Sa EUROCODE 2 70 SECTION ANALYSIS (1): SLABS AND BEAMS Using the lewsr atm of 178mm obtained in Example 4.6, the steel stress is = 3074 WWS6L = 1789 300.2 Nim’ The reinforcement provided at support B is Wp-1Dele. Assuming the cracks are caused predominanty by loading. sitber the provisions of table 4.11 oF the provisions of table 412 of EC2 should he complied with to avoid excessive crack widths. The provisions of table 41] ate met and thus the steel provided for Hexure at the ultimate limit state gives adequate crack control To comply with stres limita w (section 48.1 of this chaplcr) the rare combination loads willbe used with = 07. This gives My = 37.04 KN m, 369 Nimm? and a, = 622Nimum’. Thus the steel stress limitation of OS fy i just satisfied. The concrete stress is only 0.21/. and thus this does not resent a serviceability problenn. Member analysis, Plastic analysis with equal support and. span ‘moments; thus the design moment and shear for the tend span is My = 0.036 (1.35 » 6.74 + 1.5 35) x 72° = 63.97 KN mim Vp = 1435 036 = 6054 uN Section analysis For bending Mlb = 6397 x 10°08 x 23 From Figure 43 wld =O. for f, = 25Nimme x 253mmExample 4.8: deflection check by calculation The purpose of this example to apply the proce dare given in Appendix 4 of EC2 for estimating deflections by cakulation. The Code states that, ia buildings. i will normally be satisfactory to consider the deflections under quasi-permaneat combination ff leading, assuring this load to be of long dura- tion, Consider a four-span continuous one-way sib (Figure 4.25) with the following design daa (© Four equal spans of 72. Jy = 25mm © fe = a0 Nima © 0, (variable action) Hghiweight partitions) © G, (permanent setion) based on unit weight of concrete plus OS kN/m? for suspended ceiling and services © 4 =03 quasi permanent loading assumed long Cove 10 controll of reinforcement, say 30mm. 35kN/in? (offices plas The Following cakvuhtions relate to the endl span, Utimate tit stato Loading ‘Assume a spanioverall depth ratio of L/A = 28, Thus, fh = 0257 m, say, 260mm Gy = 026 4-05 = 674 NI? a 35 KNin Thus A, = 63,97 « 1ONABH.IS x 230 - 04 253) = 7233 mii Provide 12g-180 (754 mm?/m). For shear, shear stress v= Kolb = 6054 « 10/108 « 230 = 0.283 Nimm? From Table 16 the basic shear strength ty i O3Nimm? for f= 28Nimm'; thus adequate in shea Serviceabilty limit state ~ deflection For & continuous slab with uniformly disiributed Toading, the deflection in the end span can be expressed in the form = 0104 (1 ~ prto) 22 (Ur) 430) where B= UM, + MMe where My and My are the support mements and Me is the midspan moment. The loading arrangement 4s shown in Figure 4.23:SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES nm f= 026m r 1.95 64+ 1.50% us| Mo = 0.086(1.35 Gx + 1.5 On)L? Me T ‘oro, A © 8 36 38 sisFOR SLS (DEFLECTION) Ma = 0 Mo = O.107GKL? + 0.054 2 Ox L? Me = (Gx+veagLto. M2 B Nas Me. 0.108 (1 -Mioy2. DEFLECTION ‘ Figare 423 Examples 4.8 and 49: four spaa sab, loading errangemens 2 SECTION ANALYSIS (1): SLABS AND BEAMS. ple end support assumed) To determine the value of a, the equation of My =0 bending gives My 0107 GL? + 0084 4, OL 107 x 6.74 x 7.2! + 0.054 » 0.3% 35 x12 For fy = 25 Nimm®, £ 37.39 +294 hi 10.33 kN mim Ir = MI is obtained from 95 (ig + 8) = 304 kN Creep is allowed for using an effective modulus of MC = (Gy + ty Qy) LII8 ~ My = (674+ 03 x 3.8) 7298 ~ 40.3972 50,48 - 20.20 Taking ¢ 25 20, say (see table 33 of C2), Fogg = Ball +9) 2028KN me Foag = MAX 033 = 10.14 Nim? My + MyM, = 40393028 ‘Tous1- B/10 = 0867 k= 0.104 x 0867 = 0,090 “Thus deflection 8 = 0000 12 (19) ‘The final stage of the calculation is to estimate the curvature from the deformation parameter (curvature) a a Soy #1 Dy, roting that «and ay ate the parameters for the uncracked ard fully cracked sections respectively. ‘The distribution factor § is obtained from 5-1 By B, (MIM)? ‘The cosficient for bond wil be taken as LD (high- tond bars) and the duration of leading coofizient fy will be taken as 0.5 (sustained loading). The sacking moment Ma Sahl For fg = 25 Nim, fay 6 Nima. Thus Mg, = 26% 10° x 200510 x 108 = 29 AN mim ‘The midspan moment was estimated to be 30.28 kN mim, Thus MIM = 30.2829.2 033 ‘Thus $= 1-10 x05 x 1.0332 = 0.466 ay = r= 29.29 10" x 12110.14 X10 1D x 260" = LT2x 106 ‘The value of eis obtained (see Figure 4.24) from Ur = 0B y ‘The steel percentage p= TSH x 230 x 10° = 033, ‘The neutral axis factor n is obtained by solving the quadratic p = (S0ia,)rI =n) oF from Figure 419, Using the effective modulus Eyer 1014kNmm? 4, = E/E xe = 2010.14 = 19.72 (say, 20) and 4 = 20 From Figure 419 with p = 0. 1 = 036 (approx) ini) = 2024 “Thus stet stress or, = M028 x OHS 2024 = 198 Nim? (in) = y = 1472 mm and oy = Ur=aJEy 198/200 x 10° x 1472. 6.75 x 106SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES 13 Pr a Q /| / d-nd a L +@-2-e——_"_= o Vip 424 ele 48 agra wo ebuda ‘Ts x35x72 ee = [0466 x 6.725 + (1 ~ 0.466) x 1972}10¢ 37.39 + 659 mats x04 = 89818 win ‘Thus deletion From Beamle 48, p = 033 and wing the lorg- term tale of, = 2 the neviral axis aor from 3 = 009110 Figure 49 5 n'= 0.4% Thus = 0.00 72256 106 w 4187 » 106 = 19,53mm Li = 72001953 » 360 ‘This valve is well within the guideline of span/250 relevant to the appearance and general utility of the structure MyA,d (1 ~ m3) 43,98 x 109754 x 2024 2882 Nimm? < D3 f, 368 “The cracking moment is 29.29 kN m (sce Example 48), ThusExample 49: crack width by calculation Using the design data for Example 48, the crack width will be estimated at support B. The loading conditions are shown in Figure 4.25. The fist stage is to caleulate the stress in the tension reinforce ‘ment on the basis of a cracked section and the stress 4, in the tension reinforcement calculated on the bbisic of a cracked section under the loading condi tion: causing first cracking. The moment at B for Gi, + 4s Oy is given by (see Figure 4.25): My = 007 Gy L? + 0.21 dy Qe LP = 0107 6.74 x 7.28 + O12 « 03 4 (4/6, ‘The mean strain ELI ~ BB (@f0)"] ‘Taking By = 1.0 for high-bond bars and sustained Foading, 05 for 2882200 x 10° (1 -0.5 x 0.443) Inxs SECTION ANALYSIS (1): SLABS AND BEAMS We Ox‘SLS (CRACKING) Ms = 0.107GKL? + 0.121 ¥2OxL? igure 425 Example 4. loading to estimate crack width final erack spac The design erack width is given by Sg 