Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 381

DESIGNERS’ GUIDES TO THE EUROCODES

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2 EUROCODE 2: DESIGN OF CONCRETE STRUCTURES

PART 2: CONCRETE BRIDGES

Eurocode Designers’ Guide Series

Designers’ Guide to EN 1990. Eurocode: Basis of Structural Design. H. Gulvanessian, J.-A. Calgaro and

M. Holicky´. 0 7277 3011 8. Published 2002.

Designers’ Guide to EN 1994-1-1. Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures. Part 1.1:

General Rules and Rules for Buildings. R. P. Johnson and D. Anderson. 0 7277 3151 3. Published 2004.

Designers’ Guide to EN 1997-1. Eurocode 7: Geotechnical Design General Rules. R. Frank, C. Bauduin,

R. Driscoll, M. Kavvadas, N. Krebs Ovesen, T. Orr and B. Schuppener. 0 7277 3154 8. Published 2004.

Designers’ Guide to EN 1993-1-1. Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures. General Rules and Rules for Buildings.

L. Gardner and D. Nethercot. 0 7277 3163 7. Published 2004.

Designers’ Guide to EN 1992-1-1 and EN 1992-1-2. Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures. General Rules and Rules for Buildings and Structural Fire Design. A.W. Beeby and R. S. Narayanan. 0 7277 3105 X. Published

2005.

Designers’ Guide to EN 1998-1 and EN 1998-5. Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance. General Rules, Seismic Actions, Design Rules for Buildings, Foundations and Retaining Structures. M. Fardis,

E. Carvalho, A. Elnashai, E. Faccioli, P. Pinto and A. Plumier. 0 7277 3348 6. Published 2005.

Designers’ Guide to EN 1995-1-1. Eurocode 5: Design of Timber Structures. Common Rules and for Rules and Buildings. C. Mettem. 0 7277 3162 9. Forthcoming: 2007 (provisional).

Designers’ Guide to EN 1991-4. Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures. Wind Actions. N. Cook. 0 7277 3152 1. Forthcoming: 2007 (provisional).

Designers’ Guide to EN 1996. Eurocode 6: Part 1.1: Design of Masonry Structures. J. Morton. 0 7277 3155 6. Forthcoming: 2007 (provisional).

Designers’ Guide to EN 1991-1-2, 1992-1-2, 1993-1-2 and EN 1994-1-2. Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures. Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures. Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures. Fire Engineering (Actions on Steel and Composite Structures). Y. Wang, C. Bailey, T. Lennon and D. Moore.

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

Designers’ Guide to EN 1993-2. Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures. Bridges. C. R. Hendy and C. J. Murphy.

0 7277 3160 2. Forthcoming: 2007 (provisional).

Designers’ Guide to EN 1991-2, 1991-1-1, 1991-1-3 and 1991-1-5 to 1-7. Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures. Traffic Loads and Other Actions on Bridges. J.-A. Calgaro, M. Tschumi, H. Gulvanessian and N. Shetty.

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

Designers’ Guide to EN 1991-1-1, EN 1991-1-3 and 1991-1-5 to 1-7. Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures. General Rules and Actions on Buildings (not Wind). H. Gulvanessian, J.-A. Calgaro, P. Formichi and G. Harding.

0 7277 3158 0. Forthcoming: 2007 (provisional).

Designers’ Guide to EN 1994-2. Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures. Part 2: General Rules and Rules for Bridges. C. R. Hendy and R. P. Johnson. 0 7277 3161 0. Published 2006.

www.eurocodes.co.uk

DESIGNERS’ GUIDES TO THE EUROCODES

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2 EUROCODE 2: DESIGN OF CONCRETE STRUCTURES

PART 2: CONCRETE BRIDGES

C. R. HENDY and D. A. SMITH

GUIDE TO EN 1992-2 EUROCODE 2: DESIGN OF CONCRETE STRUCTURES PART 2: CONCRETE BRIDGES C. R.
GUIDE TO EN 1992-2 EUROCODE 2: DESIGN OF CONCRETE STRUCTURES PART 2: CONCRETE BRIDGES C. R.

Published by Thomas Telford Publishing, Thomas Telford Ltd, 1 Heron Quay, London E14 4JD URL: http://www.thomastelford.com

Distributors for Thomas Telford books are USA: ASCE Press, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, VA 20191-4400 Japan: Maruzen Co. Ltd, Book Department, 3–10 Nihonbashi 2-chome, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 103 Australia: DA Books and Journals, 648 Whitehorse Road, Mitcham 3132, Victoria

First published 2007

Eurocodes Expert

Structural Eurocodes offer the opportunity of harmonized design standards for the European construction market and the rest of the world. To achieve this, the construction industry needs to become acquainted with the Eurocodes so that the maximum advantage can be taken of these opportunities

Eurocodes Expert is a new ICE and Thomas Telford initiative set up to assist in creating a greater awareness of the impact and implementation of the Eurocodes within the UK construction industry

Eurocodes Expert provides a range of products and services to aid and support the transition to Eurocodes. For comprehensive and useful information on the adoption of the Eurocodes and their implementation process please visit our website or email eurocodes@thomastelford.com

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN: 978-0-7277-3159-3

# The authors and Thomas Telford Limited 2007

All rights, including translation, reserved. Except as permitted by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the Publishing Director, Thomas Telford Publishing, Thomas Telford Ltd, 1 Heron Quay, London E14 4JD.

This book is published on the understanding that the authors are solely responsible for the statements made and opinions expressed in it and that its publication does not necessarily imply that such statements and/or opinions are or reflect the views or opinions of the publishers. While every effort has been made to ensure that the statements made and the opinions expressed in this publication provide a safe and accurate guide, no liability or responsibility can be accepted in this respect by the authors or publishers.

Typeset by Academic þ Technical, Bristol Printed and bound in Great Britain by MPG Books, Bodmin

Preface

Aims and objectives of this guide

The principal aim of this book is to provide the user with guidance on the interpretation and use of EN 1992-2 and to present worked examples. It covers topics that will be encountered in typical concrete bridge designs and explains the relationship between EN 1992-2 and the other Eurocodes. EN 1992-2 is not a ‘stand alone’ document and refers extensively to other Eurocodes. Its format is based on EN 1992-1-1 and generally follows the same clause numbering. It identifies which parts of EN 1992-1-1 are relevant for bridge design and adds further clauses that are specific to bridges. It is therefore not useful to produce guidance on EN 1992-2 in isolation and so this guide covers material in EN 1992-1-1 which will need to be used in bridge design. This book also provides background information and references to enable users of Eurocode 2 to understand the origin and objectives of its provisions.

Layout of this guide

EN 1992-2 has a foreword, 13 sections and 17 annexes. This guide has an introduction which corresponds to the foreword of EN 1992-2, Chapters 1 to 10, which correspond to Sections 1 to 10 of the Eurocode and Annexes A to Q which again correspond to Annexes A to Q of the Eurocode. The guide generally follows the section numbers and first sub-headings in EN 1992-2 so that guidance can be sought on the code on a section by section basis. The guide also follows the format of EN 1992-2 to lower levels of sub-heading in cases where this can conveniently be done and where there is sufficient material to merit this. The need to use several Eurocode parts can initially make it a daunting task to locate information in the order required for a real design. In some places, therefore, additional sub-sections are included in this guide to pull together relevant design rules for individual elements, such as pile caps. Additional sub-sections are identified as such in the sub-section heading. The following parts of the Eurocode are 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:

Design of structures for earthquake resistance

hENs:

Construction products relevant for concrete structures

EN 13670:

Execution (construction) of concrete structures

These documents will generally be required for a typical concrete bridge design, but discus- sion on them is generally beyond the scope of this guide.

