it will be rare for tensile stress to exist solely from
imposed deformations. The mean value of stress in prestressing tendons should not exqled
lr5fo;. The values of ,t3, a and 5 are ntionlly determined parameters and arc recommended
lo bc taken as 0.8, 1.0 and 0.75 respectively. The higher stress Umit for reinforcement tension
under indirect ctins reflects the ability for stresses to be shed upon concrete cracking.
The lbllowing method can be used to determine stresses in cracked reinforced concrete
beams and slabs. The concrcLc modulus to usc for scction analysis depends on tlle ratio olpermanent (long{erm) actions to variable (short-term) actions, The short-term modulus is
8"., and thc long-tcrm modulus is E" l(,1 +,!). The effective conffete modulus for a
combination of long-term nd shrt-term actions can be taken as:
(Mqp + M.r ).E'"-

M$+

(1

+ )Mqp

7.2(3)

2-l-l/douse

2-l-l/clouse
7.2(s)

(D?-l)

where Mr, is the moment due to short-term actions and Mqe is the monlent from quasiprmanent actions. The neutrl axis depth and steel strain can be derjvcd from a cracked
elastic anaLysis, assuming plane soctions remain plane. For a rectangulr beam, from Fig. 7.1:
Strains

.,

d-d,.

d. '"

(D7-2)

Forces

Ft;
SO

ls4es - 0.5b4.[

(D7-3)

,eff

Putting equation {D7-2) into equation (D7-3) gives:

1:

:-

A.E, + V (,4.2,)'. +2bA.E,E'"d

D

Lc clf

(D7-4)

277

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Fig. 7.2. Cracked section transformed to sreel units

The second mment of arca of

Lhe

cracked section. in sleel units. is derived frol.r the cross-

section in Fig. 7.2:

r- "ld
A

d,):

+_:+bd.,

(D7-5)

The elastic section moduli are:

z.- I ld,
Steel: ;, : I l(.d d.)
Concretc:

(D7-6)
(D1-7)

f'or a given noment, MEd, the

( oDcrefe: o -

stresses arc thcrcforc:

-'j-j: ---:l:::
ts

Mna
qi!. -

(D7-8)
(D7-e)

Thc strains are:

L oncrclc:

__
a^: M"^

(D7-10)

-'- I
Steelr:M",
t;

(D7- I

l)

Thc above may also be applied to flanged beams where either the neutral axis remains in
the compression flange (when is the flange lvidth) or remains in the web when the flange is
wholly in tension (whereupon is the web width).
The procedure for checking stresses is illustrted in Worked example 7.1. In prticulr',
this illustrtes the treatment ol' creep on modular ratio.

Wrked example

7. | :

Reinforced concrete deck slab

A reinfo rced concete deck sla b. 150 nrd ibik aryi wit[itisi Ci s/+j iori.creri ii iutigtd, :
momnt:f :9tl.I41t:: *4af ,ifie c!rtriitiia. ainbitd n'f :
.to a transverse,saggrg
js
actions at SLS.
momenr comprises | 5Yo permanent adions from self-ueighr and superimposed dead load and 85Yu transienL acrions iiom tratTic. The ullinute design requires a

228

CHAPTER 7. SERVICEABILITY LII.4IT STATES

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Treatment of differential temperature in stress calculation

For bridge beams, a calculation of the stresses induced by nn-uniforin temperature
distributions needs to be considered. Strictly, these stresses (which include primary sellequilibriting stresses and secondary stresses due to rcstrajnt of deflection) need to be
included in the stress checks discussed bve. For crcked sections, the analysis to determine

self-equilibriating stresses is complicated and highly iterative. However, since cracking

results in a reduction in stiffness of the section, cracking ofa section will lead to substantial
rclaxaLion of the stresses induced by temperature. It is therefore generally satisfactory lo
ignore temperture-induced self-cquilibriating stresses in cracked sections nd to consider
only lhe secoldary efects.
The neglect of tcmperature-induced self-equilibriating stresses applies also to crack width
calcultion for reinforced concretc scctions in 2-2iclause 7-3, where temperature is also
included in the quasi-permanent combintion for bridge members. For prestressed
members where dccompression is being checked (and therefore sections are expected to be
substantill.v uncracked), both primary and secondary effects should, however, be included
in the calculation of stresses, This approach is in accordance with prvious UK practice and
the UK's National Annex.

7.3. Crack control

The consistency in use of symbols in this section of EN 1992-2 and EN 1992-1-1 is poor, with
the same symbols sometimes changing delinition liom sub-clause to sub-clausc. Care is
therelbre needed t use the correc[ dcfinition in the relevant clause.

2-l-!/clouse
7.3. r (t )P

2-l-l/clouse
7.3. r (2)

2-l-l/clause
7.3. t (3)

2-l-l/clouse
7.3. t (4)
2-Uclause
7.3. t (t 0s)

l1

7.3.l. General considerations

2-I-llclause 7.3.1(I)P sLtcs thal cracking shall bo limitcd to lhc cxtent that it should not
impair the proper functioning or durabilitl' of the structure, or cause its appearance to be
unacceptable- 2-l-l lclause 7.3,1(2) is. however, a rerrinder that cracking is inevitable in
reinbrced concrete bridges subjected to bending, shear, torsion or tension. Cracking may
arisc from the result of either direct loading, from trafic actions, for example, or restraint
of imposed deformations, such as sbrinkage or tcmperature movcmcnts. The rules in EC2
cover thc control of cracking from these causes and are discussed in detail in this section.
Section 7.5 below discusscs early thermal cracking. Additionally, cracks may arise from
other causes such as plastic shrinkage. corrosion of reinforcement or expansive chemical
reactions (such as alkali silica reaction). 2-l-llclause 7.3,1(3) notes that the control of
such cracks is beyond the scopc of EC2, even though thcy could be vcry large if they occur.
2-1-l lclause 7.3.1(4) and 2-2lclause 7.3.1(105) both essentially require the design crack
width to be chosen such thaL cracking does not impair the functioning of the structure.
Cracking norn.rally 'impairs' the function of the structure by either helping to initiate
reinforcement corrosion or by spoiling its appearance. The relationsl.rip beLwen cracking

CHAPTER 7. SERVICEABILITY LII4IT STATES

and corrosion in reinfbrced concrete has been cxlensively researched. Thc alkalinitl' of fresh
concrete protccts reinforcernent fiom coftosion. This protcction can be destroyed, however,
by carbonation or ingress of chlorides. Cracks can lead to an acceleration of both of these
Frocesscs by providing a path

for carbon dioxidc and chloride ions to the reinforcement.

The size of the cracks also has an influence on the time to initiation of reinfbrcement
corrosion. Noticeable cracking in strucLures causes concel'n to the public ancl it is therefore
prudent to limil crack widths to a size tht is not readily noticcable
Tlre above considerations have led to the crack width limittions specilied in 2-2'lttble
7.101N, which is subject to \,rition in a National Annex. 2-27clause 7.3-1(10-5) notcs tht
although complianc with the crack width calculation mcthods and adherence to these

liniting crck widths should guarar.rtee adequate perfonnance, the calculated crack widths
themsclves should not be considered as real values. For reinforccd concrete. the crack
rvidth check is recommended to be perfbrmed under the quasi-permanent load cmbination.
This ellectively excludes tralllc lor highway bridges when the recommended value of ?12 = 0
from Annex A2 of EN 1990 is r.rsed. The quasi-permanent combjnation does, however,
include temperature. In ohecking crack widths in reinforced concrete members, only the
secondary ellcts of temperture differcnce need to be co[sidered as discussed in section
7.2 above- For bonded prestressed members, however, the self-equilibriating stresses
should also be included in decompression checks.
Prestressing steels are much more sensitive to damage lrom corrosion than normal
reinforcement, mostly duc Lo their smaller diametef and higher level of stress undel which
they normally operte. It is thereforc widely accepted that it is necessary to l.rave more
onerous rulcs for protection of prestressed concrete mcmbcrs against corrosion. This is
reflected in stricter crack control criteria fbr prestressed membefs with bonded tendons in
2-2iTable 7.l0lN, It also specifles requircmer.rts for decompression checks for prcstrcsscd
members wiLh bonded tendons and defines under which relevant combination of ctions
the decompression check is required. For XC2, XC3 and XC4 environments, it is the
quasi-permanent conbination while for XD and XS classes, iL is the frequent combination.
Metlbers with only unbondcd tendons are tl'eated in the sme way as reinlbrced concrete

mcmbers 2-2l clause 7.3.1 (6).

In order to safeguard bonded tendons from corrosion. it would be logical for two-way

2-2/clouse
7.3. t (6)

spanning elements with prestressing in one direction only, such as a deck slab in a prestressed
concrete box girder, to also have stricter crack critcria in thc direction transverse to the
prestressing. This is not, however, explicitly required by 2-2iTable 7.101N and was not
required in plevior.ls UK codesThe decompression linit check requites that no tensilc stresses oscur in any concrete

within a certin distance, rccommended to be l00mm. of the tendon or its duct. This
cnsures that there is no direct crack path lo the tendon for contaminants. Thc 100 mm
requlrement is ol a cover requirement. It simply means that if the cover is less than
100mm. it must all be in compression. Lessef covels may be acceptable, providing the
minimum requirenents of z-2lcluse 4 are met. Conversely, tensilc stressr:s are permitted
in the cover as long as the concrete within 100mm (or amended value in the National
Annex) of the tendons or ducts is in compression. Il, in checking decompression, the
extreme fibre is found to be cracked, the check of decompression at the specified distnce
liom the tendons becomes iterative. Additionally, although not stated in 2-2/Table
7.101N, if decompression is not checked at the surfaoe for XD and XS cnvironmental
clsses, a crack width check should also be performed if untensioned reinforcement is
present. It is therefore simpler and conservative to check decompression at the surface of
the member. If a crack $'idth check is peformed, the criterion for reinforced concrete in
Table 7.101N can be adopted. Stress checks in a pre-tensioned beam are illustrated in
Worked example 5,10-l in section 5.10 of this guide.
In deep beams and clcments with geometricl discontinuities, where strut-nd-tie analysis
it is still necessry to check crack widths.2-1-llclause 7,3,1(8) allows Lhc bar
forces thus dctcrmined to be used to calculte reinforcement stresses t verify crack
widths in accordnce u.ith thc rcnainder of 2-l-llclause 7.3. 2-l-llclause 7.3.1(9) ir
is required,

2-l-l/clouse
7.3. t (8)

2-l-l/clouse
7.3.r (e)

231

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-2/douse
7.3.

(t r0)

TO EN I992.2

general permits either a direct calculation of crck widths using 2- l-l/clause 7-3.4 or a check
of allowable reinforcement stress for a given crack widtb in accordance with 2-l-l/clause
7.3.3. The latter is simpier as many of the parametets needed in 2-l-l/clause 7.3.4 relate to
beam geometry. Where strut-and-tie modelling is used to verify crack widths in this way,
the results will only bc rcprescntativc if Lhe strut-and-tie model is based on the elstic
stress trjectories in the uncrcked stte. This is discussed in section 6.5.1 and is noted in
2-1-liclause 7.3.1(8).
2-2lchuse 7.3.1 ( I l0l suggests that 'in some cases it my be necessry to check and control
shear cracking in webs'. These'cases're not delined and 2-2/Annex QQ, which is referenced
ftrr further information, is equally vague other than to imply that a check is most relevant lbr
prestressed members, perhaps partly because the longitudinal web corpression rcduces the
tensile strength ofthe concret in the direction of maximum principal tensile stress. Previous
UK design standards have not required a verification f crcking due to shear in webs, but
the sheal design lor reinforced concrete members at ULS differs in EC2 in two wys. First,
highcr crushing resistances are possible which mcans greater forces need to be carried by the
links if the web concrete is fully stressed. Second, shear design was previously based on a

truss model with web compression struts fixed at 45". Since tbc Eurocode permits the
compression struls lo rolate to flatter angles, fewer links might be provided using EC2 in
solne cases to mbilize a given shear frce, thus creating greater link stresses at the seNiceability limit state.

7.3.2. Minimum areas of reinforcement

In deriving the expressions for the calcultion ofcrack widths and spacings in section 7.3.3,
fundamental assumptjon is that the reinforcement remains elastic. If the reinforcement
yields, deformation rvill become concentrted t the crack where yielding is occurring, and
this will inevitabl.v invalidate the formulae,

For a section suhjecrcd Lo uniform tcnsion, the force necessry for the member to crack is
N". : 1""/.,-, where N", is the crcking load, ,1" is the area ofconcrete in Lension and /1,- is
the mean tensile strength ofthe concrete. The strength of lhc rcinforcement is lr/r1. To ensure
tht distributed cracking develops, the steel must nt yield when the lirst crack forms hence:
(D7-12)

4.1,u > A"l"t'"

2-2,/clouse

7.3.2(r02)

Equation (D7- 12) needs to bc modilied for stress distributins other than uniform tension.
2-2lclause 7,3.2(102) introduces a variable, ., to account for different types f stress
distribution whicl.r has the effect of reducing thc rcinforcement requirement when the
tensile stress reduces through the section depth. A furthel'fctor, fr, is included to allorv
for the influence of internal self-equilibriating stresses which arise where the strain varies
nonJinearly through the member depth. Common sources of nonlinear strain variation
are shdnkage (where the outer concrete shrinks nole rapidly than the interior concrete)
and temperaturc djflerence (where the outer concrete heats up or cools more rapidly than
the interior concrete). The self-equilibriating stresses that are produced can increase the
tension at thc outer fibre, Lhus leading to cracking occurring at a lorver load than expected.
This in turn means that less reinforcement is necessry to carry the fbrce at cracking and thus
to cnsure distributed cracking occurs. The lactor /r thercforc reduces the feinforcement
necessary where sell-cquilibrjating stresscs can occur. These stresses ate tnore pronounced
1br deeper members and thus k is smaller for deeper members.
Tbc minimum required reinlorcement area is thus given as:
A. n,,,o.

2-2lQ.t)

k"kf6."1sA
"1

where:

A"t

232

is the required minimum area of reinforcing steel within the tensile zone
is the area ofconcrete within the tensile zone. The tensile zone should be taken as
that part of lhe concretc sectioD which is calsulated to be in tension just belore
the fbrmation of the first crck

CHAPTER 7. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES

crs

is the absolute value of the maximum stress permitled in the reinforcement

immediately fter formation of thc {irst crack. This will generally need to be
taken as the value to satisfy the mximum bar size or bar spacing requirements
of 2-l-1/Tahtes 7.2N or 7.3N respectively

It"r

is the mean value oftensile strength ofthe concrete eflective t the time when the
cracks are expected to first occur, i.e. if,,n or lower (/",-(l)) ifcracking is expectcd
earlier than 28 days. lu maDy cases. where the dominant imposed deformations
result from dissipation of the heat of hydration, cracking my occul within 3 to 5

fron

casting. However, 2-2lclause 7.3.2(105) requires that /;1,,,(t is not

2.9 MPa, which corresponds to the mean 28-dy tensile
strength of grade C30/37 cncrete. The use of mean tensile strength (rather
than the more conservative uDner characteristic va.lue which was used in
Modet Corte 906) has, in nart, bcen used t,r produuc simiLar minimum reinfolcement provisions to those obtined with previons European practice
is a cocilcicnt allowing for the eflct of non-uniforn self-equilibriating stresses
and should be taken as:
1.0 for webs with /2 < 300mm or flanges with widths less than 300mm
0.65 for webs with h ) 800 mm or flanges with widths grcater than 800 mm
Intermediate values should be interpolated. A value of of 1.0 can always
days

taken as less than

2-2/clouse

7.3.2(t05)

con5crvalivcl) be uied

"

is a coefficient allowing

for the nature of thc

stress

distribution within the sectio

immediately prior to cracking and the change of the lever arrrr, calculaLed from
2-2lExpression (7.2) or 2-2iExpression (7.3) for webs and flanges of flanged
beams respectively. It depends on the mean direct stress (whether tensile or
comprcssive) acling on the part of the cross-section being checked. It is equal
to 0.4 for rectangular beams without axial force. Prestressing has the effect of
reducing " for webs by way of 2-2iExpression (7.2), while clirect Lcnsion
increases its valuc. A value of 1.0 is always conservative. It should be noted
that 2-2lExpression (?-2) contains a term, k1, which differs in delinition and
value from ihat in 2-l - li Expression (7.2) nd nother in 2-l-l7clause 7.3.4
For flangetl beams. such as T-beams or box girders, 2-2iclause 7,3.2(102) requires that the
minirnum reinforcement provision is determined for each individual part ofthe section (webs
and flanges. for example), and 2-21Fig. 7.l0l identifies how the section should be sub-divided
for this purposc: Lhe web height, l], is taken to extend over the full heighL of the member. The
sub-division used clearly affects the calculation of somc of thc terms in 2-2i Expressions (7.2)
and (7.3), particularly concrete area and mean concrete stress.
Despite the apparenl similarity betrveen 2-2iQ.l) and the minimum reinforcement
rqirements in 2-l-1i9.2.1.1, the former is associated with timiting crack widths while the
lattcr is associated with preventing steel yield upon cracking ol the cross-scction. Both
checks must therefore be performed2-1-llcl use 7,.1.2(3/ allows any bonded tendons located within the eflective tension area
to contrjbutc to the area of minimurl reinforcement required to control cracking, provided
they re within 150 mm ol the surfacc to be checkecl. 2-2iExpression (7.1) then becomes:
,4,,.n1,o"

{ {1 lnAo, -

k.kf"1,"1A"1

2-l-l/clouse
7.3.2(3)

(D7-13)

lo

is the area of bonded pre- or post-lensioned tendons within the clTective tensile area, l",.ip
(discussed under clause 7.3.4), and on is the stress increse in the tendons from the statc of
zero strain of the concrctc aL lhe same level (i.e. the increase in strcss in the tendons after

decompression of the cncrete at the level of the tendons). {1 is the djusted ratio of bondstrcngth taking into account the diflrent diameters of prestressing and rcinlorcing steel,

is the ratio of hond strenglh of prestressing and reinforcing stcel, given in 2-l- 1/clause

6.8.2

155

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

d,

is the largest br diameter oJ'reinl'orcing steel

,y',, is the equivalent diameter ofthe tendon in accordance with 2-l-l/clause 6.8.2. lfonly
prestressing stecl is used to control cracking, {' - uf
2- I- I /douse

7.3.2(4)

2-I-llclnuse 7.3.2(4) allows minimum reinlorccmcnt to bc omjttcd rvhere, in prestressed

concrete members, the stress t the most tensile fibre is limited i] nationally determined
value. recommendcd to be refl, under the characteristic combination of actions and
the characteristic vlue of prestress. This does not remove the need to consider the
provision of rcinforcement to control early thennal cracking prior to application of thc
prestlessing.

7.3.3. Control of cracking without direct calculation

2-2/douse
7.3.3(t 0 | )

2-l-l/clouse
7.3.3(2)

The basis of the crack width calculation n.rethod in EN 1992 is presenled in section 7.3.4.
2-2lclause 7.3,3(I0I), however, allows 'simplified methods'to be used for the control of

cracking without direct calculation and. undesirably fbr pan-Europeal consistency,

allows the National Annex to specify a mcthod- The rccommcnded method is tht given
in 2-1-l,iclause 7.3.3. In this method,2-1-llclause 7.3.3(2) requiles the reinlbrcement
stress t be determined from a cracked section analysis (see Worked example ?.1) under
the relevant combintion of ctions (see section 7.1 of this guide). The relevant effective
concrete modulus for long-tenn and short-term loading should also be used. It is assumcd
that minimum reinforcement according to 2- 1-1/clause 7.3.2 wilJ be provided. An dvntge
of rhis simplified approach is that mny of the diffculties of interpretation of parameter
definition involved in direct oalculations to 2-21clause 7.3.4 for non-rectangular crosssections (such s for circulr sections, discussed below) can be avoided.
For cracks caused nainly by direct actions (i.e. iniposed forces and moments), cracks
may be cntrolled by limiting reinl'orcemenl stresses to the values in either 2-1-llTable
7.2N or 2-l-liTable 7.3N. It is not necessry to satisfy both. The former sets limits on
reinforcement stress based on bar diameter and the latter based on bar spacing. For
cracks caused minly by restraint (for example, due to shrinkage or temperture), only
Table 7.2N can be used; cracks have to be controlled by lirniting the bar size to match the
calculated reinforcement stress immediately after cracking.
Tables 7.2N and 7.lN of EN 1992-1-l were produced lrom prmetric studies carried out
using the crck width calculalion formulae in 2-l-1,/clause 7.3.4, discusscd below. They were
based on reinforced concrete rectngular sections (r".:0.5r) in pure bending (ft2 :0.5,
":0.4) with high bond bars (ir1 :0.8) and C30/37 concrete (f;r.eff : 2.9 MPa). The
cover to the centroid f the main reinforcement was assumed to t:e o.lh (h d :0,1h],.

The valucs in brackets above refer to the assumptions given in Note I of 2-l-l/Table
7.2N. (r", and /r are dc6ned in 2-l-l/clause 1.3.3(2), k1 and t2 are defined jn 2-1-I,/clause
7.3.4(3) and k" is defined in 2-2/clause 7.3.2(102).) Correction for other geometries can be

made. as discussed below.

The use ofthese tables for bridges rvas criticized by some countries becuse they hve been
derived for menbers with covers mor typical of those lbund in buildings (specifically
25 mm), whereas bridge covers are typically much greater. Cover is a significant contdbutor
to crack spacing and hence crack width, as can be seen in section 7.3.4 and Worked example
7.3. This potentilly leads to grcater calculated crack widths for bridges- This criticism was
onc reson l-or the allowance of ntionl choice in the clculation method to be employed,

Detailed arguments over the parameters to use in crack width calculation, however, tcnd
to attribute a gfeater implied accuracy to thc crack width calculation than is really justified.
Of greaLcr significance is the load combintion used t clculte the crack widths, as discussed in section 7.3. 1 abovc- There is a strong argunent that adequate durability is achieved
by specifying adequate cover and by limiting reinforcement stresses to sensible values below
yield. The former is achievcd through compliance with 2-2i'clause 4 and the lalter by following thc rcinfbrcement stress limits in 2-l-llclause 7.3.3(2) and 2-l-1/clause 7.2(5).
For members with geometry, loading or concrete strength other than as in the assumptions
above, the maximum bar diameLers in 2-l-llTable 7.2N strictly nced to bc modilied. The

234

CHAPTER

7. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT

STATES

fbllowing tw equations arc given:

d,

0i

k"h",.
(l"r"i/2.q);;; !;1

tbr sections at least parLly in compressron

h.

o. o,(J,, a12.9);;;:r - lor:,eclion5 er)mplelely in

l/? - al

tension

2-1-1(7.6N)
2-r

-l(7.7N)

.J

where:

o.
ql
lr
1",
d

is the adjusted bar diameter

is the maximum bar sizc givcn in 2-l-llTable 7,2N
is the orerall depth of rhe secLion
is the depth of the tensile zone immeditely prior to crcking, considering the characteristic values ofprestress and axial forces under the quasi-pernanent combination of

actions
is here defined as Lhc c feotive depth to the centroid o l the outer hyer of reinlbrcement.
This is not intended to be a general dcfinition ofd, but rather a clarification that ifthe
whole scction depth is in tension, the effective depth shuld be measured to the
centl'oid of the steel in one facc and not to the centroid of the sLeel in both faccs.

Thc latter could lead to a centroid t mid-depth of the member. Generally, d is

the depth to the ccntroid of the area of the reinforcement in tension, as clarified in
2-l-l/Fig.7.la), where there are Lwo layers ofbars
While 2-l-1/clause 7.3.3(2) states that this adjustment of br diametr 'should' be made.
earlier drafts of EN 1992-1-1 and. Model Cotle 90.6 stated that this adjustment 'may' be
made. It should be noted that the adjustment can be either beneficial or detrimental to
limiting stress. depending on circunstance, so the distinction betweer 'may'and 'should'
is importanl. The lormer implies that benet can be taken from the adjustment, ignoring
it in other cases, while the latter implies that it should be considered also where it is nore
onerous to do so. Whether r nt this level of sophistication is merited is a mtter for
debate, as mentioncd above. It is noted tlat no such adjustment to bal diameter is made
in crack checks in EN 1994-2, where thc same two tables of limiting bar stress appear. In
general, thc whole issue of adjusting bar diameters can be avoided by using Table 7.3N to
determine limiting stresscs. For a 0.3mm crack width and bar spacing up to 200n.rm. it
will be advantageous to use 2-1-1,iTable 7.3N for all bar diameters from l6mm upwards.
The adjustment to bar diameter is not practical when strut-and-tie modelling is used to
determine reinforcement stresses as the terms all relate to beam behaviour. I)irect use of
EN 1992-1-l Table 7.2N or 7.3N would probably be reasonable in such cases.
Differences in cover cannol be accommodated by the adjustments of 2- I - l,/Expression
(7.6N) and 2-l-liExpression (7.7N) which, ironicaily, is thc most significant fctor in
determining crack widths when using the direct clcultion method of 2-l-l/clause 7.3.4.
Calculations on reinforced concrcle slabs and rectangulal beams indicate that the simplc
method of calculation based on the use of EN 1992-l-l Table 7-2N and 7.3N renain
conservtive reltive to the more accurate calculation method of 2-l-liclause 7.3.4 for
covers up to about 35mm. For greter covers, Lhe simple method becomes increasingly
lrn-conseNativc by comparison. However, considering the limited ccuracy of both crack
width calcultion methods and Lhe benefits to durability associated rvith the provision of
grcaler covers as discussed bove, the simpLified mcthod probabty remains acceptable for
greter sovers- There is certainly no stated limit to its use in EN 1992 based on a
n]a-{lltum cover.
Where there is a mirture ofplestressing steel nd un-tensioned reinforcement, the prestress
can conselvatively be treted as an external force applied to the cross-section (ignoring the
stress inilrease in the tendons aiter cracking) and the stress determined in the reinlbrcement,
ignoring concrete in tension as usual. Tbe reinforcement stress derived can then bc compared
against thc tabulated limits. For pre-tensioned beams with relatively little untensioned

reinforcement, where crack control is

to be provided minly by the

bonded tendons

235

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

themselves, the Note to 2-l-lic)ause ?,3.3(2) permits Tables 7,2N and 7.3N to b{r used with
the steel stress taken as the total str'ss in the tendons aflcr cracking, minus the initial
prestrcss aftcr losscs. This is approximatcly equal to the stress increase in thc tendons
alleI decornpression at the level of the tendons.

with depth grtater than 1000mm and main reinforcement concentrated in

proportion
only a smal)
of the depth. 2-I-llclause 7.3.3/3.) requiles additional minimum
reinfbrcement to be evenly distributed over the side faces of lhc bcams in the tension zone
to control cracking. [t is norn]al in bridgc dcsign to distribute steel round the perimeter
of sections t control early thermal cracking and reinforcement for this purpose should
generally be sumcient to meet the requirements of this ciausc; scction 7.5 refers.
2-I-I ldause 7.3.3 ( 4) is a rcmindcr that there is a prticular risk of large cracks occurring
in sections rlhere there are sudden changes of stress such as aL changes of sectin, near concentratcd loads. where bars are curtailed or at areas of high bond stresses such as at the end
For

2-l-l/clouse
7.3.3(3)

2-I-l/clouse
7.3.3(4)

bean.rs

oflaps. While sudden chnges ofsection should normally be avoided (by introducing tapers),
conpliance rvith the reinfbrcement detailing rules givcn in clauses 8 and 9, together with the
crck control rules of clause 7, should normally give stisfctory perfornance.

236

CHAPTER

7. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT

STATES

7.3.4. Control of crack widths by direct calculation

The basis of the clack width calculalion to EN 1992 is presented here. first considering the
sin.rplified casc of a rcinforced concrete prism in tension as iu Fig. 7.3. The member will first
crack when the tensile strength of the weakest section is reached. Cracking leads to a local
redistribution of stresses djacenl to the crack as indicated in Fig. 7.3 by the strain distributions. At Lhc crack, the entire tensile force is carried by the reinforcement, Moving away from
the crack, tensile stress is transferred from lhc reinforcement by bond to the surrounding
concrete and, thercforc, at some distance Z" from the ct'ack, thc disftibution of stress is
unaltered from tht before the crack formed. At this location, the strain in concrete and
reinforcement is equal and lhe slrcss in the concrete is just belorv its tensile strength. The
redistribution of stress local to the crck results in an extension of the member which is
taken up in the crack, causing it to open- This also leads to a reduclin in the member
stillness.
With increasing tension, a second crack will lbnn at the ncxt wekest section. This will not
be within distance I- ol the first crack due to the reduction in concrete stresses in that
region assooiated wiLh thc first crack, With further increase in lcnsion, more cracks will
dcvelop until the mximum crack spacing anywhere is 22"- No further cracks will then

Fig. 7.3. Strains adjacent to a crack

237

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-

|-

l/clouse

7.3.4(t )

TO EN I992-2

form but furthcr loading will cause the exisLing cracks to widen. This is called 'stabilized'
cracking. The member stiflness $'ill continue to reduce, tending towards Lhat of the fully
cracked section, considering reinforcement alone in the tension zone.
The crack width formulae in EC2 are based on the discussions above. The crack width
stems ftom the dillrence in extension of the concrete nd steel over a length equal to the
crack spacing. Thc crack width, Lr., is thus given in 2-l-llclause 7.1.4(1) as:
tr'1 :.1,,"u*(e". - a"-)
2-l - li(?.8)
where:

lr*
r,ln,*

is the characteristic crack width

is lhe rraximum crack :\f'auing

cm

strain of the teinforcement in the length sr.n'nx undr the relevant

combination of loads, including the effect of imposed deformatioas and taking
into account the effects of tension stiflning. Only the additional tensile strain
beyond zero strain in the concrete is considered
is the mean strin in the concrete in the length s,.-,,, between ctcks

s. is the mean

These terms are discussed in detail below.

Crock spocing

From the above discussion, the minimum crack spacing is Z" and the maximum crck

spacing is 2I". The average crack spacing, s-, is therefore sornewhere belween these two
values. Figure 7,3 illusates that Z" and thus s- depend on the rate at which stress can
be transferred l'rom the reinforcement to the concrete. Assuming a constant bond stress,
r, along the length Ze, the strcss at a distance Z" from a crack will rcach Lhe tensile strength

of the concrete when:

rltLc - Ac.l

(D7- l4)

where '4. is the concrete area and .,f, is the tensile strength of the concrete, Introducing the
reinforcen.rent ratio p: n!'l4A.into equation (D7-14) gives:

(D7-15)
The mean crack spacing cn then bc expressed as:
s,",

0.25kr/p

(D7-16)

where l is a constant which tkes account of the bond properties of the reinforcement in
the concretej4r/, and the diference betrveen minimum and mean crack spacing. Equation
(D7- l6) docs not Iit test dt well, so an additional term for reinforcement cover, c. needs to
be included in the exprcssion for crack spacing:

s^

kc + 0.25kl p

(D7-17'

The need fbr the reinforcement cover term probably ariscs because, although equation
(D7-14) assumes that the tensile stress is costant in the area.4", the concrete sess will
actually be greatest adjacent to the bar and will reduce with distanc from it. This reduces
the cracking load of the area lc.
Equation (D7-17) applies to concfete sections in pure tension and a further factor is thefefore necessary to allow for other oases where the stress distribution varics through the depth
of the member- It iri also necessary to define an effective reinforcement ratio, pp since the
"ff
appropriate concrete rea is not that of the whole member but rather must be related
to the
actul tension zone. This leads to:

s, :
2-l-l/clouse
7 7 417l

kc + 0.25k1k2<l.tl

po.,1

Finally, a further factor o is required to obtain the upper characteristic crack width rather
than an average one. The formula presented in ?-I-l/clause 7.3,4(3) for the maximum final

CHAPTER

7. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT

STATES

crack spacilg is thcrcfore:

.r..- :

tl(/.c + 0.25kft2l pr,6)

: \c'l

k1k2kaQlprp11

2-t-tiQ.rt)

lvhere:

is the cover to reinforcemenu the relevant definition of covcr to use is not

stated in EN 1992, but clause 4.3(2) of EN 1990 states that 'the dimensions
specified in the design may be taken as characteristic values' This implies
the cover to use is c,,o.. This may produce a conseryativc design where
covcr in cxcess of that required by 2-2i clause 4 is provided
is the bar diameter. Where a mixture olbar diameters is used in a section, an
equivalent diameter, 4"o, should he used as delined in 2- 1 - li Expression

,r

(7.t2\

,1.

+ {?.4"

2- 1-

li (7.10)

nc.e|f

ls
Ap
lc.er

is the area of reinforcing steel within the eflective area ,4"."p1

is the area ofpre- or pst-tensioned tendons within the effective area,4""6
is the effective tension area, i.e. the area ofconcrete surrounding the tension
reinlorcement ofdepth c.ef (2-l-1/Fig.7.1 ref'ers), where 1"..r is the lesser oi

.
.

one-third of the tension zone depth of the cracked section,

rvith

(/, r)/3.

negative when the wholc section is in tension

half the secrion depth, ,/2, or

2.s(h

d)

is the depth lo Lhc centroid ofthe area ofthe reinforqement in tension This
is clarified in 2- 1-l iFig. 7.1(a). The definition of d in the Note to 2- 1-1,/clause
7.3,3(2). which refers to the depth to the outer lyer of rein forcernent, is not
intended to be a general deflnition but rather a clariflcation of what to do
when the whole section depth is in tension

{r

ir

the adjustcd ratio of bond strength tking into account the dilrent
diameters of prestressing and leinlbrcing sti:el. It is detned undcr the

comnents on 2-1-1,/clause 7.3.2(3) above

k1.lc1, k3, /r4 are coefficients whose purpose is discussed above. Values of t and k2 arc
specited in 2-l-I7'clause 7,3.4(3), while /e1 and k4 are nationally dctermined
pararneters

The above definitions are readily applicable lo rectangulr sections, but for general
seclions, for example a circular column, considerable interpretation is required in choosing
ppropriate values to use. This makes the use of lhe simplified method in section 7 3.3
appealing, as there is no such difficulty of interprettion; the reinforccment stress is simply
compared to the allowable limit in 2-l-liTable 7,3N. The use ofthe tables is not prohibited
for circular sections, although Note I benealh 2-1-liTable 7.2N gives lhe assumptions on
which they are based, in.rplying they were derived for selected rectangular sections. as
discussed in section 7.3.3 of this guide.
For a circular section. the maximun crack widths will occur between the most higl y
stresscd bars. A possible calsulation method would therefore be to cotsider a thin slice in
the plne of bending through the diameter, thus producing nrrow rectangular beam
with width equal to the bar spcing. /r"."1, 1"."s and po..1.1 cn thetr be oalcu]ated fr rectangular beam of these proportions, with d referring to the centrid of the reinforcement in this
slice. Alternatively, ./r" could be calculatcd with 11 taken equal to the cffcctive depth of the
"1
rcinforcement in the tension
zne ofthe complete cross-section. .1"..1 and po."n would then be
determined lbr the concrete and reinforcemenl within this height /r"."1. The first method tends
to lcad to the most conservtive prediction of crack width and both often lead to greater
crack widths than the simplilied nethod of 2-1-liclause 7.3.3 for typical bridge coversThe above analysis for ,s. n u* docs not hold for members without bonded reinforcement in
the tension zne (s the reinforcement ratio is ueeded). In such cases, the concrete strcsses are

239

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

modited by the presence of thc crack over a length approximtely equal to the crack height
each side of the crack. Using the samt: arguments as above, the averge crack spacing will
then be equal to betwcen one and two times the crack height. In this case, 2-1-17/clause
7.3.4(3) presents this as a maximum crack spacing, thus:

s'..""

2-l-l/clouse
7.3.4(5)
2-

l- I/dause

7.3.4(4)

1.3(

- r)

2-1-1 0 .r4)

2- 1- l,/Expression (7.14) also applies whcre the reinforcement spacing is wide (defined as
greater than 5(c+gl2) in EN 1992-1-l) because the strain in the concrete then varies
appreciably between bars. A similar rule is presented in 2-1-llclause 7.3.4(5).
When the angle between the axes ofprincipal stress and the direction ofthe reinforcement
in a member reinforced in two orthogonal directins exceeds 15", such as may occur in skew
deck slabs for example, the following expression n 2-1-llclaase 7.3.4(4) can be used to
tletermine the ma\imum crack spacing:

/ cos?

Jr m

sind \
\'t.,,o"",1' s,,^"*,./

(D7-18)

where 0 is the angle beLween the reinforcement in the y-direction and the direction of
principal tensile stress nd q,,,,u",u and.!r,mar.? are the crack spacings calculated in the yand z-directions according to 2- 1-llExpression (7.11)Averoge strons for crock prediaion

To calculate the crack width, the verge sttins in the stgel and concrete between cracks
must be considered, Figure 7.4 illustrates the situation for a section subjected to pure
tension. The total axial tension, N, is given by the force in the reinforcement at the crack
so thal N: ',e,21,. The average steel and concrete forses are given by N, :8'e'n',1.,
where e.,o is the average strain in the steel, and N : Eccmlc where e.. is the average
strain in the concrete between the cracks. The total axial tension can therelbre be expressed
as N - lr's + N" so that:
E"e,2l"

4s.n.4. + E"6cn l.

OI

E" A.

5s2:5"i,+44cm
SubstituLing for p
sm

ecm:

A"l A" and o"

s' 3t1t1""p1
ae!

- E"/tc

and re-arranging gives sn

e,2

a../cr.p, thus:
(D7-re)

At section l, the axial force, N, is shared between the reinforcement nd the concrete
such that the strains are equal. For the concrete to be just un-cracked, this occurs at a
concretc shess of /",-; therefore sl :6cl : .f"r-1E",'|he avetge concrete strin between
the cracks, 6cm, is some proportion of this value, thus:

e, :

kt/",- lE.

Fig. 7.4. Strains for a single crack

240

(D1-20)

CHAPTER 7. SERVICEABILITY LII4IT STATES

k, is an empiricalll, determined factor which is dependent on the durtion ofthe applied load.
2-l-1,/clausc 7.3.4(2) assigns jt values of 0.6 for short-term loading and 0.4 for long-term
lding. It would be possible to interpolte between these v:rlues where the total applied
load comprises a proportion of both short- and long-term loads.

Substituting equation (D7-19) into cquation (D7-20) gives:

-c,n

c.T

- -q)

-4,2
and sincc

e.t: o"tl

tf
^"(r*

L.a"P

t-tr./crn

E"O

rl | "p)
.,
\L ' o,P)

E.'.

o., $-(l

+ o"p)

(D7-zr)

This eqution appears in 2-1-l lclausc 7.3.,1(2) as:

2-

l-l /douse
7.3.4(2)

.,s
_

6,41"o 1t

/'n.el
F
11.

ci"pp,"n)

,- nv'U;,, d.
lt.

2-t-tl(7.e)

where:

os

is the stress in the tension reinforcement assuming cracked section. For pretensioned members, rs may be replced by Aoo which is the increase in stress in
the tendons after decomoression at the level of the tcndons

,fo

is the mean value of tensile strength of the concrete discussed in section 7.3.3 below.

"6

It

should be noted tht the definition of .1","p in EC2 is given in 2-2/clause

7.3.2(102) regarding minimum area of reinforcement where maximizing ./11,"6 is
conseruative. Here, however, jGt eir is contributing to the tension stiffening effect

of the

concrete and is therefore beneficial for crack width predictions, so a

smaller value is conservative. An argument for using the lower characteristic
value could therefore be made, but" for similar reasons to thse given uuder
clause 7-3.2(102). a valuc of /1,. has been adopted to produce values of crack
width tht do not differ significantly from current practice
ad is the modular ratio E /E"
pp,eff is the effective reinforcement ratio from 2- 1 - I /Expression (7.10) reproduced above
r is the factor dependent on the duration of the load, as discussed above
(1 is the bond strength adjustment factor discussed under the comments on 2-1-li
clause 7.3.2(3) above

Thc limit ol 0.60"1 E" in 2-l

cncrete tensin stiffenin.

iExpression (7.9) is made to place limit on the benefit of the

241

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

from

2-1.-

l/Expression t7.10): /,r..1

A.+ElA^
- _r;--]]-:!
A-r

:::
., :,1.,,.,:,,*:1:i : I : :: ::::' :' :: : : I .::'::l:::l:::::
where,4. - area ofreinforcement
prestreseofreinforcment x 82/0.10 - 20l0mm:7m.,4p : 0 since no preslrese4""r I: effective rensjon
4"."r
rension area - ._.r
wirh 1...r
...r with
l..a-taken
taken as the lesser
les;er ol
.

7r

2.5(h

or
(h

..qr...

.))

- x)/3-

(250

(250

63.5)/l

- -

h/2

(lt

62.2mm +nd

","tt

.nn..n: 62.?
,='."'",",
x lO'
3.4 x 50

::

1000

l-

r 62.2:62,2

.< l0r mm2/m

0.0123

0.425 x 0.8 x 0.5

0.5 for bending, therefore:

16/0.0323

154.2 mm

shoutd be noted rhat the conffete colr term. J.4r, contributc

..iat

242

rn

62.2mm

0.8 for high bond bars and 2

r,.,o""

145

I25 mm

)al | /)

Therefor

ls2) =

.,.:,:'lir. i, ::,:::::,::,..