50-4 025 &, KP, = Bin fan = bar diameter = 12 17 (load:induced racking) 4, = 0.8 (high-bond bars) Spy = 50+ 025 20.8 x OS x 1212.76 > 10% 50 + 94.06 14404 mm =05 (bending) For slabs. the height of the effec should not exceed (i ~ x3. From L12« 105 smd = 086 y 20 ~ 928 Thus we get W, = 1.7 5 14408 51412 108 = 0.274 mm (93 = 59.07 mm ‘This is within the limitation of a maximum design crack width of about 0.3 mm under the quasi-perma- 25x 30-75 rent combination of lous. Thus 4.9 SUMMARY Agen = 9.7% 108 494. Flexure and shear at ultimate limit 758 state Thus Section analysis for feaure and shear atthe ulimate limit state in accordance with EC? is. straight- 1b, = TSHS9.07 10S = 12.75 x 105) forward. The procedure is summarized below for aEXAMPLES OF THE 1 DYaxy taney i Reinforced Concrete Buildings TO BS 8110 FOURTH EDITION Charles E. Reynolds and James C. Steedman8.7 CRACKING: ANALYTICAL METHOD ‘The foregoing simplified nutes for the maximum spacing of bars may be ignored provided that itcan be shown by calculation that the resulting maximum crack widths do not exceed the limiting value of 0.3mm permitted by BS8110. Since the arbitrary rules described above have been designed to ensure that excessive cracking is prevented in the most extreme practical conditions, detailed calculations will almost always show that wider ‘bar spacings than those permitted by the simplified rules ‘can be adopted. Thisis particularlylikely to be tue where ‘the member concerned is fairly shallow, and is normally ‘only untrue for deep beans. ‘A suitable mathematical procedure for calculating ‘erick widths is described in clauses 3.8 of Part 2 of 'BS8110. Provided thatthe strain inthe tension steel does not exceed O8f//E,, design surface crack width) = 68) where dis the distance between the peint oa the surface “atwhich the erack width i being ealculatedand the face of the nearest longitudinal bar, hi the overall depth of the 45 ad Cay is the {In normal circumstances with a restangalar tension zone, the average stain fq in the memiver ai the level at Which the crack width is being calculated, taking into ‘account the stiffening effect of the concrete ia the tension zone, may be calculated from the expression SEES 63) Cracking: analytical method of elaticity of the steel (200N/mm*) by YE, (Le. a 4001F,). The charts on Date Sheets 22t0 25 may now be used to read off the values of the neutrals and lever- ‘arm factors x/d and 2/d corresponding to given values of ‘0,¢ and (a, — 1)¢". Then calculate the average surface strain cy at the tension face from the expression “M, (h=2) AzE, (d=) “The crack width at any given section may then be caleulated by using expressions (8.8) and (8.9). The procedure is ilustrated by the worked examples given in section 88. “The principal criteria determining erack widths are the distances of the point considered from the nearest bar running at right angles to the crack and from the neutral axis, and the average surface strain, Thus across the tension face of a member the width ofthe crack rises from. ‘a minimum velue directly above a bar toa maximum at a point midway between bars or at an edge. Over the sides ‘of abeam, theerack width varies from a minimumvalue at the same level asthe tension reinforcement tozero at the neutral axis, attainingitemaximum value ata depthequal tosboutone-thied ofthe distarce from the tension steel to, the neutral axis. In the light of the foregoing, unless the exposure conditions come within the “very severe" category, the task of the designer merely resolvesinto ensuring that the rack widths (a) in the tension face midway between bars (oratthe edge ofthe member) and (b) atthe critical level in thesides, donot exceed 0.3 mm. Tofacilitatethisiask it {possible t0 prepare design charts to simplify the somewhat cumbersome calculations involved once Fat, the ‘adjusted’ strain at the tension face, has been determined. Such charts are provided on Data Sheets 38 and 39, and theit derivation isas follows. (6.10)where A, and f, ate thearea and charscteristiestressof the tension feinforcement, b, isthe widih of the member at the level of the centroid of the tersion steel, ais the distance from the compression face 10 the point being considered, and ey isthe stainin the member at the point being considered. To allow for creep, when calculating , the value assumed for the modulus of elastiity of the concrete should be only 50% ofthe instantaneous value shrinkage strains exceeding 0.00% are expected in the concrete, ¢,should be inereased by adding one-half tothe pated shrinkage strain. If teasion occurs across the entire section (ie. x=), BS8IIO recommends that 3 suitable value for hx should be interpolated from the Hits that Ax =A wien the neutral axis coincides with the edge of the section, and A~x=2h when the loading ‘ purely axial ((e. there is no applied moment.) ‘To calculate a design surface crack width, the fist step {to dotermine the moment M, at the section concerned ue to service loads, Calculate (using the expression on Data Sheet 21) the modulus of elasticity E.corresponding to the charscterisic strength of the concrete used, and determine the modular rato a, by dividing the modulus ‘Thus, dividing expressions (8.11) and (8.12) through by Sn where ee (coal oie (MYA (as) Vi(E7)(2+#+1)] @2) 7.1 Tension face Here tq equals ¢, and the maximam crack width occurs midway between the bars, the spacing of which is sy ‘Thus, for this condition, 5 = Ve + 89) ~ Cnn * 07") ‘This requirement may be rewritien as. = VM, = eNO tenet OBL) With a crack width of 0.3mm, expression (8.8) may be from which = Aha 3) oo ee 6.12) 65 Tha ving owe yen S-Vibensy +6(S)] 48 By subatituting appropriate values of (~)émas(d=3)/ Coins Wem AMM Cay Cans the Curves represented by the broken lines on the charts may be determined; asbefore, na rics expressed in milimettes,‘where én Gn is expressed in millimetres. By substituting appropriate values of (h~)Cprs fm Cnn 294 ley the curves represented by the full lies On the charts may be obtained. 