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

In this guide, references to Eurocode 2 are made by using the abbreviation ‘EC2’ for EN 1992, so EN 1992-1-1 is referred to as EC2-1-1. Where clause numbers are referred to in the text, they are prefixed by the number of the relevant part of EC2. Hence:

.

.

.

.

2-2/clause 6.3.2(6) means clause 6.3.2, paragraph (6), of EC2-2

2-1-1/clause 6.2.5(1) means clause 6.2.5, paragraph (1), of EC2-1-1

2-2/Expression (7.22) means equation (7.22) in EC2-2

2-1-1/Expression (7.8) means equation (7.8) in EC2-1-1.

Note that, unlike in other guides in this series, even clauses in EN 1992-2 itself are prefixed with ‘2-2’. There are so many references to other parts of Eurocode 2 required that to do otherwise would be confusing. Where additional equations are provided in the guide, they are numbered sequentially within each sub-section of a main section so that, for example, the third additional expres- sion within sub-section 6.1 would be referenced equation (D6.1-3). Additional figures and tables follow the same system. For example, the second additional figure in section 6.4 would be referenced Figure 6.4-2.

Acknowledgements

Chris Hendy would like to thank his wife, Wendy, and two boys, Peter Edwin Hendy and Matthew Philip Hendy, 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 prepara- tion of this guide. He also acknowledges his son, William Thomas Smith, and the continued support of Brian and Rosalind Ruffell-Ward from the very beginning. Both authors would also like to thank their employer, Atkins, for providing both facilities and time for the production of this guide. They also wish to thank Dr Paul Jackson and Dr Steve Denton for their helpful comments on the guide.

Chris Hendy David A. Smith

Contents

Preface

v

 

Aims and objectives of this guide

v

Layout of this guide

v

Acknowledgements

vi

Introduction

1

 

Additional information specific to EN 1992-2

2

Chapter 1.

General

3

1.1.

Scope

3

 

1.1.1. Scope of Eurocode 2

3

1.1.2. Scope of Part 2 of Eurocode 2

4

 

1.2. Normative references

4

1.3. Assumptions

4

1.4. Distinction between principles and application rules

5

1.5. Definitions

5

1.6. Symbols

5

Chapter 2.

Basis of design

7

2.1. Requirements

7

2.2. Principles of limit state design

7

2.3. Basic variables

7

2.4. Verification by the partial factor method

9

 

2.4.1. General

9

2.4.2. Design values

9

2.4.3. Combinations of actions

9

 

2.5. Design assisted by testing

10

2.6. Supplementary requirements for foundations

10

Chapter 3.

Materials

11

3.1.

Concrete

11

 

3.1.1. General

11

3.1.2. Strength

11

3.1.3. Elastic deformation

14

3.1.4. Creep and shrinkage

14

3.1.5. Concrete stress–strain relation for non-linear structural

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

 

3.1.6. Design compressive and tensile strengths

20

3.1.7. Stress–strain relations for the design of sections

21

3.1.8. Flexural tensile strength

22

3.1.9. Confined concrete

23

 

3.2. Reinforcing steel

23

 

3.2.1. General

23

3.2.2. Properties

23

3.2.3. Strength

23

3.2.4. Ductility

24

3.2.5. Welding

25

3.2.6. Fatigue

25

3.2.7. Design assumptions

25

 

3.3. Prestressing steel

25

 

3.3.1. General

25

3.3.2. Properties

26

3.3.3. Strength

27

3.3.4. Ductility characteristics

27

3.3.5. Fatigue

28

3.3.6. Design assumptions

28

 

3.4. Prestressing devices

29

 

3.4.1. Anchorages and couplers

29

3.4.2. External non-bonded tendons

29

Chapter 4.

Durability and cover to reinforcement

31

4.1. General

 

31

4.2. Environmental conditions

32

4.3. Requirements for durability

35

4.4. Methods of verification

36

 

4.4.1.

Concrete cover

36

Chapter 5.

Structural analysis

39

5.1.

General

39

5.2.

Geometric imperfections

40

 

5.2.1. General (additional sub-section)

40

5.2.2. Arches (additional sub-section)

43

 

5.3

Idealization of the structure

44

 

5.3.1

Structural models for overall analysis

44

5.3.2.

Geometric data

44

 

5.4.

Linear elastic analysis

48

5.5.

Linear elastic analysis with limited redistribution

49

5.6.

Plastic analysis

52

 

5.6.1. General

52

5.6.2. Plastic analysis for beams, frames and slabs

52

5.6.3. Rotation capacity

53

5.6.4. Strut-and-tie models

56

 

5.7.

Non-linear analysis

58

 

5.7.1. Method for ultimate limit states

58

5.7.2. Scalar combinations

60

5.7.3. Vector combinations

61

5.7.4. Method for serviceability limit states

62

 

5.8.

Analysis of second-order effects with axial load

62

 

5.8.1. Definitions and introduction to second-order effects

62

5.8.2. General

63

5.8.3. Simplified criteria for second-order effects

64

CONTENTS

 

5.8.4. Creep

69

5.8.5. Methods of analysis

70

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

70

5.8.7. Second-order analysis based on nominal stiffness

71

5.8.8. Method based on nominal curvature

76

5.8.9. Biaxial bending

80

5.9. Lateral instability of slender beams

80

5.10. Prestressed members and structures

81

5.10.1. General

81

5.10.2. Prestressing force during tensioning

82

5.10.3. Prestress force

83

5.10.4. Immediate losses of prestress for pre-tensioning

84

5.10.5. Immediate losses of prestress for post-tensioning

85

5.10.6. Time-dependent losses

90

5.10.7. Consideration of prestress in the analysis

95

5.10.8. Effects of prestressing at the ultimate limit state

96

5.10.9. Effects of prestressing at the serviceability and fatigue limit states

98

5.11. Analysis for some particular structural members

104

Chapter 6.

Ultimate limit states

105

6.1. ULS bending with or without axial force

105

6.1.1.

General (additional sub-section)

105

6.1.2.

Reinforced concrete beams (additional sub-section)

105

6.1.3.

Prestressed concrete beams (additional sub-section)

118

6.1.4.

Reinforced concrete columns (additional sub-section)

121

6.1.5.

Brittle failure of members with prestress (additional sub-section)

126

6.2. Shear

131

6.2.1.

General verification procedure rules

132

6.2.2.

Members not requiring design shear reinforcement

133

6.2.3.

Members requiring design shear reinforcement

140

6.2.4.

Shear between web and flanges of T-sections

154

6.2.5.

Shear at the interface between concrete cast at different times

158

6.2.6.

Shear and transverse bending

160

6.2.7.

Shear in precast concrete and composite construction (additional sub-section)

160

6.3. Torsion

166

6.3.1. General

166

6.3.2. Design procedure

167

6.3.3. Warping torsion

171

6.3.4. Torsion in slabs (additional sub-section)

172

6.4. Punching

175

6.4.1. General

175

6.4.2. Load distribution and basic control perimeter

176

6.4.3. Punching shear calculation

177

6.4.4. Punching shear resistance of slabs and bases without

 

shear reinforcement

179

 

6.4.5. Punching shear resistance of slabs and bases with shear reinforcement

183

6.4.6. Pile caps (additional sub-section)

185

6.5. Design with strut-and-ties models

193

6.5.1.

General

193

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

 

6.5.2. Struts

193

6.5.3. Ties

195

6.5.4. Nodes

196

6.6. Anchorage and laps

201

6.7. Partially loaded areas

201

6.8. Fatigue

208

6.8.1.

Verification conditions

208

6.8.2.

