6 In situ concrete: issues and solutions
Key reference: How to design concrete buildings to satisfy
disproportionate collapse requirements O Brooker, The Concrete
Centre 20086.1. BS EN 1992-1-1: Eurocode 26.2 (EC2) and
BS 8110-16.3 are also key references.
6.1 Introduction
Well detailed, in situ, reinforced concrete is inherently
robust6.3, 6.4. In most cases, checks for compliance
with tying rules will show that tying requirements
have already been met through the normal
reinforcement provided. Therefore in a large part, this
chapter discusses best practice in the positioning
and detailing of tie reinforcement rather than how to
provide for minimum code compliance.
In precast, and hybrid precast and in situ
construction, joints between units often form
a reinforcement path discontinuity. Where this
occurs, the provision of a continuous tie will need
more explicit consideration. Industry best practice
methods of providing such continuity are presented
in Chapter 7.
Occasionally it may be necessary to consider a
concrete member as a key element or in other cases
to consider the implications of element removal on
the rest of the structure. The appropriate approach to
these situations is discussed in Chapter 5 and below.
This chapter broadly follows the requirements of
BS 81106.3. However, for the UK, the rules in EC26.2
as supplemented by the UK National Annex6.5 and
PD 66876.6 require near identical consideration.
Internal ties Corner column ties
(dotted lines)
Horizontal tie
to external
column or wall
(solid line)
Peripheral
tie (dashed Vertical
lines) tie (solid
line)
Figure 6.1 Ties required in concrete structures
32 The Institution of Structural Engineers Practical guide to structural robustness and disproportionate collapse in buildings
Furthermore, whilst the values of specific parameters
may vary, the approach described is good practice
wherever construction takes place and should be
considered a minimum requirement in the absence of
any more onerous local regulatory requirements.
The rules incorporated in BS 8110 6.3 are semi-
empirical. Whilst it may be useful to rationalise
mechanisms to aid understanding, such
rationalisation should not be used to reduce the
stated requirements.
6.2 Overall robustness strategy
At the highest level, the robustness strategy
advocated for concrete structures is similar to that
for other materials as will be set out in later chapters.
Likewise, the sequence of design for robustness is as
set out in Chapter 5.
6.3 Notional horizontal load
In BS 81106.3, the notional horizontal loads are
defined as a minimum of 1.5% of the characteristic
dead load. This criterion can be significant for
the design of low rise buildings and in the long
direction of narrow, higher rise, buildings. The
1.5% effect is considered as a minimum load and
ignored if the wind load is greater. In BS 59506.7 the
corresponding load is 0.5% of the factored vertical
dead and imposed loads, applied at the same level,
thus the force value is expressed differently but is
nevertheless numerically similar.
EC26.2 has a similar concept to BS 81106.3 except
that the horizontal load is developed from a notional
out-of-verticality (see Section 5.3).
6.4 Tying
6.4.1 Provision of ties
Four types of ties (as shown in Figure 6.1) are
specified both in BS 81106.3 and EC26.2; all are
discussed below. Ties are normally assumed to act
at their characteristic strength and no other actions
are considered in conjunction with the tie force.
This means that bars provided for other structural
effects can be included in the area of reinforcement
assumed for the tie. For design, the tie force
magnitude can be derived from References 6.1, 6.2
or 6.3. The magnitude varies with the number of
storeys but will not exceed 60kN for peripheral ties
and perhaps double that for internal ties.