8.7.2 Sides of members ‘The precise depth at which expression (8.8) reaches its maximum value depends on a combination of various factors and no simple rule can be devised to give It. However, it has been pointed out by Alen that, provided that the ‘thickness of cover is relatively insignificant compared with the depth of the section, in practice the maximum width of crack occurs at shout one-third of the distance from the tension reinforcement to the neutral axis. Ifthe erack width at this depth (ic. a’ = 4(2d + 2)) is calculated, the difference between the value obtained, and the true maximum will be found to be negligible. Now at a depth a’, tq = (a! —1) q(x). Thus, for ‘amaximum crack wid of 0.3mm, 0.3 - ——¥e__[(@'=2),, ] 142( Sree) 1 O-3) a Thus tag = GED +2 es) oat =a) andsince a! ~x=74(d~.), th= s+ TOae(4~=) ‘Then dividing through by cys 8.7.3 Use of design charts ‘The normal method of using the design charts on Data Sheets 19 ond 39s to calculate eng, the ‘adjusted’ strainat the tensile face of the member, us described carlier. The relevant chart is then entered with the known values of| Fann ANd (hh), and the corresponding ratios of ‘Sulenm ANG, if appropriate, (d ~x)(h =x) are read off. ‘The former factor gives the maximum spacing between Jongitudinal bars that may be utilized; the distance from the centre-line of the outermost barto the edge of a beam ‘must not exceed one-half ofthis distance. Thelatter factor sives the maximum ratio of (d=.xy/( 2) that may be adopted, Itmust be borne in mind that, in the cae of a slab, the spacing of an assumed size of bars cannot be discetly increased to the maximum value given by the charte since (in addition to altering the resistance moment of the section) any adjustment to the amount of reinforcement provided will alter the values of r,z, f,and so on, If the ‘required amount of reinforcement, instead of the amount provided, is substituted for A, in the calculations to etermine fqa, the maximum spacing given by the chart may be used in conjunction with the appropriate value of A, to determine a suitable bar arrangement, It must be remembered however that, to be accurate, interpolation between the charts depends on the actual value of lc, and at this stage @ is unknown. Furthermore, since h=d-+%o +c, h,dand @are related anditis impossible to evaluate ¢ay without assuming some value for $. However, approximate designs can be prepared in this way and the final bar arrangement checked by ensuring that the spacing adopted does not exceed the maximum permissible value given by the chars Chants are only provided for the limi Heng = 0 ( withthe concrete cover) and leq = 1 (when the bar sie is equal tothe cover provided), since inspection will show thatthe actual ratio of 6/¢au hasa relatively minor effect ‘on the values obtained. Since the values of r/ems given by the chart for 6/éaq = Oare always lower than those when ‘lenin = 1, the former chart may be used directly forAssuming that the critical value of occursat!/(2d +), 0, = VW cnin* Yt)? + (d= a'))|= 86 = VilCan + 199)" + (d= 2)"1— 19 7) preliminary design. For grester accuracy, linear Interpolation between the charts shoulé be employed. ‘As regards cracking in the sides of beams, the ratio of (a= 2y(h—2) is not very sensitive to the actual value Of dem: Above the chain line on the charts, the chart {ot $ltmq 1 actually gives the more critical value for (d—2)(—2); below this line, the chart £6F @uq™= 0 should be used. Again, for extreme accuracy, linear interpolation berween the chart is recommended. The use of the charts is illustrated in the worked examples that follow. Note that tue felates 10 the minimum coverof the tension reinforcement tothe face of the member being considered. Thus if different amounts ofcoverare provided tthe side and bottom (ortop faces ofa beam, when determining the value of qshould be that beneath (or above) the bars. but when checking (d—/( 2) the value taken for ena should be the cover tothe sides ofthe beam, 15 CRACKING: WORKED EXAMPLES 3.2.1 Stab Design the reinforcement for a freely supported 125mm Sab spanning 4.5m to support an imposed load of SkNimiff, = 25Nimin* and f,= 460 Nim. Assuring that no allowance need be made for Sirishes, the selfweight of the slab is 23.6 x 0.125 = 2.95kNia Thos Cracking: worked examples cee nba) SO SEA (d= 2) = 0.00176 Since the maximum crack width occurs midway between bars, by caleulation a4 © V(I37.5* +33") 8 = 134mm, apd With qu = 25m, Bae tos 142 om au) hee ‘maximum rack width 32 153.40.00176 | 71> 2xU 4-7) 25 (038992) = 020Smm Alternatively, by using the charts on Data Sheets 38 and 39, with ple = 1625 = 0.64, (h ~ ac = [125 ~ (0.389 x 92))25 = 3.57 and «, = 0.001 88 25 = 0.047. it will be cen that the point where the given curves for (h~sYe and se intersect falls outside the charts, but theultimate moment (2.98 x 1.4)+.0x 1.6) 464.5 0.125 = 22.6kNm per m Using the design chart on Date Stet 13, he requited amount of tension reinforcements 713mm per metre. wrould be convenient to provide 16mm bas a 275mm centres, and this would meet the Code requirement tat the maximum bar spacing mast not exceed 3d+.9 = (Gx 92)+ 16= 292mm. However, the simplified rules in Part 1 of BSE110 limit the maximum spacing between high yield bars to 1¢0mm. Using the analytical method described in BSS110, an approtimate valve of &, or grace 23 concrete (from the ‘expression on Daa Shec121)s2SkNimm; thus a= 200 O5%25) 16, Te oponion of, renorenent required is 713(02 10) «0.00775. From the charts ‘on Data Shees 22 t0 25 the corresponding values of s/d tnd 2/d (with a, = 16) are 0.389 and 0.690 respectively. “The bending moment due to service loadsis(2.95-+3.0)* 4.355012 = 15.06}Nm per m, and thus the corte- sponding stress in the reinforcements fy MJA,2 = 18.06% 10°1713 «0.87 x92) = 264 Nim Since this is less than 08f,=368Nimm*, the Code analytical method may be used. Thea the strain in the ste! = ,/E, = 2647200 000 = 0.001 32. Thus s fe = 1252103895) 9.09132 = 0.00209 (1 — 0.389) corresponding limiting value of syfe is well above 50. Calculations willin fact show that, from th point of view (of cracking, the 20mm bars could well be spaced at 400mm centres without a maximum erack width of (0.3mm being exceeded. 