Internal forces and stresses for fatigue verification

208

6.8.3.

Combination of actions

209

6.8.4.

Verification procedure for reinforcing and prestressing steel

209

6.8.5.

Verification using damage equivalent stress range

210

6.8.6.

Other verification methods

212

6.8.7.

Verification of concrete under compression or shear

213

6.9. Membrane elements

215

Chapter 7.

Serviceability limit states

225

7.1. General

225

7.2. Stress limitation

226

7.3. Crack control

230

7.3.1. General considerations

230

7.3.2. Minimum areas of reinforcement

232

7.3.3. Control of cracking without direct calculation

234

7.3.4. Control of crack widths by direct calculation

237

7.4. Deflection control

243

7.5. Early thermal cracking (additional sub-section)

243

Chapter 8.

Detailing of reinforcement and prestressing steel

245

8.1. General

245

8.2. Spacing of bars

246

8.3. Permissible mandrel diameters for bent bars

246

8.4. Anchorage of longitudinal reinforcement

247

8.4.1. General

247

8.4.2. Ultimate bond stress

248

8.4.3. Basic anchorage length

248

8.4.4. Design anchorage length

249

8.5. Anchorage of links and shear reinforcement

251

8.6. Anchorage by welded bars

251

8.7. Laps and mechanical couplers

252

8.7.1.

General

252

8.7.2.

Laps

252

8.7.3. Lap length

253

8.7.4. Transverse reinforcement in the lap zone

254

8.7.5. Laps of welded mesh fabrics made of ribbed wires

257

8.7.6. Welding (additional sub-section)

257

8.8. Additional rules for large diameter bars

257

8.9. Bundled bars

258

8.10. Prestressing tendons

258

8.10.1. Tendon layouts

258

8.10.2. Anchorage of pre-tensioned tendons

259

8.10.3. Anchorage zones of post-tensioned members

262

8.10.4. Anchorages and couplers for prestressing tendons

271

8.10.5. Deviators

272

CONTENTS

Chapter 9.

Detailing of members and particular rules

275

9.1. General

275

9.2. Beams

275

9.2.1.

Longitudinal reinforcement

275

9.2.2.

Shear reinforcement

278

9.2.3.

Torsion reinforcement

279

9.2.4.

Surface reinforcement

279

9.2.5.

Indirect supports

279

9.3. Solid slabs

281

9.3.1. Flexural reinforcement

281

9.3.2. Shear reinforcement

282

9.4. Flat slabs

282

9.5. Columns

282

9.5.1.

General

282

9.5.2.

Longitudinal reinforcement

283

9.5.3.

Transverse reinforcement

283

9.6. Walls

284

9.7. Deep beams

284

9.8. Foundations

285

9.9. Regions with discontinuity in geometry or action

288

Chapter 10.

Additional rules for precast concrete elements and structures

289

10.1. General

289

10.2. Basis of design, fundamental requirements

289

10.3. Materials

290

10.3.1. Concrete

290

10.3.2. Prestressing steel

290

10.4. Not used in EN 1992-2

290

10.5. Structural analysis

290

10.5.1. General

290

10.5.2. Losses of prestress

291

10.6. Not used in EN 1992-2

291

10.7. Not used in EN 1992-2

291

10.8. Not used in EN 1992-2

291

10.9. Particular rules for design and detailing

291

10.9.1. Restraining moments in slabs

291

10.9.2. Wall to floor connections

291

10.9.3. Floor systems

291

10.9.4. Connections and supports for precast elements

291

10.9.5. Bearings

292

10.9.6. Pocket foundations

293

Chapter 11.

Lightweight aggregate concrete structures

295

11.1. General

295

11.2. Basis of design

296

11.3. Materials

296

11.3.1.

Concrete

296

11.3.2.

Elastic deformation

296

11.3.3.

Creep and shrinkage

297

11.3.4.

Stress strain relations for non-linear structural analysis

298

11.3.5

Design compressive and tensile strengths

298

11.3.6.

Stress strain relations for the design of sections

298

11.3.7.

Confined concrete

298

11.4. Durability and cover to reinforcement

298

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

 

11.5. Structural analysis

298

11.6. Ultimate limit states

298

11.7. Serviceability limit states

302

11.8. Detailing of reinforcement – general

302

11.9. Detailing of members and particular rules

302

Chapter 12.

Plain and lightly reinforced concrete structures

303

Chapter 13.

Design for the execution stages

307

13.1. General

307

13.2. Actions during execution

308

13.3. Verification criteria

309

13.3.1. Ultimate limit state

309

13.3.2. Serviceability limit states

309

Annex A.

Modification of partial factors for materials (informative)

311

Annex B.

Creep and shrinkage strain (informative)

313

Annex C.

Reinforcement properties (normative)

316

Annex D.

Detailed calculation method for prestressing steel relaxation losses (informative)

317

Annex E.

Indicative strength classes for durability (informative)

322

Annex F.

Tension reinforcement expressions for in-plane stress conditions (informative)

324

Annex G.

Soil-structure interaction

325

Annex H.

Not used in EN 1992-2

Annex I.

Analysis of flat slabs (informative)

326

Annex J.

Detailing rules for particular situations (informative)

327

Annex K.

Structural effects of time-dependent behaviour (informative)

331

Annex L.

Concrete shell elements (informative)

344

Annex M.

Shear and transverse bending (informative)

346

Annex N.

Damage equivalent stresses for fatigue verification (informative)

356

Annex O.

Typical bridge discontinuity regions (informative)

362

Annex P.

Safety format for non-linear analysis (informative)

363

Annex Q.

Control of shear cracks within webs (informative)

364

References

369

Index

371

Introduction

The provisions of EN 1992-2 are preceded by a foreword, most of which is common to all Eurocodes. This Foreword contains clauses on:

.

.

.

.

.

.

the background to the Eurocode programme

the status and field of application of the Eurocodes

national standards implementing Eurocodes

links between Eurocodes and harmonized technical specifications for products

additional information specific to EN 1992-2

National Annex for EN 1992-2.

Guidance on the common text is provided in the introduction to the Designers’ Guide to EN 1990 – Eurocode: Basis of Structural Design, 1 and only background information relevant to users of EN 1992-2 is given here. It is the responsibility of each national standards body to implement each Eurocode part as a national standard. This will comprise, without any alterations, the full text of the Eurocode and its annexes as published by the European Committee for Standardization (CEN, from its title in French). This will usually be preceded by a National Title Page and a National Foreword, and may be followed by a National Annex. Each Eurocode recognizes the right of national regulatory authorities to determine values related to safety matters. Values, classes or methods to be chosen or determined at national level are referred to as nationally determined parameters (NDPs). Clauses of EN 1992-2 in which these occur are listed in the Foreword. NDPs are also indicated by notes immediately after relevant clauses. These Notes give recommended values. It is expected that most of the Member States of CEN will specify the recommended values, as their use was assumed in the many calibration studies made during drafting. Recommended values are used in this guide, as the National Annex for the UK was not available at 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 National Annex may contain only the following: 2

.

.

decisions on the use of informative annexes, and

references to non-contradictory complementary information to assist the user to apply the Eurocode.

The set of Eurocodes will supersede the British bridge code, BS 5400, which is required (as a condition of BSI’s membership of CEN) to be withdrawn by early 2010, as it is a ‘conflict- ing national standard’.