250/2.-

Thus
ltlgJ.il'ier- i..,.1

k1

2.5

hera so

11

u"ry ,;gnil

.,::

, : : : : -, : ; :

:::::::

CHAPTER 7. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES

7.4. Deflection control

2-1-l lclause 7.4.1( 1 ) ( P ) requires that the delormation of a memher or structure shall not be
such that it adversely affects its proper function or ppearnce. Excessive dcformations
under permanent actions can give a visual impression of inadequalc strength nd disrupt
the intended draiuage paLh. Excessive deformations under live load can damage surfacing
and waterproofing systems, and can also lead to dynamic problems including both motion
discom forL rnd structurrl dlmage.
2-l -l ldause 7.4.1(2) rcqsircs thaL appropiatc limiting values of deflections should be
established for each individual structure considering the above. Excessive sagging deflections

under pennanent actions can generally be overcome by precambering and dynamic

considcralions are addrcsscd in EN 1990 and EN 1991-l-4 for live load and wiud-induccd
oscillations respectively. Resonance ofbridges can become an ultimate limit state if sumcient
fatigue danage occurs or ifdivergent-amplitude wind-induced motion, such as galloping and
flutter. occru. No guidance is given in EC2 on appropriate limits for other effecls (such as
disruption to drainage) as these will need to be checked on a structurc-hy-structure basis.
2- -1/clausc 7.4.2 (idcntifying siLuations where no chcck of deflection is required) does not
pply t bridge design and deflections should be calculated following the rules in 2-1-l7clause
7.4.3. In practice. it is usually necessary to calculate deformations of concrete bddges
in order. lor example, to calculatc rotations and translations in the design of bearings.
2-I-l lclause 7,4,3 ( I ) and 2-1-l lclause 7.4.3(2 ) effectively lequire the actions and structural
behaviour to be assessed realistically and to an aoouracy meriLed by the type of check being
carried out. The remainder of 2-l-liclause 7.4.3 gives recommendations for achieving a
rerlislic calculation, These includr

2-l-l/clouse
7.4. | (tXP)

2-l-l/douse
7.4. r (2)

.
.

.
.

2-l-l/clouse
7.4.3(t)

2-l-l/dause
7.4.3(2)

adopting un-cracked section properties where the tensile strength of the concrete will not
bc excccdcd anywhcrc in lhe member;

using member behaviour intermedite between the un-cracked and fully cracked
conditions for members whiqh are expected Lo crack- This behaviour is dependent on
duration of loading nd stress level. An allowance for the tension stiffcning effect f a
cracked section is also given;
using an cllcclivc modulus of elasticiLy ol'the concretc to allow for creep;
consideration of shrinkage curvature.

7.5. Early thermal cracking (additional sub-section)

Early thermal cracking is the cracking that occu$ in concrete members due to restrint s the
heat of hydration dissipates and while the concrete is still young. Restint can occur liom
internul ot cxternd testrarnt'.

Internal restraint - one part of a concrete poru expands or contracts relative to another.
This is most likely in thick sections where thermal gradients develop. Excessive reinfot'cement quantities can also restrain conLracLion and give rise to very fine cracking aligned
with the reinforcement. This will generally be avoided if the maximum percentges of
reinforcement specilied in EN 1992-2section 9 are observedExternal restraint - member beine cast is restrained bv the member or external element to
which it is being cst aginst.

EC2-2 and EC2-1-l do not provide guidance on early thernal cracking, but EC2-3 for
liquid rctaining and containing structures does- Thc UK National Annex for ECl2-2 is
likely to refer to this. The early thermal and shrinkage strains calculated can be used in
coniunction with 2-l-llclause 7.3.4 to check crack widths.

243

CHAPTER 8

Detailing of reinforcement and

prestressing steel
Tl.fs chapter deals with the detailing of reinforcement and prestressing steel as covered in
section 8 of EN I992-2 in the iollowins clauses:

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Clouse
Ckruse
Clause
Clause
Ckutse
Clause

General
Spacing ol bars
Permissible mandrcl diameters ior bent bars

Anchorage of longitudinal reinlorcement

Anchorage of links and shear reinlbrcement
Anchorage by welded bars
Laps and mechanical couplers
Additional rules for large diameter bars
Bundled bars

Prertrccrinu tendon

8.

l.

8.1

8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6

I .7
Cleuse 8.8
C luu.te

Clawe 8.9
Clause 8.10

General

Section 8 of EN I992-2 gives general rules for the detailing of reinforced and prestressed
concrete members. The detailing rules in EC2 apply to ribbed reinfbrcement, mesh and
prestressing tendons only plain round bars ale not covered.
Many of the detailing requircmcnts of EC2 relaLe lo bond and mechanical anchorage
properties rvhich are influenced mainly b1':

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Lhe concrete Llpe and strenglh:

the surfce characteristics of the bars;
the shape ol the bars and the inclusion of bends or hooks;
the amount of concrcLc cover in rclation to the sizc of thc bars;
the presence ofwelded transverse bars;
additional confinement ollred by links or other non-welded transverse bars;
additional confinement offered by transvcrsc prcssure.

2-1-lldause 8,1(1)P indicates tht the rules in section 8 may not be adequate lor coated
reinforcement bars. This is bccausc thc coatjng may affcct the bond chracteristics ol the
reinfbrcement. The rules may also be insufficient for bridges with seismic loading. Additional
conning links arc oflcn provided in this latter case, particularly around cotnpression
members. t gi\e greter ductility.
2-I-llclause 8.1(2)P is a reminder that the detailing rules givcn in EC2 ssume the
minimum cover requirements have been complied with in accordance with 2-1-1,/clausc

2-l-l/clouse

8.t(t)P

2- I- I /douse

8.t (2)P

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

4.4.1-2. This is particularly in.rportant for anchorage and lap lengths whose sLrcngth could be

reduced by substndrd cover (due to an increased tendency for concrete splitting nd the

2-l-l/clouse

greater potential for reinforcement corrosion),

8.t (3)

2-I-Ilclause 8.1(1) and 2J-I lclause 8.1(4) refer to additional rules for the use of lightweight aggrgate concrete and for members subjected to ftigue loading.
Many of thc rcquirements in 2-2,/clause 8 are self-explanatory and are not discussed in
their entirety here. 2-2iclause 9 also deals with detailing, but this is concerned with detailing
oi- cnlirc members or zones ofmembels rather than individual bars.

2-l-l/clouse
8. t

(4)

8.2. Spacing of bars

2-1-1,/clause 8.2 defines plactical rules

2-l-|/clouse
8.2Q)

2-l-l/clouse
8.2(3)

for the minimum spacing of reinforcement. These

rules are designed to ensure that concrete can be placed and satisfactorily compacted,
enabling adequate bond strength to be developed along the full length of the bar. The
minimum spacings in 2-1-llclause 8.2(2) should certainly noi be detailed lhroughout as it
would lead to indequte access for vibrators as required t:y 2-I-llclause 8.2(3). They
should only be resorted to in localized regions of congestion, e.g. short regions where
links ove ap-

8.3. Permissible mandrel diameters for bent bars

l- I /dause
8.3(2)

2-

2-l-l/clouse
8.3(3)

2-1-l lclause 8.3 (2) givcs recommended minimum mandrel diameters to which reinforcement
can be bent. These permissible mandrel diameters have been chosen to avoid bending cracks
being formcd in the bar. EC2 recommends minimum values of4E for bar dianeters less than
or equal to 16 mm and 7t' for bar diameters greater than 16 mm- but these may be amended
in thc National Annex. These are the same vlues as presented in BS 8666: 2000.
2-l-l lclause 8.3(3) docs not require an explicit cheok of concrele crushing in the bend if
the fbllowing are satisfled:

.
.

the anchorage of the bar does not require a length more than 5o beyond the end of the
bend (i.e. the br is not fully stressed within the bend);
the planc of the bend of the bar is not positioned 'close', presumably adjacent, lo a
concrete face (so that spalling of the cover cannot occur) and there is br of t lest
the samc diameter positioned inside the bend and running along the axis ol the bend
(which locally increases the concrete compressive resistance);
thc mandrel diameter is at least equl to the recommended values in 2-1-l/clause 8.3(2).
Where the bove conditions cannot be met- the followins exnression for rnndrel dimeter

15

Slven:

n,".",,=*

G.)

2-1-

(8.1)

wbere:

F6,

is the bar diameter

is the tensile force from ultimatc loads

in thc bar or group of bars in contact at the

start of the bend
ab lbr any given bar (or group of bars) is half of thc ccntrc-Lo-ccntre distance between
bars (or groups of bars) perpendiculr to the plane of the bend. For a bar or group
of bars adjacent to the face of the member, n6 should be tken as the cover plus d/2
./",1 is the concrete design compressive strength, but should noL be taken greater thn tht
for coocrete of class C55/67
The conctete strcss inside the bend ofa bar is P6,/ (il-.-1./2) and thus the requirement of
l,/Expression (8.1) corresponds Lo a limiting concre[e stress of af"ll(1 | (,.25lu,"')). '|he
allowable stress is reduced for proxirnity to another adjacent bend or t lree surface by
2- I -

CHAPTER 8. DETAILING OF REINFORCEIYENT AND PRESTRESSING STEEL

17n6 term. The applicability ofthis high limiting bearing stress depends on Lhe concrete's
ability lo resist splitting stresses by way of its tensilc strcngLh. As tensile strength does nt
increase in proportion with compressive strength (it increses rther more slowly), the
limit on J.,1 is necessary to void overesLimation of bearing strength. The use of r : 0.85

the

is most appropriate her as the relevnt concretc strcss is a sustaincd compression.

8.4. Anchorage of longitudinal reinforcement

8.4.l. General
2-I-l lclause 8.4.1 ( /.)P requires reinforcement to be adequately anchored t ensure tht the
bond stresses re safely transmittcd to the concrete without longitudinal cracking or spalling.
The transfer of these stresses is mainll' by mechanical locking of the rejnforcement ribs with
the surrounding concrctc, and is dependent on several factors including the shape ofthe bar,
concrete cover, ptesence of transverse reinforcernent and any conlinement from transverse
pressure. The rulcs in the remainder of this section ensure compliance with 2-1-l/clause

2-

l- l/dsuse
8.4.t (r)P

8.4. r(1)P.

Figurc 8.4-1 illustrates the permissible methods ofanchoragc covcred in EC2, other than
by a stright length o I bar. Other n.rechanical devices are permitted, but must be designed and
tested in accordance with the relevant product standards and are beyond the scope of this
guide.
Anchorage failure can take one of three lbrms, illustrated in Fig. 8,4-2, The mechanical
locking of the rein[orcement ribs with thc surrounding concrete leads t resulLant forces
inclined away from the bar acting on the concrete. These forces have a radial component
which can be considered analogous to a pressure acting inside a thick-walled cylinder. The
cylinder has an inner diameter equl to the reinforcing bar diameter and an outer dimetet
equal to the smaller of the botrom cover or half the clear spacing between adjacent bars.
Where the clear bottom cover is greatcr than half the clear spacing to the adjacent bar, a
horizontal split develops at the level of the bars. This lailurc is known as a side split failure.
Where the bottom cover is less than half the clear spacing to the adjacent bar, fce-and-side

split failure occurs, with longitudinal cracking through the bottom cover lollowcd by
splitting long the planc of the bars. If the bottom cover is significantly less than half the
clear spacing to the djcent bar, V-notch failure occurs, with longitudinal cracking
through the bottom cover fbllowed by inclined crackingThe strength of the transverse reinforcement and its spacing along the anchorage length
are significant palameters influencing the anchorage strength of the main bar. The greater
the transverse rcstrint, the greater is the nchrge strength up t certin limit beyond
which the transverse reinforcement contributes no trther.

90"<asl50"

(a) Basic anchorage length, /b, for any

shape measured along th cnirel;ne

lenglh
hook

(c) Equivalenl anchorage

ior standard

Fig.8.4-1.

(b) Equivalent anchorage lenglh

lor slandard bend

lenglh
loop

(d) Equivalnt anchoge

for standard

(e) Wlded tnsverse

br

Methods of anchorage covered in EN 1992-l-l F-rg.8.l

247

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Just lreiore

lailure I|

r
't

ri._______i__

(a) Side split {ailure

c>

aJ2

(b) Fce-and-side

lailurc

d2>

split
c

Ar
\r'
_

(c) V-nolch failure

alz> c

Fig. 8.4-2. Failure paftrns of single anchored bars

EC2 introduces factors adjusting the bsic anchorage length to include for the above
effects. The anchorage rules are empirical. however, and have been chosen to give reson-

2-l-l/clouse
8.4. t (3)

2-l-l/clouse
8.4.r(4)

able match t test data.

Due to the lack of relevant test data, 2-l-l lclause 8,4,113) does not allow bends or hooks
to contribute to compression anchorages. Since no alJowance is given in the code for partial

transmission of the bar force by end bearing, the anchorage requirements for bars in
compression are always at least s onerous as for bars in tension. A further conservatism
is tht the additional clamping from lateral expansion ol the bar under compression is
ignored. Where bars with bends are used to anchor tensile forces, 2-1-l lclause 8,4.1(4)
requircs that concrete failure inside bends is prevented by compl;,ing with the rules discussed

in section 8.3 above.

8.4.2. Ultimate bond stress

2-l-l/clouse
8.4.2(2)

Bond stress is a function of Lhe tensile strength of the concrete, bar size nd position of bar
during concreting. The design value of the ultimate bond stress, /6,1, is given in 2-1-llclause
8.4.2(2 ) lor ribbed bars as:
/."6

2.25

11

11

2.f,t,1

2-l-li(8.2)

where:

r71

coelicient related to thc quality ofthe bond condition and the position of the bar
during concreting Gee 2-l-llFig. 8.2)
4r : 1.0 for'good' bond condilions (e.g. bottom bars and vertical bars)
4r :0.7 fbr all other cses (e.9. top brs, where the concrete is less well compacted),
including for bars in structural elements built with slip-forms, unless it can be shown
is a

that'good' condiLions exisr

is related to the bar size and should be taken as (132 $)/100 for bar dimeters
greter than 32 mm or I -0 otherwisc
/lt6 is the design value of concrete tensile strength with d.r : 1.0. as discussed in section
3.1.6. Due lo the increasing brittleness of high-strength concrete, EC2 recommends
that the vlue of ,td taken here is limited to the vlue obtined for class C60/75

42

ooncrete

8,4.3. Basic anchorage length

2-I-l/clouse
8.4.3(2)

248

The basic anchorage length of a bar, /6,.,,,1, is obtained by assuming an average bond stress,
equal to the uLtimate bond stress, which acts over the full perimeter olthe bar and uniformly
along its length. This leads to the following expression glet rn 2-1-Ilclause 8.4.3(2):
/r,,*a

(/4)(.'.,a/a)

2-l-l(8.3)

CHAPTER

8. DETAILING OF REINFORCEMENT AND

PRESTRESSING STEEL

where d is the bar diameter. /,,1 is the design value fthe ultimate bond stress and o,,1 is thc
design stress ofthe bar t the ultimatc linit state at the position from where the anchorage is
measured.
It is desirable that, generally, anchorage Iengths should be based on the design strength of
the bar considered (i.e. o,a : {.3), although the code allows lower stress in the bar to be
used where reinforcement is not intended to be lully stressed. The reason for this is that
redistribution of moments at the ultimate limit stte may increase the stress in thc bar
beyond the envisaged design value. This recommendation wuld void the potentil for
sudden, brittle failure where the distribution of mon.rents is not as anticipated in the design.
The basic anchorage lcngth applies to stright bars with cover equal to the bar diameter
(the rninimum pennitted by 2-l-1/Table 4.2 regardless of envirnmentl requirements) nd
no trnsverse reinforcement between the anchored bar and the concrete surface. The basic
anchorage length can thercfore always be conservatively taken as the design anchorage
length sce Table 8,4-1. 2-1-l/clause 8.4.4, horvever, my llow a reducrion in this length
as discussed below.
Where bent bars are tsed,2-I-1 lclause 8.4.J(3) requires that the basic anchorage length and
design anchorage length should be measured along the centreline of the bar as in Fig. 8.4- l(a).

2-

l-

l/clause
8.4.3(3)

8.4.4, Design anchorage length

The design anchorage length,

1b,r, is obtained by reducing the bsic anchorge length to

allow for the bcneficial ellcts of additional cover, transverse reinforcetlrent. transverse
clatltping pressure and bar shape for bent brs. The reductions are made by the introduction

of coefilcients to take account of these cffects. The design anchorage length is given in 2-1-.1/
clause 8.4.4/11 as
/bd

: .lrl.l2.ll.r4aj/b,qa )

/U.,nin

2-1

-t

(.8

2-l-I/douse
e.4.4(t)

.4)

where:

a\
u1

accounts for the shape of the bars (equal to 1.0 for stright bar in tension)
accounts for the efiect ofconcrete cover (equal to 1,0 for a straight bar in tension
with cover equal to the bar dimeter and 0.7 with covcr equal to thrcc times thc bar
diameter). The relevant dcnilion ofcover to use is not stted in EN 1992 but cluse
4.3(2) ofEN 1990 states tht'the dimcnsions specified in the design may be taken as
charcteristic valucs'. This implies the cover to use is c,,o,n. The use of cn,,;n will
produce a more conservative anchorage length
ccounts for Lhe effect ofconfinement by transverse reinforcemcnt (equal to 1.0) for
bars in tension with minimum transverse reinfrcement, I 1.,.-,n, in accordance
with 2-l-liTable 8.2. For greater amounts of transverse reinforcement placed
between the anchoring bar and the concrete surfacc, j reduces to a minimum of
0.7. Transverse reinforcement placed inside the anchoring br is. however, ineffective as it does not cross the relevant plares in Fig. 8.4-2(b) and (o) and r-i, - 1.Q.

This is forced by the value of 1:0 from 2-l-l/Fig. 8.4 (reproduced here as
Fig. 8.4-3) to be used in the expression cr1 : I K
ccounts for lhe influence of one or more welded lransverse bars (of diameterol > 0.6r) along the dcsign anchorage length (equal to 1.0 in the bsence of
O5

weldcd transverse reinforcement and 0.7 otherwise)

ccounts for l.he ffect of any pressure along the design anchoragc lcngth, lransvers to the plane of spliLLing as indicated in Fig. 8.4-2 (equl to 1.0 for bars in
tension in thc absence of transverse pressure)
is the minimum anchoragc length if no other limittion is pplied:

for anchorages in tension: i6.;n > max{0-3/6..qa: l0d; l00rnm}

1br anchorages in compression: /6,-;" > max{0.6/6.,06; 10$; 100mmi

The full range ofvalues for al, c2, cr3, {rq nd n5 are given in 2-1-liTablc 8.2. 2-l-1/clausc
8-4.4(1) requires tht the product o2l.1s is not tken less than 0.7. For compression

249

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Table 8.4-1.

Basic anchorage lengths 16,.6

Concrete cylinder
strength
(MP)
25

dimter
(mm)

for 8500 straight bars

Good bond
condi(ions
/b,.qd

t0
t2
t6

32

30

t009

| 441

t29 |
t755

r845
7507

t0
t2
t6

572

6t3
Bl7

893

t02 |
1276

45

t44

,o

t554

t634
2270

t0

322

461

l7

347

I6

5t6

553
737

20

645
806

I t52

40

921

t032

1474

40

t402

2003

t0
t7
t6

295

421

354

20
25

590
738

506
674
843

t054

944

r349

40

t283

t832

t0

273
327
436
545

390
468
779

873

1247

t2
20

472

974

25

50

40

I t86

t0
t2

254

32

305
407
508
636
814

40

I t05

20

.0)

53

429

25

25

Poor bond
conditions
L,qa (mm)

692
922

20

35

404
484
646
807

20

40

(mm)

( {xcr

694

436
581

908
| 162
|

579

anchorages, only the welding of transverse bars to the bar being anchored reduces the
anchorage length lrom /6,.u6. Often, it \\,-ill not be practical to lake advantge of the above
rcduction factors in design since, ifthis is done, the anchorage nd lp lengths become depcndent on the amount of trnsverse reinforcemelt and cover. For a givcn bar dimeter, these
paramcters may vary throughout lhe bridge and a change t the size of transverse bars
during the design process could lead to re-detailing all the laps and anchorage lengths for
the main bars, Table 8.4-l therefore gives basic anohorage lengths 15..oa for straight 8500

250

CHAPTER

(a)

K= 0.10

8. DETAILING OF

REINFORCEMENT

(b) K= 0.0s

Fig. 8.4-3. Values of K for beams and

(c)

K=

AND

PRESTRESSING STEEL

slabs

reinl'orcement bars assuming all the above coemcients arc equal to 1.0, taking ccl : 1.0 (for
the reasons discussed in section 3.1-6 of this guide) and assuming the bars are fully stressd to
500/ L l5 : 435 MPa.
For bent bars. the design anchorage length calculted above is generally measured around
the bend, as shown in Fig.8.4-1(a). As a sin.rplified conseltive alternative to the above
rules, EC2 allows the tension anchorage f certain shapes of bar shown in 2-1-l/Fig. 8.1

to

be provided as an equivalent anchorage length, /b,eq. The length /6,"0 is defined in

Fig. 8.1 and my be taken as the tbllowing fr om 2-1-llclause 8.4.4(2):

2-l-l/clouse
8.4.4(2)

o116,.01 for shapes shown in 2-l-l/Figs 8.1(b) ro 8.1(d)

o415,.04 for shapes shown in 2-1-llFig. 8,1(e)
rvhere ay, ,e4 and /6,.01 are as defined above.

8,5. Anchorage of links and shear reinforcement

All links and shear reinforcement need to be adequately nchored nd this cn

be achieved
by means ofbends and hooks or bv welded reinforcement. In order to avoid the lilure ofthe
concrt:te on the inside ofthe bend. or at least to void n explicit check ofconcrete Fressurl:
in the bend, 2-I-I lclause 8.5(1./ requires a longitudinal bar to be placed in the corners of
hooks and bends. The bar size is not stated, but, for compatibility with thc requirenents
of2-1-l/clause 11.3, it should have a diameter at least equl to tht ofthe \nk. 2-1-l lclause
8.5(2) refers to 2-1-1/Fig. 8.5 for allowable details. Those for bent and hooked bars are

2-l-l/douse
8.s(r )

2-l-l/douse
8.s(2)

shown in Fis. 8,4-4.

100 but >70 mm

@6..,0u,*r0..
ll \L

il .
*tf
tl

ll

ll

'U*

(a)
Fig.8.4-4, Anchorage requirements for

(b)

links with bends and hooks

8.6. Anchorage by welded bars

EC2 allows additional anchorage to the basic resistances in 2-1-1/clauses 8.4 and 8.5 to be
obtained by utilizing transverse ba$ welded to tbe main reinforcrement. Such details
effectivcly allow some load to bc taken in bearing by the transvrse bar which reduces the
required bond length for a given force. 2-l-1/clause 8.6 gives rules for determining the force
takcn by the welded transverse bar and hence the redustion in required anchorage length.

251

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

8.7. Laps and mechanical couplers

8.7.l. General
2-l-l/douse

2-I-I lctaase

8.7. r (t )P

.
.
.

8.7.1 (

llP

allows the transfer of lbrce lrom one bar to nother to be achieved by:

lapping the brs, with or without bends, hooks or loops

and section 8,4.4 fbr equivalent anchorage lengths);
welding;

(see

2-l-llFig.

8.1 for definitions

mechanical devices such as couplers.

Commentry on the rules for each of these methods is given in the lbllowing sections.

8.7.2. Laps

2-l-l/clouse
8.7.2(t)P

2-l-l/clsuse
8.7.2(2)

The considerations of anchorage failure discussed in section 8.4 above can also be applied
to lapped bars. Where two bars are spliced side by side, the two concrete cylinders to
bc considered for each bar interct to form an oval ring instead of two circular rings
in section. The three potential tilure patterns of side splitting, face-and-side splitting and
V-notch failure are similar to thosc indicated in Fig. 8.4-2 for single bars.
For spliced bars lapped side by side, the above considcration is complicated by the uneven
distribution ofbond stress along the lenglh ofthe trvo brs nd the uncerLainty in inclination
of thc resultant lorccs from the mechanical interlocking of the bar dbs within the surrounding concrete. The treatment of the design of laps is therefore again based on matching test
data. This shows that for the samc bar diameter, bar centres, cover and concrete strength.
thc same lap length is required for well staggered laps as ftrr anchorage lngths However,
where laps re not sulliciently staggered, the percentage of bars lapped al a section does
become influenlial ol required lap lengths. The factors used in EC2 to adjust the basic
anchorage length to obtain the design anchotage lergths are therefore rugmented hy a
further factor to account fbr the percentagc ol bars lapped at a section.
The dcsign oflaps and requirements for lap lengths are covcred in 2-l-1,/clauses 8.7.2 and
8.7.3. Provided tht the design of laps is in accordance with these rules, the detiling is
deemed to be sulTicient to adequately transmit the forces liom one bar to the next without
spalling the concrete in the vicinity of the joint and without generating unacceptably large
cracks, as required by 2-l-Ilclause 8.7.2(1)P.
2-1-l lclause 8.7.2(2) generally requires tht laps betweeu should not 'normally' be locatcd
in areas of high stress and that, rvherever possiblc, laps are stggered symmetrically at a
section. While this has been adoptcd as good practice in the UK, there re inevitably
some situations in bridge design u'here these requirenents cannot be fulfilled .tn in-situ
balanced cantilever design, for exarrple, bars must be lapped at segment joints, regardless
of stress level. Although it can be attempted t stagger the length ol bars projecting lom
a previous segment, where larger diameter bars arc required, such detailing ol'tcn becomes
in.rpossible within the constraints ol thc segment lengths. These problems lead to the use

of the

Fig. 8,7-

252

ord 'normally' above.

f.

Requirements for adjacent laps from ?-l-tlFi. 8.7

CHAPTER 8. DETAILING OF REINFORCEMENT AND PRESTRESSING STEEL

Bcaring the practicalities ofstaggering laps in mind, the arrangemcnt oflapped bars should
be in accordance with 2-l-l/Fig- 8.? (reproduced as Fig. 8.7-l), as specilied in 2-I-l lclause
8,7.2( I ) where:

2-l-l/clouse
8.7.2(3)

the clear transverse distance between tw lapped bars should not be greater thn 40 or

50mm, otherwise the lap length should be increased by a length equal to the clcar
spce between the bars. This increase is required in order to take account of the
inclination of the compression struts by which force is transferred from one bar to the

.
.

otl'rer:

the cler dista[ce between adjacent bars in adjacent laps should not be less than 2$ or
20

um:

[hc longitudinal distance between two adjaccnt laps should not bc less than 0 3i. This is
eflectively the definition o[ a sLaggered lp.

Where the provisions of2-l-17clause 8.?.2(3) are met, 2'1-lldause 8.7,2(1) alows 100"/"
of the bars in tensjon to be lapped lrhere the bars are all in one layer. Examples of 1007u
lapping in this wy are shown in Fig. 8-7-3 of Worked examplc 8.7-1. It is unfortunate
tht 2-l-l/Table 8.3 and 2-l-1/Fig. 8.8 introduce another definition of the percentage ol
laps. Tl.ris lattcr definition is used fbr detelmining,16 and trnsverse reinforcement requirements in 2- 1- lTclause 8.7.4. If the bars are in several layers, only 50Yo lapping is permitted by
clause 8,7.2(4). In this situation, it is not cler what distance must be left bctween laps in
adjacent layers or indeed over what layer separation the restriction applies. For longitudinaL
separtin, it was simply the intention not to hve identical lapping arrangements overlying
each other in each layer, i.e. the stggering requirement of maintaining 0.3/6 between
adjacent laps should be maintained betwccn layers as well as within layers

2-l-l/douse
8.7.2(4)

Layer separation is clcarly relevnt to the requirement to stgger laps in different

layers. Thc rcquirement need not apply to bars in opposite faces of a heam. Where a slab
is in flexure alone, the top and bottom layers of reinforcement in one direction will not be
in tension together, so 100% of the bars in each layer could be lapped together without
considcration of the interction between layers. Howevet, for deck slabs with local and
global efiects, such that both top and bottom lyers could be in tension togethcr' strictly
the laps shoukl also be stggered betweeu layers so that only 507o of the bars are
lapped-

2-l-lr'clause 8.7.2(4) also allows all bars in compression and secondary (dis ibution)
reinforcemcnt to be lapped in one section. However, for two-way spanning slabs typical in
bridge decks, it is recommended that. wherever possible, laps are staggered in both directions
since there is not usually one direction that can clearly be considered as'sccondaly'.

8.7.3. Lap length

The following equaLion is giver, in 2-1-llclause 8.7'3(1) for the design lap lcngth, /:

/0:

.l1Qr2.rlrr5o61b,..t1

/0,n1.'

2-

l- l(8.10)

2-

l- l(8.1 1)

where:
/n.,n;,,

max{0-3n616.,0a; 15,;200 rntn}

v/6Jtr 3 1.5 and )1.0, where p1 is the percentage of reinforcement in a

section lpped within 0.65/6 from the centre of the lap length considered. Considering the
laps iJlustrated in Fig. 8.7-l as an example. thc centres of tlie dghGhand set of laps are
further wy fiom the centres of the left-hand set than 0.65/0 and therefore only 50% of
the reinforcsmcnt is lapped at any one section; thus a6 can be taken as I 41.
16,,06 is calculated fiom 2- l- 1/Expression (8-3) and values for a1, o2, .rr and a5 are taken
from 2-l-liTable 8.2. as discussed in section 8.4.4 above. tn the clculation lor o3, however'
2-l-liclausc 8.?.3(1) specif,es that X,4sl,min should be taken as 1.01"(o.a/"(a), with I' taten
as the are of one lapped bar. This requirement is discussed further below.
and 116:

2-l-I/douse
8.7.3(t )

DSIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

8.7.4. Transverse ieinforcement in the lap zone

2-l-I/clouse
8.7.4. t (2)

2- [- I /douse

e.7.4. t (3)

The effect of the presence ol' transverse reinforcement in preventing splitting t the ends of
lapped bars is taken into account by the use of the (rr fctor in calculating the design lap
length in 2-l - l/Expression (8.10). As discussed in scction 8.4,4, it will generally not be practical to tke bcnefit in reducing lap lengths fbr excess transverse reinforcement.
Where the dimeter of the lapped bars is lcss than 20 mm or less than 25olc of thc reinforcement is lapped in one section (presumably less than or equal to 25% was intended so that
quadruple staggering, as in Workcd exan.rple 8.7-1, arrangement (b) complies), 2-1-1/
clause 8.7.4.1(2) deems the minimum transverse reinforcement already provided as links
or disibution reinforcement to be sumcient to cater for the transverse tensile fofces
which occur t laps without any further justification.
Where the diarneter of the lapped bars is greater than or equal to 20mm, 2-I-llctaase
8.7.4.1(3) requires the tfansyerse rcinforcement to hve a total area, X,4",, of not less
than Lhe area, 1,, of one lapped bar assuming that the lapped bar is fully stressed. If
l, : X,4,t- o: - 1.0 due to its n.rodilied deflnition in 2-1-l/clause 8.7,3(l). The trnsverse
rcinforcement is required to be placed pcrpendicular to the direction of the lapped reinforcement at no more thn l50nm centres. For skew reinforcement. the quantity of skcw
transverse reinforcement required could be increased so as to provide either the equivlent
axial resistance or stiffness perpendicular Lo the lapped bar as if the bars were placed perpendicularly. lf the reinforcement ratio fbr set of skew bars is p* at an ngle @ from the
perpendicular to the lapping bars, the former possibility leads to an elTective reinforcement
rtio transverse to the lapping bars of p* cos2 p, while the latter gives p" cosa 4. The latter
option is the more conservtive and is recommended here.
Transverse reinforcement is required by 2-l-11blause S.7.4.1(l) to be placed between the
lapped bars and the concrete surface. Clearly, this is only really practical in beams and
one-way spanning slabs; Ibr two-way spanning slabs, thin deck slabs where transverse
reinfrcement needs to be on the uter layer 1o maximize bending resistance and in the
webs of box girders where the links are also providing ben<Iing resistance, it is inevitable
that laps will smeLines need to be made in the main reinforcement in an outer layer. In
such circumstances, where it is impracticl or impossible to comply with this requirement,
the brs could be quadrupely staggered as in Fig. 8.?-3(b) so as to comply with the criterin
in 2-l-1/clause 8-7.4.1(2) lor needing no special consideration of trnsverse reinforcement.
(a) Bars in tension

)i4",12

(b) Bars always in compression

Fig. 8-7.2. Transverse reinforcement for laooed bars

254

EA{l.t'2

CHAPTER

8. DETAILING OF

REINFORCEMENT

AND

PRESTRESSING STEEL

could reasonably be used, thus ignoring any benefits from

transverse reinforccment in line with the similr treatment of anchorages. Strictly, the latter
would not comply with 2-1-1lclause 8.7,4.1(3).
Where more than 507o of the rcinlorcement is lpped at any one scction, nd the distancc
between adjacent laps (defined as dimension a in Fig. 8.7-l) is less than or equal to l0S,
2-l-l/clause 8.7.4.1(3) requires that the transvcrse bars should be formed by links ot'Ubars anchorecl into the body of the section. This has not previously been required by UK
practicc so the need for this provision is questionable. lt is not prctical to provide links
in thin slbs. It is also not clear whether evcry bar should be eucloscd by a link leg or
perlups should be within I50mm of a bar enclosed by a link, as assumed fbr restraint of
comprcssion bars in section 9.5.3 of this guide. Staggcring laps in accordance with
Fig. 8.7-1 ensures that there is not more Lhan 50o/o of reinforcemenl lapped t a section
and the requirement for transverse reinforcement to be provided as links does not then arise.
2J-I lclause 8.7.4.1f4) requires that the transverse reinforcement calculated above should
be positioned at the ends of the laps, as shown in Fig. 8.7-2,

Alternatively, a value of o: of

I .0

Lilbt:

2-l-l/clouse
8.7.4. t (4)

l",a

,5J

d5:.::?5.l.

255

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

;,.,]
>0.3 >0.36 6 -0.96
6 .:.'
.:.n
!.:

6
:

:ii ijii
i ii: i-li
,,
rr 4 i,:riTitlTi]]TTr:
.........ii',

--lmr rri-r-irr-r---

,++itffi

::
tl

nus ror worst ca3e ( I on frars. rransement (a))i

/0.,n,"

> max{0.3 x

1.4

>

r.o x

I l51

t|l;.-.",
(a) /o

"i=:

.5; 15

25; 200}

4M nm

o.

;
I

:' :'i' I :' I :' lt

-f;
uemm

"l:

ll,.'..,-.'

256

CHAPTER

8. DETAILING OF REINFORCEMENT AND

PRESTRESSING STEEL

8.7.5. Laps of welded mesh fabrics mad of ribbed wires

The use of welded mesh fabric reinforcement is permitted by EC2 but is nol commn in
bridge design due to its reduced fatigue performance. Of the two options for lapping given
in 2-l-1,/clause 8.7.5.1, intermcshing or laycring, intermeshing will be most contmon in
bridge design as it has to be used where fatigue loads are expected. The requirements for
lapping intermeshed bars are tl.re same as for bars, excepl that the transverse reinlbrcement
on the mesh cnnot be counted in the calculation of crr, but no further transvcrse reinforcement need be provided.

8.7.6. Welding (additional sub-section)

Welding requirernents are not mentioned in section 8 of EC2-l-1. The requirements for
welding two bars togcther arc givcn by EC2 in 2-1-1/clause 3.2.5.

8.8. Additional rules for large diameter bars

t or

cascs where largc diamctcr bars arc uscd, tests have shown

tht the splitting forces and

dowel ction are significantly greater than for smaller diameter bars. 2J-I lclausc 8.8(1)
defines large diameter bars as those with a diameter greater than drurg". The value of o1,.r"
is ntionlly determined prmeter and EC2-1-1 recommends a value of 32mm- This
will be increased to 40 mm in the UK National Annex to be consistent with current practice,
where bars of 40 mm diameter are often used in abutments, cellular decks, piles and pile caps
for erample. This will mean that the provisions of 2-l-l/clause 8.8 should rarely apply.
The rest of 2-l-liclause 8.8 defines additional detailing rules that must be satislied when
using bars of a large diameter. The rules have been developed to account for lhe incresed
splitting iblces and dowel action and have been based on the rccommendtions given in
Model Cotle 90.'Thc additioual dctailing rules covcr the following:

.
.
.

2-l-l/douse
8.8(t )

crack control and surface reinforcement reouiremenls:

additional trnsverse reinforcement at straight anchorages;
laps.

Where large diameter bars are used, 2-1-l lclause 8.8(2) requires tht crack control is
achieved by either direct calculation or by incorporating additional surface rcinl'orcement
(see Annex J of this guide and 2-1-1i'clause 8.8(8)). Direct calculation will normally be
chosen as it will often be impractical to provide additional surface reinforcemcnt (e.g. in
piles).

2-I-l ldaase 8.8(4) requires lhat largc diameter bars are generally not lapped unlcss

sections are at lest 1m thick or where the stress in the bars is not greater thn 80% of
the design ultimate strength.
Where straight anchorages are used for large dimeter bars, 2-1-l lclause 8.8/5J requires
links, in addition to those required for shear, to be provided as conning reinforcement in

2-l-l/clouse
8.8(2)

2-

l- l /dause
8.8(4)

2-l-l/clause
8.8(s)

257

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-l-l/clouse
8.8(6)

TO EN I992-2

zones where ffansverse compression is not present, This additionl reinforcement is defined
tn 2-l-llclause 8,8(6) as being not less Lhan Lhc following:

A"n:0.25A,nt in

the direction parallel to the tension fce

2-r-1(8.12)

4""

2- 1- li (8.l3)
- 0.254"n2 in the direction perpendicular to the tension face
rvhere l" is the cross-sectional rea of a single anchored bar, z1 is lhe nunber of layers

anchored t the same point in the section considered and n2 is the number of bafs anchored
in each Jayer. This additional transverse rcinforccnent is required to be unilbrmly distributed along the anchorage zone with bars t centres nt exceeding five times the size ofthe longitudinal reinfbrcement. EC2 does not indicate how many legs of links are required per
longitudinal bar, but, Model Corlc 906 suggests that 2 lcgs of a stirrup can surround 3 bars
per layer t most.

8.9. Bundled bars

2-Udouse

8.9.r(t0t)

Generally, the rules for individual bals also apply for bundled bars as long as the dditinal
EC2 detailing requirements for bundlcd bars are met. 2-2lclause 8.9.1(101) requires that
bundled bars arc of the same type nd grade, but may be of different sizes providing the

ratio of diameters does not excccd

2-l-l/clouse
8.e. | (2)

8. 10. Prestressing
8.10.1, Tendon layouts

2-l-l/clouse
8. t 0.

1.7.

For design purposes, the bundle of bars should be trcated as a single bar having the sarne
area and centre of gravity as the bundle, but the spacing nd cover requirements should be
applied to the outer edge of the bundle- For same size bars. the equivalent diameter, on, is
g|en n 2-I-l lclaase 8.9.1(2) as ": (b\E; I 55mm, where n6 is the number of bars jn
the bundle. The number of bars in a bundle should be limited to no more thn 4 for verticl
bars in compression (where bond conditions have heen shown to be besl) or at laps, or lo 3
for all other cases. This is to ensure the bond and nchorge chrcteristics f bundled bars
do not stray too far fiom test cascs against which the empirical fbrmulae have been calibrated. Where two touching bars are positioned above one another in regious classified as
having good bond conditions, the bars need not be treted as bundled.
2-1-17'clauses 8.9.2 and 8.9-3 cover anchorage and laps respectively. These give requirements for staggering bars within the bundle themselves in some situations.

tendons

EC2 gives rules fbr the spcing of post-tensioning ducts and pre-tensioned strands. These
spcings are intended to ensure tht plcing nd compacting ol the concrete can be
carried out satisfctodly and that sumoient bond is available between the concrete and the
tendons, as required by 2-l-l lclwse 8.10.1.1 (l )P-

t.r (t)P
Pre-tensioDed tendons

2-l-[/clouse
8.t

0.

Minimr.rm clear horizontal and vertical spcings f individual pre-tensioned strands are
shown in Fig, 8.10-1, where d, is the rnaxinun aggregate size. Other layouts, including
bundling, can be used, but only if test results demonstrate satisfacLory ultimatc behaviour
and tlrat placement and compaction ofthe concrete is possible 2-l-llclause 8.10.1.2(1).

t.2(t)
Post-tensioning ducts

2-I-l/clouse
e. r0.

.3(t )P

2-l-l lclause 8.10.1.3(1)P requircs ducts to be positioned such that concrete cn be placed
without damaging the ducts nd tht the concrete can rcsist thc forces imposed by
terdons in curved ducts. Minimum clear spacing between ducts, bsed on the former requirement, are shown in Fig. 8.10- l. These duct spacings are, however. unlikely to be adequate to
comply with the lalter requirement \ryhere the tendn profiles are tightly curved and thcre is a
tendency fbr the concrete between ducLs to split under the bursting stresses generated by the
Tdial force, as shown nr Fig. 8.10-2(a). In this situation, eithcr thc spacings should be

255

CHAPTER

8. DETAILING OF REINFORCEMENT AND

PRESTRESSING STEEL

=4n5
>a

>50 mm

_ol
=,il
>40mm

o
a

o-a o_
o_

:ff

o'

r-i:ii.'

