Technical improvements in

Eurocode 2 Design of concrete

structures

Tony Jones
The Concrete Centre
Introduction
• Organisation of work
• Programme for work
• Key areas for improvement
• New topics
Organisation of CEN/TC/250/ SC2 for
revision of EC2.
 Programme

PT SC2.T1: Revision of
EN 1992-1-1 (including -2
& -3)

PT SC2.T2: Revision of
EN 1992-1-2

PT SC2.T3: Adtl Items EN

1992-1-1

Preparation Enquiry

Preparation FV

End End CEN CEN FV

Phase 1 Phase 2 Enquiry
Areas for improvement
High level objectives
• Main objectives for revision of Eurocodes:
• Reduction in number of NDPs
• Enhance ease of use
High level objectives
• Main objectives for revision of EN 1992 - Scope of PT
SC2.T1 (EN 1992-1-1):
• Reduction in number of NDPs
• Enhance ease of use
• Durability (input from TG10)
• Design by non-linear FEM (input from TG6)
• Size effect (input from TG4)
• Early age thermo-mechanical design (input from TG7)
High level objectives
• Integrate actual EN 1992-2 and EN 1992-3 into
future EN 1992-1-1:
• because member-specific design rules are avoided
• because there is only little bridge and containment specific
information
• because improved ease-of-use (actual EN 1992-2 requires
simultaneous use of EN 1992-1-1 together with
corresponding National Annexes)
• more compact standard (approx. 250pp versus 343pp today)
Ease of use?
• Simple equations with limited application
Or
• Physically “more” correct and transparent models
that can be applied to different situations and
different materials?
Ease of use
• What are
• αcc
• ν’
• ν1
• ν?
Columns
70
• Change in concrete60
design strength: fcd = ηcc ktc fck/γC where ηcc =
(40/fck)1/3 ≤ 1 50
• Note: ηcc for effective
40
strength in member (brittleness factor);
ktc for effect of 30high sustained load (recommended
Alpha cc = 1.0 1.0)
fcd

alpha cc = 0.85

20 New

10

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
fck
Columns
• But:
• Strain limitation for high strength concrete removed.
• Rules provided for accounting for the confinement from links
Punching Shear
• Problems include:
• Iteration for footings
• Location of control perimeter at 2d
• Size effects
• Slab slenderness
• Efficiency of Reinforcement
• Adaption for new materials
Theoretical Background
Theoretical Background
Failure Criterion
• Shear capacity can be related
to rotation
• Where the load/rotation
behaviour of the slab crosses
the capacity line failure
occurs.
Shear control perimeter
 Slabs with no links

Concrete crushing

Size factor
Reinforcement

Concrete
“Shear gradient enhancement”
Other enhancements
• Location of point of contraflexure
• Axial force (prestress)
• Membrane action.
Slabs with shear reinforcement
Slabs with shear reinforcement
Outer perimeter
• Similar approach to first perimeter but:
• “d” reduced based on a model that assumes the shear is
picked up by the bottom steel.
• Concrete capacity is reduced based on a model that assumes
the rotation is more.
Impact of headed studs
• Maximum Shear resistance depends on the type of
reinforcement.
• Studs give a greater effective depth at the outer
perimeter
Further Shear developments
• Non Black Steel Reinforcement
• Stainless Steel
• FRP
• Steel Fibre Reinforcement
Anchorage
• Concern over the “ease of use” of the current code
• Make easy for standard cases
• Use of an Average bond stress not technically correct
• But it is a convenient assumption!
Basic anchorage length
Refined anchorage length

• Further enhancements for:

• Good bond
• Confinement (transverse reinforcement or stress)
New items
• Stainless Steel Reinforcement
• Existing Structures
• Fibre Reinforced Concrete
• (Strengthening with?) Fibre Reinforced Polymer
Summary
• Revising a code to be fit for 2040.
• Assessment of comments on current code
• New theories in key areas
• New materials/aspect of design covered.
• Hopefully this all improves Ease of Use.