882 Beam ‘A beam spanning ‘wo 14m spans has an overall depthof 800mm apd is 400mm wide. The bear, which caries dead and imposed service loads of 15kNim and 10kNim respectively, i reinforced over the eeateal support with three 40mm bars. Check that the Code requirements regarding cracking at this point are no! exceeded i fue 25NItm and f, = 4€0 Ni 11s moment redistribution of 20% hat been made, the maximum clear spacing between basgiven by Deta Sheet 37 i 130mm, With 40mm wide cover and three 4Omm bars, the actual clear spacing between the bars is only ivi, so thatthe Cove requirements are met in this respect. However, since the beam has an overall depth of sore than 750mm, addtional longitudinal bars (Say 16mmat25Omm centes) mast be provided near the sides ‘over a depthot about $38 mm from the tension faceunless ‘euailed calculations indicate otherwise ‘The maximum moment at the support dve to service loads is M, (10+ 15) x14? 4 = 013 «1k aServiceability limit-states For grade 25 concrete, an appropriate value of E, (Dawa Sheet 21) is 2kNimm*. Thus a, =40025= 16. The proportion of reinforcement provided is (3 0" x Yer) (740x400) = 37707296000 = 0.0127, s0 thai ga, = 0.2032. “Thus 21d = 0.466 and zid = 0.545 from the chart on Daca Sheet 22. Now =te Az Since ths is ess than 0.8f, method is valid. Then 613 x 10° S770 x 0845 x TAO 368 Nimm*), the analytical fe = 20mm? = 0.00130 and 500 ~ (0.466 * 740) Ta oa % O00 30 = 0.00150 or siving a 100 (800 — 0.466 x 740)? m= 0.001 50-— 5108 3770 7401 = 0.465) = 0.00141 Considering the top of the beam, dyrmuc = V(70" + 60") = 202 72.2mm. Then Bet ‘maximum crack width ~ —Ma-fo 142 eal Considering the sides ofthe beam, the maximum width of crack will occur at a depth of about '4(2d + x); i.e. about 4x 140 x 2.46 = 607mm, At thislevel, = WT = (0.486 140) 5 004 41 = SOOO ace Tap) eet = B08 Since a, = V{(740~ 661)? + 60#] = 20 = 126mm, 3% 126 x 0.00081 1+ —_2026=40) 50D (0.466 x 730) = 023mm Wf the chart on Data Sheet 39 is used i le= 1.0, (h=x/e= [800 ~ (0.466 x 740))/40 = 11.4 and ¢=000141%40=0.056, the chart gives ‘maximum values of sy/e=4.3 and (d~ xVl(h—~x 10. Since the actual values of s,/c and (d ~ x)'(h~ 2) are 3.5 and 0.87 respectively, the section is clearly satisfactory, and no adjustment or additional steel need bbe provided. maximumerack width = read, with| REINFORCED CONCRETE ‘DESIGN THEORY AND EXAMPLES THIRD EDITION Prab Bhatt, Thomas J. MacGinley & Ban Seng Choo666 Reinforced concrete design crack width = - 14242760) (h-x) The code states that this formula can be used provided that the strain in the tension reinforcement does not exceed 0.8{/E,. The terms in the expression are defined as follows: ag distance of the point considered to the surface of the nearest longitudinal bar tm ~ average strain at the level where the cracking is being considered (this is discussed below) Cin = Minimum cover to the tension steel werall depth of the member x= depth of the neutral axis The average strain ¢, can be calculated using the method set out for determining the curvature in BS8110: Part 2, section 3.6, and section 19.1. ‘The code gives an alternative approximation in which 1. the strain &}, at the level considered is calculated ignoring the stiffening effect of the conerete in the tension zone (the transformed area method is used in this calculation) 2. the strain s), is reduced by an amount equal to the tensile force due to the stiffening effect of the concrete in the tension zone acting over the tension zone divided by the steel area 3. tq for a rectangular tension zone is given by b(h-x)la'-0) 3E, A, (d=3) where b= the width of the section at the centroid of the tension stecl a'= the distance from the compression face to the point at which the crack width is required The code adds the following comments and requirements regarding use of the crack width formula:1. A negative value of ty indicates that the section is not cracked; 2. The modulus of elasticity of the concrete is to be taken as one-half the instantaneous value to calculate strains; 3. If the drying shrinkage is very high, i.e. greater than 0.0006, & should be increased by adding 50% of the shrinkage strain, In normal cases shrinkage may be neglected. 19.4 EXAMPLE OF CRACK WIDTH CALCULATION FOR T-BEAM. The beam chosen is the same as the one used in section 19.2. The total moment at the section duc to service loads is 111.6kNm. The materials are grade 30 concrete andDesigners’ Guide to EN 1992-2 Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures Part 2: Concrete bridges tency in use of symbols i this section of EN 1992-2 and EN 1992-1-1ispoor, with the same symbols sometimes changing defiaition from sub-clause to sub-clause. Care is therefore needed to use the correct definition in the relevant clause. 73.1. General considerations Rletidause we 73.1(1)P states that cracking shall be limited to the extent that it should not 73.4 impair the proper functioning or durability ofthe structure, oF cause its appearance to be Lleticouse unacceptable. 2-1-Ieiause 7.1.12) i, however, a reminder thal cracking is inevitable in 73.112) reinforced conerete bridges subjecied to bending, shear, torsion or tension. Cracking may arise from the result of either direct loading, from trafic actions for example, or restraint 6f imposed deformations, such as shrinkage or temperature movements. The rules in EC? cover the control of cracking from these causes and are discussed in detail inthis section. wally, cracks may arise from fother causes such as plastic shrinkage, corrosion of reinforcement or expansive chemical Belet/douse reactions (such as alkal-silica reaction). 2-4-I[elause 73.1(3) notes that the control of 73.13) svch cracks is beyond the scope of EC2, even though they could be very large if they occur Zi-t/douse 2eI-Ifelause 7.3.1(4) anid 2-2/elause 7.3.1(105) both essentially require the design crack 73.114) ‘width 10 be chosen such that cracking does not impair the functioning of the siructu 2éowse Cracking normally ‘impairs’ the function of the structars by either helping to initiate 7311105) reinforcement cortosion ot by spoiling its appearance. The relationship between cracking 230 nv ialCHAPTER 7. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES and corrosion in reinforced concrete has been extensively researched. The alkalinity of fresh conerete protects reinforcement from corrosion. This protection can be destroyed, however, by carbonation or ingress of chlorides. Cracks can lead to an acceleration of both of these processes by providing a path for carbon dioxide and chloride ions to the reinforcement. The size of the cracks ao has an iafluence on the time to initation of reinforcement corrosion, Noticeable eracking in structures causes concern 10 the public and iis therefore prudent to limit crack widths to a size thot is not readily noticesble ‘The above considerations have lad to the erack width limitations spedfied ia 22/Table T.AOIN, which is subject to variation in a National Annes. 