4u mm

>20

(b) Slnds

(a) Ducrs

Fig.8.l0-1.

al- ---L'20

Minimum clear spacing beween ducts and between pre-tensioned strands

increased or the concrete should be reinlbrced between tlle ducts. Curved ducts may
also require an increase in cover perpendicular to the plane of the bend. Recommended
duct spacings and covers for different duct dimeters and bend radii were given in
BS 5400 Part 4,' and these are reproduced as Tables 8-10-1 and 8.10-2. Tendons will
sometimes ls need tying back into the main body of the section if the bend is such that
the duct pulls against the cover. This is common where tndons arc placed in webs curved
in plan or flanges curved in clcvation and a suitablc reinforcement detail is shown in

Fig. 8.10-2(b).
2-1-1 lclause 8.10.1.J (2) states that ducts for post-tensioned mcmbers should not normally
be bundled except in the case of a pair of ducts placed vertically one above the othcr. Particular care should be taken if this is done in a thin deck slab, such as rnay occur in balanced

cantilever construction, as the transvcrse shear resislance of the slab can be significanlly
reduced at the duct positions, prticuldy while ducts are un-grouted.

8.10.2. Anchorage of pre-tensioned tendons

8.10.2.1. General

The bond strength applicable to the design of anchoring of pre-tensioned tendns depends
on the type ol loading. Thc highest values are applicablc to the initil transmission length,
1or, since the tendons thicken against the concrete in the trnsmission zone at transfer s
the strss in them reduces. Lower values are applicable lor calculation of the anchorage
length, 16, at ultimate limit states where the force in the tendon increases and the tendon
diameter rcduces, thus shrinking away from the concrete. These dilTcrent bond values are
reflected in the calculation of iniLial transmission length and ultimte limit state anchorage
length, as shown in Fig. 8.10-4.

(b)

(a)

8, | 0-2. (a) Splitting of concrete betvveen ducts due

resisting pull-out

Fig,

to

curyature forces and (b) reinforcement

2-l-l/clquse
8.t 0. t.3(2)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Table 8.10-1. Minimum distnce between cenrrelines of ducts in Dlne of curvature. in mm

Duct internal diameter (mm)

19 30 40
Radius

s0

80

of

curvature f
duct (m)
2

90

t00

t20

t30 t40

t50

t60

t70

Tendon force (kN)

796 387 960 t337 t920 2640 3360 4320 5t83 60t9 7200 8640 9424
I

t0 t40 150 485 700 960

s5 70 t75 245 350 480 r0
38 60 t20 t65 23s 320 4 t0
6

90
80

t0

t75 240
140 t95
t60

t25
t00

t2
t4
t6
I8

140

t3200

Radii not normlly

785

940

525

630
470

used

3t5

730 870
545 655
440 525
365 435

t75

270

t60

235
210
200

275
245
220

305

395

245
205

3t5

t80

20

t0336 248

l5

22

375
330

290

t045

785 855
630 685
525 570
450 490
39s 430
350 380

r5

265

240

285 3 t0
265 285
260 280

24
26

345

940
750
625
535
470
420
375
340

3t5
300

8t5
680
585
510
455

800

4t0

480
435
400
370
345
340

370
340
320

30

745
600

32
34
36

40

38 60 80 t00 t20 t40

Note l. The tndon force shown

is

t60

180 200 220

240

the maximum normlly availble for the given size of duct, (Taken

260

280

as 80% of

300

the charcterhtic strength of the

Note 2. Values less than 2 x duct internal diameter are not included.

2-l-l/clouse

8.t0.2.2(t)

8.10.2.2. Transfer of prestress

The transmission length at transfer is determined lrorn 2-1-l lclause 8.10.2.2(1) ssuming a
constant bond stress r, where:
.fnpr

rlprrh

"f"'dQ)

2-l-li(8.15)

with:

\pr 4r :
ird(4

2.7 tbr indented wires or 3.2 for 3- and 7-wire strands

1.0 for good bond conditions (as defined in EC2-1-1 Fig. 8.2) or 0.7 otherwise
is the concrete design tensile strcngth at time of release

2-|-l/clause

The basic value of transmission length is given in 2-1-llclause 8.10.2.2(2) by:

8.r0.2.2(2)

l$ :

olo2(bo

pno

Jtlpl

2-r-r(8.r6)

wherc;

cit : 1.0 for gradual release or 1.25 for sudden release

a2 - 0.25 for circular tendons or 0.19 fbr 3- and 7-wire strands
is the nominal diamctcr of tendon
o
.'pn 0 is Lh(j tendon stress just after release
2- l-l /clouse

8.t0.2.2(3)

The design value of the transmission length should be tket from 2-1-l lclausc 8.10.2.2( j )
as eilher /n1t : 0.8/pr or lpo: 7.2lpr. whichever is most adverse for the check being carried

out. The shorter length,

/o,1, will usully be used for checking stresses at transfer at beam

ends, as the increasing dead load sagging moments away fiom the supports help to

260

CHAPTER

8. DETAILING OF REINFORCEMENT AND

Table 8.10.2, Minimum cover to ducts perpendicular to

plne

PRESTRESSING STEEL

of curvture, in mm

Duct internal diameter (mm)

19 30 40
Radius

curvature of
duct (m)
2

t00

s0

120

t40

r30

t50

r60

t70

Tendon force (kN)

296 387 960 t337 t920 2640 3360 4320 sr83 6019 7200 8640 9424 t0336 11248

50

55
50

rss 220
70 r00

50 65

t0

50

445

t45

205

65
60

t6

55

t8

50

350
220

L65
t65

t25
95 |5
85 t00
75 90
70 8s
65 80
65 75
60 70
55 70
55 65
50 65

90

55

20
22

24
28
30

8s
80
80
75
75
70
70
65
65
60
60

55
34

55
55

50

50

50

50
50

50

s0

Nole: The tendn frce shown is the maximum normally avilable

420

265
t85
t40
t25

t50
t20
0
t00 |5
95 |0
90 t05

60
60

38

13200

Radii not normally

320

t7
t4

40

lf

r00
95

90
85
85

80

80
75
75

70
70

used

310 375
220 270
t65 205
t45 t65
t30 t50
t25 t40
I t5 r35
ll0 125
t05 120
r00 | 15
i00 I l0
95 105
90 t05
90 100
85 I00
85 95
80 90
80 90

for rhe given size of duct. (Tken

460
330
250
200

360

395

215

240

27s
t85
t75

t70
t60
t50
t45
t40
t30

165
155

t50
t45
t35
r30

t2s
t20
t20

t30
t25
r20

0
0

l15
I t5
I t0

t05
t00

as 80% of

the

300
200

t90
t80

t70
t60
r55

t50
r45

t,rc
t35
| 30

t25
t25

t20

ch

260
215
205
t90
r80
t75
t65
160
155
r50
145
t40
r40
t35
t30

3t5
260
225

2l5
205

t95
t85
180

t70
t65
160

t55
t50
t50
t45

acteristic strength of the

prevent overstress in tension aL thc beam top and in conpression aL the bottom under the
elcctq nf nrecfr<{

2-1-llclause 8.10.2.2(4) allows the concrete stresses to be assumed to have a linear

distribution outside the dispersion length, /a;"n. as shown iu Fig. 8.10-3:

t_

fui+: /1it+a-

2-

8.10.2.3. Anchoroge of tensile force

2-l-l/clouse
8.t0.2.2(4)

l-l i (8.19)

the ultimote limit stote

At the ultimatc limit state, the lblce in the strands increases due to bending and shear and the
anchorage ofthe strands needs to be chccked. A check is only, however. necessry ccording
to 2-1-1 lclause 8.10,2.Jf1), u,here the concrete tnsile stress exceeds/;tk.0 05 so this check will
generally onJy alTect beans with strands which re de-bonded t the bean ends, such that
these strands are nchored at higher momcnt positions.

/l\
la.p

2-l-l/douse
8. t0.2.3(t)

/l\
/l

Fig. 8.l0-3, Distance at which concrete sesses are uniform

261

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

(t

)r

ipnll

'---;-*l

.*l

Dislaflc from end

I

Fig. 8,l0-4, Stresss in anchorage zone of pre-tensioned tendons a! release ( l) and at uldmate limit
stre {2)

The bond strength for anchorage in the ultimatc limit state is obtained frm 2-1-I lclause

2-l-l/dause
e.t 0.2.3(2)

8.10.2.3(2 ):
.frpa

rlpz\rt1,r

2- l

l(8.20)

whele:

: 1.4 for indented wires or 1-2 for ?-wire strands

is as above
should not be taken higher than lhat for C60/75 concrete without special investigation as higher strength concretes are more prone to brittle bond failure

1lp2

nl

The total anchorage length fr nchring tendon with stress opd is obtained from

2-|-l/clquse
8.t0.2.3(4)

2-l-1/

clause 8.10.2,3 ( 4 ):
pa

1p,:

* a2(ooj on--)/.pa

2-r-11(8.21)

where oom- is the prestress after all losses and the other terms are defined aboveDetermination of lhis anchorage length is illusLrated in Fig. 8.10-4.
8.10.2.4. Tronsverse stresses from burcting ond spolling (odditionol subseaion)

No guidance is given in EN l992section 8.10 on the clcultion of transvrse stresses at

anchoragc zones ol pre-tensioned melnbersr although they do still occur and must be
considered in design. The behaviour is similar to that for post-tensined members, descdbed
in 8.i0.3 below, but the lengths of the primary prisms for bursting are longer due to the
transfer of prestress over an anchorage length rather than through a mechanical anchorage
device. The length ofthe overall equilibrium zone is similarly increased and typically a strut-

and-tie diagram similar to that

in Fig.8.l0-7(d) will be relevant- Consideration of these

ffects typically leads to the link reinforcement being increased t bem ends, Model Cotle
906 gives greater detail for the analysis of pre-tensioned beams, including determination of
the lengths of prisms and calculation methods for the reinforcement necessary to tontrol
bursting and spalling.

8.10.3. Anchorage zones of post-tensioned members

An anchorage zone is the area where the concen ted prestress force spreads out over the
full member cross-scction. In design, attention has to be given Lo:

.
.
.
2-l-l/clouse
8.

r0.3(2)

the highly stressecl compression concrete in the immediate viciniLy of the anchorgesi
bursting stresses generted in the localized area of the nchorge;
transvcrse tensile forces arising fion any further spread olload outside this localized area-

2-I-l lclaase 8.10.3 (2) requires the design prestress force used in the local verifictins to
be in accordance with 2-l-1/clause 2.4.2.2(3), which contains recomrnended partial Ioad

CHAPTER

8. DETAILING OF

REINFORCEMENT

AND

PRESTRESSING STEEL

factor of l.2. 2-1-llclause 8,10.3(3) requires that the bearing stress behind nchof plates
should be checkcd in accordance with the relevnt ETA. In addition, 2-2,/Annex
J.104.2(102) requires the minimum spacings and edge disLanccs rccommended for the
nchorages according to the relevant ETA t be obseNed. The determination of the
tensile fbrces from the dispersal of the prestress can be done entirely wilh sLrut-and-tie
nrodels and if the reinfbrcement design stress is limired to 250MPa, 2-2lclause 8.10.3(104)
permits no check on serviceability cl'ack widths to be made. It is not clear whether this
stress limittion should be mct with the ULS partial load factor required by 2-l-17'clausc
8.10.3(2) applied, but obviously it is conservative to include it.
2-2lclaase 8.10,3(106) requires 'particular consideration' to be given to the design of
anchorage zones u.ith two or more anchored tendons and then invokes some additional
rules in 2-2,/Annex J. The need for these supplementary rules is not clear (the strut-and-tie
rules sufice) and they arc not required for the designing of anchorage zones in buildings.
8. I 0.3.

l.

2-l-l/clouse
8.t0.3(3)

2-2/clouse

L r0.3(r04)

2-2/clouse
8.

t0.3(r 06)

Bursting reinforcement (oddional sub-seaion)

Reinforcement is required in a zone local to the anchorage (called a primary prism) to

prcvent local bursting. This my be determined from local strut-and-tie models f type
indicated in Fig. 6.5-1. A method is also given in Informative Annex J of EN 1992 which
is described below. It has many shortcomings, including botl.r poLenlial double-counting
of reinforcemcnt from bursting and overall equilibrium and lack of guidance on where to
place spalling feinforsement. It only applies, ho$ver. to zones where there are two or
n.rore ancholages 2-2lAaaex J.I04.2(I0l ). This is intended to overcome the problems of
double-counting rcinforcement if applied to single nchorges, as discussed in section
8,10.3.3 below. It is still not always successful in this respect and, as the check does not
dcpcnd on the shape of the menber, the reinforcement requirements cnnot lways be
justifled from strut-and-tic analysis or finite element modelling,
As a consequence ofthe above, and as Annex J is informative only, it is recommended here
tht bursting reinforccment be determined fbllowing the method of CIRIA Guide l.2r The
latter is consistent with the strut-and-tie approach of clause 6.5 as rcquired by 2-2,/clause
8.10.3(104). lt may then be checked that Annex -T does not require more reinforcement
within the localized bursting area it defines. If necessary, the reinforcement can be locally
increased to accommodte the Annex J requiremenls.

L4ANNEX

l.|04.2(t0t)

Method of EC2-2 nnex J

In 2-2iAnnex J, the cross-sectinal dimensions of the 'primary regularization prism' re

determined from the sprcad of load needed to reduce the stress to a reasonable pressure
lbr uniaxial compression according to 2-2lAnnex J.104.2(102):

jj-i:0.0,u(4

2-2iQ.r0r)

/;k(l) is the tensile strcngth of the concrete at the time of stressing and P,".* is the
maximum lbrce applied t the tendon- (The hole lor the duct and anchorage means that
the calculatcd stress based on the rectngle in 2-2lExpression (J.101) is not the true stress.)
The rectangular cross-section of the primary regularization pdsm should be approximately
the sme as that of the bearing plate (or the enclosing rectangle if tbc hearing plate is nt itself
rectngular) and must be centred on the bearing plte- The similrity of shpe is defined by
the need to satisfy eqution (D8.10-l):
where

clq <

t.2sl#

and i

la, < t.2s\f

!l!

(D8.10-l)

/ are the dimcnsior.rs ofthe anchor plate and pdmary pdsm cross-scction as
shown in Fig. 8.10-5, which lso shows the length of the primary pdsm. Where there le
several anchorages, lhe cross-sectional dimensins of the prism must be chosen so as not
to overlap at the stressing face but they rlay overlap away from the stressing facc where
adjaccnt Lendons, and hence prisms, re not parallel.

whet'e a, a', c and

Lllnnex
1.

r04.2(t 02)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

.'1- - -

-IIT':

t]4

I
1.

.2

maxlc,

C')

Fi8. 8.10-5. Dimensioning of primary regularization prisms to 2-2lAnnex

2-2/Annex

1.t04.2(t03)

1.2 x max(c,

c)

To prevent bursting and spalling local to thc anchoragc, a minimum reinforcement needs
to be provided which 2-2lAnnex J.104.2(103) states must not be less than:

t, :0.I5furp*r.",

z-2iQ.r02)

P.u" is the gretest load at the time of stressing and 1,un1iu is the load factor which is L2 for
iocal design. The reinforcement should be distributed evenly over the length of the primary
regr riztion prism. The significance of'noL less than' this amount of reinforcement is that
this represents a minimum area of reinforcement in the primary regularization prism. If
another strul-and-tie analysis, which better allows for anchorage zone geometty (s in
'Method of CIRIA Guide l' below), indicates more reinfrcement is necessary in the bursting zone, this should be provided.
Although thc reinforcement from 2-2lExpression (J.102) is described as covering the
elTects of spalling at the end face, there is a lack of guidance on the location lor placement
of this reinforcement. 2-2lAnnex J,104.2(103) also goes on to require a minimum sutfce
reinforcement at tbe loadcd face of 0.03P,",./dd7p.unrav. This is covered in section 8.10,3.2
below.

For tendons in external post-tensioned construction, it would be more approprite to use

the chrateristic breaking load of thc tcndon to size the reinforcement, rather than
?n.""n,P..", unless a detailed nonlinear analysis is performed to predict the increase in
cable frce with global deflccLion- This is bccause it is possible for short tendons located
within highly stressed areas to rech stresses in excess of yield and the anchor block itself
must resist this forceMethod of CIRI Guide I
In CIRIA Guide 1, the cross-sectional dimensions of the primary prism are delermined liom
the geometry of the member in each trnsverse direction. The prism is symmetrical about the
anchorage and thc width in each direction is taken as thc lcsser of twice the distance to a free
edge or the distance to n djcent nchorage centreline, as illustrated in Fig. 8.10-6. The
length of Lhc prism for each dilection equals the $'idth.
Bursting reinforcement in each prism is essentially designed with strut-and-tie models fbr
the plan and elevation directions seprtely. The guidance for full or partial disconlinujties
discussed in section 6.5 o[ this guide (Figs 6.5-l and 6.5-2) could be applied to this situation
(with spread width'r'chosen so that stresses from adjacent tendons do not overlap or
lie outside the cross-section). CIIRIA Guide I does this directly by way of a table, relating
the reinfbrcement tension 7, to the prestressing force P^u". This is reproduced here as
Table 1t.10-3. The reinforcement is distributed in a region from 0.2y1 to 2y1 from the
stressing face in the'l'djrection and from 0.2y2 to 2_u2 from the stressing fce in the'2'

direction. Tests hve shown tht the most effective reinforcement is closed links or
spirals around the prisms, rather than mat reinforcement placed through the prism.
Spirals and circular links should have a diameter at lest 50mm greater than the side of
the anchorage plate.

264

CHAPTER 8, DETAILING OF REINFORCEMENT AND PRESTRESSING STEEL

Table

8. |

0-3. Tensile forces related to primary prism geomerry

lpi /Yt

r/hp.*r"" P.*)

<0.3
0.23

0.4

0.5

0.20

o.t7

>0.7
0.

t4

0.tl

8.10.3.2. Spalling neor the loaded foce (ddditjonol sub-section)

Additionally, reinforcement to control spalling shuld be placed adjcent to the loded

face. According to CIRIA Guide 1, this reinforcement has to carry at least 0.04P,n." in
each direction. wiLh a greatel'amount in some geometrical situations- This is the equivlent
requirement t tht in 2-2/Annex J.104.2( 103) above, which requires a surface reintbrcement
area of 0.03 (P-,,,/,/ya )f'p,*r,, in each direction. Only one of these very similar provisions
need be mct.
8. | 0.3.3. Qveroll eguilibrium (oddtionol sub-sea)on)
Where thc load has not spread out unifrmly across thc section by the end of the primary
prism, strut-nd-tie analysis should be used to derive the reinforcement needed to control
the remaining spread, 2-2,/Annex J does noL cover this further spread. Typical situations
and reinforcement zones are as shown in Fig. 8.10-7, which also shows the primary
prisn locations according to CIRIA Guide 1. (The beams have been rotated so that thejr
axes are vcrtical.) The ligule does not show the primary regularization prisms according
to 2-2,/Annex J. These figures illustrate the spread of load tht is still taking place outside

the primary prisms.

In cases (a), (c), (d) and (e), the size of primary prisms according t Annex J and CIRIA
Guide I would be similar. In case (c), the primary prism is shown less than the full width oi
the scction on the assumption that the prism widLh for bursting dcsign would be controlled
by the thickness oflhc section. In case (b), the primary prism to CIRIA Guide 1 incorporates
the entire zone as sho\^'n nd the strut-and-tie models for bursting and 'overall' equilibrium
are one and lhe sane. The primary regularization prism to Annex J would be much smaller.

Fig. 8.10-6, Deflnition of primary prisms in CIRIA Guide

265

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

0.5b

O.25b lo

0.30b

(b) Rectangular block

(a) Heclangular block

0.5b
CIRIA Guide

0-25ltto
0.30b

(c) Reclangulr block

-D.125b

I
0.5b

(d) Reclngular

Fig.

8. |

block

(e) Flanged beam

0-7. Typical slrut-and-tie models for anchorage zones

This highlights the problem with Annex J, which could lead to steel bcing provided for
bursting, and then more steel provided for overall equilibrium outside the primry prism.
This would double-count reinforcement requirements if the two were superimposed. This
is the reason that EC2-2 Annex J only applies to 2 or more tendons anchored together,
which generally avoids this problcm. This situation is not entirely satisfctory as there is
then a danger tht case (e) could be designed considering only the overall strut-and-tie
model shown and not Lhe localized bursting llorces in the vicinity of the anchorage that
CIRIA Guide 1 would identify. Where Annex J does not apply, bursting should still
always be checked using a local strut-and-tie model (e.g. Fig. 8.10-7(b) or from the
requirements of CIRIA Guide l.
The intemal lever ann of0.5D in each model in Fig, 8.10-7 is consistent with that discussed
in section 6.5 for discontinuity zones. The position of the ties is not prescribed but must
follow the elastic flow of force as required by general strut-and-tie analysis principLes. The
tie positions in (a) and (d) follow liom the recommendations in CIRIA Guide 1. This
required the reinforcement to be provided within a length of 0.25 from the loaded face.

266

CHAPTER

8. DETAILING OF REINFORCEMENT AND

PRESTRESSING STEEL

Plan on llange

tan \zt!)

.lJ.t'

Elevlion on beam

E - lendon prolile
Fig.

8. |

0-8. Dispersion of prestress

(Il is aoceptable to plce reinforcement nearer to the loaded fac than this.) In (b) and (c), the
tie position 0.25 from the end of the block was implied in CIRIA Guide I, while other
references (such as Model C.).le 906) woukl lead to a dimension of 0.30. As an alternative
to strut-and-tie analysis. beam theory cn be used to determine reinforcement, but this
would need to be based on the same assunptions of lever arm and reinforcement zone
placement as above.
Where the beam is flanged, the strut-and-tie design for the web shuld take into ccount
the concentraled rections acting al the flange positions, as well as the distributed load in the
web as indicated in Fig. 8.10-7(e). The flanges thcmselves should also be designed for the
trnsverse spread out across Lheir width by strut-nd-tie anlysis. Figure 8.10-7(b) can be
used for this purpose, ssuming the equilibrium force in the flange is applied as a concentrted load ovcr a width equal to that of the web. The distance from the stressing face of

this 'point' of appliction of this force can be determined liom the idealized spread of
forcc according to Fig, 8,10-8, which comes from the recommendations of 2-I-llclaase
8.10.3(5). This distance approximately corresponds to the position of the tie in Fig. 8.107(b) at which the load hs essentially sFread out across the section.
In addition Lo the above rules, sliding wedge mechanism should be checked for any
anchorages close to the edge of the section as required by 2-2lAnnex J,104.1(104) and
discussed in the commentary to 2-2iAnnex J.

2-l-I/clouse
8.

0.3(s)

2-2/Annex

l.t04.t(t04)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

iuch

:?:I

to
ik|i,: .t:

leads to a transverse tensile force

6rn

btru

268

t11

CHAPTER

8. DETAILING OF REINFORCEMENT AND

PRESTRESSING STEEL

,.
ric;
e.

ti!!i4

:4t

!9

e\ample). Conside'ring hali rhe box cross-secon,

Uniform slress

-2 t

3.876

x l0r x

1.2/4.14

Force in half width of bollom llange

.

x l0'= 2J5MFa

3000 x J00

v 2.25 :

2022

kN

: Fote i.:\r.b. bloteeti,e.1io{ of'Li:rwer i

269

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

:a::l

""rtri
for reinforcei

:::: ::,

::::::::
::.:::Bl
:::::,;

270

CHAPTER 8. DETAILING OF REINFORCEI.,IENT AND PRESTRESSING STEEL

8. | 0.4.

Anchorages and couplers for prestressing tendons

Couplers often temporarily ct s nchorges during construction, before lhc tendons from
the next stage are couple<l on, and must therefore be designed as such as discussed in section
8.10-3 above.
EN 1992 considers it to be good detiling prctice to keep couplers away from intermediate
supports (2-7-1/c/ause 8.10.4(4)) and to avoid coupling more lhan 50% ofthe tendons at any

one section (.2-2lclause 8.10.4(105)). The Latter is because finite element modelling and
physical model testing hve shown that the stress stte round couplers is very complex

2-l-l/clouse
8. t 0.4(4)
2-Uclouse
8.

0.4(t 0s)

and uniform compressive stress is not achieved. The comprcssive stress from prestress in
the vicinity of a coupled tendon can be significantly reduced from thai obtained with a continuous tendon. Where all tendons are coupled at one location, this can lead to a very large
reduction in the compressivc strcss expectcd. (The reduction was shown to be up to 70yo
by Oh and Chae in reference 24.) This can lead to cracking in webs and flanges under load,
typically over a length of the order of the section depth eaoh side of the coupler. Prestress
from any tendons u'hich arc continuous hclps to reducc thc chances ofcracking and additional
longitudinal reinforcement cn be used to control crcking t the serviceability limit state.
The 'good practice' of staggering couplers has often not been observed in the UK fbr
practical reasons, To avoid anchoring tendons at one sectin, it is usually necessary to lap
tendons across the construction joint using anchorages on ribs on the outside of webs or
l'langes- However, somi:timcs this will not bc practicai and all the tendons will be coupled
at the same location in adjacent webs. Typically this will occur in cellular structures with

it would be impractical to provide anchorages inside the voids (and

impossible to access them). An alternatjve would be to provide top-pocket anchorages in
the upper surface of the top flange but these are highly undesirable from durability
considcrations and should be avoided, particularly whcre de-icing salts are used or thc
envirnment is aggressive in some other way. This is oted i 2-2lclouse 8,10.4( 107) .
small depth where

If

more than 50% of the tendons nust be coupled at one section then 2-2iclause
8.10.4(105) requires either the minimum reinforcement requirements of 2-1-l/clausc 7-3.2
to be provided to limit cracking or the section at the couplers should everywhere have a
compressive stress of 3MPa under lhe characteristic combination of actions. It will not
generally be difficult to comply with this stress check since construction joints are usually
positioned in areas of low mon.rent, typically around span quarter points. Z-2,/clause
8-10.4(105) recommends that no more than two-thirds of the teudons at one ilcction
should ever be coupled, but this may not always be practical as djscussed above. Recommendations are givcn in 2-2iTable 8-10IN on lhe minimum longitudinal distance between
couplers required such that the couplers re not considered to occur at one loction.
These recommendations can be modified in the National Anncx.
When deck slabs are transversely post-tensioned, it is necessary to check that the
stress fiom the post-tensioning is uniform at the section where it is rcquired. This is noted
by 2-2lclause 8,10,4(106). The longitudinal spacing of anchorages cn be determined
frm the ngle of prestress dispersion in Fig. 8.10-7, such that adjacent zones.lust overlp
at the section being considered.
Where a tendon is anchorcd within thc body of a mcmber (a typical detail is shown in
Fig, 8,10-10), cracking may occur behind the nchorage due to restraint ftom the concrete
behind the anchor resisting the deformations caused by stressing. It is usual to anchor
some prt of the prestressing force back into the concrete behind the anchor wjLh reinforcement to control this cracking, unless there is sufficient residual compressive stress in this
arca from continuous tendons. Z-2/c/arse 8.10.4(108) suggests thele should be a residual
compression of at least 3 MPa under the fiequent combination, before such reinfotcement
can be omitted. No guidance on rcinforcement provision is made in EN 1992-2. CIRIA
Guide 1" recommends tht 50% of the prestressing force should be anchored back into
the concrete behjnd the anchor regardless of prestress, whilc Schlaich and Scheefz' recommend tht 25% of the prestressing force is anchored back, but this can be reduced with
increasing compressive stress in the region of the anchorage produced by other continuous

2-Uclouse
8.

r0.4(t 07)

2-2/clouse
8. t

0.4(t 06)

2-2/clouse

L t 0.4(t 0e)

prestresslng tendons.

271

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

__l
Fig.8.f0-f0.

Longitudinat

,"tn

or.llrYorages

in rh body of a member

8.10.5. Deviators
The term 'deviaLor' refers to a discrete structurl element which allows an exteml posttensioning cable to be deviated from an otherwise straight line between adjacent anchorages.

2-l-l/clouse
8. r0.s(t)P

l- l/douse
8.t0.s(2)P

2-

2-l-l/clouse
8.r 0.s(3)P

The protcctive duct surrounding the tendon strands is normally continuous through a
deviator without direcL connection to it, so as to fcilitte replcement of tendon. The
sLructural element providing deviation may be concrete or structural steel and normally
supports a dcviator pipe through which the ducted tendon passes.
2-1-llclause 8.10.5 (.1,)P rcquires deviators to fullil a number of fequirements. Their basic
purpose is to carry all forces pplied to them and transmit them to the rest ofthe structure. lt
will often be necessary to use strut-and-tie models to ensure this. The effects of longitudinl
forces from friction nd asymmeLry in the incoming and outgoing bend angle must also be
carried by Lhe deviator into the structure. The principal force is usually the transverse
force due to the intendcd change in direction of the cable. However, in designing for this
force, the ell'ects of tolerance should also bc considered. This includes unintentional deviation from tolerances in setting out the devitor pipes nd also in setting out the whole
bridge. These tolerances should be declared in the Project Specilication. The design force
should also include deviations from the effects of dellcction and precamber during construction, together with the anticipated accuracy of the precmbet.
EC2 does not specify the tendon design force to use in these calculations ofdeviation force,
but it is suggested here that the breaking load of the cable should bc used unless detailed
second-order analysis considering material and geometric nonlinearities has been used,
This is because, although it is hoth conservative and common to assume in the global
design that tbc lendon strain does not increse at the ultimate limit state, it is possible, particularly for shoft cables, for significant strain and hence stress increase to occur at the ultimate limit state as the structure deflects. At thc serviqeability limit state, the design load
should be that of the cable belbre long-term losses.
The radius ofdeviation should also not lcad to damage to the tendon, its protective system
or the deviator pipe itsell This is the bsis of 2-1-llclaase 8.10.5(2)P- Tight rdii give dse
to large transverse pressures whiqh can damage the strands, ducts and deviator pipes,
whilc the longitudinal mvement during stressing of a Lcndon on a LighL radius can cause
the snds to cut through the protective duct or devitor pipe (if plastic). To avoid such
problems, 2-I-llclausc 8.10.5(.1)P requires appropriate minimum bend radii to be obtained
from thc prestressing supplier. Table 8.10-4 provides some preliminary guidance taken from
BD 58/94." The groupings in the table are based on similar charactelistic strength for the
two dillcrent tendon systems given. For systems with larger strands than given in Table
8.10-4, the radii should be detennined on rhe basis of the group into which the system flts
in terrns of similar characteristic strength.
2-1-llclause 8.10.5 does not specifically cover deflectors in prc-tcnsjoned beams, but the
satle problems of damage to strand could be encountered. The recornmendations of
BD 58/94 could again be followed here. This would mean that for single tendons, the
Table 8.10-4. Guidance on minimum devition radii for tendons
Tendon (strand no. and size)

Minimum radius (m)

l9 ll

mm and l2-l5mm
l3 mm and l9-15 mm
53-13 mm and 37-15 mm

3l-

272

3-0

5.0

CHAPTER

8. DETAILING OF REINFORCEI.4ENT AND

PRESTRESSING STEEL

bend radius should not be less than five tendon diameters for wire or l0 diameters for strand.

The total devition angle should not exceed 15'.

A commn problem with concrete deviators is spalling at the cntrance and exit due to a
misaligned tendon. The causes of such 'unexpected' angles of approach are as discussed
above. In order to prevent this, some method of providing angular tolerance should be
provided in the deviator pipe. Typically this can be done by providing a bell mouth. by
overbending the pipe in the plne of principal curvature so that the tangent point for the
tendon's contact with the deviator pipe is some way inside the pipe, or by using a
compressible matcrial around the pipe entrance. The designer will have to decide which
measure might be pproprite in a given situation as each method has its shortcomingsCare should be taken in the positioning of deviators so as to avoid a loss of eccentricity
from second-order effects as the bridge dellccts (or from inaccurate precamber). This is
particularly important fbr spans with quarter point deviators only as thc tendon will
remain slraight between quarter points, while the mid-span position deflects a greater
mount with a consequent loss of eccenLricily aL mid-span. In such situations, the loss of
eccentricity with deflection cn offset any beneficial increase in tendon force caused by the
dellection.
2-l-l lclause L10.5(4) ppers to allow design tendon deviations of 0.01 radians to be
accomrnodated without providing a deviator. However, given the polcntial for signiflcant
unintended deviations as discusscd abovc, it is recommended here that a physical deviator
detail is alwavs orovided where devition is to be made.

2- l- l/douse
8.r 0.5(4)

273

CHAPTER 9

Detailing of members and

particular rules
This chapter dcals with the detailing of members and particular rules as covered in section 9
of EN 1992-2 in the followine clauses:

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

9,I

GeneraL
Beams
Solid slabs
Flat slabs

C lquse

Columns
Walls

Clause 9.5
Clausc 9.6
Clause 9.7
Clause 9.8
Clause 9.9

Clause 9.2
Clausc 9.3

Clluse 9.4

Deep beams

Foundations
Regions with discontinuity in geometry or action

9. | .

General

In addition to the gencral detailing rules <liscussed in section 8,2-2,/clause 9 gives additional
rules lbr specific members including beams, slabs, columns, walls and foundations2-l -l ldause 9..1(r) notes tlat the validity of general rules elsewhere ior safety, serviceability
and durability are dependent on the rules for detailing in this section being lbllowed.
2'1-llclaase 9,1(2) is a reminder tht detailing should also be consistent with the design
model adoplcd- For example, if strut-and-tie analysis is used to determine reinforcement
requirements, it is essential that the position, odcntation and anchorage of the detailed
reinforcement is consistent with the assumptions in the analysis. The subjecl of minimum
reinlorcement (sce section 9.2.1.1 below for beams) is intloduced by way of 2-2lclause
9,1(103). Minimum reinforcement ensures that when the moment resistance of the
un-cracked concrete section is exceeded, the reinforcement is able to provide a moment
resistnce t lest s large as that of thc gross concrete so tbat a sudden (brittle) 1ilure is
not initiated on cracking. It also ensures tht wide cracks do not fbrm when the concrcte's
tensile strength is ovcrcome.

9.2. Beams
9.2. l. Longitudinal
.

reinforcement

Minimum ond moximum oreas of reinforcement

All beams should be detailed with a ninimum quantity of bonded reinforcement to avoid
brittle failure or rvide crack formation upon concreLc cracking. The value of lr.-1n for
9 .2. | . I

2-

l- l/douse

2-

l- I/dause

e.t(r)
e.

t(2)

2-2/clouse
e.t (t03)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

2-l-l/douse

beams may be dened

e.2.t.t (t)

following:

r,..i,.

0.2b

f
'i'"

bL

in lhe

d>

Natior.ral Antex. 2-1-llclaase 9,2.1,1(l

0,00Ilbd

recornmends the

2-1- l (9.1N)

/vk

where:

./rr",,

.lu*
1
d

is the mean tcnsile strength of the concrete

is the charcteristic yield strength of the reinforcement
is the mean width of the tension zone (excluding the compression flange for nonrectangular sections)
is the effective depth to the tension reinforcement

This requirement is derived from Lhe development ofan expression to ensure the reinfrcement does not yield as soon s crcking in the cncrete occurs. Considering a rectangular
beam, the cracking moment is given by:

M.,

/;bh2

16

where and I are the breadth and verll depth of the concrete betn respectively. If the
beam is reinforced wiLh an area of steel ls, of yield strength ,{,r at ar.r effective depth r/,
the ultimate moment of resistance is given by:

M,,

JtyA"z

where z is the lever arm. For the cracked strcngth of thc scction to exceed the men
un-cracked strength at f,rst crcking, M,, > M",. This requires JykA,z > J..^bh2 f 6 whic,h
terrnges to:

f,h bh)
o Jrk z

, -_;---,t
as

Introducing the effecLive depth. d. gives;

^" i*(:)'i"
A typical value of l/d might be l.l. A conservtive vlue of d/z would be 1.25, corresponding to a heavily reinlorced section with z : 0.80d, which is unlikely to arise with minimum
reinforcement in rectangular section, but could arise with other cross-section shapes, such
as

T beams. These valus lad to:

As> o2s,bd
1/Expression (9.1N) above is ofthe same form as this expression lor a rectangular beam,
but the 0.25 Ictor has been replaced by 0.26, which makes some llowance for other section
geometries- The rclatively small increase for other geon.retries reflects the conservative
value ot df z already assumed bove. Elements contining less thn the minimum area of
reinforcement,,4",.1". should be considered as un-reinforced and designed in accordance
with 2-2/clause 12 as required hy 2-l-lldaase 9.2.1.1(2).
In addition to the minimum reinforcement requirements detailed above, EC2-2 requires
that all elements in bridgc design should contain a minimum quantily of reinforcemnt to
control cracking as discussed in section 7.3. Fr prestressed concrete sections, additional
rules to prevent brittle lailure are given in clause 6,1 and discussed in section 6.1-5 ol'this
guide. Similarly, 2-l-Ilclause 9.2.1.1(4) requires the designer to chek tht the ultimate
bending resistance of members with permanently un-bonded or external prestressing
tendons exceeds the flexural cracking monent by a recomnended factor of 1 .15,
In order to ease the placing and compacting of concrete and to prevent cracking from
excessive internal resLraint to concrete shlinkase. reinforcement in beams should be
2- 1-

2-l-l/clouse
9.2.r.r(2)

2-l-l/clouse

9.2.t.|(4)

276

CHAPTER

9. DETAILING OF

MEIYBERS

AND PARTICULAR RULES

limited to a maximum value. ,4. n u.. Thc value of 1.,n"" for beams, outside lap locations, can
be specified in the National Annex aud 2-l-Ilclaure 9.2,t,1(.1) recommends the ylue of
0.04,4., where ,{" is tbe gross cross-sectional concrete are of the element considered.
1.2. Other detoiling orrongements
9.2.1 .2 (/) requires that for monolithic construction, even where sinple supports
have been assumetl in the design, support scctions ofbean-ts should bc rcinforced to provide a
minimum hogging moment resistance. This should be a proportion, pr, of the maximum
sagging moment in thc span. The value of 31 may be provided in the National Annex and
EC2 recommends tking vlue of 0.15. This relatively small minimum design moment
could require considerable redistribution of moment to occur and it is likely that the
National Annex rvill specify a larger value. For bridges, however, where plasLic analysis is
generally not permitted, it will not usually be acceptablc to treat a monolithic connection
as a simple support. The results ofan elastic analysis, with r without any limited redistribution allowed in clause 5.5, are then likcly to determine minimum hogging momcnt requiremc1s- Crack width checks u'ould dditionally have to bc performed using the results of
the unmodifled elastic analysis.
For flanged beams. 2-1-l lclause 9.2.1 .2(2l requires the total area of tcnsion reinforcement
required lo bc spread over the effective width of the flange, although prt of the reinfbrcement may be concentrated ovcr thc web width. This is presun.rably to limit cracking across
the width of the llange at SLS (including from early thcrmal cracking), even though such
distribution might not be necessary at ULS.
Where the design of a section has included the contribution of any longitudinal compression reinlorcement in the resistnce clculation, 2-l-I lclause 9.2.1.2(3) requires the
reinforcement to be ellcctively held in place by tlansverse reintbrcement. This is intended
to prevent buckling of the brs out through thc cover. Thc spacing of this trnsyerse
reinforcement shoqld be no greatel' than 15 times the dimeter of the compression bar.
The minimum size of the transversc rcinforcement is not giveu, bul jt is recommended
hcrc that the requirenents of 2-1-1,/cluse 9.5-3 for columns be followed. 2-l-llclause
9.2.I.2(3) lso does not dcfrne specific requirements for how the transverse reinftrrcement
should enclose the compressin reinforcemcnL- Thc requirenrcnts for columns in 2-1-1t'
cluse 9.5.3, as discussed in section 9.5.3 of this guide, could also be applied to colnpression
flanges of beams.

2- l -

l/clouse

e.2.t.t(3)

9.2.

2-I-I lclausc

9.2.

2-l-l/douse
e.2.

t.2(t )

2-l-l/clouse
9.2.t.2(2)

2-l-l/clouse
9.2.t .2(3)

1.3. Curtoilment of longtudinol tension reinforcement

EC2 allows longitudinl bars to be curLailcd beyond the point which they are no longer
required for design, provided suflicient feinforcement remains to adequately resist the
envelope of tensile forces acting at all sections (including satisfying minimum requircmcnts).
Bars should extend at least an anchorge length beyond this point. The contribution to the
sectin resistance ol bars within their anchorage length my be taken into account assuning
a linear variation of force (as indicatcd in 2-l-liFig. 9.2-2 and allowcd by 2-I-l lduuse
9.2.1.3(3)) or r.r.ray conservatively be ignred,
In determining the point bcyond which the reinfbrcement is no longer required, appropriale allowance lnust be given to the requiremcnis to providc additional tensile frce for
shear design. This lcads to the 'shift lrrethod' desuibed in 2-l-1/clause 9.2,1.3 and discussed
in section 6.2.1.1 fthis guidc. It shoukl be noted that a further shift is required for posi[ion
within wide flanges as discussed in section 6-2.4.
2-l-llclause 9.2.L3(4) also specilies an incresed nchorage length requirenent for
bent-up bars which contribute to the shear rcsislance of a section. This ensures the bar
can reach its design shength at the point it is required s shet reinforcement.

