technical note: bs 8007
Improved crack width calculation method to
BS 8007 for combined flexure and direct tension
BS 80071 includes recommendations for the calculation of
design crack widths for sections under flexure and for
sections under direct tension. It does not provide
recommendations for sections under the combined forces. In
a previous technical note2 Erhard Kruger set out a method for
calculating crack widths under combined loads. Now with
Robin Atkinson he proposes an improvement on the method.
I
n a previous Technical Note by one of
the authors2 it was shown that the sepa-
rate equations for flexure and combined
tension are based on similar premises. A
method was proposed to proportion the
tensile stiffening force to the two layers of
reinforcement by considering horizontal
and moment equilibrium of the stiffening
forces. This method results in the ‘neutral
axis’ of the stiffening strain diagram not
coinciding with the neutral axis of the
section under the applied forces.
Some literature suggests, however, that
the stiffening strains should emanate from
the neutral axis position in all cases. This
approach gives a seamless consistency
throughout the whole range of possible
combinations of moment and tensile force.
The authors set out an improved method
for proportioning the tensile stiffening
force to the two layers of reinforcement for
certain cases in order to achieve this. It
also provides revised equations for the
case where the neutral axis is between
face 2 and its adjacent reinforcement.
Notation
a1 distance from face 1 to centroid of
reinforcement at face 1
a2 distance from face 2 to centroid of
reinforcement at face 2
acr distance from point considered to
surface of the nearest longitudinal bar
As1 area of reinforcement at face 1
As2 area of reinforcement at face 2
b width of section considered (normally
1m)
cmin minimum cover to tension steel
c1 minimum cover to reinforcement at
face 1
c2 minimum cover to reinforcement at
face 2
eccentricity = M
e should emanate from the neutral axis
T
Ec modulus of elasticity of concrete (1/2
the instantaneous value when used
to determine αe)
Es modulus of elasticity of reinforcement
fc compressive stress in concrete
fcu 28 day characteristic (cube) strength
of concrete
fs1 stress in reinforcement at face 1
fs2 stress in reinforcement at face 2
f´s1 stiffening stress in reinforcement at
18|The Structural Engineer – 17 May 2005
concrete
∆εs2 strain reduction in reinforcement at
face 2 due to tension stiffening of
concrete
ρ1 ratio of reinforcement at face 1
d=
A s1
n
bh
ρ2 ratio of reinforcement at face 2
d= n
A s2
bh
Note: Generally subscripts 1 and 2 refer to
face 1 faces 1 and 2 of the section respectively
f´s2 stiffening stress in reinforcement at
face 2 Introduction
fstif1 stiffening tensile stress in concrete at The author2 showed that the separate
face 1 equations for flexure and direct tension
fstif2 stiffening tensile stress in concrete at are based on similar premises, and that
face 2 eqn (1) of BS 8007: Appendix B, i.e.
fy characteristic strength of reinforce-
3acr f m
ment w= ...(1)
1 + 2 d cr n
a - c min
Fstif total stiffening tensile force in
h-x
concrete
Fstif1 portion of stiffening tensile force can be used both for flexure and for
acting at level of steel at face 1 direct tension. He then indicated that it
Fstif2 portion of stiffening tensile force can therefore be assumed that eqn (1) will
acting at level of steel at face 2 also apply to the case of combined flexure
h overall depth of section and direct tension.
a constant = <
h - a1 F
k1 a2 Combined flexure and direct tension
For combined flexure and direct tension,
k2 a constant = < h -a1a2 F two cases; (i) Complete section in tension
and; (ii) Section partially in compression,
K a constant for a particular section can be considered:
under a certain configuration of
moment and axial tension Case 1: Complete section in tension
Determining the neutral axis depth:
J h -a N
Ke+ 2O Equations (9) to (15) in Kruger2 still apply.
=K 2 O Proportioning the stiffening force:
Ke- h +a O
2 1 Previous method: Consider a section as
L P
shown in Fig 1. The author2 proposed a
M applied moment at section considered method for proportioning the total stiffen-
n1 ratio x ing force to the two layers of reinforcement
h
T applied axial tension at section by considering horizontal and moment
considered equilibrium of the stiffening forces, Fstif1
w design surface crack width and Fstif2.
w1 design surface crack width at face 1 Apportionment according to this
w2 design surface crack width at face 2 method results in the ‘neutral axis’ of the
x distance to the neutral axis from stiffening strain diagram not coinciding
face 2 with the neutral axis of the section under
xstif apparent neutral axis depth of stiff- the applied forces, i.e. xstif ≠ x. However, the
ening strain from face 2 lecture notes of the British Cement
Association3 contains a figure that seems
αe modular ratio b = E s E l to suggest that the stiffening strains
c
ε11 strain at face 1 ignoring stiffening position. It is generally accepted that this
effect of concrete is the case when the neutral axis lies
ε12 strain at face 2 ignoring stiffening within the section, so it would be consis-
effect of concrete tent to adopt the same approach when the
εm average strain at level where crack- neutral axis is beyond the section.
ing is being considered Proportioning the stiffening force:
εs1 strain in reinforcement at face 1 Improved method: Consider a section
εs2 strain in reinforcement at face 2 with width, b, as shown in Fig 2. Say f´s1
∆εs1 strain reduction in reinforcement at and f´s2 are the tensile stiffening stresses
face 1 due to tension stiffening of in the two layers of reinforcement. With
 technical note: bs 8007