2-2/clause 7.3.1(105) notes that although compliance with the crack width ealulation methods and adherence to these limiting crack widths should guarantee adequate performance, the calculated crack widths themsdlves should not be considered as real values. For reinforeed concrete, the crack width check is recommended to be performed under the quaspermanent Joad combination. ‘This effectively excludes trai for highway bridges when the recommended value of from Annex A2 of EN 1990 is ued. The quasi-permanen! combination does, however, include temperature. In checking crack widihs in reinforced conerete members, only the secondary effects of temperature difference need to be considered as discussed in section 7.2 above. For bonded prestressed members, however, the self-equilibrating stresses should also be included in decompression checks. Presiresing steels are much more sensitive to damage from corrosion than normal reinforcement, mostly due to their smaller diameter and higher level of siress under which they normally operate. I is therefore widely accepted that itis necessary to have more fonerous rules for protection of prestressed conercte members against corrosion. This is reflected in stricter erack control criteria for prestressed members with bonded tendons in 2.2/Table 7.1O1N. It also specifies requirements for decompression checks for prestressed members with tonded tendons and defines under which relevant combination of actions the decompression check is required. For XC2, XC3 and XC4 environments, itis the 4quasi-permanent combination while for XD and XS classes, itis the frequent combination. ‘Members with only unbonded tendons are treated in the same way as reinforced concrete members ~ 22/elause 7.366). In order to safeguard bonded tendons from corrosion, it would be logical for wo-way’ spanning elements with prestressing in oneditection only, such asa deck slab in a prestressed concrete box girder. to also have stricter erack criteria in the direction transverse to the prestressing. This is not, however, explicitly required by 22/Table 7.101N and was not required in previous UK codes. 2veouse 73.106)‘The decompression limit cheek requires that no tensile stresses occur in any concrete within a certain distance, recommended to be 100mm, of the tendon or its duct. This ceasures that there is no direct crack path t© the tendon for contaminants. The 100 mun requirement is not a cover requirement. It simply means that if the cover is less than 100mm, it must all be in compression. Lesser covers may be acesptable, providing the ’inimum requirements of 2-2/clause 4 are met. Conversely tensile stresses are permitted in the cover as long as the concrete within 100mm (or amended value in the National Annex) of the tendons or duets is in compression. If, in checking decompression, the extreme fibre is fourd to be cracked, the check of decompression at the specified distance from the tendons becomes iterative. Additionally, although not siated in 2-2/Table 7AOIN, if decompression is not checked at the surface for XD and XS environmental classes, a crack width check should also be performed if untensioned reinforcement is present. Iti therefore simpler and conservative to check decompression at the surface of the member. If a crack with check is performed, the criterion for reinforced concrete in ‘Table 7.1OIN ean be adopted. Stress checks in a pre-tensioned beam are ilustrated in ‘Worked example 5.10-3 in section 5.10 ofthis guide In deep beams and elements with geometrical discontinuities, where strutand-ti analysis is required, iis still nesessary to click erack widths. 2J-T/elause 7.3.1(8) allows the bar forces thus determined to be used 10 calcukite reinforcement stresses 10 verify crack widths in accordance with the remainder of 2-1-L/ekuwse 7.3, 2-I-Melawse 731(9) in DletAause 73.18) 2tl/deuse 73.10) aiDESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992.2 22douse 73.4110) 22/douse 73.2(102) general permits either a direct calculation of crack widths using 2-1-I/ckause 7.34 ora check of allowable reinforcement stress for a given crack width ia accordance with 2-1-1/clause 7.3.3. The latter is simpler as many of the parameters needed in 2-1-I/clause 7.4 relate to beam geometry, Where struteand-tie modeling is used 10 verify erack widths in this way, the results will only be representative if the strut-and-tie model is based on the clastic stress trajectories inthe uneracked state, This is discussed in section 6.5.1 and is noted in 2uleLjelanse 7.3.18) 2-2clause 7-3.1(110) sugzests that ‘in some cases it may be nevessary tocheek and control shear cracking in webs’. These ‘eases’ are not deined and 2-2/Annex QQ, which i referenced for further information, is equally vague other than toimply that a check is most relevant for [prestressed members, perhaps partly decause the Tongitudinal web compression reduces the tensile svength of the concrete in the direction of maximum principal tensile stress, Previous UK design standards have not roquited a verification of cracking duc to shear in webs, but the shear design for reinforced concrete members at ULS differs in EC? in two ways. First, higher erusting resistances are possible which means greater forces need to be carried by the links ifthe web concrete is Fully sressed. Second, shear design was previously based on & ‘truss model with wed compression struts fixed at 45°. Since the Eurocode permis th compression struts to rotute to flatter angles, fewer lnks aight be provided using EC2 it some cases to mobilize a given shear force. thus ereating greater link stresses atthe service= ability limit state, 7.3.2, Minimum areas of reinforcement In deriviog the expressions for the calculation of ersek widths and spacings inseetion 73.3, Fundamental assumption is that the reinforcement remains elastic. If the reinforcement yields, deformation will become concentrated at the crack where yielding is occurring, and ‘this will