2-l-l/clouse
9.2.t.3(3)

2-l-l/clouse
e.2.t.3(4)

9.2.1.4. Anchoroge of bottom reinforcement ot on end support

For end supports, where litLle or no end fixity is assumed in the design, the designer should
provide at least a propoftion ofthe reinforccmcnl provided in thc span. This proportion,732,
is recommended by EC2 to be taken as 0,25. This longitudinal teintblcement should not be

277

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

lbr the shear design together with any axial lorce and must be adequately anchored heyond thc face of thc support.
less than that required

9.2. | .5. Anchoroge of bottom reinforcement ot intemediote supports

For intermedite supports, EC2 allorvs the minimum bottom reinforcement calculated in
accordance with 2-l-l/clause 9,2.1.4 to be curtailed after extending at least l0 br diameters
(for straight bars) into thc supporl mcasured from the support fce. For bars with bends or
hooks, EC2 requires the br to be anchored length at least equal to the mandrel diameter
beyond the support face, to ensure the bend of the bar docs not begin until well within the
support. Where sagging moments can develop, the bottom reinforcement should obviously

be continuous through intermediate supports, using lapped bars ifneccssary- Considerations

of early thermal cracking may also lead to the need for continuity of the longitudinal
reinforcement.

9.2.2. Shear reinforcement

2-2/douse
9.2.2(t 0 r )

2-l-l/clouse
9.2.2(3)

2-l-l/clouse
9.2.2(4)

2-l-l/clouse
e.2.2(s)

2-2lclause 9.2.2(107) requires shear reinforcement to form an angle, a, of belween 45' and

90' to the longitudinal axis of the structural member. In mosL bridge applications, shar
reinforcement is provided in the form oflinks enclosing the longitudinal tensile reinforcement
and anchored in accordance with 2-l-l/clause 8.5. The inside of link bends should be
provided with a longitudinal bar of at least the same diamctcr as the link as discussed in
section 8.5. 2-1-l lclnuse 9.2.2(3) allcrws links to be formed by lapping legs near lhe surface
of webs (it is oflen convenient to form links fiom two U-bars, for example) only if the links
are not requircd to resist torsion. It has, howevcr, been common practice in the UK to form
outer links in bridges in this wy and they have performed adequately as torsion links.
2-2,/clause 9.2.2(101) allows shear reinforoement to comprise a combination of links and
bent-up bars, but a certain minimum propofiion of the required shear reinforcement
must be provided in the form of links. This minirrum proportion, 193, is recommended by
2-1-llclaase 9,2,2(4) to be taken as 0.50 bul it may be varied in the Ntional Annex. The
restriction is largely due to the lack of test dta for combinations ol <lifferent types of
shear reinfbrcement. If strut-and-tie design was used in accordance with 2-l-l/clause 6.5,
this restriclion would not apply, providing all slruts, nodes and concrete stresses at bends
of bars were checked accordingly- The use of the other types of shear assemblies allowed
in 2-1-1/clause 9.2.2(2) for buildings, which do not enclose the longitudinal reinforcemeut,
is nt recommended for bridges according t 2-2i clause 9.2.2(101), although the National
Annex may pennit their use,
2-IJ lcluse 9.2.2(5/ dclines a minimum shear reinforcement ratio for beams (reproduced
below) to ensure that the failure load exceeds the shear cracking load:

p, : ,4.*/(s.

sin

o) 2 p*,"'in

2-1-11(e.4)

where:

l,*
,r
,,
o

within the length r

is the spacing of the shear reinforcement mcasured along the lngitudinal axis
the member
is the breadth of the web of the nember
is the angle between the shear reinforcement and the longitudinal axis
is the re of shear reinforcement

The value of the minimum shear reinlbrcernent ratio, p* .;,,, is rccommended by EC2 to
t least thal given hy thc follouing crpression:

p* -i,

(o .oB

v.j;)

I lyk

of

be

2-1-1(9.5N)

where /11 and 4,k are the characteristic cylinder strength f the concrete and characteristic
yield strength of the shear reinforcement respectivly (both in MPa).
Clauses 9.2.2(6). (7) and (8) of EN 1992-1-1 give additional recommendtions for the
detailing of shear reinforcement- These rules cover maximum longitudinal spacing

274

CHAPTER

9. DETAILING OF

MEMBERS

AND PARTICULAR RULES

between shear asscmblies (s1,.",), maximum longitudinal spcing ofbent-up bars (s6.*u*) and
maximum transverse spacing of the legs in a series of shear links (.s,.'n,,"). Values for each of
these limits can be lbund in the National Annex and EC2 recommends the followinq:

sr.* :0.75d(l a cot o)

2-l-1(9.6N)

,rr,..* = 0.6d(l + cot ct)

2-

r,,."-

0.75d

l- 1(9.7N)

2-l-1(9.8N)

600mm

The recommended values for J1,n,"" and sb,ma, have been chosen from a consenative
considcration of test data to ensrue that a shear failure plane cannot be formed between
two adjcent sets of shear reinforcement. The expression for ,r1.,,r"" is intended to apply to
links.

9.2.3. Torsion reinforcement

Torsion links should conply with the requirenents of2- l - I i F'ig- 9.6, which require bars to be
either fully lapped or anchored by means ofhooks, and be flxed perpendicular to the member
axis. 2-l-l lclause 9.2.3(2) states tht the provisins for minimum shear reinlorcemcnL in
beams discussed above arc generally suflicient t cver the minimum requirements for
torsion links. However, 2-1-l lchase 9.2.J(3) specilies further requirements for longitudinal
spcing of torsion links, specifically that the spcing should not exceed a/8 (where a is the
outer circumlrence f the cross-seclion) or the minimum dimension of the beam crosssection- This limil is to ensure tht torsion cracks do not develop beLween planes of
torsion reinforcement and to prevent prmature splling of the corners of the section
under the action of the spirlling compression struts.
2-1-1 lclause 9.2,J(4) requires that longitudinal reinforcement for torsion be arranged so
that there is at lest one bar in each corner of the links. The rest of the longitudinal reinfbrcemcnt should be spaced evenly around thc remaining perimeter, enclosed by the links, at a
maximum spacing ol- 350 mm. The need for approximately uniform spacing of lngitudinl
bars is discussed in section 6.3.2 of this suide.

2-|-l/dause
e.2.3(2)

2-l-l/douse
q.2.3(3)

2-l-l/clouse
e.2.3(4)

9,2.4. Surface reinforcement

Surface reinlbrcement is discusscd in section

I of this suide.

9.2.5. Indirect supports

Where beams frame into cach other, such as might occur at the intetsection between cross
girders and nain beams, the reaction between the two elements needs to be carried by
reinforcement or prestressing steel. The need for'suspcnsion'reinforcement can be seen

fiom a truss model and is illustrated in Fig. 9.2-l for the

cse of single-cell box girder

diaphragm supported on a centrl bearing.
EN 1992-1-1 gives guidance on the area t the web {liaphragm intersection where this
reinforcement should be providcd, and this is also shown in Fig. 9.2-l lbr the box girder
diaphragm case. ln general, suspension reinforccment will add to reinforccmcnt for other
eflects and a truss model will often clarify this. This is stted in 2-L-Ilclqase 9.2.5(1).
Howcver, in the particulr web-diaphragm region of Fig. 9.2-1, it can be secn that the
suspensin reinforccment need not be added t the normal web shear reinfrcement
wit]lirl this intersection region as the respective ties do not coincide. In other words, the
reinforcement for ordinary shear design starts outsidc this interscction zone. The density
of links in the web should not, however, be reduced ner to the diaphragm. 2-l-llclause
9.2.5(2) gives some guidnce on placcment of suspension reinforcement. Work by
Leonhardt er a/. (reference 27) suggests that 70o of tbc suspcnsion reinforcement should
always be plovided within the box girder web. rvithin the intersction legion of Fig. 9.2-1,
s experimcnts showed that reinforcement in this arca was the most cffilctive. The reinforcement should extend over thc whole depth of the beam and be dequtely anchored.

2-l-l/clouse
e.2.s(t)

2-I-l/clouse
e.2.s(2)

279

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

Fig.9.2-1.

Suspension reinforcement in a box girder and intersection region (plan) where

provided

*
o**

280

it should be

CHAPTER 9, DETAILING OF MEMBERS AND PARTICULAR RULES

(5rol1l-l))= -

25 300

mm'

9.3. Solid slabs

This section ofthe code covers specific detailing rules for the design ol onc-way and two-way
spanning solid slabs, defined as elements where the breadth. , and effective length, /et, are
not less than 5 times the overall depth. h. This section covers general rules for flexural
reinforccment in slabs as well as edge, corner and sbcar reinforcement- The subsequent
section in the code on flat slabs (see section 9.4) gives additional recommendations for the
detailing of slabs supported by columns and punching shear reinforcen.rent.
9.3. l. Flexural reinforcement
The requirements for maximum and minimum areas of main flexural reinforcrment in slabs
are thc same as those fbr longitudinal reinforcement in beams dircussed in section 9.2.1
above. For two-way spanning slabs, both reinfbrcement directions should be considered as
main reinlbrcement directions in determining mininum steel. 2-1-l lclause 9,3,1,1 (2.1 requires
that the area of secondary reinfbrcement in one-way spanning slahs is at least 2070 of the fea
provided in the principal direction, to ensure adequate transverse distribution but transverse
rcinl-orcement is not required in the top of slabs near supports wherc there is no chance of
developing transvcrse bending rroments. A suitble minimum quntity of transverse slab
reinforcement will always, howevcr, be needed to resist early thermal and shrinkage cracking.
Maximum spacing of flexural reinforcement in slabs is coyercdbr- 2-I-I lclause 9.3.1.1(3).
The rules covering curtailment of reinforcement in beams also apply to slabs as noted in
2-1-llclause 9,3,1J(1). but with the 'shift' of bending moment taken as the efective
depth, 11, as lor beams without shear reinforcement. In the rare circumstances whefe slabs
do contain shear reinforcement. it would be reasonable to use the shift for bean.rs with
sheat rcinforcement in accordance with 2-l-l/clausc 9.2.1.3(2), which is only r1/2 for vertical
links and a 45" truss.
Minimum reinforcement at supports is covered by 2-l-llclause 9.3.1.2. This requires Lhat
at least balf the oalculated spn reinfrcement continucs up to Lhe lace of a support and is
then fully anchored. Where partial fixity occurs along the edge of a slab but is not considered
itr the analysis. 2-1-llclause 9.3.1.2(2) requires that top reinforcement is provided u'hicb is
sumcienl to resist at least 25% of the maximum moment in the adjacent span. These are
more onerous reqlrirements than lhe corresponding ones for beams and, unlike for beams,
are nol nationally determined parmeters.
2-1-1!clause 9.3.1.4(1) requires that free edges ofslabs should normally be detailed with
suitable closing reinforcement comprising transvcrse U-bars enclosing thc longitudinal bars.
For two-way spanning slabs without edge stiffening, one set of edge U-bars will inevitably
have to be placed inside thc perpendicular set which will not comply with 2-l-l/Fig. 9.8.
This problen.r will not often arise in practice in bridgc dccks, however, as deck edges
usully terminatc with parapet edge beams and expnsion joint detils at the ends of the
deck olten require additional longitudinal U-bars to be detailed on the outside, extending

2-l-l/clouse

9.3.t.t(2)

2-l-l/clouse

e.3.t.t(3)
2-l-l/clouse

9.3.t.t(4)

2-l-l/clouse
e.3. t .2(2)

2-l-l/clouse
e.3.t

.4(t)

into joint nibs.

281

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-l-l/clouse
e.3.2(t)

TO EN I992-2

9.3.2. Shear reinforcement

2-l-llclause 9.3.2(1) rcques slabs with shear reinforcement to be at least 200mrn deep in
order for the links to contribute to shear resistance. The general dctailing rules for shear
reinforcement are as lor bcams in 2-1-1/clause 9-2.2 with a lew exceptions:

. The rules for minimurn links only apply where designed links are necessary.
. lf the applied shear force, I/8,1, is no greater than onc-third of the design value of the
maximum shear force,

.
.

tr/p6,,.,,r*,

all of the shear reinforcement may be provided by

either bent-up bars or links.

The maximum longitudinal spacing of bent-up bars can be increased to r-^ = d.
The maximum transverse spacing of shear reinforcement can be increased to 1.5d.

9.4. Flat slabs

2- | -

l/clouse

e.4.3(t )

l- I /douse
9.4.3Q)

Z-

The rules in clause 9.4 supplement thse in 9.3 nd cover reinfbrcement detailing for flexure
at qolumn supports and for punching sheiu in general. Only punching shear is considered here,
The punching shear reinforcement rules given in this part ofthe code are intended primarily lor concentrated loads from columns, but also apply to n.roving loads on hridge decks, as
discussed in section 6-4 of this guide. Since bridge deck slabs are usually detailed to avoid
shear reinforcement, these problems will seldom arise. Detailing ofpunching shear reinforcement in bridge design is most common when considering pad foundations and pile caps,
Where reinforcement is required to resist punching shear.2-1-llclaase 9,4.3(1) tegu;Lres
that it should be placed between the loaded area oL column and a distance kd within the
control perimeter at which shear reinforcement is no longer required. The value of ft is
recommended to be 1.5 in clause 6.4.5(4) of EN 1992-1-1, The reinforcement should be
provided in at least two perimetels, with spacing between the link pe meters not exceeding
0-7511. Bent-up bars can bc distributed on a single perimeter. Addilionl rules lbr bent-up
bars are also given in clauses 9.4.3(3) and (4).
Where punching shear reinforcement is require<l.2-1-1 lclause 9,4.3(2 ) defines a minimum
value based on th same recommcndation lor minimum areas of links in beams for flexural
shear. The difliculty in applying this rule to punching shear links is in determining an
appropriate reinforcement ralio. The following equation is given:

l,*,.1,, (1.5 sin cr *

cos cr)/(.r.s,)

> (0.08r,f"r)/,t

2-1-t l(.9.11)

where:

.4.*.1n

I
.r.
.r,

.1.u,

lyx

is lhe minimun area of one link leg (or equivalent)

is the angle between the shear reinforcement nd the main reinfbrcement
is the spacing of shear links in the radial direction
is the spacing of shear links in the tangential direation
arc the characteristic cylinder strength of the concrte and characLeristic yield
strength of the shear reinforcement respectively (in MPa)

Where punching shear reinlbrcement is provided in orthogonal grids and nt on rdial

perimeters, the above minimum reinforcement requirements my be rather conservative as
not all the bars within the outer perimeter will be considered. This is the same as the ULS
strength problcm discussed in section 6.4.5 of thc guide-

9.5. Columns
9.5.l. General
The detailing requirements given in this section of EC2 are applicable to elements classed as
columns where lhe larger cross-sectional dimension, , is not greater than 4 times the smaller
dimension, . For solid columns. whcrc > 4/2, the column is classed as a wall. For hollow
columns, where b > 4h, rto guidance is given.

282

CHAPTER 9. DETAILING OF MEMBERS AND PARTICULAR RULES

9.5.2. Longitudinal reinforcement

A minimum percentagc of longitudinal reinlbrcement is required in columns to cter for
unintended eccentricities and to control creep deformations. Under long-term application
of service loading conditions, load is transferred fron.r the concretc to thc rcinforcement
because the cncrete crccps and shrinks. If the area of reinfrcement in a column is
small, the reinforcement may yield undcr long-term service loads. The recommended
minimum area requirements in 2-l-Ilclause 9.5.2(2) therclore accounts for the design

2-l-l/clouse

axial compressive force, as wcll as the column gross cross-sectionl rea such that:

ls -,n

: 0.l0NEd/ld

> 0.0021"

2- l

9.s.2(2)

1(9.12N)

where:

y'y'sa is the nraximum design axial compression force

"/ya is the dcsign yield strength of lhe reinforcement

A.

is the gross cross-sectional concrete area

The National Annex may also specily minimum bar sizes to be used for longitr.rdinal
rcinlorcement in columns (recommendcd by 2-I-llclause 9.5.2(1) to be 8mm) and
maximum areas of reinforcement, The maxirnum areas have been chosen prtly from
practical considertions of placing and compacting the concrete and partly to pl'vent
cracking lrom excessive internl restrint to concrele shrinkage caused by thc reinllorcemcnt.
2-l-I lclause 9.5.2(3) rccommends a maximum reinforcement content f 0.041. outside lp
locations, increasing to 0.081" at laps.
For columns with a polygonal cross-section, 2-I-l ldause 9.5.2(1) reqnires at least one
longitudinal br to be placed at each corner with a minimum of four bars used in circular
columns.

2-l-l/clause
e.5.2(t

2-l-l/clouse
e.s.2(3)

2-l-l/clause
9.5.2(4)

lt

is recommended, however, that, as in current UK practice (and as recommended

it Model Code 906 ), a minimum of six bars is used for circular columns in order t ensure the
stability of the reinforcement cage prior to casting.

9,5.3, Transverse reinforcement

'Transvelse reinforcement' generally refers to links, loops or spirals enclosing the longitudinal
reinforcement- The purpose of transverse reinforcemenL in columns is to provide adequate
shear lesistnce and to secure longitudinal compressin bars against br.rckling out through
thc concrete cover. Although not explicitll, stated in EN 1992, it is recomnendetl here that
minimum links are provided lbr columns using the sam requirements as those for beams.
To ensure the stbility of the reinforcement cages in columns prior to castil4, 2-2lclause
9.5.3(I0l ) recommends the minimum diameter of the transverse rcinforcment to be the
greatel of 6 mm or one-quarter the size of the maximum dimeter of the longitudinal bars.
The maximum spacing of transverse reinforcement in columns, -scl.mar. may be given in the
Nationaf Annex, but 2-1-llclause 9.5.3(3) recommends Laking a value of the lest of the

2-2/clouse
9.5.3(t 0 | )

.
.
.

l/clause
9.s.3(3)

2-

I-

2-

l- l/douse

fbllowing:
20 times the minimum diarneter of the longitudinal bars;
the lesser dimension of the column:
400 mm.

2-1-l lclause 9,5,1(4) further recommends that these maximum spacing dimensions are
reduced by multiplying them by a factor f 0.6 in column sections close to bem or slb,
or near lapped joints in tbe longitudinal reinfbrcement where a minimum of three bars
evenly placed along the lap length is required.
2-IJ lclause 9.5.3 (6) requires that every longitudinl br or bundle ofbars placed in a corner
sl.rould be held by transverse reinforccment. In addition. no bar within a compression zone
should be furthcr Lhan 150 mm fiom 'restrined' bar. There is, however, no deflnition pro-

vided of what constitutes restraincd bar.

9.s.3(4)

2-

l- I /dause
e.5.3(6)

It could be interpreted as requiring all

compression bars in an outer layer to be rvithin 150 mm of a bar held in place by link, with
links passing around every alternalr bar. For box sections with wide flanges, this would

283

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

require additional link reinforcement in the flanges in addition to web links over the depth ofthe
section. This interpretalion was the onc uscd in BS 5400 Part 4' fol'bars contributing to the
section resistnce. It is not practicl to provide this detail in all situations - links in flanges is
an obvious example. Where this detailing cannot be achieved, it is recomtlended herc that
transveme bars should still be provided on the outside of the longitudinal reinforcement
(rvhich 2- l-l /clause 9.6.3 for walls describes as 'horizonlal' rcinforcement rther than transverse
reinforcement), but Lhe longitudinal compression bars in an outel layer should not then be
included in the resistance calculation- This detailing problem does not arise in circular
columns with perimeter links as these will be suiTicient to rcstrain the cmpression bars.
It should bc noled that lhe inclusjon of reinforcement in compression zones is implicit in
other expressios elser.here in the code (such as the noninal sliffness method for nalysis of
slender columns in 2-l-1/clause 5.8.7.2 and Lhe interactin formula tbr biaxial bending of
columns in 2-1-liclause 5.8-9). For stiffness calculation (as in 2-l-1,/cLause 5.8.7.2), it
would be reasonable to use the code fomulae without cnclosing evety other compression
bar by a link. For sLrcngth calculation (as in 2-l-1,/clause 5.8.9), it is imporlanl that compression bars are propedy held b1' links as above,

9.6. Walls
2-l-l/clause
e.6. t

(r)

2-1-l lclause 9,6.1( 1) defines a wall as having a length to thjckness ratio of at least 4. Where a
wall is subjcctcd Lo prcdominanlJy ouL-of-plane bending, clause 9,3 for slabs applies- The
mount of reinforcement in a wall and appropriate detailing for it may be determined
lrom a strut-and-tie nodel.
Leaf piers may fall into the 'wall' category. 2-1-1,/clause 9.6,3 and 2-1-1,/clause 9.6.4 deal

rvith 'horizontal' and 'transverse' reinfbrcement requircmcnts respectively, Horizontal

rcinftrrccnrert lies paralleJ Lo the long lace of the wall while transverse reinforcement
passes through the width of the wall in the form of links, It is reconrmcnded here that the
requirements lbl columns in clause 9.5 should also be mcl, which can be more onerous,
e

.g. minimum vcr[ical rcinforccmcnl.

Considerations of erly thermal cracking may give rise to greatcr reinforcement requirements. The UK National Annex is likely to givc guidance here.

9.7. Deep beams

A deep beam is formally detned in EN 1992 as a member whose span is less than 3 times
its overall section depth, In bridge design, this rvill mosl frcquently pply to transverse
diaphragms in hox girdcrs or bcLwccn bridge beams- Strut-nd-tie modelling, as discussed
in section 6.5, rvill be the normal method of design and all Lhc rules on anchorage of
reilforoement at nodes and limiting concrele prcssure wiJl apply-

2-l-l/clouse
e.7(t)
2-2/clouse
e.7(r 02)

284

The main reinforccmcnt dctcrmincd for a deep bem from strut-and-tie analysis may not
require any surface leinfolcement. A recommended minimum rcinforcement ratio of 0.17o
(but not less than t5Ommrim) for cach fase and each orthogonal direction is therefore
required to be placed near each face in accordance with )-1-l lcla se 9.7(1). Thrs amonl
can, however, be varied by the National Annex. From 2-2lclause 9.7(102), bar centrcs
should not exceed the lesser of 300 mm or the web thickness (which n.ray also be varied by
the National Annex). This reinlbrcement is intendecl to control cracking from effects not
dircctly modelled in Lhe struland-tie analysis, such as transverse tension liou bulging of
cornpression struts as discussed in section 6.5, and surtce strains rcsulting from tensile
ties withjn the concrcte section. (The nominal rcinforcement is nt intended to be suflicienL
to fully restrin the tensile forces perpendicular to a bulging compression strut and thus
increase its allowable compressive stress. If this is required, reinforcement should be
cxplicitJy designed for this purpose in acoordance with 2-l-liclause 6.5.)
For deep beams, it is likely tht reinforcement to control eatly thermal cracking will exceed
thc abovc minimum requirements. The UK National Annex is likely to give guidance herc.

CHAPTER 9. DETAILING OF MEMBERS AND PARTICULAR RULES

9.8. Foundations
2-l-1icluse 9.8 gives additional detiling guidance in section 9.8 for the following types of
foundations: pile caps, footings, tie beams and borecl piles- PiLe caps and footings are discussed below.
Pile .ops

2-l-I,/clause 9.8.1 gives additional requirements lor the design f reinforcd concrcte pile
caps, including:

.
.
.

Reinforcement in a pile cap should be detern.rined by using either strut-and-tie or flexural

mcthods.
The distnce from the edge of the pile to the edge of the pile cap should be sulicient to
enable the tie forces in the pile cap to be properly anchored.
The main lensile rcinl'orccmcnt to rcsist the action effects should be concentrated above
the tops of the piles. This is a harsh requirement. Where flexural design is appropriate, it
has been co[rmon practice

in the UK to adopt a unil'orm distribution of reinforcement

across the pile cap unless the pile spacings exceeded three pile diamcters. Even rvhere
strut-and-tie analysis is used, it may be possible to consider reinforcement outside the
pile width, provided transvcrsc rcinforccment is able to distribute the forccs as shown

in Fig.9.8-1.
the concentraied reinforcement placed above the pilc tops is t least equal to thir
nrininum rcinforccmcnt rcquirements of the full sectiot,2-2ldause 9.8'1(103) allows
evenly distributed bars along the bottom surface of a rl]embet to be omitted. This is
not recommended here for the clesign ol bridgc pile caps in order to control early
thermal cracking in such areas. Note the provision in 2-l-llclause 9.8.1(3) for buildings,
which allows the side fces and tops ofpile caps to be un-rcinforced where there is no risk
of tension dcvcloping, is omittcd in EN 1992-2 for similar reasons.
Welded bars are allowed t provide anchorage to the tensile reinforcementThe corlplession caused by the support reaction from thc pile may be assurnetl to spread
at 45' ftom Lhc edge ofthe pile (2-1-1iFig. 9.ll) and my be taken inlo acgount when

. If

.
.
.

clculting nchorage lengths.

The tops of the piJes should extend a minimum of

50

2-2/douse
r(t 03)

9.8.

mm into the pile cap.

Footings

2-1-liclausc 9-8.2 gives additional guidance on the design of column and wall footings
including:

.
.
.

The rlain tensile reinlorcement should be providcd with bars of a minimum diameter,
r/',,,;n, with recommended value of 8 mm.
The main reinfbrcement of cifcular lbotings may be orthogonal and concentrated in lhe
mjddle halfolthe footing (110%). If adopted, the remainder ofthe footing should be
considered s plin cncrete.
The anal.vsis should include checks for any tensile stresses resulting on the upper surl-acc
ol thc footing, and lhesc should be adequatel.v reinforced.

Transverse lension
resisled by reirlorcement

Tie-backlorce

Fig. 9.t-

l.

Spread of load from pile to djecent ties

285

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-l-l/clouse
e.e.2.2(t )

2-l-l/clouse
e.e.2.2(2)

TO EN I992-2

2-1-liclause 9.8.2.2 descdbes strut-nd-tie method (Fig. 9.8-2) for calculating the forces
along the length ofthe tension reinforcement in order to determine anchorage requirements.
This modcl is necessary to account for the effects of inclincd cracks', as no ted, in 2-1-l lclaase
9.8.2,2( I ). Anchorage is particularly important at the edges of the footing in determining
whether or not the main tension rcinforcement requires bends, hooks or laps onto side
face reinforcemcnt.
The tensile force to be anchored at any distance j fi'om the edge of the base is given in
2-1-I lclause 9.8.2.2rl2) as follows:

F,

Rz,lzi

2-1-1(9.13)

where:

4
R
l{ra
.:"
zi

is the force to be anchored at a distance x from the edge ofthe fboting

is the resultant fbrce from the ground pressure within disLance.x
is the vertical forcc corresponding to the total ground pressure between sections A
and B (illustrated in Fig.9.8-2)
is the external lever arm (the distance between and NB,1)
is the internal lever arm (the distance between the reinlbrcement and the horizontal

F.

is the compressive force corresponding to the mximum tensile force, ,f.

-,,*

force,,Q)

2-l-l/dause
9.e.2.2(j)

The lever arms, ze nd zj, can bii readily determined from considerations of the conrptession zones from Nsl and 4 respectively, I)tt 2-l-I lclause 9,8.2.2(3) g:.es
simplifications where z" may be calculated assuming e :0.15b and ?i is taken as 0.9d. In
practice, the value of z1 will ahedy be known from Lhe ULS bending analysis and this
simpliflctin is unnecessary. The value of ;d, however, depends on the distnce between
A and B, and, since B is not initially known, the process of linding a compatible value of
e is iterative.

2-l-l/clouse
9.8.2.2(4)

2-l-l/clouse
e.8.2.2(s)

Where the available anchorage length, denoted /6 in Fig. 9.8-2, is not sumcient to nchor
thc force 4 at the distnce x,2-l-Ilclause 9.8,2,2(4) allows additional anchorage to be
provided by bending the bars or providing suitble end anchorage devices. Theoretically,
the anchorage of the bar should be checked at all values of ,r. For straight bars, the
minimum value of r would be the most critical in determining anchorage requirementsThis is because the diagonal compression strut is flatter for small x, and a greater proportion
of the lcngth x is concrete cover. If x is taken less than the cover then the reinfrcement
cleally cannt operatc at all. 2-I-llclause 9.8.2.2(5) therefore recommends using
minimum value of /2 s a practical simplification. For other types of anchorage, such as
bends or mcchanical devices, higher values f r may be more critical, since doubling the
distance x, for example, will not double the available anchorge fesistnce. The calculation
procedure is illustrated in Worked examplc 9-8-l -

Fig.9.8-2. Model for

296

calculating required anchorage forces in tensile reinforcement

CHAPTER

9. DETAILING OF

IYEMBERS

AND PARTICULAR

RULES

.
.l:: .::, ::
::::::::::i
;lt:: :. : ::: i

t-

;".",

::::

I ',:

::. '

287

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

9.9. Regions with discontinuity in geometry or action

The definition of a 'D-region', together with typical examples of such regions, is given in
section 6.5.1 of this guide. D-regions have to be designed using strut-nd-tie models (see
section 6.5), unless specific rules are given elsewhere in EC2. (Such exceptions include
beams with short shear span which are covered in section 6.2.)

288

CHAPTER

IO

Additional rules for precast

concrete elements and
structures
This chapter deals rvith Lhe dcsign ol'precast concrete elements and structures as covered in
section l0 ofEN 1992-2 in the followins clauses:

.
.
.
.
.

General
Basis of design, fundamental requirements

Materils

Structural analysis
Particular rulcs for design and detailing

Clause l0.l
Clause 10.2
Cluse 10.3

Claute 10.5
Clause 10.9

Comment on EN 15050: Precast Concrete Bridge Elements and its applicability to design
are nade in section 1.1.1 of this guide.

10.

I.

General

of LC2-2 apply to bridges made partly or entirely of precast

concrete, and are supplementary t the design recommendations discussed in the previous
chapters and detailed in the corresponding sections ofEC2-2. EC2-2 addresses the additional
rules for the use ofprecast concrcte elements in relation to ech ofthe main general clauses in
sections 1 to 9. The hedings in section l0 are numbered 10, followed by the number ofthe
corresponding main section, For example, rules supplementary t 'Section 3 - Materials' are
given under clausc'10-3 Materials'- The sub-sections in this guide follow the same format.
Tl.re design rules in sccLion 10

2-l-llclause 10.1.1 provides def,nitions of terms relating to precst concrete design.

'Transient situatjon' is perhaps most relevant to bridge design, Examples of trnsient
situations include de-moulding, trnsporttion, storage, erection and assembly. Transient
design situations during transportation and storagc are particularly imporLant in the

2-l-l/clouse
10.1.l

design ofprctensioned beams, which can experience moment reversal in a transient situation

but not in the permanent situation.

10.2. Basis of design, fundamental requirements

In the design and detailing ofprecast concrete elements and structures, 2-1-1 lclause 10.2(1)P
requires the designer to specifically consider connections and joints between eLements, temporary and permnent bearings and trnsient situations as above. 2-1-llclaase 10'2(2)
recuires dvnamic effects in transient situations to b{] taken into account wherc relevnt

2-l-l/clouse
t0.2(t)P
2-l-l/clouse
t0.2(2)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Dynamic actiols are particularly likely to arisc during erection when lifting and landing
beams, but the clause is not intended to apply to ccidental situations such as a dropped
beam. No specific guidance is given in EC2-2 on dynzrmic load clculation, other than to
pennit representation of dynamic effects by mgnitction of static elTccts by an appropriate
fctor- Factors of0.8 or 1.2 would bc reasonable in such calculations, depending on whether
the static effects were l'avourable or unfavourable for the elTccLs beine checked. These factors
rverc recommende d n Motlel Cotle 90.6
An analogous rule for amplification of static effects is given in clause 3.2.6 ofEN 1993-l

-11

fbr the dynamic elects of the case of sudden cable failure on a cable-supported structure,
but this represents n extremc cse.
It should bc noted that in situ construction may also have transient situations which
neerl to be checked and these are covered by 2-2iclause I 13. Some of the recommendations
in 2-2lclause 113 also apply to prccast concrete.

10.3. Materials
10.3.l. Concrete
The rules in this seclion are mainly concerned with the ellccts of heat curing on the rate of
gain of compressive strength and the creep and shrinkage prperties ol concrete. Where
heat curing is applied, the 'maturity function' of 2-1-liAnnex B expression (8,l0) is used
to produce a fictitious older age of loading which leads to reduced creep when used in
conjunction with the other form ulae in 2-l-liAnnex B. The time t which the creep effect
is calculated shoulcl also be similarly adjusted according to expression (8.10). Exprssion
(8.10) can also be used in coniunction with expression (3.2) to calculate an accelerated
gain of compressive strength-

2-l-l/clouse
t0.3.2

10,3.2. Prestressing steel

2-I-I lclause 10.3.2 requires thc accelerated relaxation of prestressing steel to be considered
where heat curing ol the concrete is undertaken. An expression is given to calculate an
equivalent time which may then be used in the stndard relaxation equations of 2-1-1/
clause 3.3.2(7).

10.4. Not used in EN 1992-2

|

0.5. Structural analysis

10.5.l. General
2-2/douse
t

0.s. t (t)P

The structural analysis of precast bridges usully involves staged constructin, which is
covered by 2-2,/clause l13. 2-2lclause 10.5,1(1)P gives further requirements for analysis of
precast rnembers. In particular, the designer must specitcally consider:

.
.
.

2-2/dause
r0.s.t (2)

development of composite action (e.g. superstructures comprising pretensioned beams

with in

siLu deck slabs);

behaviour ofcomrections (e.g. in situ stitch joints between prcast deck panels);
tlerances on geometry and position that may ffect lod distribution (e.g. box beam
Ianded on Lwin bearings t each end is susceptible to possible uneven sharing of
bearing reactions dus to the torsinl stiflness f the box).

2-2lclause 10.5.1(2,) allows benetcial horizontal restrainL caused by friction to be used in

design, providing the element is not in a seisn.ric zone and the possibility ofsignificant impact
loading is eliminatcd both of these could temporarily eliminate the compressive reactions

that led to the frictional restraint. This is particula y pplicable to bearings but applies
equally to precast and in situ construction. Further restrictions are that friction must not
provide the sole means of attaining structural stbilitv and that it should not be relied

290

CHAPTER IO. ADDITIONAL RULES FOR PRECAST CONCRETE ELEMENTS AND STRUCTURES

upon if the element geometry and bearing arrangements cn led to irreversible sliding
trnsltins. In the bsence of a mechanical fixed bearing, the latter could oscur between
superstructure and substructure under cycles of temperature cxpansion nd contraction,
cau:'ing allernale :'ticking and sliding.

10.5.2. Losses of prestress

2-1-llcluse 10.5.2(1) gives a method for calculting

losses

in tendons lrom tempertule

dilerences dudng the heat curing of precast concrete elelllents.

2-l-l/clouse
t 0.5.2(t )

10.6,7,8. Not used in EN 1992-2

10.9. Particular rules for design and detailing
10.9.1. Restraining moments in slabs
The rules in tl.ris section are of little relevance

Lo bridscs and are

nt discussed here.

10,9,2. Wall to floor connections

Thc rulcs in this scction arc of liLtlc relcvancc to bridees and re not discussed hcre-

10.9.3. Floor systems

The rules in this section are of little relevance to bridges and ale not discussed here.

10.9.4. Connections and supports for precast lements

Generol

The detailing of connections for precast concrete elements js a critical aspect of their design.
Materials used for connections must be stable and durable for the lifetimc of the structure
and must possess adequate strength. Th principles rn 2-1-llclaaset 10.9.4.1 and 10.9.4.2
seek to ensure this. EC2-1-1 gives specific rules for the detailing ofconnections transmitting
compressive forces, shear forces, bending moments and tensile forces as discussed in the tbllowing sections. lt also covers the detailing ofhlfioints and the nchorage ofreinforcement
at supports.

2-l-l/clouses
10.9.4.1 ond
t

0.9.4.2

Connections tonsmittin g ..nmprcssive fofces

In the design ofconnections transnitting compressive forces,2-I-I lclause 10.9.4.3(1) allows

shear forces to be ignored if they are less than 1OYo of the compressive force. Where greater
shear forces exist, the vector resultnt force could be used in the check of bearing pressure, as
suggested in section 6.7 of this guide.
2-I-llclause 10.9.4.3(2) reminds the designer tht pproprite rreasures should be taken

2-

to prevent relative rnovements that might disrupt bedding materials between elements during
sctting. This applics also to stjtchjoints betwcen precast elements. The prevention ofrelative

movement may require restrictions to adjcent construction activities or provision of

temporary clamping systems.
Bearing areas should be reinforced to rsist transverse tensile stresses in adjacent elements,
as discussed in sections 6.5 and 6.7 of this guide. The rules in clause 6.7 generlly dictate the
nraxinrun.r achievable bearing pressure. 2-1-llclause 10,9,4.3(3), however, restdcts bearing
pressures to 0-3/16 for dry connections without bedding mortar. Additionally, concrete
faces with rubber bearings are susceptible to splitting caused by trnsverse expansion olthe rubber and, 2-1-llclause 10.9.4.3(5) gir.es a method of calculating the required surface
reinbrcemnt.

l- l /douse
0.9.4.3(t)

2-l-l/clouse
0.9.4.3(2)

2-l -l /douse
| 0.9.4.3(3)

l- I /dause
t0.9.4.3(s)

2-

Connections tronsmitt)ng sheor forces

Interfce sher t construction joints between two concrete elments (for example, precast
beam and in situ deck slab) should be checked in accordance with clause 6.2.5.

291

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Fig. | 0.9-

l,

Connection of precast units by overlpping reinforcement loops

Conneaions tronsmitfing bending moments or tensile forces

2-[-l/clouse
t

0.9.4.5(

t)

2-l-l/clquse
t0.e.4.s(2)

For connections transmitling bending rnonents and tensile forces,2-l-llclause 10.9,4,5(1)

requires reinforcement to be continuous across the conncction and be adcquately anchored
into the adjacent concrete lements. 2-I-llclause 10.9.4.5/?) suggests methds of chieving
continuity. The methods listed, together with some comments on their use, are as follows:

.
.
.
.

.
.

lapping ofbars requires a large in situ p1ug, so is often not a suitable option for prccast
deck panels landed on beams, for exmple where limited connection width is available;
grouting reinforcemcnt bars into holes requires accurate setting out and placemnt;
overlapping reinforcement loops (sec Fig. 10.9-1) usel ul for minimizing the size oI the in
situ joint, but physical testing may be needed to demonstrte dequate servicebility
pefofmance;
welding ofreinforcement brs r steel plates - useful for minimizing the size of the in situ
joint, but bars will require fatigue checks in accordance with 2-1-liclause 6.8.4 and the
fatigue verif,cations are morc onerous ior weldecl reinforcement than un-welded
reinforcement:
prestressing - as in precast segmental box girder construction. Although the use ofprestressing in this manner can eliminate the need lor in situ concrete plugs, the joint mai,
require glue to seal the interfce;
couplers - threaded types of coupler are usually il1lpossible to use to join bars in infill
bays while mechanically bolted couplers are usually of larger diameter, requiring
gIeter concrete cover.

Holf joints
2-l-l/clquse
t

0.9.4.6(t )

2-I-llclause 10.9.4,6(1) provides two alternative strut-nd-tie models for the design of half
joints which may be used either scparalely or combined. It is common to usc prestressing
tendns to provide the ties fbr the hlf-joint nib, prticularly for those ties angled across
the corner from nib to main body of the member. This helps to limit crack sizes in an area
which is hard to inspect and ensures the ties re adequately anshored- The lack of provision
for inspection and maintenance and the difliculties of excluding contaminants, such as
de-icing salts, dictate that halfjoints should not generally be used for bridge applications.
There havc been many examples in the UK of half-joint details which have been dversely
aflcted by comosion.

2-l-l/clause
|

0.9.4.7(t )

Anchoroge of rcinfor.ement ot supports

2-1-I lclause 10.9.4,7(1) reminds designers that reinforcement in supported and supporting
members sbould bc deLailed to provide adequate ancholage, allovr'ing for construction and

setting-out tolernces.

2-l-l/douse
r0.9.s.2(2)

10.9,5, Bearings
2-l-l/clause 10.9.5 covers the detailing of bcaring areas. 2-1-llclause 10,9,5.2(2) gives
recommendations for sizing of bearings based on the following allowable bearing pressures:

.
.

0.4,4a for dry connections, i.e. those without bedding mortar:

the design strength of the bcdtling material for all other cases but lildted to a maximum

of 0.85/la.

292

CHAPTER IO. ADDITIONAL RULES FOR PRECAST CONCRETE ELEIYNTS AND STRUCTURES

These pressures are only intended to be used t determine minimum bearing dimensions.
ReinforccmcnL in the bearing areas must still be determined in accordance with clause

2-l-1 6.5. 2-l-liTable 10.2 gives absolute minimum bcaring lengths. These are clearly
intended for building structures and bridge bearing dimensions will always be significantly
greater. dictated by limitation of bearing stress as above.

10.9.6. Pocket foundations

2-1-l,/clause 10.9.6 covers pocket fbundations which are capable of transferring vertical
ctions, bending moments and horizontal shear forces fron.r columns to foundations. For
bddges, precast pockets are sometimes used for pile to pile cap connections and pile cap
to column connecLions, with in situ concrete used to form a plug between elcmentsFor connections where shcar kcys are provided, 2-1-l lclause 10.9.6.2 allows the connection to be designed as monolithic, but a check on the shear connection is still required. ln
parlicular. only if adequate interfce shear resistnce is provided under bending and axial
force (see 2-1-l,iclausc 6.2-5) can punching shear be checked assuming a monolithic
colul l,/pocket interface. Lap lengths need to be increased due to the distance belwecn
lapping bars in adjacent elenents. as shown in Fig. 10.7(a) of EC2- I - I .
Where there are no shear keys and the interlace between precst elements is snooth.
2-l-l lclause 10.9.6.3(1) allorvs fbrce and moment trnsfel to be achieved by compressive
reactins on the sides ol the pockcL (through the in situ plug concrete) nd corresponding
frictional fbrces, as shown in Fig. 10.7(b) of EC2-l-1- This behaviour is very much rhat ol
a dowcl in a socket, rather than of a monolithic connection. 2-1-llclause 10.9.6.3(3)
therefore requires the reinforcemcnt jn column and pocket Lo be detailed ccoldingly for
the forces acting on them individually. In parti lr, care is needed with checking shear in
the element in thc pocket as high sl.rear forces can be generated in producing the lixity
momenl.