the neutral axis position at x ≤ 0, the Fig 1. (right)

maximum stiffening tensile stress in the Previous method
concrete is: for proportioning
f stif1 = 2 3 N/mm 2 for w = 0.2mm stiffening effect
...(2)
and f stif1 = 1N/mm 2 for w = 0.1mm
Since x is negative, it follows from the
figure that:
_- xi
f stif2 = f stif1 ...(3)
_h - xi
The total stiffening force is: Fig 2. (below)
Stiffening effect
Fstif = e o bh
f stif1 + f stif2
...(4) of concrete; x≤0
2
The tensile stiffening forces in the two the neutral axis is given by equation 17
reinforcement layers are: (originally eqn 34)2 : (see panel 1)
Fstif1 = f ls1 As1 where n1 = x and e = M . The concrete
h T
...(5) stress, fc and steel stresses, fs1 and fs2, can
Fstif2 = f ls2 As2
be determined from equations (35) to (37)
From horizontal equilibrium: in Kruger2.
When: x < a2:
Fstif = f ls1 As1 + f ls2 As2 ...(6) By setting n1 = a2 in equation (17), the
h
value of the eccentricity, e, can be deter-
Since x is negative, it follows from the mined for which x ≤ a2 i.e. (See Eq 18,
figure that: panel 1).
For this case fs1 and fs2 are both tensile.
f ls1 f ls2
= ...(7) If these are defined as positive, and fc as
h - x - a1 a2 - x
negative, and by considering horizontal
Therefore and moment equilibrium, the position of
f ls1 _ a2 - x i the neutral axis, x can be determined from
f ls2 = ...(8) the equation (19) (see panel 1):
h - x - a1
where n1 = x and e = M .
h T
Substituting equation (8) in equation (6) The concrete stress, fc, can be deter-
and re-arranging, it follows that: mined from Eq (20) (see panel 1)
The equations for steel stresses are
Fstif
f ls1 = a2 - x A ...(9) again given by equations (36) and (37)
As1 + previously presented in Kruger2.
h - x - a1 s2 Fig 3. (above)
f s2
Similarly: Stiffening effect of Df s2 = Fstif ...(16) It should be noted that both equa-
f s1 As1 + f s2 As2
concrete; x≥h tions (17) and (19) are cubic, and therefore
Fstif
f ls2 = ...(10) These equations differ from those in the the solution of n1 can also be found
h - x - a1 A + A
a2 - x s1 s2 previous method (equations (24) and (25)). directly as described by Tuma4 or on the
But, from the diagram: Equations (26) to (33) in Kruger2 can still web page:
be used to eventually calculate the design http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/faq.cubi
h - x - a1 = f s1 ...(11) crack widths. c.equations2.html.
a2 - x f s2
Proportioning the stiffening force: As
Substituting equation (11) in equations Case 2: Section partially in compression shown in Fig 4 and Fig 5, the maximum
(9) and (10): Determining the neutral axis position: stiffening tensile stress in the concrete is
Strictly speaking, two cases have to be again given by Eq (2).
f s1
f ls1 = Fstif ...(12) considered, i.e.
f s1 As1 + f s2 As2
When 0 < x < a2:
x < a2 Apportionment according to the previ-
f s2
f ls2 = Fstif ...(13) where fs2 ≤ 0 (i.e. compression) ous method suggested by the author2
f s1 As1 + f s2 As2
again results in the ‘neutral axis’ of the
Fstif can be determined from equations x ≥ a2 stiffening strain diagram not coinciding
(2) to (4). where fs2 > 0 (i.e. tension) with the neutral axis of the section. For
When the neutral axis position is at x ≥ the improved method, consider a section
h (Fig 3): When x ≥ a2: with width, b, as shown in Fig 4. From the
f stif2 = 2 3 N/mm 2 for w = 0.2mm The equations previously given by the figure it follows that the total stiffening
...(14) author2 apply to this case. The position x of force is:
and f stif2 = 1N/mm 2 for w = 0.1mm
As previously, equations (12) and (13) Table 1: Comparison between design surface crack widths for the improved and
can be used to determine the tensile stiff- previous methods
ening stress in the two layers of reinforce- Improved method Previous method
ment. T M x w1 w2 w1 w2
Determining the average strain: By [kN] [kNm] [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm]
dividing both sides of equations (12) and 675 0 –∞ 0.200 0.200 0.200 0.200
(13) by Young’s modulus for steel, Es, the 675 1 –10712.1 0.204 0.197 0.204 0.197
effective reduction in strain in the rein- 675 5 – 2002.4 0.217 0.185 0.220 0.182
forcement due to the stiffening effect of 675 10 –913.7 0.234 0.169 0.239 0.164
concrete is: 20 87.8 83.0 0.208 – 0.208 –
5 87.8 84.6 0.202 – 0.202 –
f s1 1 87.8 85.0 0.200 – 0.200 –
Df s1 = Fstif ...(15)
f s1 As1 + f s2 As2 0 87.8 85.1 0.200 – 0.200 –