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

Additional information specific to EN 1992-2

The information specific to EN 1992-2 emphasizes that this standard is to be used with other Eurocodes. The standard includes many cross-references to EN 1992-1-1 and does not itself reproduce material which appears in other parts of EN 1992. Where a clause or paragraph in EN 1992-2 modifies one in EN 1992-1-1, the clause or paragraph number used is renumbered by adding 100 to it. For example, if paragraph (3) of a clause in EN 1992-1-1 is modified in EN 1992-2, it becomes paragraph (103). This guide is intended to be self-contained for the design of concrete bridges and therefore provides commentary on other parts of EN 1992 as necessary. The Foreword lists the clauses of EN 1992-2 in which National choice is permitted. Elsewhere, there are cross-references to clauses with NDPs in other codes. Otherwise, the Normative rules in the code must be followed, if the design is to be ‘in accordance with the Eurocodes’. In EN 1992-2, Sections 1 to 13 (actually 113 because clause 13 does not exist in EN 1992-1-1) are Normative. Of its 17 annexes, only its Annex C is ‘Normative’, as alternative approaches may be used in other cases. (Arguably Annex C, which defines the properties of reinforce- ment suitable for use with Eurocodes, should not be in Eurocode 2 as it relates to material which is contained in product standards.) A National Annex may make Informative provisions Normative in the country concerned, and is itself Normative in that country but not elsewhere. The ‘non-contradictory complimentary information’ referred to above could include, for example, reference to a document based on provisions of BS 5400 on matters not treated in the Eurocodes. Each country can do this, so some aspects of the design of a bridge will continue to depend on where it is to be built.

CHAPTER 1

General

This chapter is concerned with the general aspects of EN 1992-2, Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures. Part 2: Concrete Bridges. The material described in this chapter is covered in section 1 of EN 1992-2 in the following clauses:

.

.

.

.

.

.

Scope

Clause 1.1

Normative references

Clause 1.2

Assumptions

Clause 1.3

Distinction between principles and application rules

Clause 1.4

Definitions

Clause 1.5

Symbols

Clause 1.6

1.1. Scope

1.1.1. Scope of Eurocode 2

The scope of EN 1992 is outlined in 2-2/clause 1.1.1 by reference to 2-1-1/clause 1.1.1. It is to be used with EN 1990, Eurocode: Basis of Structural Design, which is the head document of the Eurocode suite and has an Annex A2, ‘Application for bridges’. 2-1-1/clause 1.1.1(2)

2-1-1/clause

emphasizes that the Eurocodes are concerned with structural behaviour and that other

1.1.1(2)

requirements, e.g. thermal and acoustic insulation, are not considered. The basis for verification of safety and serviceability is the partial factor method. EN 1990 recommends values for load factors and gives various possibilities for combinations of actions. The values and choice of combinations are to be set by the National Annex for the country in which the structure is to be constructed. 2-1-1/clause 1.1.1(3)P states that the following parts of the Eurocode are intended to be

2-1-1/clause

used in conjunction with Eurocode 2:

1.1.1(3)P

EN 1990:

Basis of structural design

EN 1991:

Actions on structures

EN 1997:

Geotechnical design

EN 1998:

Design of structures for earthquake resistance

hENs:

Construction products relevant for concrete structures

EN 13670:

Execution (construction) of concrete structures

These documents will often be required for a typical concrete bridge design, but discussion on them is generally beyond the scope of this guide. They supplement the normative refer- ence standards given in 2-2/clause 1.2. The Eurocodes are concerned 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, 2-1-1/clause 1.1.1(3)P includes the European standards for concrete products and for the execution of concrete

2-1-1/clause

structures. 2-1-1/clause 1.1.1(4)P lists the other parts of EC2.

1.1.1(4)P

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

One standard curiously not referenced by EN 1992-2 is EN 15050: Precast Concrete Bridge Elements. At the time of writing, this document was available only in draft for comment, but its scope and content made it relevant to precast concrete bridge design. At the time of the review of prEN 15050: 2004, its contents were a mixture of the following:

.

definitions relevant to precast concrete bridges

informative design guidance on items not covered in EN 1992 (e.g. for shear keys)

cross-reference to design requirements in EN 1992 (e.g. for longitudinal shear)

informative guidance duplicating or contradicting normative guidance in EN 1992-2 (e.g. effective widths for shear lag)

cross-reference to EN 13369: Common rules for precast concrete products

requirements for inspection and testing of the finished product.

Comment was made that EN 15050 should not contradict or duplicate design requirements in EN 1992. If this is achieved in the final version, there will be little Normative in it for the designer to follow, but there may remain some guidance on topics not covered by EN 1992.

.

.

.

.

.

1.1.2. Scope of Part 2 of Eurocode 2

2-1-1/clause

EC2-2 covers structural design of concrete bridges. Its format is based on EN 1992-1-1 and generally follows the same clause numbering as discussed in the Introduction to this guide. It identifies which parts of EN 1992-1-1 are relevant for bridge design and which parts need modification. It also adds provisions which are specific to bridges. Importantly, 2-1-1/

1.1.2(4)P

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

1.2. Normative references

References are given only to other European standards, all of which are intended to be used as a package. Formally, the Standards of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) apply only if given an EN ISO designation. National standards for design and for products do not apply if they conflict with a relevant EN standard. As Eurocodes may not cross-refer to national standards, replacement of national standards for products by EN or ISO standards is in progress, with a time-scale 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, may not be complete. Designers who then seek guidance from national standards should take account of differences between the design philosophies and safety factors in the two sets of documents. Of the material and product standards referred to in 2-1-1/clause 1.2, Eurocode 2 relies most heavily on EN 206-1 (for the specification, performance, production and compliance criteria for concrete), EN 10080 (technical delivery conditions and specification of weldable, ribbed reinforcing steel for the reinforcement of concrete) and EN 10138 (for the specifica- tion and general requirements for prestressing steels). Further reference to and guidance on the use of these standards can be found in section 3, which discusses materials.

1.3. Assumptions

It is assumed in using EC2-2 that the provisions of EN 1990 will be followed. In addition, EC2-2 identifies the following assumptions, some of which reiterate those in EN 1990:

Structures are designed by appropriately qualified and experienced personnel and are constructed by personnel with appropriate skill and experience.

.

.

.

.

The construction materials and products are used as specified in Eurocode 2 or in the relevant material or product specifications.

Adequate supervision and quality control is provided in factories, in plants and on site.

The structure will be adequately maintained and used in accordance with the design brief.

CHAPTER 1. GENERAL

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

EC2-2 should not be used for the design of bridges that will be executed to specifications other than EN 13670 without a careful comparison of the respective tolerance and workman- ship requirements. Slender elements in particular are sensitive to construction tolerances in their design.

1.4. Distinction between principles and application rules

Reference has to be made to EN 1990 for the distinction between ‘Principles’ and ‘Applica- tion Rules’. Essentially, Principles comprise general statements and requirements that must be followed and Application Rules are rules that comply with these Principles. There may, however, be other ways to comply with the Principles and these methods may be substituted if it is shown that they are at least equivalent to the Application Rules with respect to safety, serviceability and durability. This, however, presents the problem that such a design could not then be deemed to comply wholly with the Eurocodes. Principles are required by EN 1990 to be marked with a ‘P’ adjacent to the paragraph number. In addition, Principles can also generally be identified by the use of ‘shall’ within a clause, while ‘should’ and ‘may’ are generally used for Application Rules, but this is not completely consistent.

1.5. Definitions

Reference is made to the definitions given in clauses 1.5 of EN 1990 and further bridge- specific definitions are provided. There are some significant differences in the use of language compared to British codes. These arose from the use of English as the base language for the drafting process, and the resulting need to improve precision of meaning and to facilitate translation into other European languages. In particular:

.

.

‘action effect’ and ‘effect of action’ have the same meaning: any deformation or internal force or moment that results from an action.