2-l-l/clouse
t0.9.6.2

2-l-l/clouse
|

0.9.6.3(t )

2-l-[/clouse
|

0.9.6.3(3)

293

CHAPTER II

Lightweight aggregate
concrete structures
This chapter dea.ls with the design oflightweight aggregate concrete structures as covered in
section l1 of L.N 1992-2 in the followins clauses:

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

I.l

General

Clause I

Basis of design

Cluu:ta I1.2

Materials
DurabiUty and cover to reinforcement
Structurl nalysis

Clause I1.3

Ultimate limit states

Claure I I .4
Clause I 1.5
Clause I 1.6

Sen'iceability limit states

Detailing of reinfrcament - general

DcLailing of men.rbers and particular rules

Clause I L8
Clause I L9

No comments are made on the'Additional rules for prccast concrete elements and strucLurcs' in clause 11.10 as it makes no modilications to the rules ofZ-l-liclause 10.

l.l.

General

The design rccommenclations discussed in the previous chapters and detailed in the
colresponding sections f EC2-2 have becn dcveloped for concrete made from normalweighl aggregates. As naturally occurring aggregates become less abundant and increasingly
expensive, manufacturcd aggregates are increasingly used and mosL manufactured
aggregates are lightweight. The use of lightwcighr aggregatc concretes (LWAC) also has
obvious advantages where it is desirable to reduce dead loads, such as in long spans that
are dead load dominated.
Lightweight aggregate concrete has been used throughout the wodd lthough less so in the
UK, particularly in britlge constluction. There is extensive test data verifying the properlics
of lightweight aggregate concrete and thc implications its use has on the design verifications
oi concrete structures. Section I I addresses these implictins on the use of the main general
sections for normal-wcight aggregate concrete. All the clauses given in sections 1 to 10 and 12
of EC2 are generally applicable to lightweight aggregate concrete unless they are substituted
by special clauses given in section I L The headings in section 1l are numbered 1 l, followed
by the number of the corresponding main scction thal it modifies, e.g. section 3 of EC2-2 is
'Materials' so I 1.3 is similarly called 'Materials' and makes specific material requirements for
lightrveight ggregate concrete2-1-llclause 11.1.1t'J) clarifies tht section l1 does not apply to air-entraind concrete or
lightweight concretc wiLh fl open structure. 2-l-llclause 11.1.1(4) dcfincs lightweight

2-l-l/clouse

H.t.t(3)
2-

l- I /douse

rt.t.t(4)

DSIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

aggregte concrete as concrctc having a closed sLructurc with an oven-dry density ofno more
than 2200 kgimr, made with proprtin f rtificil or natull lightrveight aggregates with
a parlicle dcnsity of less lhan 2000kg/m'.

| 1.2. Basis of design

2-2,/clause 2 is vaLid for lightweight aggregate concrete without modificatjons. This includes

the material lctors for concrete.

11.3. Materials

2-l-l/clouse

il.3.t (t)
2-l-l/clouse
t t.3.r (z)

2-l-l/clouse
t t.3.r (3)

I 1.3. |. Concrete
The strcngth classes of lightrveight aggregate conclte are designated by adopting the
symbol LC in place of C f<rr normal-wejght aggrcgatc concrcte, thus a lightweight ggregte
concrete with characteristic cylinder stength of 40 MPa and cube strength of 44 MPa is
designated LC40i44. It should be noted that the ratio of cylinder strength to cube slrength
is generally higher for LWAC than for normal-weight concrete. EC2 dopts an dditional
subscript (i) to designate mechanical properties for lightweight aggrgate concrete. l.r
general, where strength values originating from 2-l-l/Table 3.1 have been used in
expressions elsewhere in the code, those values should be replaced by the corresponding
values for lightweight aggregate concrete given in 2-l-l/Table 11.3.1 (reproduced hcre as
Table I 1.3-1 for convenience)Lightweight aggregate is classified in EN 206-l according to its density, as illustrated in
2-l-l/Table 11.1. Densities are given for both plain and reinforced concrete, the latter
assuming a reinforcement cntent of l00kg/m'. 2-1-llclause 11.3.1(1) permits the quoted
reinforccd concrete densities to be used lbr weight calculation. In heavily reinforced
bridges with low-density concrete, it may be more appropriate Lo calculate the reinforced
concrete weight more accurtely according To 2-1-llclause 11.3.1(2).
Thc tcnsile strength of concrete is affected by the moistulr content, since drying reduccs
tensile strength and lorv-densil1, concrctcs undcrgo grcater moisture loss. 2-1-llclause
11,3.1(3) introduces a coeTncient, ?r, to take ccount of the reduction in tensile strengtl.r

with density:

2-t-r l(1r,t)
nt :0.40 + o.6opl22oo
where p is the upper linrit of the oven-<lry density in kg,/m3 from 2-l-liTable 11.1. For a
given cylinder strength, the tensile strength lor a lightweight concrcte should be obtained by
multiplying the tcnsjle strength given in 2-l- 1/Table 3.1 by 41 . as indicated in Table I 1.3- 1.
| 1.3.2. Elastic deformation
2-l-l/clouse
t t.3.2(t)

Thc clastic modulus is strongly influenced by the reltive oven-dry density of the aggregate
lxed. 2-1-llclause 11.3.2(I) therelbre introducas a oemcicnt, 4E, Lo take account of the
reduccd modulus of elasticity for lightweight aggregate concrete. For a given cylinder
strength, the values for E'",,, given in 2-l-liTable 3.1 should be mulriplied by 176 for lightweight aggregate concLete where:

r73:

Q12200)z

2-1-rl0r.2)

Tests give considerable soatter for E ., so, where more accurate deternination of concrete
stillness is needed, 2-1-I,/clause I l-3.2(1) requires tests to be carried out on the^-speciflc mix
proposed to dclernine the modulus of elasticity in accordance with ISO 6784.'"
The coeficient of thermal expansion for lightweight aggregate concretes varies widely
depending on the type ofaggregate. but is typically less than that ofnonnal-weight concrete.

2-l-[/clause
t t .3.2(2)

296

2-l-llclause 11.3,2(2) permits a value of I x 10 6/K to be usecl in clesign where thermal

movenrents are 'not of greatest importance'. This value should be of general applicability.
Exceptions might include bridges where movement ranges are predicted to be at the limit of

II.

CHAPTER

Table | 1.3-1.

Stress and deformation charcteristics

LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE CONCRETE STRUCTURES

for lightweight concrete according !o

2-

l- l/Table |

Strentth classes for lightweight aggregate concrete

(MPa) 17 16 20
f1.e,-6" (l'lPa) 13 18 22
f6. (MPa) t7 22 2S

f1.

30 35 40 4s
33 l8 44 50
38 43 4A 53

25
2a
33

Formulae/notes

50

55

60

70

80

55

60

66

77

88

68

78

88

58

f1.,1,e.s5 (F'lPa)

/r<tk.o0t

rctl,0.05

'

f1.p

20 MPa

5% lracrile

r/l

95% fractile

f1..1,6.e5 (l'1Pa)

E. -E.

Ekm (GPa)

er.r (%.)

For

ftm-frck+8(MPa)
ttt:0.40+0.60p12200

(f4Pa)

f6,.

1.3. I

= kfi, lGt"tn) k:
- I.o,
t
- k:

l.lforsanded
1.0

r11
lightweight aggregate

for all other lightweight

nc:

(.Pl22oo)2

sk,zl

ler.u

.|.r

lr.r

con.."." f-

aggregate

concrete

er.,r (%")

e.r
e

(%o)

.,2

ft,i

2.0

2.0

__

t.75
I (n.

eL.r (%")

r.,3 (%o)

2.2
3.ll1
1.75
1.8
3.14r

2.3

2.4

2.5

7.9rjt

2.7\t

2.6'111

1.6

r.45

1.4

1.9

2.0

2.2

2.9nt

2.6111

an expansionjoint's capacity or for inLegral bridges where temperature lnovement is rcstrainedln such cases. a range ofcoemcients oftherrnal expansion could be considered in the design.
2- 1-1,/clause 1 1-3.2(2) also allows the di{lelences between the coeficients of themal expansion

of reinforcing steel and lightweight aggrcgate concrete to be ignored in design.

The reduce<l elastic defbrmation properties for lightweight aggregte concrete have the
following implications on bridge design:

.
.
.

Stresses rising from restrained thermal or shrinkag movements are generally less than
for normal-weight aggregate concrete.
Elstic losses in prcstressed concrete members can be signilicantll, greater lhau for
normal-weight ggregate concrete membcrs. although Lhis loss is often reltively
5mall fraction ol'the lotrl loss.
Deflections of members and hence also second-order efTects will be greater than for
normal-weight ggfegte concrete membcrs. This can be significant for slender columns.

I 1.3.3. Creep and shrinkage

Test dt on the creep charactcrislics of lightweight agglegate concrte sl.rows considerable
scatter with sonle tsts suggesting tht LWAC exhibits morc crcep than norml-weight ggregte concretes and others suggesting the opposite. ?-.l-.f/clquse 11.3.3( I ) rcconlmends that the
creep coeflicientr.y', is tken s the value for normal-weight aggregale concrete multiplied by a
factor of (p/2200)'. Since the elastic modulus is also reduced by the sme fctor in 2- I - I /blause

2-l -l/clouse
r

t.3.3(t)

I1.3.2(l), the clculated crecp slrains produced lbl a given stress are, therefore. the samc for

lightweight concrete nd norml-weight concrcle (as creep strain : clastic strain x creep coefficient). The creep strains so derived have to be multiplied by a further factor, 4:, but this is 1.0
for concrete grades of LC20/22 and above (i.e. all structural bridge concretes)Shrinkage strains for lightweight aggregte concretes also vary grexlly. 2-I-Ilcluse
11.3.3(2) allows thc nal drying shrinkage values for lightweight aggregate concrete to be
obtained by multiplying the values for normal density concretc by a factor, r73, which is
1.2 for concrctc grades of LC20i22 and above (i.e. ll structural bridge concretes). 2-1-1/
clause 11.3,3(3) allows the autogenous shrinkage strain to bc taken equal t that for
normal density concrete, but it notes tht this can be an over-estimte for concretes with
wter-sturated aggregaLcs.

2-l-l/clouse
t t.3.3(2)

2-l-l/clause
t r.3.3(3)

297

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-l-l/clouse

TO EN I992.2

11.3.4. Stress strain relations for non-linear structural analysis

2-1-llclause 11.3.4(1) requires the appropriate strain limits for LWAC from 2-l-l/Table
to be used with 2-l-liFig. 3.2. LWAC values should also be used for l"- and 81"..

3.1

r t .3.4(t )

11,3.5. Design compressiy and tensile strengths

The values of the design compressive and tensilc strcngths of lightweight aggregte concrete
are delined in 2-l-llclauses 11.3.5(l) and 11.3.5(2) as:

Jia

cq*fi.* l^r.

at"..fi.*l't"

2- 1-

l(1

1.3.15)

and

.frta

2-r-l(11.3.16)

respectivcly, where 1is the partial safety lbr concrete and rltcc and old are soemcients to
account for the lng-term effects on the compressive strength. tc" and (}Lcr are equivalent
to o"" and a",. i.e. in 2-l-l/clause 3.1,6, The values of arcc and dlcr may be given in the
National Annex to EC2-1-1 thcrc is no equivalent National Annex provision in EC2-2.
Both are recommended to be taken as 0.85. It is not recommended in this guide lo takc
a1"" as 1.0 for shear, as is appropriate for normal-rveight concrete, until more test evidence
is available to support this for LWAC.

I 1.3,6. Stress strain relations for the design of sections

2-l-I/clsuse
t t.3.6(t )

2-1-I lclause I l .3,6(7/ requires the appropriate strain limits for LWAC to be used with 2-l - 1i
Figs 3.3 and 1.4. This should also apply to the rectngulr stress block in 2-l-liFig. 3.5, but
this has bcen omitted. LWAC values should also be used for f"6.

I 1.3.7. Confined concrete

An increased con.rpressive strength is allowed lbr lightweight aggregate concrete elements
under triaxial stress, but a given confining prcssure gives less strength increase for LWAC
than lbr normal density concrete. This, together with the reduction of tensile strength
i-or LWAC- leads to the need for modification to the partially loaded area rules, as given
in 2-1-1/clause 11.6.5.

| 1.4. Durabili and cover

to reinforcement

The sam environmental exposure classes used for normal-weight aggregate consrete are
appropriate for use with lightweight aggregate concrete. However, 5mm needs t be
added to the minimum cover obtained from 2-l-liTable 4.2, which relates to the cover
nccessary to provide adequate bond stress for anchorage and laps.

| 1.5.

Structural analysis

The structutal analysis of lightweight aggregate concrete structures is allected mainly by the
reduced elstic deformation propcrties discussed above. In add;Ltlon, 2-I-llclause 11.5.1

2-l-l/douse
I t.5.1

requircs lhat the rotation capacities, 9oy.,1, given in 2-l-l/Fig. 5.6N are multiplied by a
factor (e1",,r/e"u2)- Since rotation capacity depends on the limiting strin for reinforcement
as well as that of the concrete (see section 5,6.3.1 of this guide), multiplying the rotaLion
capacity hy this ratio is conservative as the limiLing reinforcemenL strain is unchanged.

| 1.6.

Ultimate limit states

This section makes direct modillcations to most of the ULS resistance rules with the
exceDtion of bendine.

294

CHAPTER

II.

LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE CONCRETE STRUCTURES

Bending

The rules for bending are only indirectly modified for the usc of lightweight aggregate
concrete; the limiting concrete strins nd the stress-strin relationship for concrete is
adjusted by 2-1-1,/clause 11.3.6, The stress block comparisons illustrated in Tablc 3.1-4 of
section 3,1.7 of this guide are noL thcrefore applicable to lightweight ggregte concrete,
although the fblmulae presented there for verage stress in the compression zone,.luu, and
dcpth of cenLroid of compressive fbrce. li, can still be used for LWAC- For the parabolicrectngulr and bi-linear stress blocks, the rcduction in failure strain, a1"u2, for LWAC
leads to a reduction in 1"" (and a relatively smaller reduction in p) compared lo thc values
for normalweight concrctc. These values are unaffected for the rcctangular block, making
it even more reltively economic for bending calculation than for nomal-rveight concrete.
This was probably not intended and it is therefore safer to use one of Lhe other two more
realistic stress blocks. although they will only produce a significant difference to the
rctangular block for heavily over-reinforced members.
Sheot and totsion (2-l-l/clouses I 1.6.1

to I 1.6.3)

Significant research has been undertaken in assessing the shear behaviour of lightweight
aggregat concrelc. The lesls indicate that. where shear cracks develop in lightweight
aggregate concrete members, they often pss through the aggregte rather than around jL,
resulting in significantly smoother shear surfaces. This results in less shear force being
trnsmitted by ggregate interlock and thus the shear strength f LWAC is reduced compared to nonnal-weight concrete. The expressions defined in section 6.2 of EN 1992-2 are
therefore modified for use with lightwcight aggregate reinforcement as discussed below.
In 2-1-llclause IL6,I, the design value of shear resistance of a member withouL shear
reinforcement is rcnlaced bv:
I'rna,"

(Gna."tr

l00Alcr) t/r

1o.)b *d

(il -r, *

kr

o"n).d

2-1-t t(tt.6.2)

2-l-l/clouse
I t.6.t

wherc:
C1p,1."

is a nationallv determined parameter. EN 1992 recommends laking a value of

0.ls/n

41
r1,,n;n

/r1

is delined in 2-1-llclause 11.3.1(3)

is a narionally dctermined parameter. EN 1992 recommends taking value of

ul-," - 0 010k''' '{i*'
is a nationally determined parameter with recommended value :0-l5

All other parameters are as lbr normal-weight concrete. Note that the reduced shcar strength
of lightweight aggregatc concrete discussed above is reflected in lower recommended
values of p,1," and r,1,.;n and the use of the reduction factor 41. It should be noted that
2-1-lTExpression (11.6.2) does not include the parameter 41 wilh n1.,,.;n, whereas it is
present in 2- l-1/Expression (l 1 .6-47) tor punching shear. This omission was not intended.
For nrembers lvith shear reinforcement, 2-l-llclause 11.6.2(1) simply states that the
reduction factor for the crushing resistance of concrete struts for LWAC is /1, ntionlly
determined prameter with recommended value z1 :0.5?l(l - "k1250). (Note that the
density-dependent reduction factor ?r is again used here.) This compares with
z1 :0.6(l - k/250) from 2-1-l,iclause 6.2.3(3) for normal-weight concrete. This LWAC
value ofzl is then used with expression (6.9) ofEC2-1-1. No reduction is necessary for
the shear resistancc in expression (6.8) of EC2-1-1, as it contains only a reinforcement
contribution. For members without shear reinforcement, 2-1-l lclause 11,6.1(2) explicitly
gives the shear crushing resistance for LWAC as 0.5ryb*dv1.fL7 compared to the normalweight concrete vlue of0.5*dr,/16 lrom 2-1-1/clause 6.2.2. Since r11 appears both explicitly
in the expression for shear strength itself and also within /1, the strength is reduced by
r7f, which was not intended.
2-1-l lclaase 11,6.3.1(I) also applies the reduction factor ur:0.5a1(l - fi.k 1250) to
the crushing resistance of concrete struts in torsion calculations, by replacing i, with l/1 in
2- I - liExpression (6.30).

2-l-l/clouse
t t .6.2(t)

2-l-l/douse
rt.6.t(2)

2- l- l/dause
r t.6.3. |

(r)

299

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Punching sheor (2-

l-

/clouse | 1.6.4)

Similar modifications to those for the flexural shear resistances are madc to the punching
shear resistances. The punching shear design stress f slb is frm 2-I-llclause 11.6.4.1:
2-l-l/dause

riql

I t.6.4.t

and

2-l-l /clouse
t t .6.4.2(t)
2-l-l/clouse

"

/2

C111,1."r/r fr ( I

v."

fr

l-

l/clause

(r1'u1,.;n

1itna,,n", :0.511/.,1

Pon)ally looded oreos

is recommended to be 0-0ti. The values of

u1d:

2o.0

.o"0)

C'1p,1,",

41,

l"

2-t-rt(1.6.47)
and 11n,;n are as given above

for flexural shear. All other prmeters re s for norml-\r.eight conclete. Unlike for flexural
sher, EC2 considcrs a proportion ol the concrete resistance component in thc punching
shear design ofelements $.ith punching shear reinforcement. Therefore the above reductions
in punching shear strength are also made rn 2-I-I lclause I1.6,4,2( I ) for th concrete temrs in
the design tesistance of slabs wiLh shear reitrforcement.
2-1-llclause 11,6,4.2(2) makes a reduction to the mximum punching shear stress in the
sme way as lor flexural shear, such that:

t r .6.4.2(2)

2-

00p,l"u)'/t *

2-l-1i(11.6.53)

(2-l-l/clause I1.6.5)

The mechanism for the development ofenhanced bearing pressures in partially loaded areas
is discussed in section 6.7 of this guide. The maximum bearing pressurc depends on both the
concrete's tensile strength (to generate confinement t the loded area) and the concrete's
complessive resistance whcn confining pressure is present. Both ol these arc lower for a
givcn ooncrete grade for LWAC than for normafweight cor\crete.2-1-Ilclause 11.6,5(I)
therefore modifies the expression in 2-l-liclause 6.7 as fbllows:

.6.s(t)
FR,r"

1"61"3ll.r I A"ttt't410'a o oli*r",

(#)

2- 1-l

(1 1 .6.63)

Strutand-tie models

No modilications are made in 2-l-I,/clause ll to the resistances of concrete struts in 2-1-1,/

clause 6.5.2- However, for consistency with the LWAC shear rnodification in 2-1-l/clause
11.6.3.1(l), it is recommended herc that thc design strcngth given in 2-l-liclause 6.5.2(2)
for strufs with transverse tension be reduced from 0.6u'J;d to 0.541ru'f.a, where

"'

: (l

.fi"kl2s1).

A similar inclusion of

41 might be considered appropriate

for the

resislance ol node types (b) and (c) in 2-1-llcluse 6.5.4 due t the presence of transverse
tension.

300

CHAPTER

II.

LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE CONCRETE STRUCTURES

Froln eqution

f:,,mH:,::

.,1.* against linrit from equation (D6.1-81 to cnsll.e reinforcement yields:

Check
vie,ds:

;:::"*,eir.rcemen,

**-',"*,,.]

".@

si+ >

D6 5, z-2oo-o4o3x

+*r*,1:*::r::',--'
'i:n::-:

'

,h!. resisrance or
-.l.,,-".= 0,*o {o*'*'"''"'*":*
i;l,|il #,lj:',:: :,'#: "Ji.1:

Again,pl-

#:#K*d:
1,5 and (ip6,"

_:

"

::'

:0.15/1.
)

0.15/l.sr-oio
-. :rslr
- 010

lthe limir).

(1t.6.2):

301

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

| 1.7. Serviceability limit states

2-l-l/clouse
t t.7(t)

2-1-llclause 11.7(1) modtfres the span-t-depth ratios in 2-l-ll/cluse 7.4.2(2) that are
deened to satisfy defleclion criteria. This is necessary because of the reduction in the
modulus ofelasticity for LWAC. 2-l-1,/clause 7.4,2(2) is, however, intended for use in building design.

2-l-l/clouse

2-1-Ilclaase 11.8.1(1) effectively requires the minimum mandrel sizes in 2-1-liTable t.lN
to be increased by 50%. This is necessary becuse the reduced tensile strength of LWAC
leads to splitting of the concrete inside bends of bars at a lower bearing pressure than for

| 1.8. Detailing of reinforcement

il.8. t (t)

2-l-l/clouse
t | .8.2(t )

general

normal-weight aggregate concrete

2-1-l lclause 11.8,21',1) requires the ultimat bond stress to be calculated using f",6 in place
of /1t6, as bond stress is strongly dependent on concrete tensile resistance. There appears to
be no need for this clause as Z-l-l/clause 11.1.1(l) states that, unless clause 1l provides
otherwise, all normal-weight concrete expressions apply to LWAC when the relevant
strength parmeters are taken from 2-l-llTable ll.3.l. A similar modifiction should
therefore appl)' to the anchorage and transmission lengths of pre-tensioned tendons in
2-l-liclause 8.10.2, but this is not specifically idenrified in 2-l-llclause 11.S.2(l).

I 1.9. Detailing of members and

particular rules

2-2lclause 11.9(101) requires tht reinforccnent bars should not normally exceed 32mm
2-Uclouse

diameter and bundles should not contain more than 2 bars (with a maximum equivalent

t t.9(t

diameter

of 45mm).

These restrictions reflect the lack

larger diameter bars in lightweight aggregate concrete.

302

of test dta for the

use of

CHAPTER I2

Plain and lightly reinforced

concrete structures
This chapter deals with the design of plain and lightly reinforced concrets structures (where
the reinlbrcement providcd is less than the minimum required for reinforced concreLc) as
covered in section 12 of EN 1992-2 in the lbllowins clauscs:

.
.
.
.
.
.

12.l

Ultimate limit states

Clause
Clause
Clause
Clause

Serviceability limit states

Cleuse 12.7

Detailing of membcrs and particular ntles

Clause

General
Mterils
Structural analysis: ultimate limit states

12.3

I2-5

I2.6
12.9

The clauses given in sections I to I I of EN 1992-2 are generally applicable unless they are
substituted or modified by specific clauses in section 12. Thc headings in section 12 of
EN 1992-1-1 are numbered 12, followed by the number of the colresponding main section
after the decimal point- This format is not folowed in this section of the guide.
The use of plain concrete is not common in bridge design and there are no bridge-specific
provisions in EN 1992-2, so lhe comments on this section are limited. 2-1-llclause 12.1(2)
states that the provisions of section 12 do not apply to mcmbers resisting 'effccts such as
those from rotating machines and traffic loads'. The restriction in applicability for trallic
loading clearly applies to mcmbers which are directly trafiicked, but it is less clear how far
Lhe restriction extends to sr.rpporting members. The rules could certainly bc applied to
elements whose load effects are nol inlluenced directly by tramc actions, such as wing
walls. They could probably also be applied to othr loundation elements lvhere dynamic

2-l-l/clouse
t

2.l (2)

effects from trffic re smll,

Materials and structural analysis

Plin cncrete, in the absence of any confining reinforcement, is less ductjle than reinforced
concrete. 2-1-l lclause 12.3.1 ( 1 ) therefore requires the values of a"" and o", for plain concrete
members (denoted a.".01 nd clct,pL) to be less than those taken for reiuforced concrete. The
limited ductility of plain concretc also means that mny of the assumptions for stnlctural
analysis in section 5 of EN 1992-2 may no longer be valid. Ljnear elastic analysis with redistribution cannot generally be used because the rcal behaviour ofplain concrete pproxlmates
to tl.rat of lincar clastic un-cracked sections until cracking oocurs, whereupon failure may
occur before moment can be redistributed. Plastic analysis is similarly not generally
allorvable. 2-I-llclause 12.5(7) statcs that Lhese methods should not be used 'unlss their
application can be justited'. Justifiction would involve a chcck of deformation capaclty

2-|-l/douse
t2.3.r(r)

2-l-l/clouse

r2.s(t)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

2-l-l/clouse
2.5(2)

TO EN I992-2

Cracking need not, however, trigger ultimate tilure for members with axial compressive
force. For a wall, for example, decompression will occur when the load moves outside the
middle third. However, a plastic stress block can develop in the concrete to pennit greater eccentricity ofload and this is the basis fthe expression for axial resistance in 2-l-l/clause 12.6-1.
2J-l lclause 12.5(2) alows structul'al analysis to be bascd on linear elastic theory (the
simplest) or nonlinear theory. For nonlinear alalysis (such as frasture mechanics) the
deformation capcity must be checked to ensure ducLility is sulTicient to chieve the nlysis
assump ons.

Bending and axial force

2-l-l/clouse
2.6.t (3)

2-1-l ldause 12.6.1(3) provides an expression for axial resistance for eccentrically loaded
plain cncretc walls ald columns that re not slender. The tensile strength of thi) concrete
is neglected and the rectangular stress block for concrete in compression is used as shown
in Fig. l2-1. The ultimate axial rcsistance, Np,1, is determined from the strcss block:
Nna

Ti-6a

x b x 2(h,,/2

(Dl2- r)

e)

which reauanges to give the exprcssion in 2-l-llclause 12.6.1(3):

Ns6: nf.abh*(\ -2e/h*)

2-t-tl(t2.2)

i l'*
rv
.-_l
ltt
I

i---fr---l
til

r-l"E--'r-;rr*l
(a) Elevation

i' i-l
n*n-

I"

"

(b) Stress block

Fig. l2-1. Eccentrically loaded plain concrete wall at failure

2-l -l /clouse
|

2.6.2(t )P

2-l-l/clouse
t2.7(2)

2-1-I lclause 12,6,2(1)P requires the eccenrricity of the pplied forcc ro be limited to avoid
large cracks forming, unless other measures have been taken to avoid local tensile failure of
the cross-section. No guidance is given in EN 1992-2 on cither the limit ofeccentricity or suitable control measures, Cracking from bursting stresses adjcent to the load can be controlled
by lildting the bearing pressure in accordancc with the recommendations fr bursting in
section 6.7 of this guide; plain concrete can be considered by wa1, of Expression (D6,7-4),
Control of cracking is, however. generally a serviceability issue, so a sr.ritable approach
might be to limit all tensile stresses in serviceability calculations to /].6in accordance
rvith 2-1-l/clause 7 .l(2). 2-l-llclause 12.7(2) supports this by suggesting control ofcracking
through the 'limittion of concrete tensile stresses to acceptable values'.

Shear and torsion

2-l-l/douse
t

2.6.3(t )
I - l/clause

2-

t2.6.3(2)

2-l-l lclause 12,6.3 (1,) allows the tensile strength f concrete to be considered in the ultimate
limit state for shear, provided bdttle failure can be avoided and adequate resistance ensured.
The calculation method given in 2-1-1 lclause 12.6.3( 2 ) is based on limiting principal stresses
to the design tensile strength of the concrete, r4.4, in a similar manner to the shear design of
un-crcked scctions for prestressed concrete n.rembers, as discussed in section 6.2.2.2 of this
gujde. In the calculation, the shear stress is tken as:
r"o

104

hVBafA""

7-t-r'02.4)

CHAPTER I2. PLATN AND LIGHTLY REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES

The value of may be given in thc NationaL Annex; the recommendcd value is 1.5. It
accounLs for the non-uniformity of the shear stress distribution through lhe section. A
value of 1.5 is appropriate lbr an elastic distribution of shear for a reotangular crosssection and is conservative for othcr cross-section shpes.
2-1-I lclause 12.6.4f1) sttes tht cracked sections of plain members should not normally
be designed to resist torsional moments, 'unless it can be.justified otherwise'. For un-cracked
members, the torsional resistance could be calculated by again limiting the principal tensile

2-l-l/clouse

t2.6.4(t)

stress to the design tensile strength.

Buckling of slender sections

Tbe slcnderness of a wall or column is given by : /o/1, where i is the minimum radius of
gyrtion and 1n is the ellective length of the member- The effective length is defined in
EN 1992-1-l as ln- 3l*, whcrc /*. is the clear height ofthe meuber and p is a coefficient
to ascount for the end restraint conditions.2-l-llclause 12.6.5.1(1) and 2-\-l/Tablc 12.1
provide values of B for men]bers with differcnr edge restraint conditions. 2-l-1,/clause
12.6.5.1(5) gcncrally restricts the slenderness of rvalls in plain concrcte to l0lh* 325.
Hving determined the slenderness, 2-I-I lclause 12.6.5.2fi) gives the lbllowing simplified
expression for the resistance to axial compression:
Nna
where
creep.

:
@

is a factor taking into first- and sccond-order eccentric.ities and the norml effects
is defined in EC2 as:

2e,",1h,,))

2-l-l/clouse
t

2.6.s.2(

I)

2-1-li(r2.10)

b* /iad'

(1.14(1

2-l-l/clause
r 2.6.5. t (t )

0.02lolh*

!(l

2e,",lh*)

of

2-1-1(12.11)

lioln
l) equates to that

where e,n, is the sum ofthe first-order eccentricity fthe load and atlditional eccentricity

geometrical inperfections. The upper limit on @ in 2- I - 1/Expression (12.1

implicit in 2- l- 1i Expression ( 12-2) for stocky members.

305

CHAPTER I3

Design for the execution stages

This chapter discusses design for the execution stages as covered in section 113

ofEN

1992-2

in the followin!: clauses:

.
.
.

Gcneral

Actions during execution

Verification criteria

Clause 1 13.1
Clause I13.2
Clause I I3.3

13.1. General
Section I l3 gives design rules covering structures during construction (termed 'execution' in
the Eurocodes). For bridges built in more than one stge, it is l)ecessary to allow for the
build-up of forces and stresses fiom the construction sequencc. 2-2lclause 113.1(101)
identifies four circumslances where thc construction sequence should be considered in
design. These are essentially where:

.
.
.
.

2-2/clouse
H 3.r(t0t)

clcmcnls cxperience temporary forces, e.g. bearing friction on piers during launching of a
deck or out of balance forces on piers during balanced cantilevcr consttuc on;
redistribution of stresses throughout the shucture or across local cross-sections is
possible due to creep, shrinkage or steel relxlionj
the construction sequence affects the build-up of stresses and the geometry of the final
sLructurc:
the construction sequence ffects the temporry stbility ofthe structure-

It is ol'ten the case that the designs of some bridge elements are governed by action combinations during constructin rther thn n the completed structure, such as the piers during
balanced cantilever construction lor example. l-2lclause 113.1(102) therefore requires ultimate and serviceability limit state verifications to be crried out at each eonsLruction stge.
Creep can have a significant eflect in modifying the stress state for serviceability checks for
bridges built by stagcd construclion. Creep tends to cause action effects built up lrom staged
construction to move twrds the action effects that would have becn produced had the
structure been constructed monolithically. (Creep redistribution is discussed in Annex KK
of this guide.) This is the basrs of 2-2lclause 113.1 ( 103 ) rvhich requires the designer to consider the effects ofcreep in global analysis as well as in the local sectjon design - particularly
significanl in thc design of beam-and-slab-type construction for example.
2-2lclause 113.1( 104) is a reminder that rvhere the erection procedure has a significant
influence on the stability of a structure during construction (such as in balanced cantilever
construction for example) or on the built-up forces in design, the construction sequene
assumed in design should be detailed on the drawings.
Clause 113.1 is not exhaustive. The designer should always consider the construction
sequence and the possible interction with the temporary works. Flcxible lalsework, which

2-2/douse

t r3.t(t02)

2-2/clause

t t3.r(t03)
2-Uclause
r

t3.r(t04)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

allows strcsses to develop in the permanent works as they arc construcled, is one particular
example of a situation to consider.

3.2. Actions during execution

The actions t take into account in the design of structures during constructin re cvered
in EN 1991-1-6. These ctions includc Lhe followins:

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

self-weight;

soil movement and earth pressures;

prestressingactions;
pre-deformations (such as loosening ofcables or supports);
temDerature effects:

shrinkagc and hydration effects;

wind actionsj
snow loads;

actlons due to water and ice:

accidental actions (from failures of auxiliary construction equipment fbr example);
seismic loads;

as well as the additional temporary construction loads from:

.
.
.
.
.
.

Z-Uclouse

t | 3.2(t02)

2-2/clouse

t r3.2(t03)

2-2/clouse

tt3.2(t04)
2-2/clause
r t 3.2(t 0s)

308

Dersonnel:
storagc of movable items;
movable heavy cquipnent in position or during movement (such as travelling formwork,
gantries or launching noses);
other equipment liee to move (such as cranes);
variable loads from parts of the structure (such s wet concrete);

impacts from plant.

EN l99l -1-6 is intended for use by contrctors as well as designers. and the magnitudes of
many of the construction-rclatecl plant loads may need to be agreed u.ith proposed contrctors during the design phase. The magnitudcs of the characteristic values of some of these
construction loads are recommended in EN 1991-1-6 and can be modified in its accompanying National Annex.
Clause 113.2 gives additional requirements. 2-2lchuse 113.2(102) recommends taking a
minimum horizontal or uplift wind pressure of 200 Nim2 on one of the cntilevers in
balanced cantilever construction. This pressurc should only be considered as an absolute
minimum value. It can be signiticantly exceeded if a structure is susceptible to excittion
by wind turbulence (which becomcs increasingly likelir with reducing natural liequency) or
to vortex shedding. Dynamic analysis can be performed to establish the wind loading or
more conservatlve static pressurcs used.
2-2lclause 113,2(103) requires the design to allow for an accidcntal fall of formwork in
in situ balanced cantilever construction. This would be n accidentl ction. Lss of the
formwork traveller (together with any concrete being placed at the time) would unbalance
the cantilever and put additional moment into the pier or supForting temporary moment
restraint- The clause does not sFecifically require consideration of the loss of the whole
traveller but if this is not considered, the risk of its loss would have to be addressed by
other n]eans, such s the provision of fail-safe systems in the design of the trveller itself.
2-2lclause 113,2(104) requires similar considcrations for the drop ofa precast unit.
2-2lclause 113.2(105) is a reminder to consider the deformations imposed by launching a
hridge deck.
For balanced cartilevel construction, another significant consideration is the ut of
balance moments from deck self-weight on the piers. This comprises out of blnce
moments from the seque[ce of casting and also from unintentional variations in selfweight (due to dimensional tolerances and conclete density variations)- For the ltter, it is

CHAPTER I3. DESIGN FOR THE EXECUTION STAGES

Table 13.2-1.

Recommended return
oeriods for the assessment of

charcterislic values of climatic actions

Durtion

Retu

5 3 days

2 yers
5 years
l0 years
50 years

!3

months

:! | year
> | year

rn period

sommon to adjust the nominal se!f-weight on eithcr sidc of a pier (say +3% on one side and
20lo on the other side), Out ofbalance moments due to construction loads and thc sequence
of travcller movements also need to be considered. Any restrictions assumed in design fleed
to be greed with the cnstructor and clearly indicated on construction drawings.
The combination of actions is covered by the general rules given in EN 1990 nd the
structure should be designed for approp atc pcrsistcnl, Lransient, accidental and seismic
design situations,
The nominal duration of any transient design situations should be Laken as being equal to
or greater than the anticipatcd duralion of the appropriate construction stge in ccordance
with EN 199 L- 1-6. The design situtions cn tke int ccount the leduced likelihood ofthe
occurrence of any variable action (such as wind or temperature cllects) by considering
reduced return periods for the actions. Recommended return periods for the assessment of
characteristic values of such climatic actions are given in Table 3.1 of EN 1991-1-6 and
are summarized here in Table 13.2-1 for convcnicncc. Use of the reduced return periods
lbr transient design situations is generally covered in the Annexes to the re]evant )oading
Eurocode (e.9. EN l99l-4 lor wind and EN 1991-5 lbr temperaturc).

3.3. Verification criteria

. Ultimate limit state

| 3.3. |

The ultimte limit state verifications required by the code for design during construclion are
the same as those given in section 6 fbr completed structules.
I

3.3.2. Serviceability limit states

The serviceability limit stte veriflcations required by the code for design dudng construction
arc gcncrally thc same as those given in EN 1992-2 section 7 for completed structules, but
some exceptions are given in 2-2iclauses 113.3.2(102) to (104).
In general, the criteria associated with the servicebility limit states during constmction

should take into account Lhc rcquircments for the complelcd structrue and should not be
detrimentl to the permnent works. Construction operations which can cause excessive
cracking or early deflections which rray adversely alect the durabiliLy, lltness for use ot
aesthetic appearance of thc complcLed structure should be avoided- Conversely, operations
which will not flect the durability or ppearance of the final bridge need not be asscssed,

such as temporary deflections during construction. This

is tbc

of

2-2/clouse

2-2lclause

r t 3.3.2(r02)

For temporary conditions, 2-2lclause 113.3.2(103) and 2-2lclaase 113.3,2(104) relax the
allowable tensile stress limits and criLcria for crack width vcrification for certain concrete
members. Such relaxations are made on the basis that small tensile stresscs are unlikely to
cause cracking but, whcrc thcy do. thc qracks will close again upon rernoval ofthe temporaly

I t 3.3.2( r 03)

basis

113.3.2( 102 ).

2-Vclouse
2-2/clouse

I t3.3.2(t04)

ctions.

309

ANNEX A

Modification of partial factors

for materials (informative)
Al.

General

The partial factors for naterials def,ned in clause 2.4 correspond to the permitted geometrical tolerances ofClss I to ENV 13670-1 and a normal level of workmanship and inspcction
(equivalent to Inspection Class 2 to ENV 13670- 1). If Lhesc tolcrances are tightened up in the
prject specification, these partial factors may be reduced undel certain circumstances in
accordance with EC2-l-1 Annex A.

42.

In situ concrete structures

or in situ reinforced or prestressed cncrete structures, 2- 1-1,/clause A.2 allows the mterial
partial lactor for reinforcement to be reduced by doing any of the following:
F

.
.

specifying rcduced setting-out tolerances to 2-l-liTable A.1 (clause A.2.1);

taking dimensional tolerances explicitly into account in the design calculations, c.g. in

effective depth calculation (clause A.2.2);

using measured dimcnsions from the final structure (clause A.2.2),

The material parlial factor for conclte may be reduced by doing any of the following:

.
.
.
.

specifying rcduced setting-out tolerances to 2- 1-1/Tble A.l nd limiring the coellicient of

variation of the concrete strength (clause A.2.1);
taking dimensional tolerances into ccount in the design calculations, with or without
limiting the coefficient of variation of the concrete strength (clause A.2.2);
using measured dimensions from the final strucLure, rvith or without limiting the
coclficient of variation of the concrete strength (clause A.2.2);
using measured concrete strengths in the linal stlucture (clause A.2.3). This may be
considered in conjunction with the above.

The National Annex may give the reduced values of the material lactors under the
above conditions. Any of the above methods which rely on measuring dimensions and
strengths in the linal structure (rather than by tightcning up tolerances in the project
specification) will only be relevant in verifying the dequcy of n element which has
perhaps not been constructed as intendcd; they obviousll, cannot be rclied upon at the
eslsn staqe.

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

43. Precast elements

and products

The above provisions may also bc applied to precast elements, provided suitable quality
control and assurance mesures are in place. Specilic recomrnendations for the faclory
production control required to enable reduced material partial factors are given in the
approprite product stndards, but general recommendations may be found in EN 13369.

3t2

ANNEX

Creep and shrinkage strain

(informative)
Annex B in EC2-2 incorporates all the rules in EC2-1-l and adds some additional sections.
covefs the following 4 areas jn the treatment of creep and shrinkage:

It

(l) B.l
(2)
(3)
(4)

and B.2 from EC2-l-l providc mathematical formulae behind the creep and
shrinkage figures and tables in 2-1-l/clause 3.1.4, together with information on the
rate of creep with time ;
8.103 provides lterntive formulae for high-strcngth concrete with Clss R cements,
disringuishing between concretes with and without silica fume;
8.104 provides a means ol determining creep and shrinkage parametcrs from tests;
8.105 recommends values ofadditional partialfactors on calculated long-term creep and
shrinkage strains to allow for uncertainties in the formulae arising li'om lack ofavailable
lons-term testins dt.

l.

