Canterbury Decoding Eurocode 7

Decoding Eurocode 7
Introduction to Eurocode 7
Geomantix
www.geomantix.com
Institution of Structural Engineers
Canterbury Forum 21st February 2008
Feb-08 Decoding Eurocode 7 2005-8 Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved 2
Understand, analyse, and assess
Geotechnical engineering is
the art of using soils whose properties we do not really
understand to form and to support structures we cannot
really analyse, so as to withstand forces which we
cannot really assess, in such a way that the public does
not really suspect
Professor Noel Simons, Inaugural Lecture, University of
Surrey
(with apologies to Professor Eric Brown, Imperial College)
Mr Andrew Harris
MSc DIC MICE CEng FGS
Director, Geomantix Ltd
Consultant, TGP, Atkins
Senior Lecturer, Kingston University
Eurocode experience
Co-author Decoding Eurocode 7 (2008), Spon Press
Co-author Chapter 7 PP1990 (Guide to the Structural
Eurocodes), BSI
Trainer for Geocentrix, IStructE/ Professional
Solutions, & Thomas Telford/Eurocode Expert
Teaching experience
Lecturer (1985-2004) and Associate Dean (2000-4) at
Kingston University
Author of CPD courses in geotechnical design & pile
design for Kingston University and IStructE/
Professional Solutions
Consulting
Regional Manager at CL Associates (2004-6)
Design and execution of geotechnical and
contaminated land investigations
Implementation of Eurocodes
The structural Eurocodes are a European suite of codes
for structural design developed over twenty-five
years
By 2010 they will have effectively replaced the current
British Standards as the primary basis for designing
buildings and civil engineering structures in the UK
They [will be] used as an acceptable basis for meeting
compliance with UK Building Regulations and the
requirements of other public authorities
National Strategy for Implementation of the Structural
Eurocodes (2004)
The Eurocode programme
Connections between main
Eurocodes
Contents of Eurocode 7
Overview of EN Eurocodes
Contents of EN 1997-1:
General rules
Contents of EN 1997-2:
Ground investigation and testing
Division of responsibilities
between Parts 1 & 2 of EN 1997
EN 1997-1 General rules
General framework for geotechnical design
Definition of ground parameters
Characteristic and design values
General rules for site investigation
Rules for the design of main types of geotechnical structures
Some assumptions on execution procedures
EN 1997-2 Ground investigation and testing
Detailed rules for site investigations
General test specifications
Derivation of ground properties and geotechnical model of the
site
Examples of calculation methods based on field and laboratory
testing
[ref. EN 1997-2 Figure 1.2]
The wider landscape
E
N

1
4
7
3
1
E
N

1
5
2
3
7
E
N

1
5
3
6
E
N

1
5
3
7
E
N

1
5
3
8
E
N

1
2
0
6
3
E
N

1
2
7
1
5
E
N

1
2
7
1
6
E
N

1
2
6
9
9
E
N

1
4
1
9
9
E
N

1
4
4
7
5
E
N

1
4
6
7
9
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
o
n
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
G
e
o
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
i
n
v
e
s
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d