Actions are further subdivided into permanent actions, G (such as dead loads, shrinkage and creep), variable actions, Q (such as traffic loads, wind loads and temperature loads), and accidental actions, A. Prestressing, P, is treated as a permanent action in most situations. The Eurocodes denote characteristic values of any parameter with a suffix ‘k’. Design values are denoted with a suffix ‘d’ and include appropriate partial factors. It should be noted that this practice is different from current UK practice in concrete design, where material partial factors are usually included in formulae to ensure they are not forgotten. It is therefore extremely important to use the correct parameters, duly noting the suffix, to ensure that the material partial factors are included when appropriate.

‘action’ means a load and/or an imposed deformation;

1.6. Symbols

The symbols in the Eurocodes are all based on ISO standard 3898: 1987. 3 Each code has its own list, applicable within that code. Some symbols have more than one meaning, the particular meaning being stated in the clause. There are a few important changes from previous practice in the UK. For example, an xx axis is along a member and subscripts are used extensively to distinguish characteristic values from design values. The use of upper-case subscripts for factors for materials implies that the values given allow for two types of uncertainty, i.e. in the properties of the material and in the resistance model used.

CHAPTER 2

Basis of design

This chapter discusses the basis of design as covered in section 2 of EN 1992-2 in the following clauses:

.

.

.

.

.

.

Requirements

Clause 2.1

Principles of limit state design

Clause 2.2

Basic variables

Clause 2.3

Verification by the partial factor method

Clause 2.4

Design assisted by testing

Clause 2.5

Supplementary requirements for foundations

Clause 2.6

2.1. Requirements

2-1-1/clause 2.1.1 makes reference to EN 1990 for the basic principles and requirements for

2-1-1/clause 2.1.1

the design process for concrete bridges. This includes the limit states and combination of actions to consider, together with the required performance of the bridge at each limit state. These basic performance requirements are deemed to be met if the bridge is designed using actions in accordance with EN 1991, combination of actions and load factors at the various limit states in accordance with EN 1990, and the resistances, durability and service- ability provisions of EN 1992. 2-1-1/clause 2.1.3 refers to EN 1990 for rules on design working life, durability and quality management for bridges. Design working life predominantly affects calculations on fatigue and durability requirements, such as concrete cover. The latter is discussed in section 4 of this guide. Permanent bridges have an indicative design life of 100 years in EN 1990. For political reasons, it is likely that the UK will adopt a design life of 120 years in the National Annex to EN 1990 for permanent bridges for consistency with previous national design standards.

2-1-1/clause 2.1.3

2.2.

Principles of limit state design

The principles of limit state design are set out in section 3 of EN 1990. They are not specific to the design of concrete bridges and are discussed in reference 1.

 

2.3.

Basic variables

Actions to consider

 

2-1-1/clause 2.3.1.1(1) refers to EN 1991 for actions to consider in design and also refers to

2-1-1/clause

EN 1997 for actions arising from soil and water pressures. Actions not covered by either of these sources may be included in a Project Specification.

2.3.1.1(1)

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

2-1-1/clause

2-1-1/clause 2.3.1.2 and 2-1-1/clause 2.3.1.3 cover thermal effects and differential settle- ments respectively, which are ‘indirect’ actions. These are essentially imposed deformations rather than imposed forces. The effects of imposed deformations must also always be checked at the serviceability limit state so as to limit deflections and cracking – 2-1-1/

2.3.1.2(1)

clause 2.3.1.2(1) and 2-1-1/clause 2.3.1.3(2) refer. Indirect actions can usually be ignored

2-1-1/clause

for ultimate limit states (excluding fatigue), since yielding of overstressed areas will shed

2.3.1.3(2)

the locked-in forces generated by imposed deformation. However, a certain amount of

2-1-1/clause

ductility and plastic rotation capacity is required to shed these actions and this is noted in 2-1-1/clause 2.3.1.2(2) and 2-1-1/clause 2.3.1.3(3). A check of ductility and plastic

2.3.1.2(2)

rotation capacity can be made as described in section 5.6.3.2 of this guide. The same

2-1-1/clause

clauses also note that indirect actions should still be considered where they are ‘significant’.

2.3.1.3(3)

The examples given are where elements are prone to significant 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 them in other cases. Imposed deformations covered by the above discussions include those from:

.

Thermal effects – variable action

.

Differential settlement – permanent action

.

Shrinkage – permanent action, covered by 2-1-1/clause 2.3.2.2

.

Creep – permanent action, covered by 2-1-1/clause 2.3.2.2.

2-1-1/clause

Secondary effects of prestress are not dealt with in the same way as the above imposed deformations because tests have shown that they remain locked in throughout significant rotation up to failure. Consequently, 2-1-1/clause 2.3.1.4 does not contain similar provisions

2.3.1.4

to those above and secondary effects of prestress are always considered at the ultimate limit state.

Material and product properties

2-1-1/clause

2-1-1/clause 2.3.2.2(1) and (2) relate to the treatment of shrinkage and creep at serviceabil-

Geometric data

2.3.2.2(1) and (2)

ity and ultimate limit states respectively and make similar requirements to those for thermal

2-1-1/clause

effects and settlements discussed above. 2-1-1/clause 2.3.2.2(3) requires creep deformation

2.3.2.2(3)

and its effects to be based on the quasi-permanent combination of actions, regardless of

the design combination being considered.

Generally, the dimensions of the structure used for modelling and section analysis may be assumed to be equal to those that are put on the drawings. The exceptions to this rule are:

(1) Member imperfections due to construction tolerances – these need to be accounted

(2)

for 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). Eccentricities of axial load – a minimum moment from eccentricity of axial load has to be

2-1-1/clause

considered in the design of beam-columns according to 2-1-1/clause 6.1(4), but this is not additive to the moments from imperfections. (3) Cast in place piles without permanent casing – the size of such piles cannot be accurately controlled so 2-1-1/clause 2.3.4.2(2) gives the following diameters, d, to be used in

2.3.4.2(2)

calculations based on the intended diameter, d nom , in the absence of specific measures

to control diameter:

d nom < 400 mm

d

¼ d nom 20 mm

400 d nom 1000 mm d

¼ 0 : 95d nom

d nom > 1000 mm d ¼ d nom 50 mm

CHAPTER 2. BASIS OF DESIGN

2.4. Verification by the partial factor method

2.4.1. General

2-1-1/clause 2.4.1(1) refers to section 6 of EN 1990 for the rules for the partial factor method. They are not specific to the design of concrete bridges and are discussed in reference 1.

2-1-1/clause

2.4.1(1)

2.4.2. Design values

Partial factors for actions

Partial factors for actions are given in EN 1990 and its Annex A2 for bridges, together with rules for load combinations. EC2-1-1 defines further specific load factors to be used in concrete bridge design for shrinkage, prestress and fatigue loadings in its clauses 2.4.2.1 to 2.4.2.3. The values given may be modified in the National Annex. The recommended values are summarized in Table 2.4-1 and include recommended values for prestressing forces at SLS from 2-1-1/clause 5.10.9. They apply unless specific values are given elsewhere in EC2-2 or the National Annexes.