mevitably invalidate the formulae. For a section subjected to uniform tension, the Force necessary forthe meriber to crack is Acfaaus Where Noy the cracking load, 4, is the area of Concrete in tension and fy 16 Oi ma ae suenphof te onset. Testaments foe Toons tho dibued rcing develop these nus aot eld when he at ac rs na Alon > Acfamn (7-2) Equation (D7-12) needs to be modified for stress distributions other than uniform texsion, 2-Yelanse 7.3.2(102) introduces a variable, f;, to account for difierent types of stress ‘distribution Which has the effect of reducing the teinforvement requirement when the tensile stress reduces through the section depth. A further factor, &, is included to allow for the influence of intemal sef-equilbriating stresses which arise where the strain varies non-linesrly through the member depth. Common sources of non-linear strain variation are srinkage (where the outer concrete shrinks more rapilly than the interior concrete)mm and temperature difference (where the outer concrete heats up or cools more rapidly than the interior coverete). The self-equilibriating stresses that are produced can increase the tension at the outer fibre, thus leading to cracking occurring at a lower load than expected. This in urn mesns that les reinforcement is necessary to carry the force at eracking and thus to cnaure distributed cracking occurs. The factor & therefore reduces the reinforcement necessary where slf-equilibriating stresses can occur, Thete seesies are more pronounced for deeper members and thus kis smaller for deeper members ‘The minimum required reinforcement arca is thus given as: kar hs 2240.1) Acsin i the required minimum area of reinforcing steel within the tensile zone An" isthe area of eoncrete within the tensilezone. The tensile zone should be taken as ‘that part of the concrete section which is calculated to be in tension just before the formation of the frst crack Page 233 is not part of this bock preview. Learn more DESIGNERS GUIDE TO EN 1992.2 Dleteause 73.2(4) 6, isthe largest bar diameter of reinforcing steet 5, istheequivalent diameter of the tendon in accordance with 2-L prestiessing steel i used to control cracking, & = VE 2-1 clause 7.3.2(4) allows mirimum reinforcement 10 be cmitted where in prestressed conerete members, the stress at the most tensit fibre is limited to a nationally determined value, recommended t0 be fue. Uider the characteristic combination of ations and the characteristic value of prestiess. This does uot remove the aced 10 consider the provision of reinforcement to contrct carly thermal cracking prior to application of the prestressng, clause 682. If only22ideuse 73.101) 2 Avelnuse 73302) 73.3. Control of cracking without direct calculation ‘The basis of the crack width calculation method in EN 1992 is presented in section 7.3.4. 22jelause 7.33(101), however, allows ‘simplified methods’ to be used for the control of racking without direct caulation and, undesirably for pan-European consistency, allows the National Annex to specify a method. The recommended method is that given in 2etjeluuse 7.34. In this method, 2-faIfelause 7.3.3(2) requires the reinforcement siress to be determined from a cracked section analysis [see Worked examole 7.1) under the relevant combination of actions (see section 7.1 of this guide). The relevant effective concrete modulus for long-term and short-term loading should also be used. Its assumed ‘that minimam reinforcement according to 2-I-1/elause 7.32 will be provided. Anadvantage Of this simplified approach is that maay of the dificultes of interpretation of parameter defiition involved in diet calculations to 2-2/cause 7.34 for non-rectangular cross sections (such as for eicubsr sections, discusted below) ean be avoided For cracks caused mainly by direct actions (ce. imposed forces and moments). cracks ray be controlled by limiting reinforcement stresses to the values in either 2-1-1/Table 72N oF 24-1/Table 73N. ICs not necessary to satisfy both. The former sels limits on reinforcement stess bused on bar diameter and the latter based on bar spacing. For cuacks caused mainly by restraiat (for example, due to shuinkage or temperature), only Table 72N ean be used: eracks have to be controlled by limiting the bar size to mated the caleulatedreinforeement stress immediately after ericking Tables 72N ard 7.3N of EN 1992-1-{ were produced from naramettic studies carried oxt using the ciuek width calevlation formulaein 2-1-1/lause 7.34, discussed below. They were based on reinforced concrete rectangular sections (hy = 0.54) in pure bending (ky = 0.5, 4, =04) with high bond bars (&; =0.8) and C30/37 concrete (faa = 29MPA). The cover to the centroid of the main reinforcement was assumed to be 0.U (k~ d = 0.14) The values in brackets above refer to the assumptions given in Note 1 of 2-1-1/Table TAN, they and hare defined in 2-1-/clause 7.3.32), ky and ko are defined in 2-1-1/elause 73.43) and k; is defined in 2-2/clause 7.32(102).) Correction for other geometries can be made, as discussed below. The use of these tables for bridges was cniticized by some countries because they have been derived for members with covers more typical of those found in buildings (spscifcaly 25 mm), whereas bridge covers ae typically muuch greater. Cover sa significant contributor to.erack spacing and hence crack width, asean be seen in section 7.4 and Worked example 73, This potentially leads to greater calculated crack widths for bridges. This ertcism was cone reason forthe allowance of national choice inthe calculation method to be employed. Detailed arguments over the parameters to use in crack width calculation, however, tend to attribute a greater implied accuracy to the erack widih calculation than is realy justified OF grewer significance is the toad combination used to calculate the erack widths, as dis- cussed in section 7.31 above. There isa strongargument that edequote durability is chieved by specifying adequate cover and by limiting reinforcement stresses to sensible values below icld, The former is achieved through compliance with 2-2'clause 4 and the latter by follow- ing the reinforcement stress limits in 2-1-1 elause 7.3.32) and 2-1-1/csuse 7.2.For members with geometry, loading or concrete strength other than as nthe assumptions above, the maximum