t
e
s
t
i
n
g
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
I
S
O

2
2
4
7
6
I
S
O

2
2
4
7
5
I
S
O

2
2
2
8
2
I
S
O

1
7
8
9
2
I
S
O

1
4
6
8
9
I
S
O

1
4
6
8
8
3
2
12
6
12
13
E
N

1
9
9
8
E
N

1
9
9
9
EN 1997
5
5
I
S
O

2
2
4
7
7
13
2
E
N

1
9
9
0
E
N

1
9
9
1
E
N

1
9
9
2
E
N

1
9
9
3 E
N

1
9
9
6
E
N

1
9
9
5
E
N

1
9
9
4
E
N

E
u
r
o
c
o
d
e
s
3
2
2
6
3
4
1
Geotechnical investigation and
testing
Execution of special geotechnical
works
Bringing European standards into
national practice
National Annex completes the
Eurocode jigsaw
Role of Eurocode 7 in UK
practice
Benefits of the Eurocodes
Of vital importance
The Eurocodes will become the Europe wide means of
designing Civil and Structural engineering works and
so they are of vital importance to both the design
and construction sectors of the Civil and Building
industries
Introduction to Eurocodes
European Commission website (http://ec.europa.eu)
Geotechnical design
EN 1997-1 general rules
Geotechnical categories
Include alternative provisions and rules to those in Eurocode 7 Structures or parts of
structures not covered
above
3
Routine field & lab testing
Routine design & execution
Quantitative geotechnical data &
analysis to ensure fundamental
requirements are satisfied
Conventional types of
structure & foundation
with no exceptional
risk or difficult soil or
loading conditions
2
Routine design & construction
methods
Negligible risk of instability or
ground movements
Ground conditions known to be
straightforward
No excavation below water table
(or such excavation is
straightforward)
Small and relatively
simple structures
with negligible risk
1
Design procedure Design requirements Includes GC
Example risk assessment
Category 1
Low height cut slope
in London clay
Category 2
Embedded retaining wall and
bored piles in London clay
Category 3
Embedded bored pile retaining
walls over underground tunnel
Category 3
Underground running tunnels
Limit states
Ultimate limit states for strength
(STR/GEO)
Ultimate limit states for stability
(EQU/UPL/HYD)
EQU
Loss of static equilibrium
Toppling Internal erosion
UPL
Buoyancy
Uplift by vertical forces
HYD
Hydraulic failure
Limit states for overall stability
Near river/canal/lake/reservoir/sea-shore Near/on natural or man-made slope
Near an excavation or retaining wall
Near mine workings/buried structures
Ultimate limit states for
serviceability
L
h
h
h
Settlement Differential settlement Vibration
Deflection Insufficient pumping Excessive flow
Design by prescriptive measures
2.5(2) Design by prescriptive
measures may be used where
comparable experience makes
design calculations unnecessary
2.5(1) These [measures] involve
conventional and generally
conservative rules in the design,
and attention to specification and
control of materials, workmanship,
protection and maintenance
procedures
Example (right)
Annex G (informative) sample
method for deriving presumed
bearing resistance for spread
foundations on rock
Information taken from British
Standard 8004
Design by observation or testing
2.7(1) When prediction of geotechnical behaviour is difficult, it can be
appropriate to apply the approach known as the observational
method, in which the design is reviewed during construction
2.7(2)P The following requirements shall be met before construction is
started:
acceptable limits of behaviour shall be established
the range of possible behaviour shall be assessed
a plan of monitoring shall be devised
a plan of contingency actions shall be devised
2.6(1)P When the results of load tests or tests on large or small scale
models are used to justify a design the following features shall be
considered :
differences in the ground conditions between the test and the actual
construction
time effects
scale effects
Design by calculation
Verification of strength
Verification of strength is expressed in Eurocode 7 by:
E
d
= design effect of actions
R
d
= design resistance corresponding to that effect
This requirement applies to limit state GEO:
Failure or excessive deformation of the ground, in which the strength of
soil or rock is significant in providing resistance
EN 1997-1 2.4.7.1(1)P
and to ultimate limit state STR
Internal failure or excessive deformation of the structure or structural
elements in which the strength of structural materials is significant in
providing resistance
EN 1997-1 2.4.7.1(1)P
d d
E R
Obtaining design material
properties
Derived values of
geotechnical parameters X
Characteristic
value X
k
Design
value X
d
Test results
Derivation
Characterization
Factorization
Deriving geotechnical parameters
Characterizing material properties
Derived values of geotechnical
parameters X
Characteristic value X
k
Well-established
experience
Statistical methods
Cautious
estimate
Standard tables of
characteristic
values
5% fractile
Effects of actions
Structural effects are independent
of material strength
In structural engineering, effects are
independent of strength of
materials
Example: bending moment at mid-
span of beam is:
Conceptually, we may write this as:
{ }
,
d d d
E E F a =
2
4 8
c
bdL FL
M

= +
internal stresses deflection
A
c
t
i
o
n
E
f
f
e
c
t
F
Geotechnical effects depend on
material strength
In geotechnical engineering, effects
often depend on the strength of
materials
Example: internal stresses in and
deflection/settlement of retaining
wall all depend on earth
pressure:
P
a
= K
a
(H + q)H
2
= (1 sin ) (H + q)H
(1 + sin )
{ }
, ,
d d d d
E E F X a =
P
a
q
earth pressure
settlement
deflection
A
c
t
i
o
n
E
f
f
e
c
t
internal stresses
Resistances
Structural resistance is
independent of loading
In structural engineering, resistance is
independent of loading on
structure
Example: bending resistance of
concrete beam is:
{ }
,
d d d
R R X a =
1
2
y s
s y
c
f A
M A f d
f bd

=

concrete
(in tension)
concrete
(in compression)
steel
(in tension)
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l