17 May 2005 – The Structural Engineer|19

 technical note: bs 8007

Fig 4. (left) determined by the previous (Kruger)

Stiffening effect method and the proposed improved
of concrete, method are given in Table 1.
section partially Table 1 indicates how the values of the
in compression; design crack width at the two faces of the
x<a2. section vary with different configurations
of flexure and direct tension. As for the
previous method, it shows a smooth tran-
sition in the values of design surface crack
widths from direct tension to combined
Fig 5. (left) direct tension and flexure, and from
Stiffening effect flexure to combined flexure and direct
of concrete, tension.
section partially
in compression; Examples
x≥a2 Four examples of sections checked for
design surface crack widths of 0.2mm with
both the improved and previous methods
are given in Table 2.

Comparison with previous method

Table 2: Examples
Tables 1 and 2 show that the previous
Parameter Example method underestimated the value of w2,
1 2 3 4 and overestimated the value of w1.
Case x<0 x>h a2<x<h 0<x<a2
a1 mm 48 48 48 48 Conclusions
a2 mm 55 46 46 46 About the
The previous method for proportioning the
As1 T16@125 mm T16@150 mm T16@150 mm T16@150 mm authors
tensile stiffening force proposed by
As2 T10@150 mm T12@150 mm T12@150 mm T12@150 mm H. G. Kruger
BEng (Civil),
Kruger2 resulted in the ‘neutral axis’ of the
M kNm 30 10 63 30 stiffening strain diagram not coinciding
BEng (Hons)
T kN 400 525 60 300 Struct, AIStructE, with the neutral axis of the section under
fc 3.07 1.78 1.78 1.78 PrEng, MSAICE, the applied forces.
–k1K 1.37 0.27 -0.22 18.62 is a specialist
engineer associate
An improved method for proportioning
–K 6.30 1.48 -1.22 102.00
of BKS (Pty) Ltd, the tensile stiffening force is proposed,
–k2K 32.14 7.85 -6.44 539.75
Pretoria, South which results in the stiffening strains
x mm –132.7 1289.9 72.2 20.22 Africa and H. R. emanating from the neutral axis position.
w1 (improved) mm 0.151 0.169 0.199 0.175
C. Atkinson, BSc. Generally, the previous method under-
w2 (improved) mm1 0.056 0.223 – – Civ Eng, MIStruct estimated the design surface crack width
w1 (previous) mm 0.188 0.200 0.199 0.192 E, MICE,
Chartered at face 2, w2, and overestimated the design
w2 (previous) mm1 –0.038 0.177 – –
Engineer, is a surface crack width at face 1, w1. This
(b = 1000mm h = 300mm fy = 460N/mm2 Es = 200kN/mm2 Ec = 27kN/mm2); 1Negative value
partner of Howes should not have serious consequences on
indicates that face is uncracked; 2Eqn (17) yields a result of 19.6mm
Atkinson calculations performed with the previous