Table 2.4-1. Recommended values of load factors – may be modified in National Annex

 

ULS

ULS

SLS

SLS

unfavourable

favourable

unfavourable

favourable

Action

(adverse)

(relieving)

(adverse)

(relieving)

Fatigue

Shrinkage

SH ¼ 1.0

0

1.0

0

1.0 if unfavourable 0 if favourable

Prestress –

P ; unfav ¼ 1.3

P; fav ¼ 1.0 (See Note 4)

(See Note 2)

(See Note 2)

1.0

global effects

(See Note 1)

 

Prestress –

P ; unfav ¼ 1.2

P; fav ¼ 1.0

(See Note 2)

(See Note 2)

1.0

local effects

(See Note 3)

Fatigue loading

F ; fat ¼ 1.0

Notes (1) In general, 2-1-1/clause 2.4.2.2(1) requires P; fav to be used for prestressing actions at the ultimate limit state. The use of P; unfav in 2-1-1/clause 2.4.2.2(2) relates specifically to stability checks of externally prestressed members. In previous UK practice, the equivalent of P; unfav was also used in checking other situations where prestress has an adverse effect (e.g. where draped tendons have an adverse effect on shear resistance) so this represents a relaxation. (2) 2-1-1/clause 5.10.9 gives factors that differ for pre-tensioning and post-tensioning and also for favourable and unfa- vourable effects. (3) This value of P; unfav applies to the design of anchorage zones. For externally post-tensioned bridges, it is recom- mended here that the characteristic breaking load of the tendon be used as the ultimate design load, as discussed in section 8.10.3 of this guide. (4) This value applies to the prestressing force used in ultimate bending resistance calculation. For internal post-tension- ing, the prestrain used in the bending calculation should correspond to this design prestressing force, as discussed in section 6.1 of this guide.

Material factors

2-1-1/clause 2.4.2.4 defines specific values of material factor for concrete, reinforcement and prestressing steel to be used in concrete bridge design, but they may be modified in the National Annex. These are summarized in Table 2.4-2. They do not cover fire design. The material factor values assume that workmanship will be in accordance with specified limits in EN 13670-1 and reinforcement, concrete and prestressing steel conform to the relevant Euronorms. If measures are taken to increase the level of certainty of material 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 stated in Note 1 of 2-1-1/clause 2.4.3(1), but fatigue combinations are covered in 2-2/clause 6.8.3. For each

2-1-1/clause

2.4.2.2(1)

2-1-1/clause

2.4.2.2(2)

2-1-1/clause

2.4.2.4

2-1-1/clause

2.4.3(1)

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

Table 2.4-2. Recommended values of material factors

Design situation

C for concrete

S for reinforcing steel

S for prestressing steel

2-1-1/clause

2.4.2.4(2)

2-1-1/clause

2.4.2.5(2)

2-1-1/clause

2.4.3(2)

2-1-1/clause 2.4.4

ULS persistent and transient ULS accidental Fatigue SLS

1.5

1.2

1.5

1.0

ð2

ð2

ð1

Þ

Þ

Þ

1.15

1.15

1.0

1.0

1.15

1.15

1.0 ð 1Þ

1.0 ð 1Þ

Notes (1) Unless stated otherwise in specific clauses (2-1-1/clause 2.4.2.4(2)). (2) Increase by a recommended factor of 1.1 for cast in place piles without permanent casing (2-1-1/clause 2.4.2.5(2)).

permanent action, such as self-weight, the adverse or relieving partial load factor as applic- able can generally be used throughout the entire structure when calculating each particular action effect. There can however be some exceptions, as stated in the Note to 2-1-1/clause 2.4.3(2). EN 1990 clause 6.4.3.1(4) states that ‘where the results of a verification are very sensitive to variations of the magnitude of a permanent action from place to place in the structure, the unfavourable and the favourable parts of this action shall be considered as individual actions. Note: this applies in particular to the verification of static equilibrium and analogous limit states.’ One such exception is intended to be the verification of uplift at bearings on continuous beams, where each span would be treated separately when apply- ing adverse and relieving values of load. The same applies to holding down bolts. This is the basis for 2-1-1/clause 2.4.4, which requires the reliability format for static equilibrium to be used in such situations to achieve this separation into adverse and relieving areas.

2.5. Design assisted by testing

The characteristic resistances in EC2 have, in theory, been derived using Annex D of EN 1990. EN 1990 allows two alternative methods of calculating design values of resistance. Either the characteristic resistance R k is first determined and the design resistance R d determined from this using appropriate partial factors, or the design resistance is determined directly. R k represents the lower 5% fractile for infinite tests. Where it is necessary to determine the characteristic resistance for products where this information is not available, one of these methods has to be used. Discussion on the use of EN 1990 is outside the scope of this guide and is not considered further here.

2-1-1/clause

2.6(1)P

2-1-1/clause 2.6(2)

2.6. Supplementary requirements for foundations

Although 2-1-1/clause 2.6 refers specifically to foundations in its title, the effects of soil– structure interaction may need to be considered in the design of the whole bridge, as is the case with most integral bridges. This is stated in 2-1-1/clause 2.6(1)P. Some further discussion on soil–structure interaction is given in Annex G of this guide. 2-1-1/clause 2.6(2) recommends that the effects of differential settlement are checked where ‘significant’. It is recommended here that the effects of differential settlement are always considered for bridges, as discussed under the comments to 2-1-1/clause 2.3.1.3.

CHAPTER 3

Materials

This chapter discusses materials as covered in section 3 of EN 1992-2 in the following clauses:

.

.

.

.

Concrete

Clause 3.1

Reinforcing steel

Clause 3.2

Prestressing steel

Clause 3.3

Prestressing devices

Clause 3.4

3.1. Concrete

3.1.1. General

EC2 relies on EN 206-1 for the specification of concrete, including tests for confirming properties. 2-2/clause 3 does not cover lightweight concrete. Lightweight concrete is covered in 2-1-1/clause 11.

3.1.2. Strength

Compressive strength

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

(f ck Þ and its equivalent cube strength (

strength class C40/50 denotes normal concrete with cylinder strength of 40 N/mm 2 and cube strength of 50 N/mm 2 . All formulae in EC2, however, use the cylinder strength. 2-1- 1/Table 3.1, reproduced here as Table 3.1-1, provides material properties for normal concretes with typical cylinder strengths. The equivalent cube strengths are such that typically f ck 0 : 8f ck ;cube . The characteristic compressive strength, f ck , is defined as the value below which 5% of all strength test results would be expected to fall for the specified concrete. It should be noted that EC2-1-1 covers significantly higher strength concrete than in BS 5400, but 2-2/clause 3.1.2(102)P recommends limiting the range of strength classes that can be used to between C30/37 and C70/85. The National Annex can alter these limits. The UK has applied a more restrictive limit for use in calculation of the shear resistance. This is because testing carried out by Regan et al. 4 identified that V Rd ;c (see

Þ determined at 28 days. For example, the

f ck ;cube

2-1-1/clause 6.2.2) could be significantly overestimated unless the value of f ck was limited in calculation, particularly where limestone aggregate is to be used. 2-1-1/clause 3.1.2(6) gives an expression for estimating the mean compressive strength of concrete with time, assuming a mean temperature of 20 8 C and curing in accordance with EN 12390:

2-2/clause

3.1.2(102)P

2-1-1/clause

3.1.2(6)

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

with

cc ðtÞ ¼ exp s 1 28 0 :5

t

where:

2-1-1/(3.2)

f cm ðtÞ is the mean compressive strength at an age of t days

f cm

is the mean compressive strength at 28 days given in 2-1-1/Table 3.1

t

is the age of concrete in days

s

is a coefficient which depends on cement type ¼ 0.2 for rapid hardening high-strength cements ¼ 0.25 for normal and rapid hardening cements ¼ 0.38 for slow hardening cements.