P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
strain in cross-section
stress blocks
R
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
Geotechnical resistance depends
on loading
In geotechnical engineering,
resistance often depends on self-
weight of and loads applied to the
ground
Example: shear stress mobilized
against underside of base
depends on self-weight of fill and
surcharge:
{ }
, ,
d d d d
R R X F a =
( )
tan S H q B = +
S
q
shear stress
self-weight
of fill
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l

p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
R
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
Introducing reliability into
design
Application of partial factors and
tolerances
d F rep
F F =
k
d
M
X
X
=
{ }
, ,
d E d d d
E E F X a =
{ }
, ,
d d d
d
R
R F X a
R
=
Actions
Resistances
Effects of actions
Material properties
d nom
a a a =
Geometrical parameters
Design Approaches
Design Approaches for STR/GEO
2.4.7.3.4.1(1)P The manner in which equations [above] are applied
shall be determined using one of three Design Approaches
Design Approaches apply ONLY to STR and GEO limit states
Each nation can choose which one (or more) to allow
UK National Annex, NA.4 only Design Approach 1 is to be used in
the UK
In simplest terms, the design approaches apply factors to the
following
Structural actions
or effects
& material
properties
Actions or effects
& resistances
Material
properties
Actions
Combination
2
Combination
1
3 2 1
Design Approach
Partial factors
Partial factors for limit states
GEO/STR
Slopes
Walls
(1.0)
R4
Varies Pile resistance
1.1
1.4
Re
Earth resistance
(R
e
)
1.1
1.4
1.0
1.4
Material
factors
1.0
M1
(0)
1.0
(0)
1.3
(0)
1.0
(0)
1.5
1.0
1.35
A1
Action
factors
1.0
A2
1.25
M2
Rh
Sliding resistance (R
h
)
c
Effective cohesion (c)
cu
Undrained shear strength (c
u
)
1.0 1.0
Rv
Bearing resistance (R
v
)

Weight density ()
qu
Unconfined compressive
strength (q
u
)
Shearing resistance (tan )

Sym-
bol
- Favourable

A
Unfavourable Accidental
action (A)
- Favourable

Q
Unfavourable Variable
action (Q)
(
G,fav
) Favourable

G
Unfavourable Permanent
action (G)
R3 R2 R1
Resistance factors Parameter
Partial factors for limit states GEO/STR (DA1)
footings, walls, and slopes
Re
Earth resistance (R
e
)
1.0
1.4
(0)
1.0
(0)
1.5
1.0
1.35
A1
Combination 1
1.0
M1
1.0
R1
Rh
Sliding resistance (R
h
)
c
cu
u
)
1.0
Rv
Bearing resistance (R
v
)

Weight density ()
qu
Unconfined compressive strength (q
u
)
1.25
Shearing resistance (tan )

Symbol
(0) - Favourable
1.0
A
action (A)
(0) - Favourable
1.3
Q
Unfavourable Variable
action (Q)
(
G,fav
) Favourable
1.0
G
action (G)
R1 M2 A2
Combination 2 Parameter
Verification of strength for
GEO/STR (DA1-1)
Verification of strength for
GEO/STR (DA1-2)
Buildings Building
s
0 0 Creep & shrinkage, linear &
non-linear settlement
All other actions
Hydrostatic effects 1.0 1.0
Hydrostatic effects
1.0
1.0
Wind
Thermal 1.3 1.5
Rail traffic
Road traffic & pedestrian 1.15 1.35
U
n
f
a
v
b
l
e
??? ???
Steel, super-imposed, road
surfacing, linear settlement
Concrete, soil, other materials,
creep & shrinkage, non-linear
settlement
0.95
1.20
Permanent
action (G)
(0)
1.0
0
1.7
1.35
A1
Combination 1
M1 R1
Material properties and resistance
Sym-
bol
(0) - Favourable
1.0
A
action (A)
0 - Favourable
1.5
Q,sup
Variable
action (Q)
G,inf
F
a
v
b
l
e
1.0
G,sup
U
n
f
a
v
o
u
r
a
b
l
e
R1 M2 A2
Combination 2 Parameter
Partial factors for limit states GEO/STR (DA1)
bridges (from draft amd 1 to NA to BS EN 1990)
Basis of design for stability
Verification of stability
Verification of stability
Verification of stability is expressed in Eurocode 7 by:
E
d,dst
= destabilizing design effect of actions
E
d,stb
= stabilizing design effect of actions
R
d
= any additional design resistance that stabilizes the structures
This requirement applies to limit state EQU:
Loss of equilibrium of the structure or the ground, considered as a rigid body, in
which the strengths of structural materials and the ground are insignificant in
providing resistance
EN 1997-1 2.4.7.1(1)P
and to ultimate limit state UPL:
Loss of equilibrium of the structure or the ground, due to uplift by water pressure
(buoyancy) or other vertical actions
EN 1997-1 2.4.7.1(1)P
, , d dst d stb d
E E R +
Verification of stability for EQU
Values underlined provide safety (i.e. are 1.0)
Values in (rounds brackets) are not explicitly given in EN 1997-1 but can be inferred
Partial factors = 0 mean that the corresponding action is omitted from design calculations
Values in [square brackets] from NA to BS EN 1997-1
(1.0)
1.0
1.4 [1.2]
R
All resistances (R)
c
cu
u
)
Weight density ()
qu
Unconfined compressive
strength (q
u
)
1.25 [1.1]
Coeff. of shearing resistance (tan