B
Creep
2-I-llclause ,R,1 provides the formulae bchiud the figures and tables in 2-l-lTclause 3.1.4 2-l-l/clause B.l
and provides a formula lbr the rate of development of creep stain which is not otherwise
covered in the main hody of EC2. The use of the formulae is illustratcd in Worked
example 3.1- l in section 3.1.4.1 of this guide, whcre some of thc formulae are reproduced.
This part of Annex B also gives a method for accounling for elevated tenperatures in the
creep calculation.

82. Shrinkage
2-1- I lclausc

8.2

gives a form ula for nominal drying shrinkage strain which form s the basis

the simplified table in

2-

l-1/clause 3.1.4.

It is self-cxplanatory and is not

of

2-

I - I /clouse

8.2

discussed further

here.

83. Creep and shrinkage in high-strength concrete

For high-strength concrele with grade greater than or equ al to C55167 , 2-2lclaase 8.103 gives 2-Uclouse 8.103
alternative rules fr creep and shrinkage calculation, which were considered by their drafters
to be more accurate than those in EC2-l-1. However, the rules cn produce spurious results
for relative humidities in cxcess ofaround 70%. which is likely to be due to lhc fact that they
were produced with lower relative humidities in mind. As a result, the UK Ntional Annex
does not allow thc use of 2-2/Annex B, prelrring to stick with the more established rulcs in

DSIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

2-1-l1Annex B. Concretes with and without silica fme are tl'eated separately. There can be
significant benefit using thcse formulae with silica fume concretes as they can give
signiflcantly smaller creep strins. Concretes without silica fume can, however, give
greater crecp strains.
A silica fume conarete is one with a mass of silica fume of at least 570 of tht of the
cemcntitious content. Cregp strains are considered to come fiom two mechanisms. 'Basic'
creep depends only on the conqrete strength at the Lime of loading and the 28-day compressive strength and does not depend on the movement of water out of the sction.
'Drying creep' dcpends on concrete strength, relative humidity and effective seclion thickness
and the mechanism is governed by thc squeezing of water out of the concrete. Shrinkage
strains are similarly split into 'autogeneous' shrinkage, which occurs during hardening of
the concrete and docs not depend on movement of water out of the sectjon. and 'drying'

shrinkage, The formulae

for calculating these strains are self-explanatory nd re not

discusscd further here.

84. Determination of creep and shrinkage parameters

by experiment
2-2/dause 8.104

In gcncral. the scatter of test results from the fbrmulae predictions of Annex B can easily be
a30%. For greater accuracy, 2-2lclaase 8,104 therelore provides a method of determining
creep parameters experimentlly, for use in the frmule provided in clauses B.l, 8,2 and
8.103. This can be used where greater precision is required in the creep and shrinkagc predictions for the particular concrete nrix to bc used.
Guidance is not given on when one might need to resort to testing, The lormulae in B.I to
B.103 are not valid for carly loading where the mean strength at time of loading is less than
60% of the mean strength at 28 days (2-2/clause 8.100(103) refers). In this sitution, 2-2l/
clausc B.104 could clearly be applied, Most prestressed structures are reasonably sensilive
to assumed creep and shrinkage strains, duc Lo thc loss of prestress which occurs as a
result. Externally post-tensioned bridges with un-bonded tendons are arguably more
sensitive to predicted long-term strains than other prestressed bridges, as lheir ultimate
bending resistance can be reduced by increasing loss ofprestress force. Testing may therefore
be of bcnefit in such cases.
Performing testing will still not reduce the uncertainty associated with extrpolating the
rcsults of lests, typically carried out over a matter ofmonths, to a long-tem strain approprite to the bridge's dcsign life. This is dealt with in 2-2,/clause 8.105.

85. Long-term values of creep and shrinkage

2-Uclouse
B.t

0s(t02)

3t4

2-2iclause B.105 addresses thc uncertainty in thc formulae used in 8.1, B-2 and 8.103 for
determring long-term creep and shrinkage strins. The uncertinty arises because the
tests upon which the formulae are based have generally only been perfbrmed over relatively
short durations of up t few years- To allow for uncertainty in extrFolting to long-term
values. 2-2 lcluuse 8,105(102) suggests that an additional safety lactor should be applied to
the strains derived 'when safety would be increased by an overestimation of delayed strains,
and when it is relevant in the project'.
The circumstances when this factor should be appliecl are not clear. The use of the word
'safty' in 2-2lclause 8.105(102) implies considerations of ultimate limit sttes. For bridges
with bondcd tendons, flexural resistance is only marginally influenced by pre-strain in the
tendons and hence by long-term creep. The shear resistance may be influenced to slighlly
greater degree by increased creep strains where shear is partially carried by inclined tendons.
The flexural resistnce of externa)ly post-tensioned bridges with un-bonded tendons is,
however, potentially more significantly flected by long-term creep as discussed in section
84 above- Since Lhe Annex is informative and commercial pressures will often prevent the
use ofa systematically conservative approach, the decision on when to include this additional

ANNEX B.

CREEP

AND SHRINKAGE STRAIN

partial factor will probbly need to be made on a proiect by project basis after consultation
with the Client.
2-2lclause 8.105(103) suggests that suitable values for the safety factor are given in
2-2lTable B,l0l. These vary from 1.0 for calculation of strains at an age of I year (which
tsts are deemed to have adequately covered) to 1.25 at 300 years (where there is greater
uncertainty due to lack of test evidence).

2-Z/clause

8.t05(t03)

3t5

ANNEX C

Reinforcement properties
(normative)

2-l-l/clouse

c.r(t)

2-l-l/clouse

c3(r)P

Reinforcement spccificd to EN 1001t0 has propcrtics which are compatible with the design
assumptions in EN 1992. For other reinforcement, and for some supplementary requirements,2-1-1,rc1ause 3.2.1(3)P requires properties to be checked in accordance rvith 2-l-li
clause 3.2.2 to 3.2.6 and 2-1-liAnnex C. Annex C therefore gives requirenents br the
mechanical and geometrical properties of leinforcing steel suitabls for use rvith EN 1992;
it is the only normative annex in EN 1992. Sonc of thcsc properties (whrch 2-1-l lclause
C'.1f1l states are valid for temperatures between -40'C and 100"C) are summarized in
2-l-l/Table C.l and are consistent lvith those in EN 10080. The reproduction of information
in EN 1992-1-l mainly aflects spccification and generally does not need to be considered in
design itself. The provisions of Annex C re not therefore discussed in detail here. Some

inlormation. however such as n.rinimum characteristic lensile strength and strin at

tnaximum fotce, can be used in calculations.
In 2-l-liTable C,l, the Classes A, B and C refel to the ductility characteristics ofthe
reinforcement. Classcs A aud B q'ill already bc familiar to UK designers and are identical
to ihose specified in BS 4449: 1997. Class C specincation defines reinforcement with
greater ductjlity, which can pern.it greater rotation oapaciLy Lo bc achieved - see 2-1-1l
Table 5.6N. Rotation capacity is important fr the justification of plastic global analysis
mcthods and for the reglect of imposed deformations section 5.6 of this guide refers.
The former is restricted for bridgc dcsign and the latter will normalll' be found to be possible
with Class B reinforcement. The use of Class C reintbrcement will therefore not typically
bring much cconomic benefit in bridge design, other Lhan a small potential increase in
bending resistnce for under-reinforced sections. 2-27'clause 3.2.4(101)P recommends that
onl1, rcinforcen.rent of ductility Class B or C should be used lbr bridgc design; the choice
is a matter for the National AnnexAdditional requirements for fatigue perfbrrnance and relative rib area o[ bars can be
deflned in the NaLional Annex and z-l-l/Table C.2 givcs rccommended values. The
fatigue criteria should be compatible with the stress ranges given in Z-l-liTable 6.3N,
r.r'hich is also the subiect of national choice in the National Annex. The bond requirements
for the minimum rclativc rib area of bars arc given to ensurc the validity of the minimum
bond strengths given in section 8. Denitions of the surface geometry of reinforcing bars.
together with the requircmcnls for measuring and calculating rib geometry and projected
rib areas, are given in EN 10080.
2-I-lltlaase C.3(1,)P requires bendability of high-yield reinforcement to be verified by
bend and re-bend tests in accordance with EN 10080. This rcquires bar specimens to be
bent through approximately 90" over a mandrel of delined diameter, aged and then bent
back by at least 20". Aftcr the tests the speoimens must show no signs olfracture or cracking.

ANNEX D

Detailed calculation method for

prestressing steel relaxation
losses (informative)

Dl.

General

The formulac givcn in 2-l-l/clause 3-3.2 for calculating relaxation losscs ofprestressing steel
are intended to be used to determine long-term relaxation losscs. As discussed in section 3.3.2
of this guide, however, the formulae lend to produce consetvative values for the long-term
losses- Since the relaxation loss is itself ffected by the vadation in stress in the tendons
ovel time, a better approximation of the total relaxation loss can be obtained by considering
the reduction of strcss over time due to other time-dependent effects- such as creep and

shrinkage. This reduction is considered approximately by way of the 0.8 fctor in 2-l-ll
Explession (5.46). but greater benefit can bc obtained using 2-l-l/Annex D. Relaxation
losses derjvcd from Annex D should not be used in conjunction with the 0.8 factor when
using 2-1- li Expression (5,46), It should also be noted that if the stress in the lendons
increases with time duc lo othcr effects, the relaxatin loss can be increased from that
predicted by 2-1- 1i clause 3.3.2.
2-I-I lclaase D.1 provides an 'equivalent tin.re' mcthod l'or determining preslrcssing steel 2-l - l/clouse D.l
relaxalion losscs where the stress in the tendon varies with time due to effects other than
just the steel relxation. It is an itertive method, as illustrated in Worked example D-l. lt
is based around 2- I - l/Expressions (3.28) to (3.30) and introduces the fo owing notation
(illusLrated in F'ig- D-l) to enable a stage by stage pproch to be adoptcd-

r;
op.i
oi.t
Aopr.t
t"n.;
Ii

the aotual time at thc start of the stage considered

the tensile stress in the tendon just before ti
the tensile stress in the tendon just atler li (to allow for n instantaneous
reduction in prestress)
thc absolute value of relaxation loss in the stage considered
the sumof all the relaxation losses of the preceeding stages up to tirne ri

The equivalent time, 1", is calqulatcd as thc time taken to chieve this total relaxation loss
2- I - l7'Expressions (3.28) to (330),
Xi 'op,.t t time li, using the appropriate expression
I
Ao,,.j. This modif,ed 'initial' strcss reflects
rvith a mdified 'initial' stress equal to
"j' + Ii
thc fact that the tendon stress may also reduce (or increase) with time due to effects other
thn relaxation, thus reducing the relaxation itself. Using this stress:

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

1-r

Fig. D-1. Equivalent time method

/tt\/

t!: lo;i+
'l)
\

't/l/f"

o,,.,

(D.1)

Thus lbr a Class 2 prestressing steel, for exmple,

o*,, :

o.oop,ro.r,, (rooo!)

"""''

("i,,

2-

l-

1/Expression (3.29) becomes:

aoo.;) x r 0

2-l-1(D.r)

which can be rearranged to lind the equivalent time. The relxation loss for the stage
considered is then obtained by adding this equivalent time to the interul of time considered
for the current stage (Al;), thus:

aoo,.

' -

^.

/t

I At \0"\(l

luuu /)
\ ",r#''

0.66proooe"'"(

/'l r

il

("", 1.a"",'l ) . to '

\' ?

it

\-,r/2'"pt1

2-1,-rl(D.2)

Worked example D-l shows that including the loss of stress lrom a representative creep
Ioss history results in a reduction of long-term relaxation losses from that derived using
2- 1- l/Exprssions (3.28) to (3.30). The long-term losses so obtined for Class 2 prestressing
strnds become close to the p1n60 hour value, which was the value taken for long-term
losses in calculation in previous UK practice to BS 5400 Prt 4'.
the equivalent
time method is used to determine a total relaxation loss, the 0.8 factor applied to the Aopr
term in 2- I - I /Expression (5.46) should be mitted as discusscd above.

If

3t8

ANNEX D, DETAILED CALCULATION METHOD FOR

PRESTRESSING STEEL RELAXATION LOSSES

current srress lerel to be reached under laxation lossei lon.,

,n:,ooo.

l#q#, ***k*]'"o"'"'

,"-1000-|#*

I/(.7']r

n?2)r-0'hours

t:f,'f H#iHiT.T',i:T,*;:ji#*i.ahu,a,edrrom?.t.,,Expression
o*'

- 0.66/,,m0"e'u(1#oo')"""' (";, * f

o"",.i) * ro-'

::,
Fo*',
3t9

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

.':1,:,:l
L7)[u+

't1:il

,.I

:l
!*a:

.a1::!a.p!

-.',

Tlle

320

ANNEX D. DETAILED CALCULATION METHOD FOR

PRESTRESSING STEEL RELAXATION LOSSES

ANNEX

!ndicative strength classes for

du rabi lity (informative)

2-l-l/douse

Et(2)

l.

General

As discussed in section 4 of this guide, the choice of adequately durable concrete fr crrosion prtection ofreinforcement and for resistance to a[ack ofthe concrete itselfdepends on
the composition f the concrete. This consideration can result in a higher compressive
strength of concrete being required than that necessary for structural design. 2-l-1,/Annex
E delines 'indicative' strength classes for concrete dependent on cnvironmental class. They
are effectively the minimum acccptable concrete classes and provide the benchmark for assessing cover requirements (discussed in section 4). The recon.rmended values of indicative
strength classes may be varied in the Nationl Annex. The EC2 recommended values are
summarized here in Trble E-l for convenience.
2-1-l lclause 8,1(2) reminds the designer that where thc chosen concrete strength is higher
than that required for the structural design. it is necessary to check minimum reinforcement
using the design value of the tensile concrete strcngth (/1.) associated with the higher
strength concrete. This is bccause increased tension stiffening elevates section cracking
moment and hence reinforcement requiremcnts. Other situations may also require
Table E-1, Indicative concrete strength

clses

Exposure classes (from 2- l- l/Tble

Carbonation-induced
corrosion

Corrosion

xcl

lndicative

C2O/25 C25l3O

4.l)

Chloride-induced
corrosion

XDI
c30/37

Chloride-induced
corrosion from sea water

XD3

xsl

c35/45

C30/17

strength clss

Exposure classes (from 2- l- l/Table

No risk
Dme8e to concrete
Indicative strentth

class

Freeze/thw ction

Chemical attack

XAI

XFI
C l2l15

4.l)

c30137

c30t37

c35/45

ANNEX E. INDICATIVE STRENGTH

CLASSES FOR DURABILITY

consideration of the stronger concrete. For example, if nonlinear analysis has been used
Lo detemrine the ullimate bending resistance of a beam with unbonded tendons, tension
stiffening wy from the critical section can have an adverse effect on tendon strain increase
and hence strength section 5.10,8 of this guide refers.

323

ANNEX

Tension reinforcement
expressions for in-plane stress
conditions (informative)
The provisions of Annex F are discussed in section 6.9 ofthis guide. This includes amending
the sign convention used in the Annex F formulae to match that used in 2-2iclause 6.109 and
Annexes LL and MM. Section 6.9 also includes some proposed design equtions for skew

reinforcement.

ANNEX G

Soi l-structure

l.

nteraction

General

2-l-liclause 5.1.1 and 2-1-I lclausc G.IJ(1) borh require tht soil structure inleraction be
taken into account where the interaction has a signilicant influence on the action effects in
the structure. 2- 1- 1i Annex G gives informativc guidance on soil-structure interaction for
shallow lbundations and piles. The basic sttement in 2-l-llclause C.1.-l(2) rcquires soil
nd slructure displacemenls and reactions to be compatible and the remainder of Annex
G dds little to this. It could be added that serviceability limit stte requirements should
be met for both structure and soil. with realistic stiffnesses employed iu analysis. At the ultimate limit state, allowable soil prcssurcs should not bc cxcccded and all members should be
suliciently strong and possess sumcient rttin cpcity t justify the distribution ol forces
assumed.

Given the lack of normative rules. the consideration of soil structure interaction for
bridge foundations need not be difl'erent to previous UK practice and other general points
apply:

.
.

Where soil-structure intcraction is included in thc analysis, the model support conditions
must be chosen to realistically model the ctual soil stiffness. A sensitivity analysis may
nccd Lo be carriecl out where results are very sensitive to assumed soil stiffness.
If the soil stiffness is non-linear under applied load, the analysis will require a degree of
itel'ation to obtain the 'mean' stiffness for the loading conditions (if the non-linearity of

thc soil cannot be n.rodelled directly).

For piled foundations, a further rclcvant considcration is that simple spring elemeuts will
often not suflice for modelling pile groups, since a mment pplied to a pile cap produces
both a rotalion and a displacemenl. (Sin.rilarl1,, a shear forcc applied produces both a displacement and a rotation.) If the piles are not themselves modelled together with sprjngs
representing the soil, suitable modelling techniques include use of a flexibility (or stiffness)
matrix as a boundary condition at tl.re pile cap level or the usq of an equivalent cantilever
beneath the pile cp to emulate the correct displacement behviour'. Modelling pile group
behaviour correctly is particularl,v important in the design of integral bridges as the forces
and moment attracted can bc scnsitivc to changcs in foundation stiflness and modelling
assumptions.

Annex H. Not used in EN 1992-2

2-l-l/clouse

G.t.t(t)
2-l-l/clouse

G.|.t(2)

ANNEX

Analysis of flat slabs

(informative)
Annex I of EN 1992-2 covers the analysis offlat slabs and is based on the requirements of
Annex I in EN 1992-1-1 with some of its provisions deleted, ilcluding those concerning
2-Uclouse

r.t.t(2)

2-Uclouse I.l .2

shear lvalls.
2-2lclaase I.Ll(2) requires'proven methods' of analysis to be used in the design of flat
slabs. These include lower-bound mcLhods, bascd on elastic grillage or shell finite element
modcls, or upper-bound methods, such as yield line analysis. The ltter is an example of
plastic nl)'sis which is generally restricted for bridge design, as discussed in scction 5.6.1
of this guide. Nonlinear analysis (using grillage or shell finite element models) would also

be pprop aLc- A further altemative is the simplited 'equivalent frame analysis' oullined
in 2-2lclause L1.2, based on sub-division of the slab into column strips and middJe strips
for the purpose of flexural design. This is a technique more suited to regulr repeting
column layouls in building structures and will rarely be used in bridge design.
Regardless ofthe method employed for the flexural design, the punching shear provisions
of EN 1992-2 clause 6.4 apply in addition to checks of flexural shear and bending moment.

ANNEXJ

Detailing rules for particular

situations (i nformative)

l.

Surface reinforcement

2-l-l/clause J.l gives informative rules on the use of surface reinforcement, as called up by
2-1-l/clause 8.8 and 2-1-liclause 9.2.4. The provision of surface reinforcencnt serves two
purposes:

(1)

(2)

Reduces crack widths through use of small bar diameter and bar spitcing.
Where surlace reinforcement is used to control cracking in beams with large diameter
bars (as defined in 2-l-llclause 8.8), the supplementary plovisions of 2-1-liclause
8.8(8) apply for minimun surface reinforcement areas. Surface reinforcement does
not ha,,je lo be used to control cracks, however, as explicit crack width calculations
can still be used in accoldance rvith 2-l-liclause 8.8(2).
Prevents concrete spalling whcn large diameter bars are uscd-

2-l-l lclause J.1tl1/ recommends the use of surface reinforcemenl to rcsist concrete
spalling where the main reinforcement is madc up oI largc diameter bars, greater than
32 mm diameter. The definition of 'large' diameter is a nationally deternined parameter in
2-l-l,/clause 8-8, but thc rccommended value is again 32n.rm. Thc UK National Annex is
likely to choose 40 mm as the definition of 'large' diameter. with the intention of avoiding
the need for surface reinfbrcement where 40mm bars are used. Surface reinforcement
should be placed outside thc main links.
Where provided, 2-l-1 lclnase ,/.7 (2) requires the area of surface reinforcement to not be
less than 1.,.u.6, a nationally determined parametel with a recommemled value of 0.011",,"*,,
where 1",."*, is defined as the area of tensile concrete external to the links. The surlce
reinforcement should be placed in two directions parallel and orthogonal to the main
reinforcemenl dircction. If surface reinforcement is provided, iL nray be included in the
bending and shear resistnce clculations in addition to the main reinforcement, providing
il is suitably delailed to the standard requirements for arrangenent and anchorage (see
sections 8 and 9 of this guide).
2-1-l lclause ./.113) recommends that surface reinforcement is also used whcre covers to
main reinforcement are greatcr than 70 nrm. However, minimum cover in accordance with
2-2l/clause 4.4.1 must still be provided to the surfase reinforcement.
UK bridgc dcsigners have rarely specified surface reinforcemenl in the past. even when
40 mm bars have been used, for example in piles (wherc its provision \tould be dillicult)
and retaining walls, The thct that Annex J is only informative gives some room for
manoeuvre in this respect and iL is likely that the UK National Annex will not require

2-l-l/clouse

l.t (t)

2-l-l/douse

l.t (2)

2-l- | /dause
J.t (3)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

surfacc reinforcement

to be

used

for 40mm bars. orovided crck width calculation

is

undertken.

f2. Frame corners

2-I-l/clouse 1.2

2-1-l lclause "/.t gives exmples of concrete frame corners, provides possible strut-nd-tie
models for analysing Lheir behaviour and recommends suitable reinfbrcemetrt arrangements
that are consistent with the analysis. Thc concrctc strcngth, ona..,*, should bc determined in
accordance with 2- l- I /clause 6.5.2.
In bridge design, framc corners are nost conmonly encountered in box girder web flange
junctions and certain substructure elements. Completely different strut-and-tie models are
required for corners '.vith closing moments and opening moments. It should be noted that
in bridge design, the moments in l.ypical frame corners nay be reversible and thercforc thc
elcmcnt design and reinforcement arrangements must be able to accommodte both sets
of strut-nd-tie modcls. 2-l-l/Fig. J.2 shorvs typical models lbl closing moments while

frigs J.3 and J.4 cover moderate opening and large opcning moments respectively. (The

2-l-l/clouse
J.2.3(2)

flgures are not reproduced here.)

It rvill be noted that Fig. J.2 indicates some link reinforcement in the main members, which
docs not result fiom the corner model, while Figs J.3 and J.4 do not. This is nt intended to
impl), that such rcinforcement is unnecessary lbr opening moment cases. A lurther observation is that the diagonl bars across thc rc-cntrant corners in Fig. J-4 arc very effective at
conLrolJing cracks and therefore cnsideration should alwal's be given to their provision in
corners with opening moments, even though equilibrium and adequate ULS perfonr.rance
can be achieved without them as in Fig- J.3. This is thc subjccl ol 2-I-l lclaase J.2.3(2).

Particular care should be taken when detiling corner regins using overlapping U-bars
(as in Fig. J.3(b) of EC2-l-1) to ensure satisfactory serviceability limit statc pcrlormanceIf insufficient overlap is provided and diagonal bars are not present, wide cracks may
open up under service loading as the hinge detail fbrmed by the reinlbrcement rotates.
A lurther consideration not mentioned in Annex J is that bend radii in bent bars should be
deLailcd to limit the bearing sesses in bends in accordance with 2-l-llclause 8.3.

13. Corbels
2-1-l/clause J.3 gives recommcndations for lhe clesign ofconcrete corbels based on the strutand-Lic model shown in Fig. J-1 (Fig. J.5 in EN 1992-l-1). Two cases are covered:

(a)
2-l-l/clquse
1.3(2)

a"

<

0.5ir"

In addition to the main reinforoement provided at the top ofthe corbel (with a tolal area
of 1",.",.), 2-l-Ilclaase "/.J(2_/ requires the designer to provide closed horizontal or
inclined links distributed within the depth of the corbel. They should be centred on
the tie labelled Fwd. The toLal area of this reiniorcen.rent is recommended to be taken
as a nrinimun of ,t11.,-"1n, v.here 1 is a nationally determined parameter defined in
the National Annex wiLh a recon.ur.rended value of 0.25 in EC2-2. A value of 0.5
would be more in line with previous UK prctice for corbel design. Regardless of the
amount f this secondary ti steel. the force coming into the top and bottom nodes is
the same. It thelefore ppers that the purpose of the secondary tie is to reinforce
what is cllectively a bulging compression strut between top and bottom nodes. thus
increasing its resistancc lo match that of the nodes sections 6.5.2 and 6.7 of this
guide refr. In this respect, the steel would be more effective if placed perpendicular to
the compression diagonal.
The check of the compression strut can effectively be made b1' limiting the shear stress
such tht Fa < 0.5b*du.f"7 in accordance u'ith 2-l-l/clause (6,5).

(b) a" >

0.5n"

ln addition to the main reinforcement provided at the top of the corbel (with a totl area
of 1,,-^6), vertical links are required where the shear force exceeds the concrete shear

ANNEX I. DETAILING

RULES FOR PARTICULAR SITUATIONS

Fig. J- l. Corbel strut-and-tie model

resistnce according to 2-l-1,/clause 6.2.2. 2-l-llclause J.J(-l) expresscs this latter

condition as aEd > tr/Rd c, but it would be reasonable to interpret this s /JFEI > I/R,l.c
in accordance with 2-l-l1clause 6-2.2(6). rvhere'1 is the reduction lctor to allow lbr.
shear enhncement. Where link reinforcement is required, its provision clcarly no
longer relates to the strut-and-tie model of Fig. J-1. 2-l-liclause J.3(3) requires the
link force provided to be a minimum of 50% of the applied vertical force. This shoulil
be viewed as n bsolute minimum requirement. with the link area determined more

2-l-l/clouse
1.3(3)

generally in accordance with 2-1-l/clause 6.2.3(8). The check of the compression strut
can agin effectivcly be made by checking that Lhe shcar is limitcd such that
Fea < 0.5b*duJ"a in accordance with 2- I - l,/Expression (6.5).

For all sizes of corbel, the anchorage of the main reinforcement pfojecting into the
supporting membcr should be checked for adequacy in accordance u,ith the rules in sections
8 and 9 of EN 1992-2.

14. Partially loaded areas

j4.

Bearing zones of bridges

The dcsign for allowable bearing pressurc and reinforcernent design is covered in sections 6.5
and 6.7 f this gde. 2-2lclause J..ft4.1 gives somc additional requiren.rents as follows:

the minimum distance between the edge of a loaded arca and thi: edgc of thc scction
should not be less thn 50mm or less than li6 of the coresponding dimension of the
loaded area:

2-2/clouse

J.t04.t

Fig. J-2. Sliding wedge mechanism under concentrated load

329

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

for concrete grades in excess of C55/67, Id needs to be rcplaced by

10.46f:i.'l0 + 0.lik)]Id. This formula doesn't actually reducc the value of fo1 until
the concrete gLrde exceeds C60/75:
an additional sliding rvedge mechanism, illustrated in Fig, J-2. also needs to be checked.

The 'failure' plane is deflned by d: 30" and an amount of reinforcement given by

> -F1.1,/2 must be uniformly distributed over the height lx. The provided reinforce'4. [a
ment should be suitably detailed and anchored in accordance with 2-2/cluse 9, which
will normallv necessitate the use of closed links.

J4.2. Anchorage zones of post-tensioned members

2-2/clouse

1.t04.2

330

2-2lclause J.104.2 gives rules

supplementary to those given
section 8-10.3 of this euide.

for anchor zones of post-lcnsioned members which are

in 2-1-11clause 8.10.3. These provisions are discussed in

ANNEX K

Structural effects of time

dependent behaviour
(informative)
Annex KK oi EN 1992-2 is mainly concerncd with the redistribution of internal actions and
stresses that occur in bridges built in stges. This includes, for example, box girder bridges
built span by span with striking of formwork at ech stge and precast composite
members in un-propped constluction where a dcck slab is cast ailer ercction of the mdn
precast beans. This section of the guide does nt fllow the clause headings of EN 1992
Anncx KK and is structured as follows:
General considerations
General method
Simplified methods

Application to pre-tensioned composite members

Kl.

Section Kl
Section K2
Section K3
Section K4

General considerations

Creep will tend to cause action effects built up from staged cnstructin to redistribute
towards the aqLion effcts tht would have becn produced had the structure been constructed

monolithically all at the same time.

The effect of creep redistribution is illustrated in Fig. K-1 for the dead load moments in

three-span bridge. The bridge is built span-by-span in the stages shown and the deatl load

molnent creeps from its built-up distribution towrds that for monolithic construction. In
prcstressed members, the Frestress sccondary roments are similarly redistributed. Similr
creep redistribution also occurs in simply supported pre-tensioned bcams whicb are
subsequently made continuous.
For prestressed members (whether post-tesioned or pre-tensioned) this redistribution
of moments nd stresscs is particularly important for the serviceability limit state design,
as it can lead to unacceptble cracking and serviceability sftesses if not considered properly
2-2lclause KK.2(101.1 refers. Consideration ofthc redistribution is olten less important at
Lhc ultimate linit state and can be ignored where there is suficient rotation capacity available
to shed the restraint moments, unless ny ofthe bridge members are susceptible to significant
second-order effects - the Note to 2-2iclause KK.2(101) refers.
Providing the concrete stress under quasi-permanent loads does not exceed 0.45[k(r,
linear creep behaviour may be assumed where the creep strain varies linearly with the
crecp 2-2lclause KK.2(102). Where the concrete stress exceeds 0.451"L(r), non-linear
creep hs to be considered, whereupon the creep strain vades exponcntially \'ith sLrcss-

2-2/clouse

KK2(t

2-2/clause
KK.2(

l02)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

l\4omenls resulling f rom

the conslruclion sequence

Fig. K-

lvlomenls after
creep redistribution

Typical redistribution of dead load moments due

Moments assuming
b dge built in one go

to

creep

n.ray need to be considered for pre-tensioned beams which are stressed to

high loads at young age. This is discussed in section 3.1.4 of this guide.
Annex KK of EC2-2 does not cover the effects of differential shrinkage. This is covered in
K4.2 of this guidc.
Five methods ofconsidering the effects ofcreep redistribuLion are presented in EN 1992-2:

Non-linear creep

(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)

gcncral stcp-by-stcp analysis 2-2lclause KK.3;

differential version of the above 2-2iclause KK.4;
applioation of the theorems of visco-elasticity - 2-2iclause KK.5;
coefficient of ageing method - 2-2iclause KK.6;
simplilied method based on coellicient of ageing method - 2-21clause KK.7.

Generally, onll' method (e) will need to be explicitly considered by designers as this will
usually predict long-term eflects adequalcly and is the only method that lends itself to
simple hand calculation. Where it is important to prdict losses and deflectins t intermediate stages of construction, as rvould be the case in balanced cantilever construction, jt
will usually be necessary to use proprietary software which is likely to usc variatins on
method (). Onll' methods (a) and (e) re theltfore considered bclow and their use in the
context of both composite and non-composite beams is discussed.

K2. General method

Thc gcncral melhod invlves a slcp by step calculation of the strain according to 2-21
Expression (KK.101), which will typically be perfbrmed by iterativc computer analysis.
Such a method will also include losses due to the primary effects of creep and shrinkage,
as well as duc to creep redistribution cffccts:

'c(rl

au o"
...

E,t,n1-

'rt)

The application ofthis

o _+ f__L-- {,..t,,)oo,,.,I -e
2- \EJ'J F...{rRli ^o'' _.,(r./.t 2_2.(KK.tgl)

E,\281-

fomula to unrestrained concrete (ignoring shrinkage strain) under

K-2. ln general for real

members, the concrete stress will not change in discrete steps as shown in Fig. K-2, as the
stress itself will conslantly vary rvith thc changing strin due to the presence of exteml
restrint or internal restraint (from reinforcement or prestressing). A computer analysis is
therefore required to split the analysis into a scrjcs of time steps such that the effects ol
a series of additive externally applied axial forces is illustrated in Fig.

ANNEX K. STRUCTUML

EFFECTS OF TII4E DEPENDENT BEHAVIOUR

E"(bl

Fig, K-2. Creep strain accordingto 2-2l(KK.l0l) for unrestrained concrete with several load incrments
the constantly varying stress can be transforrncd into smll discrete stcps similar to those in

Fig. K-2. A dillrential version of this procedure is provided in 2-21clause KK.4.

The cllccLs of prestressing steel relaxation also need to be considered. Computer methods
rvill normally also include the effects oj relaxation loss in a way similar to that discussed in
Annex D.

K3. Simplified methods

A sirrple n.rethod for calculating the long-term creep redisLribution elTcts is given in ?-2/
dause KK.7 bsed on the ageing coelTcienl mcLhod- The basic proccdure is to calculatc
the distribution of moments (or othcr internal actions) built up by fully modelling thc construction sequence and to then recalculate the distribution of moments assuming tht the
structure ws built in one go with all dead loads, superimposed dead load and prestressing
applied to the final slrucLurc. The actual long-tenn [lomcnts ccounting for creep
redistributjon can then be found by an interpolation bctween these two scts of moments
according to 2-2,/Expression (KK.ll9), without the need for calculation by a time-step
method. 2-2lExpression (KK.l19) also applies to stresses:

2-2/clouse KK7

2-2(KK.l l9)
The redistribulion of actions due to creep is therefbre:

^s

: (s. so)

ri (o]s,

lo)

c;(r", ro)

I + 1rl(co, r")

(DK-r)

where:
,SO

s"

Ploc,loJ

Q.,t()

are the inlernal actions obtined from the construction sequence build-up
are the internal actions obtained assuming that the whole sLructure is built in
one go and then all the pcrmanent load applied to it. The phrase 'construcLed
on centering' is used in EN 1992-2 to convey this idea of the structure belng

constructed in its enlirety on continuous supports, with the supports or

'centering' being released only after the entire structure is compleled- Strictly.
the word'centering' is normally uscd to describe temporary supprts to arches
is tl.re final creep coefficient for a concrete age /0 at time of first loading
is the creep coeficient fot a concrele agc l0 at time offirst loading up to an age
/", whele t. is the concrete agc at which the structural system is changed, such

333

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

as closure

of a stitch between adjacent spans. It is therefore the amount of

creep lactor'used up'before thc structural system is changed. Where the structural svstem is changed in this way a numbcr of times, a representative averge
age should be used based on the average age at rvhich each stage is connected

,r(ca,

t")

to the next. For example, if each stagc takes 30 days to construct (including
shipping of falsework) and is then immediately connected to the previous
span, Lhen /c : l0 : 30 days woulcl be a reasonable approximation as the prevlous stage concrete would be lder than 30 days, but some ofthe cufrent stge
concrete would be younger
is the flnal creep coefficient for a concrere age /c at time offirst loding

The creep coefficients can be calculated as discussed in section 3.1,4 of this guide.
The ageing coeflicient 1 can be thought of as representing the rcduction in creep, and
thcrefore increase in stiffness, for restraint of deformations occurring fter the time tc. It
cn be taken as 0.8, which is a good representtive value for most construction, but in
reality it va es with age at time ol loading and cr.eep factor.
The redistribution in equation (DK-l) can be thought ofas follows. If the initil moments
ln structure are M0,i, resulting from load applied t time t0, Lhen the free creep culyature
fronr tlrese moments occurring alter a time l" will be M11.;lEI(g(,.:n, tl - d(1c, t0)). If the
structure wet'e to then bc fully restrained everywherc (a purely theoretical rather thn practical sitution) at time /c, restraint moments would be developed. The effective young's

modulus fbr this load case would be /(l +X(oo,r")) and hence the fully restrained
moments developed would be Mo,i(O(*, ru) - AQc,r)/(1+ Id(oo, r")). These restraint
monents reFresent the ledistribution moments lbr this particular change of shuctural
system- Equation (DK-l) predicts the sme result- In Lhis case. So: Mo.t, S" is obtined
assuming the structure to be in its final condition (i.e. fully restrained everywhere in this
case) prior to initial loading. This leads to 56
- M.,;:0 and thus equation (DK-1) gives
redistribution moments ol' Mj,;(ci,(cc,ln) - (t(t",tt)))ll + XA(ca, r.)).
For non-prestressed concrete bridges. there is no problem with the interpretation of 2-2/
Expression (KK.l l9) and the 'S' terms contain only the dead load and superimposed dead
load. The internal actions are then redistributed as in Fig. K-1. For prestressed bridges,
however, the magnitude of the prestressing lbrce itself changes during the life of the
bridge so the value to use in the interpoltion needs careful consideration. The secondary
eflects of prestress are themselves altcred by creep (due to the loss of prestrcssing force)
even without chnging the structural system.
There are several interprettions possible for the prestressing force to use in the interpolat1on. This is a result ol the lirct that the method is not exact. Four interDrettions (others are
possible) include:

(a) The prcslress force after all short-term and time-dependent long-temr losses is considered in deriving Sc, but the prestress force including only whtever losss that have

(b)

334

occurred up to 'closing' the structure is considered in dcriving Sp In each case, redisffibution eflects are ignored in calculaLing S" and S0 (othef thn the small change in secondary ell-ects of prestress caused by the loss of prestressing force), This appears to be
the literal inleryretation of the definitions of Sc and 56 given in KK.TiExpression
(101). This is not the intended interpretation, however, as Soo then does not include
all the loss of prestressing force and the effects on rcducing the primary presffess
moments. This is because the final stress state is ellectively then obtained i'rom an interpolation between values ofS" which include all losses oIprestress, and values ofS0 which
include only the immediate lsses and a small fraction of the long-term time-dependent
losses. This approach is therefbre inappropriate as it underestimates losses and overestimates the actual final prestress force.
The prestress force, including ll short-term and time-dependent long-term lossss, is
used to determine both 5'" and Sn. The long-term prestrsss losses in each case can be
determined from the concrete stresscs after application of the initial prestressing force,
including the immediate losses. In ech case, redistribution eflects are ignored (other

ANNEX K. STRUCTURAL

(c)

EFFECTS OF TIME DEPENDENT BEHAVIOUR

than the small change in prestress secoudary moment resulting from the loss ofprestressing force). S- from 2-2lExprcssion (KK.119) then includes all the long-term loss of
prestress as well and can be tken to represent the fina1 internal actions including all
the long-term losses.
The prestless lbrce including only short-term losses (i.e. not considering tine-dependent
long-lcrm losses) is used to determine both S. and .ln- The ternl

. d(/cr/0)
(s..
- s.)'(T,/ul
1+ lplco rcl

from equation (DK-l) is then calculated, which represents

the redistribution eflects only. The lng-lerm loss of prestress is then subsequently calculatcd from the built-r.rp internal actions Sn and these built-up internalactions modified
accordingly to allow lbr long-Lcrnl losses of prestress. This lcads to a set of long-term
internal actions derived from followins the construction sequence but without consider-

ing redistribution. say .!0,-. The term

(S.
"rf

tlerived above

Hfi#P

is

added to Sn.- to give thc final set of internl actions allowing for both creep redistibu-

tion and all long-term

losses of prestress, i.e.

S*

So,-

(""

tt*0i#1::i")
"r)

(d) As (c) but rhe prestress force used to calculate (,sc so) 4ra;ffi*Gf) i, tt.tut
immediately t the time of the change of structural system, e.g. connection ol adjacent
spans. 56 is derived considering the build-up of stresses and all long-term losses of
prestrcss.

These approaches are all approximate but method (d) often gives results closest to
the results of a time-step analysis. This approach is summarized below under the heading
'Application to post-tcnsioned construction'. Only melhod (a) above is completely

ilapprop

ate to use.
Given the inherent uncertainty in creep calculations, this interpolation approach ls
nornally of satisfactory accuracy for predicting long-term redistribution effects Where
there re mny stages of construction with concretes of dillerent ages before a struclure is
made statically indeterminate (such as occurs in balanced cntilever construction), or
where there re mny changes to the slrucLural system (such as occurs in span-by-span
construction), one difficully is deciding representative single value for the creep coefficients
d(cc,ro) ci,(r", 16) (which is the creep reI aining after the structural system has been
modified) and qi(co, r"). It will usualJy he adequte to select an averge residual creep
value for thc slructure- In mst cses for post-tensioned structures, Lhe value of
,tfiLr/- .,\/r r. \
v--: ,-\
, ""'.'u' *ill typically be betueen 0.5 rntl 0.8
1+ig,lo(,r./

A simpler version of 2-2/Expression (KK.l l9) often used (and which was cffectively used
in BS 5400 Part 4') is:

S,.:50 * (s. -so)(1 e ")

(DK-2)

Equation (DK-2) has only the one creep fctor which cn be taken s
= o(oc, ro) O(/", /0), but it does not contain the ageing coefficient. lL is therefore less
accurate thn 2-2i Expression (KK.I 19). A value for $ of between l -5 and 2 0 will be representtive in most cases for posL-tensioned bridges.
with the above expression, the redistribution of actions due to creep is therefore:

As: (S" Su)(l

')

(DK-3)

Equations (DK-2) and (DK-3) tend lo ovcr-predist the amount of redistribution that will
occur, pafiicularly in structures where the concrele is quite old t the time of modifying
the structurl system (such as closing a structure with stitch).

335

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Application to post-tensioned construction

For post-lensioned beams,

suggested

approximate proocrlure, following EC2-2 formulae, is

as fbllows:

(l)
(2)
(3)

Build up thc internal actions for the bridge fiom the construction sequence considering
only immediate losses see 2-2iclause 5.10.5Calculate long-term losses in prestressing fbrce using 2-2iclause 5.10.6, based on the cnorete stlesses obtained fiom above.
Detcrmine the chnge in primaly nd secondary prestress moments from this loss of
ptestress.