2-1-1/clause

The characteristic concrete compressive strength at time t can then similarly be estimated

3.1.2(5)

from 2-1-1/clause 3.1.2(5):

 

f ck ðtÞ¼ f cm ðtÞ 8

for 3 < t < 28 days

(D3.1-1)

f ck ðtÞ¼ f ck for

t 28 days

(D3.1-2)

 

Clauses 3.1.2(5) and 3.1.2(6) are useful for estimating the time required to achieve a par- ticular strength (e.g. time to reach a specified strength to permit application 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 minimize waiting times. The clauses can also be used to predict 28-day strength from specimens tested earlier than 28 days, although it is desirable to have tests carried out at 28 days to be sure of final strength. 2-1-1/clause 3.1.2(6) makes it clear that they must not be used for justifying a non-conforming concrete tested at 28 days by re-testing at a later date.

Tensile strength

 

2-1-1/clause

2-1-1/clause 3.1.2(7)P defines concrete tensile strength as the highest stress reached under

3.1.2(7)P

concentric tensile loading. Values for the mean axial tensile strength, f ctm , and lower charac- teristic strength, f ctk ;0 :05 , are given in 2-1-1/Table 3.1 (reproduced below as Table 3.1-1). Tensile strengths are used in several places in EC2-2 where the effect of tension stiffening is considered to be important. These include:

.

2-2/clause 5.10.8(103) – calculation of prestress strain increases in external post-tensioned members (see section 5.10.8 of this guide);

.

2-2/clause 6.1(109) – prevention of brittle failure in prestressed members on cracking of the concrete;

.

2-1-1/clause 6.2.2(2) – shear tension resistance;

 

.

2-1-1/clause 6.2.5(1) – interface shear resistance at construction joints;

.

2-1-1/clause 7.3.2 – rules on minimum reinforcement;

.

2-1-1/clause 7.3.4 – rules on crack width calculation, which are influenced by tension stiffening between cracks;

.

2-1-1/clause 8.4 – rules on bond strength for reinforcement anchorage;

 

.

2-1-1/clause 8.7 – rules on laps for reinforcement;

.

2-1-1/clause 8.10.2 – transmission zones and bond lengths for pretensioned members.

2-1-1/clause

Tensile strength is much more variable than compressive strength and is influenced a lot by the shape and texture of aggregate and environmental conditions than is the compressive strength. Great care should therefore be taken if the tensile strength is accounted for in design outside the application rules given. 2-1-1/clause 3.1.2(9) provides an expression, for estimating the mean tensile, f ctm ðtÞ,

3.1.2(9)

strength at time t:

f ctm ðtÞ¼ð cc ðtÞÞ f ctm

2-1-1/(3.4)

CHAPTER 3. MATERIALS

" cu1 ð %Þ ¼ 2: 8 þ 27ðð98 f cm Þ =100Þ 4 for f ck 50 MPa

" c3 ð %Þ ¼ 1: 75 þ 0: 55ððf ck 50Þ =40Þ for f ck 50 MPa

" cu2 ð %Þ ¼ 2: 6 þ 35ðð90 f ck Þ =100Þ 4 for f ck 50 MPa

" cu3 ð %Þ ¼ 3: 5 for f ck < 50 MPa " cu3 ð %Þ ¼ 2: 6 þ 35ðð90 f ck Þ =100Þ 4 for f ck 50 MPa

" c2 ð %Þ ¼ 2: 0 þ 0: 085ðf ck 50Þ 0 : 53 for f ck 50 MPa

n ¼ 1: 4 þ 23 :4ðð90 f ck Þ =100Þ 4 for f ck 50 MPa

f ctm ¼ 2: 12 lnð1 þ ðf cm =10ÞÞ > C50 =60

" c3 ð %Þ ¼ 1: 75 for f ck < 50 MPa

E cm ¼ 22ðf cm =10Þ 0: 3 ðf cm in MPaÞ

" cu2 ð %Þ ¼ 3: 5 for f ck < 50 MPa

" cu1 ð %Þ ¼ 3: 5 for f ck < 50 MPa

" c2 ð %Þ ¼ 2: 0 for f ck < 50 MPa

f ctk ; 0: 95 ¼ 1: 3f ctm (95% fractile)

f ctk ; 0: 05 ¼ 0: 7f ctm (5% fractile)

f ctm ¼ 0: 30f ck ð2 =3Þ C50 =60

" c1 ð %Þ¼ 0: 7f cm 0 : 31 < 2: 8

n ¼ 2: 0 for f ck < 50 MPa

f cm ¼ f ck þ 8 (MPa)

Formulae/notes

1.4

5.0

2.8

2.8

2.6

2.6

2.6

6.6

3.5

2.3

44

90

98

105

3.4

1.4

4.8

2.8

2.8

2.2

2.6

2.6

2.5

6.3

80

88

42

95

1.45

2.7

2.7

2.7

2.4

2.0

6.0

2.8

3.2

4.6

70

78

85

41

5.7

4.4

3.0

2.6

1.6

1.9

2.9

2.9

2.3

3.1

60

68

39

75

! 1.75

3.0

! 1.75 ! 1.8

! 2.2

4.2

! 3.2

5.5

2.5

Table 3.1-1. Stress and deformation characteristics for concrete (2-1-1/Table 3.1)

! 3.1

! 3.1

67

38

55

63

2.45

2.9

5.3

4.1

37

60

50

58

2.7

2.4

3.8

4.9

36

55

45

53

4.6

3.5

2.5

2.3

50

40

48

35

2.25

3.2

4.2

2.2

34

45

35

43

2.0

! 2.0

! 2.0

3.8

2.2

2.9

! 3.5

! 3.5

! 3.5

37

30

38

33

Strength classes for concrete

1.8

2.6

3.3

2.1

30

25

33

31

2.0

2.2

2.9

1.5

30

20

28

25

1.9

1.9

2.5

1.3

24

20

16

29

2.0

1.8

1.6

1.1

27

20

12

15

f ctk ; 0: 05 (MPa)

f ctk ; 0: 95 (MPa)

f ck; cube (MPa)

f ctm (MPa)

E cm (GPa)

f cm (MPa)

f ck (MPa)

" cu2 ( %)

" cu3 ( %)

" cu1 ( %)

" c2 ( %)

n " c3 ( %)

" c1 ( %)

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

where:

cc ðtÞ is as defined in 2-1-1/Expression (3.2), reproduced above f ctm ðtÞ is the mean tensile strength at an age of t days (it should be noted that the tensile strength corresponding to a given early age compressive strength is less than that corresponding to the same 28-day compressive strength in 2-1-1/Table 3.1)

f ctm

is the mean tensile strength at 28 days given in 2-1-1/Table 3.1

t

is the age of concrete in days

¼ 1.0

for t < 28

¼ 2/3

for t 28

2-1-1/Expression (3.4) is only an approximation because of the large number of factors influencing the rate of strength gain. If a more accurate prediction is required, this should be obtained from tests which account for the actual exposure conditions and member dimensions, as identified in the Note to 2-1-1/clause 3.1.2(9).

3.1.3. Elastic deformation

The mean value of the modulus of elasticity, E cm , can be obtained from 2-1-1/Table 3.1 which is based on the following relationship:

2-1-1/clause

3.1.3(1)

2-1-1/clause

3.1.3(3)

E cm ¼ 22 f ck þ 8

10

0 :3

(D3.1-3)

with f ck in MPa. Limestone and sandstone aggregates typically lead to greater flexibility and the values derived from equation (D3.1-3) should be reduced by 10% and 30% respectively. For basalt aggregates the values should be increased by 20%. Values of E cm derived from equation (D3.1-3) are based on a secant stiffness for short-term loading up to a stress of 0.4 f cm , as shown in Fig. 3.1-2. Consequently, for lower stresses, the response may be slightly stiffer and for higher stresses (which is unlikely under normal loading conditions) the response could be quite a lot more flexible. Given the inherent difficulty in predicting elastic moduli for concrete and the effects of creep on stiffness for sustained loading, the values obtained from equation (D3.1-3) will be satisfactory for elastic analysis in most normal bridge design applications. Where the differential stiffness between parts of the structure with different concretes or materials is unusually critical to the design, either testing could be carried out to determine a more accurate stiffnesses or a sensitivity analysis could be carried out. 2-1-1/clause 3.1.3(1) relates to these considerations. An approximation for estimating the variation of the modulus of elasticity with time (which should only be required for loading at very early age) is given in 2-1-1/clause 3.1.3(3):

E cm ðtÞ¼ f cm ðtÞ

f

cm

0 :3

E cm

2-1-1/(3.5)

where E cm ðtÞ and f cm ðtÞ are the values at an age of t days and E cm and f cm are the values determined at an age of 28 days.