bar diameters in 2-I-1/Table 7.2N strictly need to be modified. The Page 236 is not part of this book preview. Learn more, DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2 21-IAdewe 73303) 2tt/dause 73314) themscives, the Note to 2-1-1/clause 7.3.32) permits Tables 72N and 7.3N to be used with the steel stress taken as the total stress in the tendons after cracking. minus the intial prestress after losses. This is approximately equal to the siress increase in the tendons ifler decompression atthe level of the tendons. For beams with depth greater than 100mm and maia rsinforeement concentrated in only a small proportion of the depih, 2-J-F/clanse 7-3.2(3) requires aditional minimum reinforcement to be evenly distributed over the side faces of the beams in the tersion zone to control cracking. It is normal in bridge design to distribute stee! around the perimeter ‘of sections te control early thermal cracking and reinforcement for this purpose should generally be sufficient to meet the requirements of this clause; section 7.5 refers. ‘2el-Hfelause 75.314) is 3 reminder that thete is: particular risk of large cracks occurring in sections where there are sudden changes of stress such as at changss of section, near eon: centrated loads, where bars are curtailed or a areas of high bond stresses such as atthe end ‘of laps. While sudden changes of ection should normally be avoided (by introducing tapers) compliance with the reinforcement detailing rues given in clauses 8 and 9. together with the ‘rack control rules of ekause 7, should normally give satisfactory performance,CHAPTER 7. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES rectangular section, the area ia tension is hail the slab depth, thus Ag =250/2 1000 = 125 x 10 mm? Facey ~ foo ba M04 less than 2.9 MPa - 22jctause 7.32(108), From 21-1/Table 3.1 for S45 concrete, fom = 3.2 MPaAS0 fee = 32 MPa. For rectangular Sections of fess than 300mm depth, & sbould be taken as 1.0 and can in general be ken as 1.0 conservatively. For sections sith no aial load, i. 7, = 0 MPa, 2-1-1/Expresson (7.2) reduces 10k, = 04 x (1 ~0) = D4 ‘7 anay i general be based on the muximum allowable valve from ether Table 7.2N (QHOMPa foe 16mm dlamster bars) or Table 7.3N (320 MPs for 100 mans ar centre) However, for minimum reinforcement calclation, itis possible that cracking may” ‘rise mainly from restraint, rather than load and, therefor. the vale from Table 7.2N is used here in sccordance with the Note to 2-I+iclawe 7.3.30). Therefore 9, =240 MPa assuming 16mm buts and so: Avan =04% [0 32 128 0 102/240 — 667m? ‘The Lomm tary at 100mm centres provide A, = 2010mm"/m, which exceeds this ‘inion value, 30 the design is adequate. From minimum: reinforcement considerations ‘alone, the bar sentees could he increased oF the bar diameter reduced in zones of low ‘moren but furtherrack control and ultimate limit state checks would then be require at these curtailment locations, 7.3.4, Control of crack widths by direct calculation “The basis ofthe rack width calculation to EN 1992 s presented her, first considering the simplified case ofa reinforeed eonerete prim in tension asin Fig. 73. The member will frst track when the tesile strength of the weakest section is reached. Cracking leads 10 2 local recistiibution of stresses adjacent to the crack as indicated in Fig. 73 by the strain distribu tions. Atthecrack, the entire tensile forces carried by the reinforcement, Moving away from. the erack, tensile stress is transferred from the reinforcement by bond to the surrounding conerete und, therefore, at some distance 1, tom the crack, the distribution of stess is ‘unaltered fiom that before the erack formed, At this location, the strain in eonerete and reinforcement is equal and the stress in the concrete is just beiow its tensile strength. The redistribution of sires local to the crack results in an extension of the member which is taken up in the erach, eausing it to open. This also leads to a reduction in the member stifness,With inereasing tension, a second crack will form at the next weakest section, This will rot be within a distance L, of the firs crack due to the reduction in conerete stresses in that region associated with the frst crack. With further inerease in tension, more eracks will develop until the maximum erick spacing anywhere is 22. No further cracks will then Fig. 73. Serains adjcone to a crack ped DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992.2 form but further loading will cause the existing cracks to widen. This is called stabilized” cracking. The member stiffness will continue (0 reduce, tending towards that of the fully cracked section, considering teinforcement alone in the tension 200, ‘The crack wit formulae in EC2 are based on the discussions above. The crack width stems from the difference in extension of the concrste and steel over a length equal to the 2-t-I/dause crack spacing. The erack wii w, is thus given in 2f-t/elause 7.3.4(1) a 7341) 2 1, = Sema lEon ~ Fen) where wy is the characteristic eracke with Sry isthe maximum crack spacing Gm it the mean strain of the reinforcement in the length imax under the relevant combination of loads. including the effec of imposed deformations and taking into account the effects of tension stifening. Only the additional tensile strain2I-Iddowe 734(3) Be beyond zero strain in the concrete is considered cm isthe mean strain in the concrete in the length 5, between cracks “These terms are discussed in detail below. Crock From the above discussion, the minimum crack spacing is L, and the maximum crack spacing is 2Z,. The average crack spacing, Sy, i therefore somewhere between these {WO values. Figure 7.3 illustrates that £, atid dhs Syq depend on the rate at which stress can be transferred from the reinforcement to the concrete. Assuming a constant bond stress, ‘along the length F,, the stress at adistance [from a rack will reach the tensile steength of the concrete when: TROL, = Aches (7.14) wwhete 4c isthe concrete area and jo, isthe tensile strength of the concrete, Introducing the reinforcement ratio p = x6" /4A, into equation (D7-14) gives: (7-15) ‘The mean erack spacing can then be expressed as: 5m =O.28K, 8/0 7.16) ‘where Ay isa constant which takes account of the bond properties of the seinforeement