Fstif = 1 f stif1 _ h - x i b Determining the design surface crack
Partnership (HAP)
method, but the authors are of the opinion
2 Consulting
b _h - xi width: In both cases, i.e. when 0 < x < a2 Engineers in that the method proposed in this report is
= for w = 0.2mm, and and a2 ≤ x < h, the crack width at face 1 Marlow, technically more consistent than the previ-
3 Buckinghamshire.
can be determined from equation (1). ous method. se
b _h - xi
= for w = 0.1mm
2 ...(21) Transition REFERENCES
Consider a section with the following char-
The values of f´s1 and f´s2 can again be acteristics:
determined from equations (12) and (13) b=1000mm h=350mm c1=c2=40mm 1. BS 8007 Design of concrete structures for retaining aqueous liquids,
respectively. As1: T16 @ 150mm As2: T16 @ 150mm London, British Standards Institution, 1987
fy = 460N/mm2 fcu = 35N/mm2 2. Kruger, H. G.: ‘Crack width calculation to BS 8007 for combined
When a2 ≤ x < h The service moment and service tension flexure and direct tension’, The Structural Engineer, 80/18,
As previously explained by the author2 capacities of the section for a design crack 17 September 2002, p 18-22
and from Fig 5, it is clear that the width of 0.2mm, are: 3. Crack width equations for combined flexure and tension, Course :
complete stiffening force acts on the rein- BS 8007 – design of concrete liquid-retaining structures, British
forcement in face 1 as in the case of flexure Ms = 87.8kNm and Ts= 675kN Cement Association, 51024
only and equation (43) from Kruger2 still 4. Tuma, J. J., Walsh, R. A.: Engineering Mathematics Handbook,
applies. A comparison between the crack widths (4th ed.), New York, McGraw-Hill, 1997, p 7
Determining the average strain: When
0 < x < a2 Panel 1
The values of the effective reduction in
n d 3 - 2n1 + 6e n + 6t 2 _ a e - 1i d n1 - a2 n d1 - 2a2 + 2e n + 6t1 a e d1 - a1 - n1 n d1 - 2a1 - 2e n = 0 ...( 17)
2
strain in the reinforcement due to the stiff-
ening effect of concrete are given by equa-
1 h h h h h h h
R V
tions (15) and (16). The values of the S a2 2 W
h S d n d 3 - 2a2 n + 6t1 a e d1 - a1 - a2 n d1 - 2a1 n W
average strains can be determined from S h h h h h W
equations (26) to (31) given previously in e# T 2
X ...( 18)
Kruger2. - 6 d a2 n + 12t1 a e d1 - a1 - a2 n
h h h
When a2 ≤ x < h n d 3 - 2n1 + 6e n + 6t 2 a e d n1 - a2 n d1 - 2a2 + 2e n + 6t1 a e d1 - a1 - n1 n d1 - 2a1 - 2e n = 0 ...( 19)
2

The method described by the author2

1 h h h h h h h

ed n ed
x n bh
still applies to this case, and equations (49) T = x + a 1 - a2 As2 - a h - 1 - a1 As1 ...( 20)
f c bh 2h 2 bh x
to (51) given there are equally valid here.

20|The Structural Engineer – 17 May 2005