6.4.2 Peripheral ties
BS 81106.3 introduced the concept of peripheral
ties. Arguably the edge of a structure is the most
vulnerable to damage and moreover has reduced
opportunities for developing alternative load paths via
two way spanning. Hence provision of a peripheral
tie ensures an alternative load system in the edge of
the structure. The peripheral tie also provides a zone
in which internal ties can be anchored and ensures
that perimeter vertical elements are interconnected
with the main tying system. Peripheral ties should
also be provided around any large slab openings,
such as those for atria. BS 81106.3 and EC26.2,
as implemented in the UK, define the tie force
magnitude and partial factors that can be used in
evaluating tie capacity (cs = 1 for reinforcement and
prestressing steel); the tie force value Ft is typically
60kN (ultimate) which is easily carried by two H10
bars. The resistant reinforcement should be located
in the outer 1.2m of the slab or within perimeter
beams or walls.
Peripheral tie value (derived from BS 8110):
Ft = (20 + 4no) G 60 (where no is the total number of
storeys in the structure)
Note the units. The Ft value has no units. The force
value is 1.0Ft in kN (60kN) which is to be located in
the slab edge 1.2m.
6.4.3 Internal ties
Internal ties should be provided in two orthogonal
directions. To maximise their benefit, ties should be
as ductile as possible and ideally placed towards
the bottom of the section as tests and experience
have shown bottom bars to be more effective. Tie
ductility can be improved by using higher ductility
reinforcement, e.g. Class B or C. The maximum
spacing of internal transverse ties is 1.5lr where lr is
the greater spacing between columns. However, it is
generally beneficial to adopt a lower spacing, indeed
the requirement for these ties to interact with column
ties (see Section 6.4.6) means that a practical
maximum is the column spacing.
For internal ties (as distinct from peripheral ties), the
tie force is evaluated differently and has different
units. For internal ties, the force is derived in kN/m
width (of the slab) whereas at the edge it is a defined
force confined to a defined width. Hence:
Ftie is the greater of (1/7.5) (gk+ qk) (lr/5) Ft
or
1.0Ft defined as kN/m across the internal slab width
(this will not exceed 60 kN/m)
where:
(gk + qk) is the sum of the average permanent and
variable floor loads (in kN/m2). Note the variable load
qk is not in this case reduced (see Section 5.13)
lr is the greater of the distances (in m) between
centres of the columns, frames or walls supporting
any two adjacent floor spans in the direction of the tie
under consideration
Ft = (20 + 4 no) G 60 (where no is the total number of
storeys in the structure).
The Institution of Structural Engineers Practical guide to structural robustness and disproportionate collapse in buildings
In situ concrete: issues and solutions 6.4
6.4.4 Horizontal ties to external walls and columns
To address the possibility of walls or columns being
pushed outwards, each external wall or column
should be tied back into the main structure. In the
case of a wall incorporating a peripheral tie, the
requirement is to ensure that the internal ties are
anchored into the peripheral tie. In all other cases, it
is recommended that the column/wall ties are lapped
with the internal ties. The tie minimum capacity
is given in the appropriate code; these are either
notional amounts or a percentage of the column/
wall load. For corner columns, the tie force should
be provided in two directions approximately at right
angles to each other.
6.4.5 Vertical ties
As discussed in Chapter 5, vertical ties provide the
opportunity, in the event of lower column removal,
for floor loads to be supported by hanging from the
column above; they also provide a minimum level
of robustness to inhibit column removal. Vertical
ties should be provided within every column and to
each wall carrying vertical load. The tie force to be
resisted is equal to the ultimate design load carried
on any floor level by the element (calculated with the
accidental load factors, see Section 5.13).
Where the vertical element is supported at its lowest
level by anything other than a foundation, the overall
robustness of the support should be considered and
most likely the supporting element will be designed as
a key element or perhaps an analysis will be carried
out to demonstrate that removal of the supporting
element does not lead to disproportionate collapse.
6.4.6 Continuity of ties
Ties should be effectively continuous. This means
that where bars forming ties are lapped, the detailing
should be such that failure is always in the bar and
not in the lap thus ensuring a ductile performance.
In practice, this means that laps should always be
designed for the bar full capacity even if the required
tie force is lower. Additionally, where bars forming the
tie system are notionally lapped but not adjacent, the
lap length should be increased and the need for links
considered, as described in EC2 (Clause 8.76.2). This
is to ensure that an effective strut and tie system can
be formed between the bars in the lap zone.
For tying systems to work, different types of ties must
interact and the need for column (vertical) ties, internal
and peripheral ties to be linked has been discussed
above (Sections 6.4.1 to 6.4.5). It is essential for
vertical and horizontal ties to interact if catenary
action is to be developed. Such interaction can
generally be presumed if some or all of the tie steel
in each direction passes through the column, so it is
recommended that horizontal ties are placed in the
bottom of the slab or beam at the column location. It is
also worth highlighting that if the vertical tie is to share
load up the building, the connection to the higher
floors needs to be capable of taking reverse shear. In
other words, if a floor is hung from the column above,
the column is pulling down on the floor above, i.e. the
shear is reversed from the normal situation where the
column would be pushing up on the floor. This can
complicate some hybrid type connections (Chapter 7
incorporates a number of details).
33
6.5 In situ concrete: issues and solutions