Other relevant properties of concrete defined in 2-1-1/clause 3.1.3 are:

.

.

.

Poisson’s ratio for uncracked concrete ¼ 0.2

Poisson’s ratio for concrete cracked in tension ¼ 0

Coefficient of thermal expansion ¼ 10 10 6 / 8 C.

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 response or alternatively causes forces to reduce from the initial elastic values when a section is held at constant strain. Creep is particularly important in prestressed concrete as the continued long-term shortening of the concrete in compression leads to a reduction in prestressing force. Creep is also important for bridges built-up in stages as

CHAPTER 3. MATERIALS

the long-term creep deformations cause 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 parameters in this section only apply to normal density concrete. Section 11 gives supplementary requirements for lightweight concretes. 2-1-1/clause 3.1.4(1)P identifies that creep of 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 by way of a creep factor as given in 2-1-1/Expression (3.6) such that the total final creep deformation " cc ð1 ; t 0 Þ at time t ¼ 1 for a constant compressive stress c is:

2-1-1/(3.6)

" cc ð1; t 0 Þ ¼ ð1 ; t 0 Þ

c

E c

where E c is the tangent modulus which, from 2-1-1/clause 3.1.4(2), may be taken equal to 1.05E cm with E cm according to 2-1-1/Table 3.1. The final creep coefficient ð1 ; t 0 Þ may be derived from 2-1-1/Fig. 3.1, provided that the concrete is not subjected to a compressive stress greater than 0.45 f ck ðt 0 Þ at an age t 0 at first loading, the ambient temperature is between 40 8 C and þ40 8 C and the mean relative humidity is greater than 40%. The follow- ing definitions are used in EC2 for both creep and shrinkage calculations:

t 0

h 0 is the notional size (or effective thickness) ¼ 2A c = u, where A c is the concrete cross-

sectional area and u is the perimeter(s) of the section which is exposed to drying, i.e. open to the atmosphere. Where h 0 varies along a member, an average value could be used as a simplification based on the sections which are most highly stressed

is the age of the concrete at first loading in days

2-1-1/clause

3.1.4(1)P

2-1-1/clause

3.1.4(2)

S

is for slow-hardening cements as identified in 2-1-1/clause 3.1.2(6)

N

is for normal and rapid hardening cements as identified in 2-1-1/clause 3.1.2(6)

R

is for rapid hardening high-strength cements as identified in 2-1-1/clause 3.1.2(6)

Where the humidity lies between 40% and 100%, the creep ratio should be determined by interpolation or extrapolation as relevant from 2-1-1/Figs 3.1a and 3.1b for 50% and 80% humidity respectively, or by direct calculation from 2-1-1/Annex B. For cases outside the humidity and temperature limits given, 2-1-1/Annex B may also be used. In the UK, it has been normal practice to use a relative humidity of 70% in design. 2-1-1/Annex B also gives information on how to determine the development of creep strain with time, which is needed in the analysis of bridges built by staged construction. The development of creep with time is determined by the parameter c ðt ; t 0 Þ which varies from 0.0 at first loading to 1.0 after infinite time such that 0 ¼ ð1 ; t 0 Þ and:

2-1-1/(B.1)

ðt; t 0 Þ¼ 0 c ðt ; t 0 Þ ¼ ð1 ; t 0 Þ c ðt ; t 0 Þ

c ðt; t 0 Þ¼

ðt t 0 Þ ð H þ t

t 0 Þ 0: 3

2-1-1/(B.7)

H is a coefficient depending on the relative humidity (RH in %), the notional member size (h 0 in mm) and the compressive strength as follows:

2-1-1/(B.8a)

H ¼ 1 :5½1 þ ð0 : 012RHÞ 18 h 0 þ 250 1500

for f cm 35 MPa

H ¼ 1 :5½1 þ ð0 : 012RHÞ 18 h 0 þ 250 f cm 0 :5 1500

35

f cm 0: 5

35

for f cm 35 MPa

2-1-1/(B.8b)

2-1-1/Expression (B.7) can also be used in conjunction with the simple graphical method of 2-1-1/Fig. 3.1 to determine the development of creep with time, rather than calculating the creep factor directly from 2-1-1/Annex B. The use of both 2-1-1/Fig. 3.1 and 2-1-1/Annex B to calculate ð1 ; t 0 Þ is illustrated in Worked example 3.1-1 where the relevant formulae in Annex B are reproduced. The creep

DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

2-1-1/clause

3.1.4(4)

factors produced in this way are average values. If the structure is particularly sensitive to creep then it would be prudent to allow for some variation in creep factor. The circumstances when this might be necessary are presented in 2-2/Annex B.105 and discussed in Annex B of this guide. When the compressive stress of concrete at an age t 0 exceeds 0.45 f ck ðt 0 Þ, non-linear creep can give rise to greater creep deformations. Non-linear creep can often occur in pretensioned precast beams which are stressed at an early age and initially have only small dead load. A revised creep factor for use in 2-1-1/Expression (3.6) is given in 2-1-1/clause 3.1.4(4) for this situation as follows:

revised creep factor for use in 2-1-1/Expression (3.6) is given in 2-1-1/clause 3.1.4(4) for this situation

2-1-1/(3.7)

where k is the stress–strength ratio c = f cm ðt 0 Þ, c is the compressive stress and f cm ðt 0 Þ is the mean concrete compressive strength at the time of loading. There is an anomaly in this equation as the criterion for its consideration is based on f ck ðt 0 Þ, whereas the formula contains the mean strength f cm ðt 0 Þ. This means that for a concrete stress of 0.45 f ck ðt 0 Þ, the formula actually reduces the creep factor, which is certainly not intended. A conservative approach is to redefine k as c = f ck ðt 0 Þ. Arguably, as deformations are based on mean properties, it is the criterion for the start of non-linear creep which should be changed to 0 : 45 f cm ðt 0 Þ, 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/Annex B gives alternative rules for creep calculation which were considered by its drafters to be more accurate than those in EC2-1-1. This suggestion of ‘greater accuracy’ has not, however, been universally accepted. Concretes with and without silica fume are treated separately with significantly reduced creep strains possible in silica fume concretes. This is discussed further in Annex B of this guide.

k ð1 ; t 0 Þ ¼ ð1 ; t 0 Þ expð1 : 5ðk 0 : 45ÞÞ

Worked example 3.1-1: Calculation of (11, t 0 ) for bridge pier

A hollow rectangular pier with wall thickness 500 mm is first loaded by significant load from deck construction at an age of 30 days. The relative humidity is 80%, the concrete is C40/50 and the cement is Ordinary Portland. Calculate the creep factor ð1 ; t 0 Þ accord- ing to 2-1-1/Fig. 3.1 and 2-1-1/Annex B.

From 2-1-1/Fig. 3.1 From the construction shown in Fig. 3.1-1 using h