(a) Modify the internal actions in (l) by the ellects of the losses in

(3) to givc long-ternr

effects excluding creep rcdistribution.

(5) Modify the interral actions in (4) by adding the effects of rcdistribution according to
cquation (DK-l) with S0 and , bsed on thc loss at the time of modifying the structural
system.

It

336

is always possible to use a conputer time-step analysis as an alLernative.

ANNEX K. STRUCTURAL

EFFCTS OF TIME DEPENDENT BEHAVIOUR

K4. Application to pre-tensioned composite members

K4.1. Differential creep in composite beams
Whcn a deck slab is cast on a pre-te[sioned beam, the change in cross-section afLer thc beam
has been prestressed will gencratc rcstraint stresses, as the loaded pre-tensioned bem tries to
deflect turther with creep and this is resisted by the deck slab- The suesses will redistribute
from the built-up values towards those obtained if the dead load and prestress were
applied to the flnal cmposite section. Evcn if thc bridge is not built in stges span-wise,
redistribution will take place internal to ech cross-section.

337

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

This redistribution is illustrated in Fig. K-4 for a simply supported beam. It illustrtes that
the internal actions nd stresses should bc calculated for thc as-built case and monolithic case

and then interpolation between them performed using either eqution (DK-1) or equation
(DK-3) to determine thc rcdistribution effects. As discussed above, equatjon (DK-3) may
overestinate the magnitude of redistribution. The prestress forces to use should be those
immediately after casting the deck slab, so an assumption has to be made with respecr to
this timing and thus how much creep has therefore already occurred. Determination of
the crccp fctors to use in equation (DK-l) or equation (DK-3) also requires estimation
of this timing. Worked example K-2 illustrates the calculation.
lf the sinply supported pre-tensioned beam is subsequently made continuous, which is
lypically achicved by connecting adjacent simply supported spans together, the creep
defornation is further restrained by thc modilicd strucLural system and the support reactions
are modified. This leads to the development of rnoments t the supports due to th
redistribution of dead load rnonents and prestress. These continuity moments develop in
the same way as discussed for post-tensioned beams due to the changed support conditions.
Usually, sagging moments develop at the supports and additionl reinforcement is required
across the jint to prevent excessive cracking. This problem can be treatcd by interpolation
bctween the as-built case (l) and monolithic cse (2) (with ll lods pplied to the composite
section) s in Fig. K-4, but case (2) will also contain the secondary effects of prestress due
to the continuitv and the dead load moments will also be modified by cntinuity. Either
equation (DK-l) or equation (DK-3) can again be used. This is shown in Fig. K-5.
Alternatively, the internal lockcd-in slresses qan first be determined exactly as in Fig. K-4
without considering the bridge to be mde cntinuous. Restrint of the creep fiom the

\[
Pnmary
Preslress

load

Dead
{beam and
deck slab)

n
Total

(1) Dead load (excluding SDL)and prestress applied to lhe precast beam

\V
l\ *
l\\ / t\l
|\

t_l

Primary
preslress

Dead load
(beam and
deck slab)

Totl

(2) Dead load (excluding SDL) and preslress applied lo the composite beam
Diffrenc

(2)-

(1)

(monolithic-as.buiit)
slress due to creep redishibulion

(3) Stress lrom creep redistibution lrom (1) towards (2)

Fig, K-4. Redistribution of stresses in simply supported composite beam due to creep

ANNEX K. STRUCTURAL

i' "'__:" "i

EFFECTS OF TIME DEPENDENT BEHAVIOUR

tJ
\
V
tI
*
t/
|
l.l\
-r;\ \ /r l\
I

L.il_..llll___:..1_i!\,ttl

P mary
prestress

Dead

load

Tolal

(Dem ano

deck slab)
(1) Dead load (excluding SDL) and preslress applied to lhe precast bearn

n
1

Primary Dead lod

Change in
pre$ress momenl
dead load
ignonng
momenl due
continuity locontinuily
\
__Y---/

Secondary

Total

prestress

(2) Dead load (excluding SDL) and prcsiress applied to the composite beam

Ditlerence

(2)-

(monolithic

(1)
as-built)

Siress due lo creep rdistibution

+++++++ +

++++*+
(3) Slress from creep redisiribution irom (1) lowards (2)

Fig. K-5. Redistribution of stresses due to creep in simply supported composite beam subsequently
mad continuous

to the devslopmcnt of support moments. These restraint

momcnts are linear between supports and the crept value at the support can be found
using eqution (DK-l) or (DK-3). [n this case, S - 0 at the supports and S" should consider
the secondary ellects of prestress nd the dead load support hogging moment on the
continuous beam only, as other effects are included in the initial step.
In either case, the stress from these redistribution cffects should be added to the built-up
stresses for the beam includins all losses.
prestress and dead load leads

.-.'..''
339

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

I - f49 x l0l mm2

z*, - i+.lt x lo6 mm l
2,.^
.rop = 46.96 x 106 mml
Eccentricitv of strands from"'""'
neurral
" axis =

142

mm.

;:":.:-"^-:'*'"
Zb.t

2,""

x l0omml
irs.e x tobmml
114.9

Eccenrriiitj of strands from neuLral ar.is:306 mm-

Botrom fibrc srress from prestress

*:::.

rop nbre

1"-

*".-i a #
:

Borlom fibre stress from dead load

Top tibre

*r.r, t *

lir- ilif - l5,27Mpa

dead load

w..I l;ya
#k:

,nrO-4.1.1

I:

II

I : : I : : : ll :]

i:

::l

:l

-4.30 MPa

MPa

':
ree :inr

itr

)s me 101

/1 r\l

,:,'lAi.o.-,;i ':: l::l i:., ' '--: r.:

340

IOn:

t'{

\:
/

....

:0 .9.4 MPf

ANNEX K. STRUCTUML

EFFECTS OF TIME DEPENDENT BEHAVIOUR

;h:.
,

-l
J

.13
It

I
'::::."1:::'::r
\t'

iroo l.-

rl

't-

.- -...t.-r-,
:: :: i :.l:
:

fig.

l(,.6;

L!

Iqr

monolil

..t

:ii.!;

i!1

rnp

akd

;,r

K4.2. Differential shrinkage

EN 1992-2 does not explicitly cover the calculation of the effect of dilercntial shrinkage. but
it must be allowecl for at the seryiceability limit state in composite beams whele the residual
shrinkage strain of deck slab and precast beam differ after the beam is tnadc composite.
Usually the precast bean will have undergone a significant parl of its totl shrinkage
strain by the time the deck slab is cast, so thc deck slab will shrink by a relatively grcater
amount, This relative shrinkage will compress the top of the precast beam (causing axial
lorce and sagging momcnt in iL) whiJe generating tension in the deck slab itsell.
The differential shrinkage strin cn be estimated from 2-2i clause 3.1.4 if Lhe approximte
age of the beam at casting is known so that:
a,11p:a.1,,66(oc) (e.r,,r*-(co) .,h,b",,-(lL))

(DK-4)

where e"1.1,"","(co) is the total shrinkage strain of the precast beam, srr sLat() is the total
shrinkage strain ol the slab and e,5s"n,',(r1) is the shrinkage strain of the precasL beam
fler casting the slab.
Il Lhc bcam was fully restrained and the shrinkage occurrcd instantneously, the restraint
axial force in the slb would be .P"1, : e66..1,66- However, as the shrinkage strain occurs
slowly, this shrinkage force is modilied by creep so ttrat ihe fully rcstrained force is actually

more realistically estimated from:

F,6

ra,x1q.,6

/l -e
i;;r

o\

(DK-5)

Once again, it is not simple to estimte a single creep rtio to apply in this case covering
boLh slab and precast beam. Given the uncertainties involved in the calculation as a whole, a
value of2.0 will generalll' suffice- This restrained force can be seprated into a rcstraint axil

force and moment acting on the whole cross-section, together with a locked-in self equilibriating stress as shown in Fig. K-7. The axial stress and bending stress can be determined
from the axil force in equtin (DK-5) acting on the cmposit section.
If the bridge is statically determinate, then the restraint rnomcnt component can be
relesed withut generating any secondary moments. Similarly, if the deck has no restraint

341

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

--l

+J

\t

l\
++

+++++++ + ++++r-++

Fullrestraint

Self-equilibrialing

Axial

Fig. K-7. Components of differential shrinkage resrrined stress

to contraction, then the axial component can similarly be

released

without generating

any rcslraining tension. If lhe bridge is statically indeterminate, however. the release of
the resint momenl component will generate secondary moments. The determination of
secondary moments is illustrated in Fig. K-8 for a simplc Lwo-span beam of constant
cross-section- In Fig. K-8, the restraint moment is hogging, so to relese this moment a
sagging moment ofequal magnilude must be applied to the beam in the analysis model. A
calculation of diffrential shrinkge eflects is given in Worked example 5.10-3.

K4.3. Summary procedure for pre-tensioned composite beams

For pre-tensioned composite beams, a suggcsted approximate procedure using formulae in
EC2-2 is as follows:

(l)

Build up the internal actions for the beams frm the construction sequence considering
only immedite losses sce 2-2/clause 5.10.4.

(2) Calculate long-term

built-up

losses

in prestressing force using 2-2/clause 5.10-6 with the above

stresses-

(3) Determine

the change in presl.rcss moments from lhis loss of prestress. ThaL part of thc
loss occurring prior to casting the slb should be used to reduc the prestressing frce on
the precst bearn alone. The part ofthe loss occurring afler the slab has been cast can be

(4)

estimated by applying the remaining loss of lorce as a series of tensile forces to the
composite section along the line of the prestress centroid. (If the strands are straight
then a single force equal and opposite at each of the beam will suflice.) It is quite
common, however, to apply all the loss to the precst bem as it will generlly mke
Iittle difference - see Worked example 5.10-3 in section 5.10 of this guide.
Modify the internl ctions in (l) by the effects ofthe losses in (3).

Fully slrained momenls

Resulting secondry momenls

Fig. K-8. Secondary moments from differential shrinkage

342

ANNEX K. STRUCTURAL

(5)

EFFECTS OF TIME DEPENDENT BEHAVIOUR

Modily the internal actions in (4) by adding the effects of redistribution ccording to
equation (DK-l) with S0 nd ,Sc based on the prestressing forces t the time ofconstructing lhe slab, as described in sectiou K4.l of this guide-

(6) Add the effects of differential shrinkase.

343

ANNEX

Concrete shell elements

(informative)
EN 1992-2 Annex LL, in coujunction with 2-2,/Annex F and 2-2/clause 6.109 (invoked by
paragraph (112) of EN 1992-2 Annex LL), gives a method of designing concrete elements
subject to in-p1anc axial and shear fbrces, together with out-of-plane rnoments and shear
forces. It is most likely that Lhis annex will be used when such a stress eld has been
determined from a finite element model, lthough the equtlons re presented in terns of
stress resultnts (force or moment per metre) rather tlan stresses. The annex can also be
used rvhere sinpler analysis has been performed, as illustrated in the discussins on
Annex MM in this guide, covering the design of bor girder webs in bending and shear,
A sandwich model is empJoyed to convert out-of-plane noments and lwisting moments
iLo stress resultants acting in a single plane in each of the outer layers of the sandwich.
The outer layers also carry the direct and shear stresses acting in the plane of the element.
The core section of the sandwich is used only to carry shear forccs which are transverse t
the elemcnt's thickness. Paragraphs (109) and (110) require the principal transverse shear
force in the core to be verified separately by means of the beam rules 1'or shcar in 2-2,/
clause 6.2. Expression (LL.123) in paragraph (110) recommends that the leinforcement
ratio for this check bc based on the strength ofthe reinforcemert layers resolved in the direction ot the principal sher, v.hereas previous practice (e.g. reference 6) has based the
reinforcement ratio on the stiflness in this directiorl. As the latter is more established, it is
recommended here that Expression (LL-123) is modifrcd in linc with this assumption such
that:
Pt

tLl

P\ Cos O0

+ pl srn

dn

(DL-1)

Having determined lhe stresses in each outer layer, the rnembrane rules in 2-2/clause 6.109
and 2-2/Annex F can be used to design orthogonal reinlorcement and check concrete stress
fields. Skew reinforcement is not covered in EC2, but section 6.9 of this guide provides some
guidance in such cascs. lt should be noted that the use ofthe sandwich model and membranc
rules in design do not make any allowance for plastic redislribulion across a cross-sectlon
and so can bc very conservative. Consequently. it is always better to use the member
resistance rules in the main body of EC2, wherc applicable, as such rcdistribution is implicit
within thosc rules.
The flrst part ofAnnex LL deals with checking rvhether or not the elenrent will crack under
the loading considered. If the element is prcdicted to be un-crackcd, the only check required
is tht the principal compressive stress is below a"..1"/1i or a higher linrit based on.,f1,"
where there is triaxial compression. Tbc formula prescntcd in paragraph (107) for checking
cracking is a general triaxial expression (based on principal stesses o1, o2 and a3), It is only
one of severl existing possible crack prediction lbnr.rulae. More background on this subject

ANNEX L. CONCRETE SHELL

LEMENTS

can bc found in reference 29. It is inappropriate that mean values of concrete strengths
should be used jn this vedfication, s implicit in Expression (LL.10l), as thc calculations
relate to ultimte limit statc strength; design values of concrete strength rvould be more
appropriate. It is therelbre recommendcd here that /* and ir- should be replaced by /11
and ;/",6 rcspectivell, in Expressions (LL.l0l) and (LL.ll2). A simpler altemative for
biaxial stress states only would be to use the cracking verification ofAnnex QQ, but replacing
the characteristic tensile strength with the design tensile strength in Explession (QQ,l0l).
The sandwich model and equations are lairly sclf-explanatory and arc much simplified
when the reinforcement in each direction in a layer is assumed to hve the sme covet.
This assumption ray not be appropriate in very thin elements, The use of the equations is
not discussed further here, but the special case of shear and transverse bending in beam
webs, with some further simplilications, is investigated in detail in Annex MM of this
guide. Use of the sandwich model is complicated slightly where reinforcement is not
centred on its respective sandwich layer. It may sometimcs be necessary to choosc layer thicknesses such that this occurs wbere the in-plane compressive stress fleld is high. Annex LL
gives a method to account for this eccentricity in its paragraph (l 15) and this is again discussed in Annex M of this guide.
A further use of Annex LL would be for the design of slabs subjected principally to
transverse loading. In previous UK prctice, such cases would have bccn dcsigned using
the Wood Armer equationsle'2o or the more general capcity fleld equations.2r The
combined use of Amex F, 2-21clause 6.109 and Annex LL to design slab reinforcement
does not necessarily lead to conflict with these approaches. The reinforcement produced is

usually the same, ther than minor differences due

to

assumptions

for lever

arms,

Houever, 2-2/clause 6,109 sometimes limits the use of solutions from the Wood Armer
equatrons r the more general capacity field equations through its limitation of
e .r = 15'. It lso requires a check of the plastic compression field, which refrences
19, 20 and 2l do not require. Despite neglect of these requirements, the Wood Armer
equationsle'20 have. however, successfully been used in the past.

345

ANNEX M

Shear and transverse bending

(informative)

l.

Sandwich model

Although the maximum allowble shear stress, determined by orushing of the web concrete
within the diagonal compression struts, is generally significantly higher in EN 1992 than previously used in the UK, there will be occsions when this higher limit cannol be mobilized. In
webs of box girders, transverse bending moments can lead lo significant reductions in the
maximum permissible coexistent shear force because the compressive stress fie1ds from
shear and from trnsverse bending have to be combined. The stresses from the two fields
are not, however, sin.rply additive because they act at different angles. In the UK, it has
been common practice to design reinforcement in webs for the combined action oftransverse
bending and shear, but not to check the concrete itself for the combined effect, The lower
limit in shear used in the UK made this a reasonable pproximation, but it is potentially
unsafe

if a less conservative (and more realistic)

cr-ushing strength is Bsed.

2-2/clause 6.2.106 formally requires consideration ofthe above shear momenl interaction,
but if rhe web shear force is less than 20% of tr/p,1.n1u" or the transverse mment is less than
107" of the maximum transverse moment resistance then the interaction does not need to be
considered- These criteria are unlikely to be satisted for box girders, but the allowance fol
coexisting moment will ollen be su{icient to negate the nced for a check of webs in t}pical
beam and slab bridges. Where the interaction has to be considered, Annex MM can be used.
2-2iAnnex MM uses the rules for membrane elements in 2-2,/clause 6.109 and a sandwich
model (based on Annex LL) to idealize the web as two separate outer layers subject to inplane forces only. Such clcultins are potentially lengthy because the longitudinal direct
stress varies over the height of the beam and the vertical direct stresses vary through the

2-2/MM(t0t)

thickness, making the angle of the elastic principal compressive stress vary everywhere.
Also, the membrane rules of 2-Z/clause 6.109 apply to the design of plates with a general
stress field ohtained from finite element (FE) analysis. The check of transverse bending
and shear in webs is usually going to be done without reference to n FE analysis,
Consequently, some simplifications are made ln 2-2lMM(101) to fcilitate the web design
as follows:

The shear per unit height rnay be considered as having constant value along .y in

Fig. M-l:

uea

VealAy.

The intent is to permit the shear stress to be taken as constant on all sides of the
element. The use of o;4 as a shear flow is unfortunate as it is used as sher stress in
the rest of EC2. There is also no guidancc given on the length Ay used lbr averaging

ANNEX IY. SHEAR AND TRANSVERSE BENDING

Fig. M-

l.

Conversion of stress resultants into layer stresses

the shear stress. When the design fbr shear is based on overall member behaviour, the
slrear flow could sensibly be taken as uE6 = Vs7fz, where z is the lever arm according
to clause 6.2 and tr/s is the she in one web. This makes the shear stress comptible
with tht assumed in the main shear section.

The transverse bending moment per unit length should be considered as having constant
value along Ly: mEd
MEdf Lx

This can be a conservative simplification, elTectively making the transverse mment

unifrm over the whole height of the web, based on the greatest moment-

Longitudinal axial force (e.g. from prestressing) cn be given a constant valu in

Pe,a :

Prd

A/:

lAf

Again, no guidance is giyen n limits for the lcngth Ay. A reasonahle interpretation is to
consider only the uniform axial component of the prestress, i.e. the stress t the centroid
of the section providing the centroid lies in the web. This is consistent with the approach
used in 2-2/clause 6.2.3 for the determintin of ocp.

The transverse shcar within the web, due to the vrition of the corresponding bending
moment, cn be neglected in Ay.
The transverse shear corresponding to variations in the transverse moment are, in any
case, usually fairly small.

One final simplification, which is not explicitly mentioned in EC2-2, but is resonble s it
is compatible with the member shear design rules, is to ignore the effects of the main beam
momcnt on longitudinal fofces in the web.
With the above assumptions, it is possible to use a sandwich model s shown in Fig. M-l
and the membrane rules of 2-2/clause 6.109 and Annex F to design the reinforcement- Thc
designer is free to decide on the thicknesses of the layers. Expressions (MM.101) to

(MM.106) re given tn 2-2lMM(102) to determine stresses in the layers and they are
reproduced as equations (DM1-l) to (DMl-6) below- Thc notation and sign convention
Ibr opa, have been amcnded in both the equations below and in Fig. M-l to give
compatibility with clause 6.109 and Annex LL in EC2-2. lf Annex M M is used as presented
in EC2-2, it is important to note that its sign convention is not consistent with other prts of

2-2/MM(t 02)

8C7.2:
TEdxyl

?/d

(2b*

b*-tt
- tt -

tt j

(DM-l)

347

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

b*-tt

,Ldryr

lI

\:/w

l)]'1

mF.d

(,5*

(tt + t12)t)

(6"

(,t

m.F.d

(2b*

t2)12)tz

b*-tt
- t1 -t2)t1
'" t1

)
,t,
\zuw

Fig. M-2. Internal equilibrium with reinforcement eccentric to layer centre

348

(DM-3)
(DM-4)
(DM-5)

(DM-6)
, \,
't/.2
One remaining problem is thc determination of det (defined in 2-2lclause 6.109) which
varis through the thickness of the element in the un-crackecl elastic state. The choice of
location to determine the un-cracked flexural strcss is therefore critical. It is recommended
here, somewht arbitrarily, that d.] be clculted from the stl'sses determined a/ier the
element has been split into the lal'ers of the sandwich. This appcars to be \1'ht is required
in Annex MM from the ordcr of thc paragraphs, but it des not then strictly relate to the
initial principal compression angle in the un-cracked elastic section
The simplcst applicalion of Lhe rules can bc done rvhere the layer thicknesses are based on
twice the cover s that the reinforcement is t the centre of the layer. This will usually then
lead to an'un-used'gap between the layers, which reduces the naximum shear resistance, In
bridges, the wcbs will often be highly strcssed in shear, so use f the full width of web
thickness will often be necessary. Consequently. it will olTen be necessary to make the
layer thicknesses total either the full width of the web or a significant fraction of it. This,
however, leads to the addcd problem that the derived layer forces act eccentdcally to the
actual reinlbrcement forces. In this cse, the procedure is to perform Lhc concrete veriflction
ignoring this cccentriqity and lhen to make a correction in the calculation of the reinforcment forces in accordance with 2-2lMM(103). Formulae for this correction are given in
Annex LL as equations (LL,l49) and (LL,l50). They are derivcd here as equations (DM7) and (DM-8) wiLh notation again changed to suit Fig. M-l.
The stless resultants in each layer are shown in Fig. M-2. riEd represenLs the forse from the
sandwich model acting at the centrc ofthe layer and zi6 rcpresents the force to be used in the
reinforcement design so as to maintain equilibrium.
dEd\2

2-2/tM(r 03)

:/Ed,

(DM-2)

ANNEX IY. SHEAR AND TRANSVERSE BENDING

Taking momcnts about the reinforcement in layer 2 gives:

(b"

/
t' a',
.,\ t 11.'(l
/r., t1)
.,\
- b; '.t,ia. . ,eor(" -i
J
./

\-

Thus:

'; o;)*^.(?-u;)
^"(.u- (. b,, b5)

(DM-7)

From force equilibrium:

ni;2:

nyar

*.,h0:

(DM-8)

tar

The above equations also allow diflerent covers to the two faces which (LL 149) and
(LL.150) do not. Using the reinforcement design formulae and axes convention in section
6.9 of this guide, the reinforcement rcquirements ni" for the 1' direction in terms of stress
resultant are from equations (DM-7) and (DM-8):

", (r"
with n,"r
n]r2

', ,,) , ,'(! ,!)

(1,* b\

lrs,1,,1 J tan d1

nrul

r?.r,2

nJyr

(DM-e)

b'r)

xEdyr and r?syr

flEdx,'2l

tan 0: +

n Edy2

(DM-10)

Similar equations can be produced lbr the x direction but noting that
ts,l"rllcot1 * tp4*1 nd n.,2 : ls,lru2icotzi np.a'2.

n,^1

The use of these equations and the sandwich model is illustraled in Worked example M-1
It illustrates the process of making the correction where rcinforcement is not centred on the
layers. It shws little difl'erence in lhe rcinforcement produced from models with )ayers
gleter than trvice the cover and equal to twice the cover- This will generally be the case
wherc Layers are equal, but it is especially important to make thc correction wherc lhe
layers are diffrent sizes lo avoid violtion of equilibrium between overall web s ess
resultants and intctnal actions in concrete and reinforccment.
The application of the membrane rules to cases of shear and transverse bending will often
led to tensile l'orces in the longitudinal direction. For shear acting lone, the longitudinl
force produced is tr/p6 cot d nd is the same force as predicted in the shear model of
section 6.2i there it is shared between tension and compression chords, increasing the
tension by 0.5trlp,1cold and reducing the compression by 0.5lll.1cotd In pplying
the membrane rules to webs in shear and transverse bending, it is reasonable to distributc
the reinforcement (or forces) betwccn chords in the same way, rather than providing
continuous longitudinal reinforsement up the webs. This is the stbject of 2-2lMM(104).

2-UMM(t04)

M2. Alternative approach based on longitudinal shear rules

2-2lMM(105) allows an alternative simpler method for combining the effecls from transverse bending and shear in the absence of axial force, based on the rules for longitudinal
shear in 2-2/clause 6.2.4. The deptb of the compression zone required lbr transverse
bending, /r,., can first be determined nd then this width discounted for the purposes of
calculating the mximum permissible shear lorce, ,/Rd.,nx, as shown in Fig. M-3. For
concrete verification, this is conservative s the compressive stress telds for bcnding and
shear do not ast at the same angle and therefore add vectorially rather than algebraically.
Figure M-3 implies that the centroid of the shear resistance in this simple model is
displaced from the centre of the web and therefore the reinforcement for shear would be
slightly eccentric to maintain this same centroid of loading. There is no requirement t
consider this effect in Lhe longitudinl shear rules in Z-2/clause 6.2.4 In the membrane

2-2/MM(t05)

349

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

Compression zone

Bending comprssion

\/\./
\

nEd

'/
Fig. M-3. Simplified combination of bending and shear in webs
rules, this efect is minimized by having a different compression ngle on each face of the web,
with a flatter truss on thc side in fleKurl tension. The resulting shear steel requirement can
then be added to that lbr bending on the tension face. The longitudinal shear rules in 2-27
clause 6.2,4 do not rcquire full combination ofbending and sher frces in the reinforcement
design. Something less than full addition will also be achieved by application of the method
in Annex MM, but it will not give as much reduction as llowed in 2-2,/cJause 6.2.4. Worked
example M-l illustrates this. For web design, 2-2,rAnnex MM(105) therefore requires i.ull
combination of the reinforcemcnt for shear and bending.
The drafters of EC2-2 have specifically intended the rules for flnges with longitudinal
shear and transverse bending to nol be used for the dcsign of webs with axial force_ This
is because the longitudinal shear rules ignore the presence f ny axial compression that is
present. The membrane rules of2-2/clause 6-109 give a reduction in shear crushing resistance
as soon as any axial load is applied. By contrast, the web shcar rules of2-l-l/clause 6.2.1(3)
allow an enhoncemezt of concrete crushing strength in shear for average web compressive
stress up to 60% of the design cylinder strength by way of the recommended value of n"*.
It is only beyond this vlue of compression that the shear resistance is actually reduced. In
normal prestressed beams the axial force will not be this hieh. in which case it would
generally appear reasonable to ignore rhe txial lad and Lo u the modilied longitudinl
shear rules above for checking web crushing in combined sher nd transverse bending.
This would, however, deparL from the recommendations of Annex MM,
It is worth noting that various clauses in ECZ can be applied to shear in an element and
none are fully consistent:

(l)
(2)
(3)
(4)

The web design rules for shear in 2-l-l/cluse 6-2 have a reduced crushing strength under
very high axial compression by wa), of the factor o",u. The resistance is, however, allowed
lo be enhanced in the presence of lorv and moderate axial stress.
A similar reduction is made to the allowable torsional shear stress in flanges under very
high flange compression by way of a"*.
Flanges in longitudinal shcar, however, ale not reduced in strength by high compression
as there is no ,1cw term in the relevant formula in 2'zlclause 6.2.4.
The mernbrane rules of 2-2,rclause 6-109 implicitly reduce maximum shear strength as

son as any axial load is prcsent. Stricter limits are also imposed on the direction

of

the compression struts.

These differences are, however, inevitable as each rule for a particular situatin (such as a
web in shear, a plate lement in shear, a flange in longitudinal shear) have only been veried
in that particular specific application. Generally, the member resistnce rules make allowance for plastic redistdbution across the cross-section on the basis of test results. The
more generalized rnembrane rules do not.

350

ANNEX M. SHEAR AND TRANSVERSE BENDING

i4rii.' : t

::

;:tl

35

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

; J"':::: i;' ;*r":**':

*t., ;:"' "*"

ruling ,h. ,.*or""nl."'

,. ::'i ,, ur'o.r,un ,,,=nr* o, *,

ffi

',

"

,r.",

"'="

:"r

*F*fi**

t'

:,,,:;;.*'

:sign srrength of 435 MPa gives a steel area

12

4q-x
x loo
100

2.85

mo:/mm

'*'';,.fr-1
,--lK-./'
/ /1 \
\
l/l\
.r

\ | \i //

-.;
#
'J*ffi ',

J5,Z

--.1.

ANNEX M. SHEAR AND TRANSVERSE BENDING

:_i

:../

,)

353

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

.:--.

t
- lJ:o
4J5

= 2.94nrrn2lmm

The reinforcemeni is essenrraUy tbe same as from Lhe first sandwich

arising because of the diflerenr angle used for the comprt
$tT1e1ccs
ireld). but the concrete srrcss iield is now acceptable. A check in accor

354

ANNEX M. SHEAR AND TRANSVERSE BENDING

,,.-.',1

| d.
.:

:.:i. :6

If tfi

1;;;.iiit

i;i;i;;: i.,; . i:1; ;,l.l. .:,l.t..

:.t

;:::::,,:
....::. i;;,;t;,;:l:... ::.::: ,.:

355

ANNEX N

Damage equivalent stresses for

fatigue verification (informative)

l.

General

Annex NN of EN 1992-2 is used in conjunction with 2-2,iclause 6.8.5 and gives a simplified
procedure to calculte the damage equivalent stresses for ftigue veriflction of reinforcement and prestressing steel in concrete road and railway bridge decks, It is based on
fatigue lod models given in EN l99l-2. Although the annex is infrmative, there is no

other simple alterntive for the fatigue verification of reinforcement nd prestressing

steel. as discussed in section 6.8.4 of this guide. Workcd example 6.8-1 illustrates the
damage equivalent stress qalculation for a road bridge. Annex NN also provides a
damage equivalent stress method for the verification of concrete in railway bridges, but
not for road bridees.

N2. Road bridges

2-2/clsuse

NN.z.r(r0r)

The damage equivalenl stress method for road bridges is based on fatigue Load Model 3,
de6ned in EN l99l-2 clause 4.6.4. This model is illustrated in Fig. N-1. The weight of
each axle is equal to 120kN. Where required by N 1991-2 and its National Annex, two
vehicles in the same lane should be considered.
For calculation of the damage equivalent stress rangcs for steel verification, 2-2lclause
NN.2.1(IU) requires the axle loads of the ltigue model to be multiplied by the following
factors:

.
.

l.?5 for verification at intermediate support locations;

1.40 for veriflcation at all other locations,

All wheel conlaci

surfaces 0,4 m x 0.4 m

Fig. N-1. Fatigue Load Model

ANNEX N. DAMAGE EQUIVALENT

STRESSES

FOR FATIGUE VERIFICATION

The modified vehicle is lhen moved oross lhe bridge along ech notional lane and the
for each cycle of stress fluctuation2-2lclause NN,2.1(102) gives the following expression for calculating the drnage
equivalent stress range for steel verification:
sLrcss rangc detcrmined

Ao","uu

: Ao,',p.,

2-2/dause
NN.2.t (t 02)

2-2(NN l01)

where:

Ao,

).

e"

is lhc strcss range causcd by faLiguc Load Model 3, modited as above and
applied in accordance with clause 4.6.4 ofEN l99l-2, assuming the load combination given in 2-l-llclause 6,8.3
is a factor to calculate the damagc cquivalent stress rnge fiorn the strcss range
caused by the modified fatigue load model

The factor, ,, includes the influences of span, annual tlaflic volume. service life, multiple
lares, traffic type and surlace roughncss, and is calculated from:
.

2-2l(NN. r02)

t'iu1.',1',2,,3.,a

Each of these factors is discussed in turn below.

{rn, is a damage equivalent impct fctor influenced by road surlacc roughness. The factor
is defined in Annex B of EN l99l-2, together with recommendations for selecting the

appropriate value, as follows:

. dn,: 1.2 for surfaces of good roughness (recommended for new and mintined
roadway layers such as asphalt);
. drr, - 1.4 for surl'aces ol medium roughness (recommended for old and unmaintined
roadway layers).

In addition to the above factors, where the section under consideration is within a distance
6.0n.r lrom an expansion ioint, a further impacl factor should be applied to the
whole loading, as defined in Annex B of EN 1991-2. This clause rcfers to EN 1991-2
Fig.4.7 (reproduced as Fig. N-2).
The . 1 factor is obtained from 2-2lFig. NN.l (for the intermediate support area) or 2-2,/
Fig. NN.2 (for the span and local elements) s appropriate. For n.rain longitudinal reinlbrcement in continuous beams, it would be reasonable to use 2-21Fig. NN.1 for a length of 15o/o
of the span each side ol an intermediate support and to use 2-2/Fig. NN.2 elsewhere. This is
the pproach in EN 1993-2. The design of shear reinforcement is bascd on 2-2lFig. NN,2.
.,1 accounts for the critical length ofthe influence line or surface and the shape ofthe_^S N
curve, so its value depends on the type ofelement under consideration. In ENV 1992-2," the
sarre graphs were provided but the horizontal axis related to span length. The latter is often
appropriate, but not always. For example, for continuous beams in hogging bending at
intermedite supports, there re two positive lobes to the influence line from each adjacent
span, each causing a cyole of stress variation. The length of thc span is therefbre approPriate.
The same is true for shear. For reaction, however the gretest positive lobe length of the

of

1.3

.E

=E

t
.9

'l
1.0

Distance from expansion joinl (m)

Fig. N-2. Additional amplilication factor for proximity to expansion ioints

357

TO EN I992-2

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

influence line, defining a cycle of stress variation, covcrs two spans, so the total length of
the two spns is morc appropriate in this case. EN 1993-2 uses the above considertions
to delermine the base length to usc in clculation and its clause 9.5,2(2) can be used for
guidnce in determining the appropfite length here.
The ,,r correction factor takes account of the annual traffic volume nd traffic type (i.e.
weight). It is oalculated liom the following expression:

\".2:Qx

2-2(NN.103)

71{"r,/2,0

u.here:

is a factor tken from 2-21Table NN.l. It accounts for the damage done by the
actual mix of traffic rveights compared to that done by lhe fatigue load model. p

need not, howevcr, be detennined fiom traffic spectra (s the equivlent prmeter
in EN 1993-2 needs to be) as it may be deternined from 2-2i Table NN.1 for a given

'mc typc', as delined in Note 3 of

given there re not easy to interpret:

.
.
.

EN 1991-2 clause 4.6.5(1). The definitions

'long distnce' means hundrcds of kilometres;

'mcdiun distance'mens 50 to l00km;

'locl tramc'means distances less than 50km.
'Long distance' will typically apply to motorways and trunk roads, The use of the
other cases will need to be agreed with the Client
k2 is the slope of the appropriate S N curve fbr the element under cnsideration
Nobs is fhe number of lories per year (in millions) in accordance with Table 4.5 of
EN 1991-2, reproduced here as Table N-l (these ylues my be modified by the
National Annex)
The

s.3

s.r

lctor takes account of the required service life:

k.-

2-2(NN.104)

?NYers/ 100

where ly'yean is the design life of the bridge (in years).

The ".a correction fctor takes account of the influence of tra{ic fron adjacent lanes.
Since most bridge decks are ble to distribute load transversely, clements will also pick up
fatigue loading from vehicles passing in lanes rernote from those directly above the
element- s,4 is calculated fiom the following:

"''t:

",8N"*
\/ N"l"J

2-2(NN.105)

where:

No6r; is the uumber of lorries expccted on lane / per year

1{.6.,1 is the numbcr of lorries expected on the slow lane per year
This expression is very approximale and does not contain any direcl measure of the relalive
influence of trafic in each lane, unlike the equivalent parametet in EN 1993-2.

Table N-

l.

Indicative number of heavy vehicles expecred per year per slow lane

Trafic categories
(

l)

with two or more lanes per direction with

flow rates of lorries
Roads and motorways with medium flow rates f lorries
l"lain rods wirh low flow rrcs of lorries
Local roads with low flow rates of lorries
Roads and motorlvays

No6, per year per slow lane

2.0

106

high

(2)
(3)
(4)

358

0.5 x 106
0.125 x 106
0.05 x 106

ANNEX N. DAMAGE EQUIVALENT

STRESSES

FOR FATIGUE VERIFICATION

N3. Railway bridges

The damage equivalent stress method for fatigue verification of railway bridges is split inro
two secLions; one for reinforcing and prestressing steel and one for concrele clements. The
key spects of both are discussed below.

N3.1. Reinforcing and prestressing steel

The darnagc equivalent stress method for reinforcement and prestressing steel in railwy
bridges follows a similar format to that for road bridgcs, buL is based n using the normal
rail traflic models (Load Model 7l and Load Model SW/O) delined in EN 1991-2, but
excluding Lhc o* factor defined therein. The characteristic (static) values for Load Model 71
consist of ld train of four 250 kN axlcs and uniformly disrributed loads of 80 kN/m. The
geonretry of this load model is illustrted in Fig. N-3. In ddirion. Ibr continuous span
bridges (including single spans witl integral abutments). the eflects lrom Load Model SW/0
should also be considered if worse than Load Modcl 71. The characteristic (sttic) values for
Load Model SW/O consist of two unitbrmly distributed lods of 133 kN/n.r with thc geometry
illustrated in Fig. N-4- Refercnce should be made to EN 1991-2 and its relevant Ntional Annex
fbr full details of the load models including transverse eccentricity of vertical loads.
For strucLures with rnultiple fiacks, 2-2lclause NN,J,I(101) requires thc relevant load
model to be applied to a maximum of two tracks to dcLcrmine the steel stress range. The
following expression for calculating the damage equivalent slress range for steel verification
15

Slven:

Aa",*u:.xLrAo.,71

2-2i

NN.l0)

whele:

4a,.71 is the sLrcss range caused by Load Model 7l or SW/O as above- It should be
clculated in the load combination given in 2-1-l/clause 6.8.3
is a dynan.ric factor which enhances the static lod effects obtained from the above
E
load modeLs. This factor is defined in EN 1991-2 clause 6.4.5 (as iD) and should be
taken as either Q2 for carefully mintined track or Or for track with standard
maintenancc- Using the forn.rulae deflned in EN l99l-2,.T'2 lies within the rnge
of 1.0 to 1.67 and iD3 lies within the range of 1 .0 to 2.0
. is a correction factor to calculate the damage equivalent stress range from the stress
range caused by above load models
Thc correclion faotor, r, includes the influences of span, annual traffic volumc, service life
and multiple tracks and is calculated from:

,:

2-2(NN.l07)

.'.1'.2,.1.,a

4x

Qvk = 250 kN ach

Unlimited 0.8m
3x1.6m
0-8m
lJnlimited
Fig. N-3. Load Model 7l and charcrerisric (saric) values for verrical loads
q* -

q"k = 133 kN/m

133 kN/m

15.0

5.3

15.0 m

Fig. N-4. Load Model 5W/0 and charactristic (static) values for verticl loads

2-2/douse

NN.3./(r0r)

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

The correction lactr ..r takes into account the influence ofthe length ofthe influence line
or surlce and trafc mix. The values of ,.1 for standard or heavy traffic mixes (defined in
EN l99l-2) are given in 2-2lTable NN.2 and 2-2(NN.108). The values given for mixed
traflic correspond t the combination of trains givcn in Annex ts of EN 1991-2. No values
for a light traffic mix are provided. In such circumstnces, either , 1 values can be based
on the stndard tralllc mix or calculations on the basis of the actual trafic speclra can be
undertaken.

The

".2

correction fctor is used to include the influence of the nnual tralTic volume:
Vol

2-2(NN.109)

25;7
where:

Vol
k2

is the volume oftraffic (tonnes per year per track)

is the slope ofthe appropriate S N curve for the element under consideration

The

2-Uclouse
NN.3. / (r 06)

,.1 coffection factor is uscd to include the influence of the serviqe life and is identical to
that for rod bridges above.
The r.4 correction factor is used to account for the influence of loading lrom more than
one track, The expression given rn 2-2lclause NN,3.1(106) includes the effects of stress
rangcs from load on tlacks other thn frm tht which produces the greatest stress range.
It is therefore more rational than the corresponding expression for road bridges, which
considers only the trffic flow in adjacent lanes.

N3.2. Concrete subieted to compression

2-2/clause

NN.3.2(t0 t)

The damage equivlent stress method for concrete under compression in railway bridges is
similar to thaL lor reinforcement and preslressi[g steel bove; the damage equivalent shesses
are based on the stress ranges obtained from analysis using Load Model 71.
2-2lclause NN,3.2(101) sttes that adequate fatigue resistance may be assumed for
concrete elements in compression if the follotving expression is satisfied:

I_F."d nr\,e'lu ! /

l+Y:rO

2-2(NN.1l2)

1/il - Requ -

where:

F.
-

4crl,max.equ

tcrl.rrin.eou

"cd.mrn.equ

- rsd J!cd.l-zil

lcd,max,equ

ocd.nax.eou

rs'J t

./cd,Lat

where:

%d
/la6t

is Lhe padial factor for modelling uncertinty, defined in clause 6.3,2 ofEN 1990.
Values are likely Lo be in the range of 1.0 to 1.15 and are set in the National Annex
to EN 1990 (1a is not defined in EC2-2 other than in 2-2lclause 5.7)
is lhe design fatigue compressive strength ofconcrete from 2-2/clause 6.8,7

and o",1,-;,."u,, are the upper and lower stresses f the dmge equivalent stress
spectrum with 10 number of cycles. These upper and lower stresses should be calculated
ocd,max.equ

from the following eKptessions:

dcd.max.cqu
acd,min,eq

Jbu

- a"0",- f .(4",."'l
:4",0"''' * "(o"0...