)
Symbol
(0) - Favourable
(1.0)
A,dst
Unfavourab
le
Accidental action
(A)
0 - Favourable
1.5
Q,dst
Unfavourab
le
Variable action (Q)
0.9
G,stb
Favourable
1.1
G,dst
Unfavourab
le
Permanent action
(G)
Resistance
s
Material
properties
Actions
Partial factors on Parameter
factors for limit state EQU for buildings
Partial factors for limit state EQU
for bridges (from draft amd 1 to NA to BS EN 1990)
Wind
Rail traffic
Thermal
Road traffic/
pedestrian
1.4
1.45
1.5
Values in (brackets) are not explicitly given in EN 1997-1 but can be inferred
(1.0)
R
Resistances
As for
buildings
M
Material properties
Symbol
(0) - Favourable
(1.0)
A,dst
action (A)
0 - Favourable
1.35
Q,dst
Un-
favourable
Variable
action (Q)
0.95
G,stb
Favourable
1.05
G,dst
action (G)
Resistances Material
properties
Actions
Verification of stability for UPL
Partial factors for limit state UPL
1.4[*]
Values in (round brackets) are not explicitly given in EN 1997-1 but can be inferred
Value in [square brackets] as modified by the NA to BS EN 1997-1; *design as for STR/GEO
1.4[*]
(1.0)
1.4
(1.4)
a
Anchorage resistance (R
a
)
c
Cu
Undrained shear strength (C
u
)
st
Tensile pile resistance (R
st
)

Weight density ()

qu
Unconfined compressive strength (q
u
)
1.25
Coeff. of shearing resistance (tan )

Symbol
(0) - Favourable
(1.0)
A,dst
Unfavourable Accidental action (A)
(0) - Favourable
1.5
Q,dst
Unfavourable Variable action (Q)
0.9
G,stb
Favourable
1.0 [1.1]
G,dst
Unfavourable Permanent action (G)
properties
Actions
Partial factors for limit state EQU
for bridges (from draft amd 1 to NA to BS EN 1990)
Wind
Rail traffic
Thermal
Road traffic/
pedestrian
1.4
1.45
1.5
(1.0)
R
Resistances
As for
buildings
M
Material properties
Symbol
(0) - Favourable
(1.0)
A,dst
action (A)
0 - Favourable
1.35
Q,dst
Un-
favourable
Variable
action (Q)
0.95
G,stb
Favourable
1.05
G,dst
action (G)
properties
Actions
Verification of stability for HYD
Partial factors for limit state HYD
(1.0)
(1.0)
R
All resistances (R)

Weight density ()
Symbol
(0) - Favourable
(1.0)
A,dst
Unfavourab
le
Accidental action
(A)
(0) - Favourable
1.5
Q,dst
Unfavourab
le
Variable action (Q)
0.9
G,stb
Favourable
1.35
G,dst
Unfavourab
le
Permanent action
(G)
Resistance
s
Material
properties
Actions
Serviceability limit states
Verification of serviceability
Verification of serviceability
Verification of serviceability is expressed in Eurocode 7 by:
E
d
= design effect of actions (e.g. displacement, distortion)
C
d
= limiting design value of the effect of actions
Serviceability limit states are defined as:
States that correspond to conditions beyond which specified
service requirements for a structure or structural member are no
longer met
EN 1990 1.5.2.14
Partial factors should normally be taken as 1.0
Some guidance on values for C
d
is given in Annex H
d d
E C
Verification of SLS
Geotechnical reports
Geotechnical Design Report
Ground Investigation Report
Conclusion
Business as usual
Decoding Eurocode 7
Book due middle 2008
Key features
Covers Eurocode 7 Parts 1 and 2,
plus relevant parts of other
Eurocodes
Also covers associated execution
and testing standards
Explains key principles
Illustrates application rules with
real-life case studies
Material extensively tested on
training courses over 5 years
Authors Andrew Bond
(Geocentrix) and Andy Harris
(Geomantix)
To be published by Spon in
hardback, with colour section
Decoding the Eurocodes blog
Web log (blog) started May
2006
Address: www.eurocode7.com
Aim to post articles at least
once a month, on following
subjects:
BGA
Books
BSI
Eurocode 3
Eurocode 7
ICE
IStructE
Seminars
Singapore
Structural Eurocodes
Training courses
Dont be the architect of decay
He who rejects change is the architect of decay
Harold Wilson
British Prime Minister (1964-70 and 1974-76)
Decoding Eurocode 7
www.eurocode7.com

Canterbury Decoding Eurocode 7

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Canterbury Decoding Eurocode 7

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Decoding Eurocode 7

Shearing resistance (tan )

Shearing resistance (tan )

Coeff. of shearing resistance (tan

Coeff. of shearing resistance (tan )

Вам также может понравиться