6.4.7 Additional considerations for post tensioned application of detailing rules. In cases where ductile
concrete energy absorbing capacity is required for extreme
robustness (as in resistance to blast or earthquakes)
The principles for post tensioned construction are advanced rules6.10, 6.11 are available.
identical to those adopted for reinforced concrete.
In bonded prestressed concrete, continuous All relevant concrete codes include requirements
tendons provide an excellent tie since there are no for minimum reinforcement. In the cases of direct
or fewer laps. For bonded construction, the principal tension and flexure, these minimum reinforcement
challenge is to ensure sufficient interaction between contents ensure that section capacities after
the horizontal and vertical ties. Research6.8 has concrete cracking are approximately equal to or
shown that a significant improvement in post failure greater than those which existed before cracking.
capacity occurs when tendons pass directly over the Whilst this is a prerequisite to controlling crack
column; however this is not always possible. In this widths, minimum reinforcement also ensures that
situation, it is recommended that ducts are placed there is a reasonable amount of post-cracking
as closely as possible (either side of the column), ductility within the element. In the event of overload,
and additional bottom steel is provided through the this ductility provides warning and facilitates load
column in each direction to lap onto the duct line. shed to other elements preventing gross failure.
The tendons support at midspan as they are in the Similarly, design codes require minimum amounts
bottom there. of reinforcement at supports; even where no
moment has been assumed. These requirements,
For unbonded tendons, a failure of tendons in again driven by the need to control cracking, also
one bay may lead to failure in adjacent bays. provide alternative (or enhanced) load paths.
For this reason, it is not appropriate to consider Such additional reinforcement provides protective
unbonded tendons as part of the tying system, and strength against the possibility of moment reversal
so tying should be provided wholly with normal which can be a feature in accidental loading 6.12.
reinforcement.
Minimum percentage of reinforcement in columns
assures a minimal tensile capacity for what are
supposedly compression members. Minimum link
6.5 Element removal and key element requirements in columns are defined to give a certain
design level of ductility at the column/floor connection.
In extreme cases, as in seismic design, greater
ductility is demanded and a greater number of links
An alternative to following the prescriptive rules for are provided and better link anchorage is specified.
tying is to consider the removal of an element and to Under overload, such links prevent column bars
investigate the subsequent collapse area following buckling and confine the concrete core, preventing
the principles of Chapter 5. There are no special disintegration, so adding to the section’s rotational
requirements for in situ concrete structures excepting capacity whilst maintaining moment resistance.
that partial factors for materials can be reduced. Nonetheless, even the non-seismic link provision will
ensure an amount of column rotation is possible prior
In EC26.2, for the accidental load case, the partial to failure.
factors are as follows:
It can be seen from above that there are a
cc for concrete = 1.2 and number of detailing requirements in current
cs for steel = 1.0. codes, related to minimum reinforcement areas
which add to the inherent robustness of concrete
In BS 81106.3 the cc for concrete under exceptional buildings. It is important that where such
loads is only reduced for flexure (= 1.3), as the partial minimum steel requirements are not provided, say
factor for shear is lower anyway. BS 8110 adopts a due to new construction techniques or systems,
partial factor cs for steel = 1.0, as does EC2. the effect on the overall structural robustness be
re-considered.
There are no special requirements for concrete key
element design and the approaches described in
Section 5.11 should be adopted.
6.7 References

6.6 Good detailing practice 6.1 Brooker, O. How to design concrete buildings to satisfy
disproportionate collapse requirements. Camberley: The
Concrete Centre, 2008
There is an implicit assumption of structural ductile
performance for the nominal Approved Document 6.2 BS EN 1992-1-1: 2004: Eurocode 2: Design of concrete
A6.9 tying recommendations to work in practice, not structures – Part 1-1: General rules and rules for
least since catenary action presumes significant buildings. London: BSI, 2004
axial and rotational ductility. To some extent, codes
recognise the demands of ductility since a modest 6.3 BS 8110-1: 1997: Structural use of concrete – Part 1:
amount of moment redistribution is permitted in Code of practice for design and construction. London:
continuous beams and since slabs designed on BSI, 1997
yield line methodology presume rotation at hinge
positions. In routine design, ductility demands are 6.4 Institution of Structural Engineers. Standard method of
not calculated explicitly, rather they are catered for detailing structural concrete: a manual for best practice.
by assuring members are under-reinforced and by 3rd ed. London: Institution of Structural Engineers, 2006

34 The Institution of Structural Engineers Practical guide to structural robustness and disproportionate collapse in buildings
 In situ concrete: issues and solutions 6.7

6.5 NA to BS EN 1992-1-1: 2004: UK National Annex to

Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures – Part 1-1:
General rules and rules for buildings. London: BSI, 2005

6.6 PD 6687: 2006: Background paper to UK National

Annex to BS 1992-1. London: BSI, 2006

6.7 BS 5950-1: 2000: Structural use of steelwork in

buildings – Part 1: Code of practice for design – Rolled
and welded sections. London: BSI, 2001

6.8 Pinho Ramos, A. and Lucio, V.J.G. ‘Post punching

behaviour of prestressed concrete flat slabs’. Magazine
of Concrete Research, 60(4), May 2008, pp245-251

6.9 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. The Building

Regulations 2000. Approved Document A: Structure.
London: NBS, 2004

6.10 Park, R. and Paulay, T. Reinforced concrete structures.

New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1975

6.11 ACI 318-08: Building code requirements for structural

concrete (ACI 318-08) and commentary. Farmington
Hills, MI: ACI, 2008

6.12 Beeby, A.W. ‘Safety of structures and a new approach

to robustness’. The Structural Engineer, 77(4),
16 February 1999, pp16-21

The Institution of Structural Engineers Practical guide to structural robustness and disproportionate collapse in buildings 35