- o".p.r"n)
o.,.i".tr)

2-2l(NN.l13)

ANNEX N. DAMAGE EQUIVALEN

STRESSES

FOR FATIGUE VERIFICATION

whre:

dc,perm is the compressive corlcrete stress caused by the characteristic combintion of

permnent actions (excluding the effects of the fatigue load models)
o".."*.71 is the maximum compressive concrete stress caused by the chatacteristic

combination of actions including Load Model 71, and the ppropriate

dynamic factor, /, from EN 1991-2 (as discussed above)
o".n,;n.71 is the minimum compressive concrete sess caused by the characteristic
combinaLion of actions including Load Model 71, and the ppropriate
dynanic factor, /
"
is a correction factor to clculate the upper nd lower stresses of the damage
equivalent stress spectrum from the stresses caused by the fatigue load model

The )c correction lactor covers the same cllccts that " covers for steel verications, but
additionally includes the influence of permanent compressive stress by way of the factor
.\",n. The factors c,1, lc,r,r and c,4 are equivalent to ",1 to "a for steel verifications.

361

ANNEX O

Typical bridge discontinuity

regions (informative)
Annex OO of EN 1992-2 provides guidance on the design of diaphragms for box girders
with:

.
.
.

twin hearings;
single bearings; or
u monolithic connection to a pier.

Guidance is also given on the design of diaphragms

in

decks

with Double Tee cross-

sections.

The inclusion ofthis material was made at a vcry late stage in the drafting ofEN 1992-2. It
differs in style and content to the rest of the document in tht it prvides n Principles or
Application Rules, but rather gives guidance on suitable strut-and-tie idealizations that
can be used in design- As such, the matcrial requires no furthcr commentary here other
than to note that other idealizations are possible and my sometimes be dictatd by constraints on the psitioning of rcinforcement and,/or prestressing steel. The layouts provided
san, however, be taken to be examples of good practice.

ANNEX

Safety format for non-linear

analysis (informative)
The provisions of Annex PP of EN 1992-2 are discussed in section 5-7 of this guide.

ANNEX Q

Control of shear cracks within

webs (informative)
2-2lclatse7.3.1(ll0) statcs that 'in some cases it may be necessary to check and control shear
cracking in webs'and reference is made to 2-27Annex QQ. Some suggestions lbr when and
why such a check might b approprite are made in section 7.3.1 of this guide.
2-2lLnnex QQ gives a procedure for checking shear cracking, although it is prefaced by
the statemnt that 'at present, the prediction of shear cracking in webs is accompanied by
large model uncertainty'. It also states that the check is particularly necessary for prestressed
members. This is probably more because of the perceived need to keep a tighter control on
crack widths where prestressing tendons are involved, rather than due to any inherent
vulnerability of prestrcsscd sections lo web shear cracking (although thinner webs
are often used in prestressed sections, which will be more likely to crack). Worked
example Q-l shows the benefits ofprestressing in reducing web crack widths due to shear.
In the procedure, the larger principal tensile stress in the web (o1) is compred to the
cracking strength of the cncrete, allowing for bixial stress state, given as:

(, o.s+

Jctk,0.05

2-2(QQ.l01)

where o3 is the larger compressive principl stress (compression taken as positive) but not
greater than 0.6/11.
Where the gretest principal tensile stress o1 < /1,6 (in this check, tension is positive), the
web is deemed to be un-cracked and no check of crack width is required. Minimum longitudinal reinl'orcement should, however, be provided in accordance with 2-2/clause 7.3.2.
Where o1 > .b, EC2 sttes tht cracking in the web should be controlled either by the
method of 2-2/clause 7.3.3 or the direct calculation method of 2-27lclause 7.3.4. In both
cases, it is necessary t take account of the deviation ngle between principal tensile stress
and reinforcement directions. Since the reinforcement directions do not, in general, align
with the direction of principal tensil stress and the reinforcement is likely to be different
in the two orthogonl directions, there is difficulty in deciding wht unique bar diameter
and spacing to usc in the simple method of 2-2/clausc 7.3.3. If the method of 2-2/clause
7.3.4 is used, the eflect of deviation angle between principl tensile stress nd reinforcement
directions on crack spacing. n,ix, can be calculated using 2- 1- I /Expression (7-15):

/ cos

sind

\Jr,max.y

Jr.rnar,.

2-t-t l(7 .t5)

The eflect of the deviation ngle between principal tensile stress and reinforcemenl
directions on calculalion of reinforcement stress is not given in EN 1992- One approach is
to calculate the sffess in the reinforcement, ns, by dividing the stress in the concrete in the

ANNEX Q. CONTROL OF SHEAR CRACKS WITHIN WEBS

direction of the principal tensile stress by an effective reinforcement ratio, p], whcre
pL - XII , p; cosa a; and p; is the reinforcement ratio in layer I at an angle or; to the direction
of principl tensile stress. This reinforcemenL ratio is bascd on equivalent stiflness in the
principal stress dircction, which was the approach used in BS 5400 Part 4.'o" is then used
in 2- I - li Expression (7.9) to calculate the strain for use in the crack calculation formula of
2- l- l,/Expression (7.8). In applying 2-l-llExpression (7.9), rr,."n could be taken as pl but,
in view of the uncefiainty of the eflcts ot tension stiflening whre the reinforccment direction

is skew to the cracks, it is advisable to ignore the tension stiffening term and take

.. ,^:

o,lE".

The direction of the principal tensile stress in the un-cracked condition wiJl vary over the
height of the web due to the variation oi- both shear stress and flcxural stress. In determining
whethr or not the section is cracked, all such points should be checked. However, a similar
lreatment aftcr cracking would also require crack checks at all locations throughout the
depth of the beam. To avoid this situation, and since the subject of the calculation is 'crackirg due to shear". one sirnplilication for doubly flanged beams might be to ignorc flcxural
stresscs whcn checking web crack widths and to take the shear slrcss as uniform ovet a
depth z, where: is an appropriate lever arm, such as the ULS flexural lever arrrr. This
latter assumption is not conseNative for shear stress, but is a reasonable approximation
given the uncertainties of thc mclhod. The axial force component of any prestressing
should also be considered in the crack width clcultrtin.
Thc ncglecl of the flexural stresses above can partly be justified for doubly flanged beams
by the fct that, on cracking, flexural tensile stresses will shed to the flanges where the main
flexural reinfbrcement is provided. Despite the shedding ofstress, longitudinal strain will still
be produced in thc wcb in order for the flange reinforcement to take up the load. While
strictly this strain will dd to tht calculated from the shear stlesses" it lrray be reasonable
lo ignore this as the flexural crack widths must still be checked separately. Care with this
approach should, however. be exercised wiLh T bcams when the stem is in tension. Since.
in this case, there is no discrete tension flnge containing the main flexural rcinforcement,
the flexural forces in thc wcb cannot be shed on cracking. In such cases, it is more
conservtive to consider the full stress field in checking web cracking.

365

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

-tseo example
Fig. Q-1. Web relnforcemem for Worked
exampE G
v-

|I

From 2-l -l /Et

trc

.tr.mar.y

-k1k.kaf

pr.,x..,

' l.{

r,.o'*.,
Jr.i,z

-r
-- 3c*/<1/c2katif
^3( ^ l^z/c

p1sn,,

= 3.4x 50-0.8 r 1.0x0..

-

5l: : I : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : i : : :, :.. : : : : :
/ co'A
.i.4 \\ II (/ea<L\'
cind5'\ I
sind
_ cos 45' sjn45'\ - s2omm
" _ (cord ,
n*,=

iExnressio
From 2-l-1
2- I -1/Expression
1....'...

(7- j

.'J
":::_._=i:;
[,,,*_.,
.

.ft

..

(ffi_x, J

niion strerng:

LLtl

presress is 6MPa- The eplculstions are repeated:

The average shear

366

sLress

in the web remains

as zy"ca

3.0

MP

ANNEX Q. CONTROL OF SHEAR CRACKS WITHIN WEBS

t.

,ot Ine nflnclDal lensue s[ress

!4:r!l.

-t:COS. :=:rdd{d

in princiyal tensile

stre.ss

cosa 67.5'

ls:

o.o2lB v coso 67-5' -. o.(, lov

and the rotarion of rhe principat lensile stress towards the

direcrion of Lhe vertical link reinforcment,

367

References
l.

Gulvanessian, H,, Calgaro, J.-A. and Holicky", M. (2002) Derigners'Guide to EN 1990

Eurocode: Bd.\i.\ of StructLnel Da.rign. Thomas Telford, London.
Eut'opean Commissin (2002) Guidun<:e Poper L ((|oucerning the Conlitruction Products
Directive 89i106IEEC ) . Application ancl Use of Eurocodes. EC, Blussels.
3. Interntionl Organization for Sl.andardization (1997) Basr,s of Design.for Structurcl; Notutiotl Geneftll symbols.ISO. Geneva, ISO 3898.
4. Regan, P. E., Kcnncdy-Reid, I. L., Pullen. A. D. and Smith, D. A. (2005) The ffiueru:e o/
dggregate type on the ,\hear resistnnce o/ reinforced ton(:rete, ,slructurti engineer,Yol.83,
No. 23/24, pp.27 32.
5. Concrete Societ), (1996) Durable Bonded Post-tensioned Concrete -Bril5'e,r. Tcchnical

Report No. 47.

6. CEB-FIP (1993) Moclel Code 90.'lhomas Telford, London,

7. British Standards Institution (2000) S'lee/, Concrete and Composite Bridges Part 3: Code
oJ Practice /br the Design oJ Steel Bridges. London, BSI 5400.
8. Schlaich, J., Schafer, K. and Jemrewein, M. (1987) Toward a corsistent design of
structural co]|,crele, PCI journsl Yol. 32, No. 3, pp. 74 1 50.
9. British Sfandards Institution (1990) Stee1, Concrerc ancl Composite Bridges Part 4: Cod
of Practice for the Dtsign of Conrrete Bridges. London, BSI 5400.
10. Cranston, W. B. (1972) Analy.sh and Dasign of ReinJort:ed Concrela Columns, Cement
and Concrete Associalion, London" Research Report 20.

11. Leung, Y. W., Cheung, C, B. and Rcgan, P. E. (1976) Shear Strength of Various Shapes
of Concrete Beams llthout Sheur ReinTorcement. Polytechnic of Central London.
12. Regan, P. E. (1971) Shear in Reinfotd Concrete sn Experimental Slud_r,. CIRIA,
London. Technical Nte 45.
13. Hently, C. R. and Johnson, R. P. (2006) Dcsrgncrs' Guicle to EN 1994-2 Eurotode 4,
Design of Composite Steel qnd Concrete Structures. Part 2, Geueral Rulet and Rules
'Ior Bridges. Thomas Telford, London.
14. Comit Europen dc Normalisation (1992) Design oJ Concrete Struttures. Part l-1,
General Rules and Rules frtr Builtling.s. CEN. Brussels, ENV 1992-l-l
15. Leonbardt, F. and Walther, R. (t964) The Stattgert Shear Tests 19d-1, C&CA Translation No. 1 1 1. Cement and Concrete Association, London.
16. Asin, M. (2000) The Behavioar of Reinforcetl Conuek f)eep Beums. PhD Thesis, Delft
University of Technology, the Netherlands.
17. Chalioris, C. E. (2003) Crcu:king arul Ultmate Torque Capacity of Reit1rt)rced Conuete
Beanrs, Role ofconcrete bridges in sustainable development. Thmas Telford. London.
18. Yonng, W. C. (198S) Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain, 6th edition. McGraw-Hi1l
Interuational Editions, New York.
19. Wood, R- H- (1968) The reinlbrcement oJ slabs in accor{lance with a pre-determined field
of moment, conuete,2. February, pp. 69 76.
.

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

20. Armcr, G. S. T. (1968) Correspondence. Contete,2, Aug., pp. 319 320.

21. Denton, S. R. and Burgoyne, C. J. (1996) The assessment of reinforced concrete slabs.
The Structural Engineer, Yol.74, No.9, pp. 147 152.
22. American AssociaLion of Slate Highway and Transporlation Olllcials (2004) AASIITO
LRFD Bridge Design SpactfLcations. 3rd edition.
CIRIA Guide | (1976) A Guide to tlrc Desi.gn ol Post-tensioned Prcstrc.\.\ed Conctete
Members. CIRIA. London.
a/l Ol.r, B. H. and Chae" S. T. (2003) Stress Distribution Around Tendon Coupling Joints in
Prestre,rted Concrete Girders, Role of Concrete Bridges in Sustainable Dewlopment.
Thomas Telford. London25. Schfaich, J. and Scheef, H. (1982) Concrete Box Girtler Bridges. Structural engineering
Documents lst edtion, IABSE, Switzerland.
Higlrways Agency (1994) The Design oJ Concrete Highway Bridge a d Stuctures witll
Exlerrui ttnd Unbonded Prestressizg. London, BD 58i9427. Leonhardt. F., Koch, R. nd Rostsy, F. S. (1971) Suspensin reinforcement fbr indirect
load application lo prestressed concrete bean.rs: test report and recommendations, Belo,
u d Stahlhehnh. , Vol. 66, Issuc 10, pp. 233 241.
Intemational Organiztion for Standardization (1982) Cc,'ncrete Determination of
Static Modulus of Elasticity in Compressiott. ISC), Geneva, ISO 6784.
29. Contrete Under MLrltiaxill Slate:t o Stt'es,\ - Conslitulive Equations Jor Prdctical Design,
CEB Bulletin. 156, Lausallne,
30. Comit Europen de Normalisatjon (1996) Design of Concrete Suctures. Pqrt 2,
Concrete Bridges. CEN, Brussels,

370

ENV

1992-2.

Index
Page numbers

in

i1,r1i..r denote figures

acceleralted relaxation, 290

actios. 9-10, 288, 308 309
aclions combinations, 209, 226

additional longitudinal reinforcemenL. 143-145

aggregate concrete strucLures, 295 302

allowable miuimum strai. 107

alternalive methods, 349 350
amplitcation factors, .ii7
analysis, 95-97, 326. 361
sce dlro structral analysis
anchorage, 29, 245, 24'7 -251,

217 243.251.272
8

lbrcc calculation model, 286

prestressing, 87, 89 90, 2'7 |
pretensioned Lendons. 259 262, 26f

support reinforccment, 292

tension, 261 262. -236
ltimate limit state. 201, 261-262
zones, 262 2'70, 262, 265-267. 27A,330

application rulcs,
archcs, 43
assumptions,

plastic analysis. 52. 53

prccast pretensioncd, 160-164
rectangular, notation, J27
shear, .1.16. l3'7. 278 2'/9
sleder, 80-81

time-dcpcndent losses. 91

with uniiorrrr loads, 5l

see alo slabs

bottom rcinforcement. 2?7

argular imperlctions,

monolithic with supprts, 47

lJ

bearings,47, 204,205 201.292 293.329 330

beding" 105-131, 299, 304, iJO
biaxial bcnding, 80, 125- 126
biaxial cornpression, 218
biaxial shear, 218
bilinear diagrams, 21
bonds, 96, 99-103, 100, 102- 245, 254
bottom reinforcen1ent, 2'77 -27I
box girders, 280 281. 280, 362

discontinLrity regions, 362

ellcfive llange widths, 46-4'7. 47
losscs, 87,

94-95

post-tensioned, 129 131, 139 140, 148

5. 25, 28-29

utogenous shrinkage, 18
axial forces, 78, 304
axial loads,62 80, 123, 125 126
'balanced' sections, 78
bars, 246-24'7, 250-258, ?J4
bases, 179-185, 134 18J
beanls,2?5-281
bearings,47
cornposire, 337-339, JJ8 JJg
creep, 337-339, JJ8 -t3q
doubly rcinforced rectangular, Il2 lI4, 1i,3
eflcctivc spa1N, 47. 48
cd stress transfer, 99 100
idealizatjon for space liame analysis, 172

l5l

shear cracks, 365 367, J66

terdon profiles, 1J1

three span. losses, 37

timc-depedcnt losscs, 94-95

torsion, 172 173

without tedon dfape, 149 151
workecl examples, 87-90, 94-95, 172-173,

280 281,280
brced columns. 74
braced members, 6-l
bridge piers "ree piers
brittle failurc, 126- 131
buckling, 43, 63, 65, 305
bundled bars. 258

bulsting. 203-205, 2A4, 262 263

K values,2il

cbles, 126-127

lateral inslability, 80 8l
midspal stress tfnsfer, 100

canlilcvcring picrs, 6'l, 70, 75-76, 79-80

carbonation corrosion, 34

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

widths, 237 242. 237, 240

worked examples, 236 23'7,241 242
creep,69 70, 313-315, J-i-?,333 341, JJ.l,

CCC nodes, 197

CCT nodcs. 198
centreline distances, 260
chemical attack corrosion, l5
chloride corrosion, 14

333

CIRIA Cuide I mcthod,264, ?6J

classcs, 24, 34 35, 3'7, 322 323
classification,3T
climatic actios, 109
close to slab eclges,i corners. 176
closc to sLrpports, 135 136. 145
coemcients of fliction, 86

139, 341

concrete, l4 1'7,29'7,313 314.333

time-depedent losses, g2-94
worked examples, 336 137,339-341,

-14.1

cross sectiolls sce scolions

clushing, 169 -170,201 203,202

CITT nodes, 198 199
curvature lbrces. Ji9

cLrNaturc ncthods. 76-80

colurnns, /8J.282 284

ve

combinadons, 157-158, 169- 170, J-t0

damage, 210 212,322,356 361

dead load moments, 3J?

conposite beams, 161,33'1 341.333 39, 14l

dcck slabs,228-230, 300

also plers

composite construction, 93, 160 165

coinposite deck slabs, 162- 164
composite membcrs, 342-343
comprcssive strengths,
12.20 21,298,

1l

360

crack control, 236 23'7. 24I-242

shear, I 14

ullimate limit slates. 110 I I I

voided reinforccd oncrele, 146 147

361

compressive stresses,

l0l

cover exanplc, 38

-f

deep beams, 284

1J

co[crete, I I -23
casl at diffcrcnt timcs, 158

delinitions, 5, 155. 167,265

160

cover vefification methods.

creep, 14 17. .l-t-l

deflectio, 70.243

dcformation. 13, 297

conf,ned.298

36 l8

damage,322

defo.mation charactedstics, I 3
elastic defornatioD, 14
fatigue verifi ctior, 21 3-215
llexural tcnsilc strcngths, 22 23
heat crilg effects, 290

indicative strength classes, J22

lightweight aggregate structures, 295-302
shear.213-215
shell clcmcnts, 344 345
shrinkagc, 14. 18 19
strelrgtbs. ll )4.20 21,296.360 16l
stfess chafacteristics, l3
stress limitation, 82-83
strcss,/strain relationships, 19, 19 20,21 22

$olked exn1ples, l6 l7
contraflexure points. 147

control, cracks, 230 242,237,240,364 367

cortrol perimelen. 176-l'7'7^ 176, 184
corbels. 328 329, J29
corner piles, 185, 139, 191
corrosioD, 32 35. 126 l2'7.322

20 21,298
anchofage lengths, 249 251

design,

assmptions,25.28 29
basis, ? 10, 289-290.296
execution stages, 307-309

particular rules. 291

shear reinforcement, 133-153, 110 141, 145,
153

tolsion. 167

171

detaiLed calculation method,

317

321

detailing rules. 215 2'73,2'75 288,291-293.

302. 32'7 330
deviation allowances. 38

deviators.272 273
diaphragrns, 199 201. 200-20 1, 280 281, 280.
162

dillcrcntial creep, 137 ll9, .l-18 -i3q

diffcrential shrinkage, 102.341 342. 342
discontinuity, 195 196. i96,288, 162
dispersion, 16T
doubly reinfolced concrete beams,/slabs,
I 12- I 14, l_f-t

couplers. 29, 252-25'7 . 271

D-regions, 57, 288

scc dLro strut-and-tie modcl
drying shrinkage, l8

cover,3l-38.261.298

ductilit)i,24,27

cracks

ducts, 147-148, 148,258 261.259

durability, 3l-38, 298, 322-321

cablcs, 126 127

28

checks, 236 23'/.141 242

cotrol, 230-242, 364-367

errly thermal. 243

flcxurc, 140, 148 149
prediction,240 241
sections,228

sllait'is.237.240

372

early thermal crackiog, 243

EC2-2 Anex J method,261 264
ccccntricjty, 42. 304. 348
edge sliding rcinforcement, 206 207
elective lengtbs. 65 67, 65
effective thickess. /69

INDEX

elltive $'idths, 44'.46- 17, l4'1-148

eLastic deformalion, 14, 85 86, 296 -297

joints,

end momets, 74

.15J. 357

values, achorage, 249, 2J1

erd spports, 277 278

cnvironmental conditions, 32 35
equivalet tim melhod. 318 321. -i18
eramples see workcd examples
executioo stages, 307 309
c)(pansion joits, -iJZ

exposurc,32-35,37
external non-bondcd tendos, 29
external tendons, 29, 98
extcrnal vs. internl post-tensioning, 95-96

laps, 201, 252-257, 252, 254, 256

large diameter bars, 257 258
laLeral instability, 80-8 I
layer ccntres, -148
layef stresses, J47
lyots, tendos, 258 259
lcaf piers, 205 207, 207

lightly rcinlbrced stmctures, 301 305

lightweigbt aggrsgte concrete slnlctures,

295

302

failure, i4, 123, 126 l2'7. 243. 304

falige, 25, 28, 98-99, 208 215, 209,356-361
worked examples. 211 212,214 215

anlysis,298
cover, 298

linite elemcnt models, 344

design, 296, 298

clastic deformation, 296-297

flanged leinforced bcams, ll5-117, l1-5, /17

llanges, 44 4'7.47, 107,.1J6, 157-158
flat slabs, 104,282, 126
flexural rcinforemet, 2lll
flexural shear. 187, /89
flexural tensile strengths, 22-23
floor systems.29l
lootirgs, 285-286
see aLro pad footings
force calculation rnodcl, 286
lbundations. 10, 285 288, 285,287.293
frames, 52,3211
free body diagrams. 141
freeze,i thaw corrosior, 34-35

defofmation,29T

natcrials, 296 298

nonJinear analysis, 298
shear,/torsion, 299
shrinkage,297
strcss.297-29iJ
st.ut-and-tie models, 300

ultimate limit states, 298- 300

worked exarnplcs, 300 301

limited redistribtion, 49-5 I

limiting slcnderness checks, 68-69
limir stares, 7, 58-60, 62, 82 83, 98-103
see a/so

ultinatc limit

states

lincar elastic analysis. 48-51, .t1

friction, 86 87,39

links,

gencral mcthod, 332 333

loads
close to slab cdges/corners, 176

251

to spports,

geometric data. 8, 44-48

geometric impedcctions, 40-44, 41 41, 74
geometry, discorltiuity regions, 288

close

halljoints,

models, 3.tq

292

heat curi9, 290

heavy vehicles, 358
high-sLrength corrcrete,

145

dispersal, r0T

distdbution,
factors, 125

I'7

6- l'1'1, 1 76, 20 2

sprcad,23-t

longitdinal reiforcemet, 143-145, 275-278,

3I

3-3 I 4

283

hollow picrs, 204

anchorage, 247 -251, 247 248, 25 1. 272

longiludinal shear, 154-158, 349-350, 355

'l'

longitudinal tensio reinforcement, 277

beams, /-t4

idcaliztion, 170, 172

geometric impet fections
imposed cu aturc, jJ
indicative strength classcs, 322-323
indirect supports, 279-280
in-plarc bucklig, 41, 4-i
in-plafle strcss corditions, ]24
in situ concrete struoturs, 311
in situ deck slabs, 160 164
interaction diagrms, 112
itcrmediate supports, 2?8
intemal vs. exlernal post-tensioning, 95 96
isolated nrernbcrs, 41. 64-67,65
ISO stndafd 3898: 1997 symbols, 5

impcrfcction",

losses

anchorage,87
elastic deformation. 85-ll6
post-tensioni9, 85 90
prestress, 84-90, 89, 291. 3l'1-321, 3 IiJ
pretensioning, S4-85
steel

relaxation,3l?-121,

-t

/8

worked examples, 87-90

low-rclaxalion prestressing tendons, 318

321

mandfeLs.246-247
materials, S, l0 29, 290, 296-298, 303-304
partial lactof modilication, 3l I 312
maximum moments, 42-43

373

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992.2

maximum punching shear stress,

185

beanrs, 162 165, 173 l'15, 175

members, 140 153, 110 l4l. t45
detaiLing, 275-288, 302
not requiring design sheat reifotcement,
133 r40
in tensio, 198-199
merbl?ne elements, 215,223. 216, 222
membrane nrlcs, 216. 2I8 222, 222
mmlmum oover, 36 38

minimum reinforcemeft, l2'/ 128

minimm shear reinforcment, 137
nodificatior, partial facrors, 3 I l-312
Mohr's circlcs, 222. 3 5 2-3 5 3
moments. 42 43,70,74, 332, 312
monitoring facility provision, 128
Dod.es. 196-201- 197 198
nominal curvature nethods, 76 80
nominal stiffness, 7l-76
non-linear nalysis. 19, 19, 58-62, 61 , '/0-'/ I,

298, 163

sections, 170-171

out-of-plane buckling, 43

orcep,92-94
fatigue limir states, 98 99

limit states, 97
losses,

84

95,

99

<99, 291

post-tersioning, 95 96
prestress considerations, 95-97
prestressing lbrces, 82 84
primary,/secondary effects. 96 97
serviccability limit states, 98- 103

unbonded prestress.96
worked examples, 99-103, 100, lt)2- 103
prestressing deviccs, 29
prestressing forces, 82-90
prestrcssing steef, 209 210, 245-273, 290,

317-321, -r18,359-360
prestressing systems, 32,35, 38
prestress transfr, 260 261
beams, 131, 160 164
composite membcrs. 33'7 339, 342-343
corcrete M bears, 162 165, 173 175,.f7J
strands, ?J9

tendons.258-262.262
primary pfestress efects, 96-9'l , 96
primary regularizatior pdsm, 263-264,

overlappirg, 29?
pad footirlgs, 1ll0-182, 180. 287 288,287
paraboLic-rectangular diagrams, 2l

priniples, 5, 7, 40

parameters, creep/shrinkage. 314

Part 2 scope, 4

properties of materils, 8. 23, 26-27, 316

provision of moniloring facilities, 128

partinl factor method, 9 10

partial factor rnodifrcario, 3l l-312
partially loaded eas, 20l 20'7. 202, 2t)4, 207,
300,329-330
partial sheared truss modgls, 141
partioular rules,

2'7

5-288, 291, 302

particlar situations, 327 330

piers, 4.t, 6J, 68-69, 68, 207

worked examples, l6 17, 17

l?e .?/"ro caltilevering piers: colulnns
pile caps. 185-193, 186-193,285
pilcs .ree corner piles
pill-ended stmts, 4?
placment of reinforcement, 1J8
plain reinforced corlcrete strturcs. 303-305
plastic analysis, 52-58, JJ, JJ
plastic hinges, -iJ
pocket foundatiQns, 293
post-tensioning, 85 90
box girders, 129 131, 139-140, 148-153

cables,272 2'13
construction,336
ducts,258-259
members, 262 2'70, 265, 270,330
precast corcrete. ij-t, 160-165,289 293, j12
prestress dispersion, 267
prestressed beams, 118- l3l,

374

bondcd tendons,99 lO3, It)O, 102-103

pretensioning,84-85

normative references. 4
nolatlol, rectangulal beams, ?27
ope11

prestressed members, 137, 140,l4'7 153, 148

prestressed stecl. 25 29, 28
prestresssd structures, 8l - I03

1/t

261-265

proximity to expansion joints, -tJ7

punching, 175 193
ontrol perimeters, l'76 I'7'7, 176, 184
comer prles, /89, 191
load distribution, I'76-17'1, 176
pile caps, 185-193
shear, 177- 179, 185, 192-193.300
shear resistatrce, l'79 185. 184
worked examples, 180-182, 180, 186-193,

186 t93

railway bridgcs, 359

361

rectagular bcam notation, 227

reclangular stress hlocks. 117
redistdbution, .l-1?, -l-18--1i9, 339-341
regions with discontinuity, 288, 362

reinfbrced concrete. 105-117, 108, 12l-126,

t22-123, 133-14'7. 303 305

rce d/so lightly reinforced. . .
reinforcement, 222 223, 2 2 2, 245 -273,
247,248, 251. 270, 272, 2'77,300 2
corrosion polentials, 32 35
cover, 31 38, 298
crack control, 232-234
durabjlity, 31-38
eccentric, -J48
edge sliding, 206-207

INDEX

normative propcrtics, 316

pad footings, 28'1 288, 287

alterrtiv methods, 349-150

bcam enhancement conparisons. 1jl,
bending, 160, 346 355.347 348,350
between web,/flanges, 154 158
oomposite construction, 160-165
concrete cast at diferent timcs, 158-160
contrffexurc points, 147

piers. 68, 2al7

cracking, 364 367. J6d

fatigue verification, 209

foudations. 28'7 -288, 237
in-plane stress corditions, 324
loop or.erlapping, 292

minimum, 3'1, I2'7 128, 13'l

properties,316
punching, 184
shear, 133 153,251

surfaces,327-328
suspension,2S0
tersion, 277, 324

torsion, 16'7 169, 167

trarsverse. 254-255, 254
webs, -166
worked examples, 255 257,2J6,300 301
reinfolcing stecl, 23-25, 24-25. 209-210. 209,

359 360
relxation. 2'7. 92, 94, 31'7 321, 3 l3
rcsltan! corvelsiors, stress, -il7
return pcriods, 309
ribhed wires, 25?
road bridges,211 212,214 215, 356-358
rotarion capcity. 53-56,54 55
rules .re cletailing rules

deck slabs,

ll4

flexurc failures, 137

ff ou' calculalion detnitions. -1iJ
lightwejght structures, 299
members not requiring reinforcement,
133

140

members rcquiting reinforcercnt, 140- 153

post-tensioned box girders with tendoIl drape,

151

153

precast concrete, 160-165

.einforced concrete, 133 140, 304-305

,:einforcenet, 145, 190, 192 193,251278 2'79,282
tonsion. 137 139

torsion, 169- 170

total transverse reinforcenent, 157
T-sections, 154-158
veriflcation proccdure mles, 132 133
wall analysis, 104
ra'orkcd examples

safety forat,

61 62,363

St Ve'rant tolsion, I66

sandwich model, 346 349. 347^343,353 355
scalar combinaLions" 60-61, 6.1
scope, Eurocodc 2, 3-4
sea rvater corrosion, 34
secondary moments. -r4?
secondary prestress elTects,96 97, 96
second-order analysis. 62 80

biaxial bending, 80

bending,35l-355
box girders, 139-140. 148-153
deck slabs, 134, 146-147

flcxure, 139 140

terdon drape, 151-153
without tcdo[ drape, ]49 l5l
see 4/sd longitudinal shear; punching
shear resistance, 179 185, i84
shar strcss, J61, lll5
shell elencnts. 344 145

braced columlrs, 7/
creep. 69 70

shift method, 143-145

delinitions, 62 6l

sh nkage,313

mcthods, 70-71, 76-80

nominal stiffncss, 7l -?6
simplifled criteria. 64 69
soil-slrcture interaction, 64

stifness,63-64,71-76
unbraced columns, 73

sections,2l-22, 78. 154 158, 169,170, 170,298

prestressed sections
"re dd
scgmenlal conrtruetron. 15.1. /i.J. l7
serviccability limit states, 225 241

actions conbiations, 226

crack contlol, 230 243
deck slabs, 218'-230. 302
execution stages, 309
prcstrcssed structures, 98 103
reinforced corcrctc deck slabs. 228-230
stress

limitation, 226 230

worked examples, 128-230

shear,

lll-165

short spans, 14J

conorete, 14,

315

l8

19

diferential, 102. 341 342, 342

lightweight structures, 297
time-dependent losscs, 92, 94
sig convention,2,16
simplified critcria, 64 69
simplifled methods, 333 336
simplited rect!.ngular diagrams, 21
singly reinlbrced concrctc, 107-112,
sinusoidal imperfections, 4J
skew reinforcc'ment, 222-223, 222

.108

slabs
edges/corners, 176
K values, 2J1

plastic analysis, 52
punching, 176, l'79 185, 184
shear resistancc, 179-185, 1E4
shear stress distributio, 16-l

torsiot, 172

175,

-lf

375

DESIGNERS' GUID

TO EN I992-2

slalrs

(contiued)

s.?,?/r., beams; flat slabs; solid slabs

slenderness,64 6'7,65,68-69,80 81,305

.
sliding wedge mechanism,329
SLS.ree serviceability limit srates
soil strucLure intcractions, 64, 325
solid sections, 169 170,281-282
spacc frame analysis, 172
spacing,246, ^?59
spalling,20l-203,202,262,265
spans. bcams,47,48
square sections, 170, /70
staged constrction, 93
static values .ree characteristic values
steel, 25-9, 28, -??8, 359 360
rec a/sa prestressing steel
stilfucss, 63-64, 71 76
stlaln
compatibilily, 106-107, ll8, 122-123
cracks, 237, 240-241, 240
rccp. 313-315, -ijj
distdbutions, JJ7
external tendons. 98
strength
classes,296,322 323
concrete, ll 14
ctrrve.2jg
presfresscd steel. 2?
reirforcing steel, 23-24
see also in.liridual itrc gths
stress
anchorage zolres,262
block idcalization comparisons, 22
concertrated loads, ?02
co[crete chamcteristios, 13
danage equivalcnt, 356-361
diffrential shrinkage, 102
,rec a/so

lightweight.

103

principles,4o
reinforced structures, 303 304
second-order efects analysis, 62-g0

structure idelizalion, 44-48

time-dependent behaviour. 331 343, -tJ?
worked cranples, 6'l-69.'t| 16.'19 BO
structral classification, 37
structure idelizalion. 44-48
strut-and-tie models, 56 58,j/. 195 196, t96
anchorage zones. ?66
corbels, -t?t
ducts, /y'8
hollow piers, 20?

lighrweighl structures, 300

nodes, 196 201, t97-198
struts, 193 195

ltimate limit states, 193_201

worked examplcs. 199 201,200-201
struts
tensile stress, 194-195
transverse stress, 193_195
jee a/sr: pin-endcd strlrts; strut-alld-tie models

summary proccdure, 342 343

supports, 135-136, 145, l\7.29l 292
surface reinforcement. 2'19. 32'7 -32g
suspension reinforcement. 280
symbols, 5
rcmperature drlTerentials, 230

terdons, 149

297-298
limitdtion, 226-230
Mohr's circles. 2?-?
non-linear structl[al ana]ysis,298
prestressed stecl, 28
redistribulion. creep, JJ8 -J-19
reinlbrced concrete deck slabs, 228 230
reinforcement fatigue verification,209
rcsultant conversions. J47
section design,298
serviceability limit sta,tes,226-230
strain relatjons, 298
lemperatre differentials, 230
transfer in beams,99 100, /00
transverse. 262
stJess strain diagrams, 24 25,28
stresFstrain proliles, 119
strcss strajn relationships, 19, 19 20,21-22
structural aalysis,39 104

44

lareral instability, 80 8l
lightweight srrctures, 298
linear elastic analysis, 48-51
local, 39-40
nonJinear analysis, 58 62, 298
plastio analysis, 52 58
post-tensioning, 95 96
precasr structures, 290-291
prestressedmembers,/structures,Sl

flanged beams.

11l

lj

global,39,45-46

distarccs, uniformity, 267

fatigue verif,cation. 356 361
lightweight structures,

376

geometric imperfecti orrs, 40_44,

l5l, Jjl

external non-bondcd, 29
low-relaxarion prestressing, ll8-321
post-tensioned. 86
prestressing, 258-273,291
strain, gg

vertical proliics, 87
tensile Iorces, 82 93,261 262
tensilc reinfol cemen t, 286, 324
tcnsile strength. 12 14,20 2l
resring. 10

thi lralled seotions,

,170

Lhree-span bridges, 87,

336

337

tics, 195 196, lq6

time-dependent behaviour, 90-95, 91.
332

time-depe[dent losses, 9,1, 92 95

torsion
cornbined shear,/torsion, 169-170
definitions, 162

33

1,343,

INDEX

design procedurc.

16'7

-l'7l,

unbraced columns, 73
unbraced members, 6J

170

lightweight structres, 299

M beam bridges, I'73 175. 175

un-cracked in flexure, 137 140

uniaxial bending, 123
uniaxial compression, 21ll 220

oper scotions, 170

purching, 175 193
reinforced stluctres. 16'l ),69, 167,279,

304

lorsion, 166

St VenanL

segmental constrlrction, l7l

slabs, 172-175, 17J
ultimate limit state, I66 175

unreinforced concretc, 204

unrestrained concrete, -tJJ

warping torsion. 171-172

worked examples, 172 175
pad footings, 180-182, ./80
pile caps, 186 193, 186 193
slabs, 173-175, J7J
total transversc rcinforcemgnt, 1JZ

values

drying shrinkage, l8
matcrial factors, l0

transfer', prestress, 260 261

transverse bending. 15'7 -158, 157,160. 346 355,

347-343
transvcrsc fores, 42-4J
transverse reinforcemer.t. 158. 254-255, 254,

233

unia-xial shear, 218 220

uniaxial rension, 220 222

uniformity, stresses, 26]
uniform loads, 5l

305

vertical loads, J-tg

variables, basic, 7-8
r.ector combinations, 6l -62
vehicle expected numbcrs, 358
verioation
execution stage criteri, 309
iatigue, 208 215, 356-361

methods,36-38
partial factor method. 9-10

284

lrarsverse stress, 193 195. 262

truss models, 140-111. 141, 154
T-sections, 154 158
two-span heams, 51

proccdure rules, 132-133

verticl profrles,87
voided reinforced concrete slabs, I 1l 112,

146-r47
ULS .!e., ultimate limit states
ultimatc bond strength, 248
uitin1ate lirit statcs (ULS), 105-223
anchorage. 201. 261 262
beams, 105 11'7. 108. l12-11'7, l1:
bending, 105- 131. /27 123
brittle failure, 126- 131
columns,
126, 122- 123
11
dck slabs, I

l2l
l0

doubly reinforced rectangular beams,

lt2-1t4.

tt3

execution stagcs, 309

fatige,208

215

llanged beams, 115- I l?

laps, 201

lightweight structures. 298-300

membrane clcmcnts. 2I5-223
methods, 58 60
partially loaded areas,201 20'7. 202, 201
prestrcssed concrete beams, 118
prestrcsscd structures, 97-98
shear'.

l3l

l2l

walls, 284. 291, J04

warping totsion, 166. l'71 172
webs

bending,/shear combinations, .tJ0

box girders, 280 281,280

control of shear cracks, 364 367, J66

diaphragm region, 280 281, ,30

longitudinal shear rules, 355

reinlbrcement, 365 367 , 366
$'idths, 147-148
welding, 25, 251, 25?
worked examPles
archorage zones, 26-1-270, 270
bonded tendons,99 103, 100, 102-103
box girdcrs, 87-90, 94-95, 139-140.

280-281,280,365

366

bridge piers. 16 17, 17

brittle failure, 129

131

cantilcvcred piers, 67, 75 76,79-80

composite bcams/'slabs, 162 164. 339-341.
341

165

singly reinforced concrete beans/slabs,

crack control, 236 237,241-242

t07-112, 108
stin compatibility, 106-

crccp,339-341,
107

strut-and-tie modcls, 193-201

torsion, 166

175

voided reinforced conc|ete slabs, 11 I 112

worked examples, 110-lll, 113 117,
129-l I I
ubondcd prestress. 96
unhonded tendons, l2l

-l4

danage eqivalent stress rage, 2l l-212

deck slabs, 38,255-257, 256
diaphragrn design, 199-201. 200 201
doubly reinfotced collcrele slabs, I l3-l 14
ellective flange widths.46-4'7, 47

cquivalent time rnethod. 318-321

fatigue, 2l l-212, 214-215
flanged beams, I1,5-117

377

DESIGNERS' GUIDE

TO EN I992-2

worked cxamples (co

tinued\

fourdations, 287-288,287
lp lengths, 255-25'/, 256

ieaf piers. 205 20?, 207

lightwcight structures, 300-301
lincar elastic analysis, 51, 5/
losses,

87

90

low-relaxalion prcstressins tendons, 318-321

membranc elemenrs. 211\-222- 222
partially loaded areas,205-207, 207
post-tensioned membcrs, 139 140, 267 270,

/:/tr

ll8 l2l, 129-13l

27

prestressed bcruns,
prestresscd steel,

103
165
pnching, 180-182, 130, 186 193. 186-193
reinlbrced concrete
columns, 124 125
prcstressedstructures,99,103,

preteosioned cocretc

100,102

beams, 162

slabs, 1l0 l12, 228-230,241 242

relaxation losses, 2?. 318 321

378

sandwich model,353 355

serviccability limit stares. 228 ?30
shear

cracking. 365-366
post-tensioncd box girders, 149 153
reinforced col1crete, 13,1 ]35
transver.se hending combinations,

351 355
structral analysis, 6'1 69,75 j6,'19

BO

strcture idealization, 46 47
strut-aDd-tie models. 199 2Ol, 200 201
three-span bridges,336 i37

time-dependert losses, 94-95

torsion, 172-175
lransvcrscbending,35l-355

ultimate limir srtes, ll0 l12, l15 ll7

voided reinforced concrete slabs, lll-112.

146 I4'/
web reinlbrccment. J66
zones for shear feinforcemetrt, J90

DESIGNERS'
EUROCODES

ffi

ice

initiative

ISBN 974-0-7277-5159-3

, ilil[[l$ililUl[iluil,