in the conzrele fa/7, and the difference between minimum anid mean crack spacing. Equation (07-16) doss not fit est data well, son additional term for reinforcement cover, ¢, needs to be included in the expression for crack spacing: sim — e+ O.38k,0/p rin ‘The need [or the reinforesment cover term probably arises because, although equation (D7-14) assumes that the tensile stress is constant in the area ,, the concrete stress ill actually be greatest adjaceat to the bar and will yeduce with cistence from it. This reduces the eracking load of the area Age Equation (D7-17) applies to concrete sections in pure tension anal a further factor is there- fore necessary to allow for other cases where the sires distribution varies through the depth ‘of the member. Its also necessary to define an effective reinforcement ratio, fyeq since the appropriate concrete arca is not that ofthe whole member but rather must be related o the ‘actual tension zone. This leads to: Sma = ke-+ 0.25 h29/ Pet Finally, a further factor is required to obtain the upper characteristic crack width rather than an average one. The formula presented in 2-T-Tlclause 7.3.4¢3) for the maximum finalCHAPTER 7. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES a Sima =0(be + 0254yh30/Pya) aria) where : isthe cover seinfocement the relevant defo of cover tows isnot Stated in EN 1992, ut clause 43(2) oF EN 199 states thatthe dimensions spose inthe deign my be taken as characerste valu This imps the cover 10 We B Gg THS may produoe a cnsevaive design where cover in ens ofthat Toque by 2emise 4 is promdsd 6 isinehardlameter Where a misture of bar iameters ed ina set ceialet cameter gy should be used defined ie 21-1/Expresson oD an 2111710) a isthe are of reinforcing ste within the fective area ae 4 is the area of pre-or pos-ensoned tendons within the ctv area Aca ‘ean Stheetfetve ensionare, ie. thearea of concrete sutroutling the e910 Feiforcoment of dept na -1-/Fig. eles). here istheleser of Ponte ot the tenson cone depih of te ccd seston, (= 3 writs + negative when the whole section i a tension half he scion depth + 2nd 4 fs the dei othe centroid ofthe ara of te ringorement in tension Tis is clarified in2-I-1 Fig. 7.(a). Thedefinition of¢ ia the Note to 2-1-1 clause 7.33(2), which refers to the depth to the outer layer of reinforcement, is not intended to be a general defnivion ut rather a clarification of what to do ‘when the whole section depih is in tension 6 is the adjusted ratio of bond strength taking into account the different Giameters of presiresing and reinforcing steel. Wis defined under the comments on 2-1-I/clause 73.23) above i kas kis ae coefficients whase purpose is discussed above. Values of ky and ky are specified in 2-1-I/clause 7.3.43), while ky and ky are nationally determined parameters‘The above definitions are readily applicable to rectangular sections, but for general sections, for example a circular column, considerable interpretation is required in choosing appropriate values (o use, This makes the use of the simplified method in section 7.3.3 appealing, as there is no sth dificult of interpretation; the reinforcement sires is simply ‘compared (0 the llowable fimit in 21-1/Table 7.3N. The we of the tables is not prohibit for cirelar sections, although Note | beneath 2-1-1/Table 72N gives the ascumptions on Which they are based, implying they were derived for selected rectangular sections, 2s discussed in section 7.3.3 of this guide. For a circular section, the maximum crack widths will occur between the most highly stresed bars. A possible calculation method would therefore be to consider a thin slice in the plane of bending through the diameter, thus producing a narrow rectangular beam with width equal to the bar spacing. cas eos and pp'ean then be calculated for a reetan- ular beam of these proportions, with d referring to the centroid of the reinforcement inthis slice. Alternatively, kc could be calculated with d taken equal to the effective depth of the reinforcement in the ension zone of thecompletecross-section. A,r ANd fpr WOUId then be ‘determined forthe concrete and reinforcement within this beight fy. The first methed tends {o Fead 10 the most conservative prediction of erack width and both often lead to greater ‘crack widths than the simpliled method of 2-1-1elause 7.3.3 for typical bridge covers, ‘The above analysis for s;qax does n0t hold for memtbers without bonded reinforcement in the tension zone (as the reinforcement ratiois needed). In such cases, theconcrete srestes 210 pe)REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN SECOND EDITION S UNNIKRISHNA PILLAI DEVDAS MENON10.5.2. Limits on Cracking The acceptable limits of cracking vary with the type of structure and its environment. The Code (Cl. 35.3.2) recommends a maximum fimit of 0.3 mm on the assessed surface width of cracks for concrete structures subject to ‘mild’ exposure. This limit of 0.3mm is based essentially on aesthetic considerations, but this limit is also considered to be adequate for the purpose of durability when the member is completely protected against weather or aggressive conditions (Ref. 10.2}. However, in the case of “members where cracking in the tensile zone is harmful either because they are exposed 10 the effects of weather or continuously exposed to ‘moisture or in contact with soil or ground water” (‘moderate’ exposure category), the crack-width limit specified by the Code is 0.2mm. Under more aggressive environments (exposure categories: ‘severe’, ‘very severe’ and ‘extreme’), a more stringent limit of 0.1mm is recommended. For water-retaining structures, the British code BS 8007 (1987) [Ref.10.19] recommends a limiting surface crack-width of 0.2mm in general (deemed adequate for water-tighiness) and a more stringent limit of 0.1mm when aesthetic appearance is of particular importance. It is believed that cracks less than 0.2mm heal autogenously, as water percolates through the crack and dissolves calcium salts in the ‘cement, preventing subsequent leakage. 10.5.3 Factors Influencing Crack-widths Crack-widths in RC members subject to flexure, direct tension or eccentric tension, ‘are influenced by a large number of factors, many of which are inter-related. These include: * For this reason, even in liquid retaining structures, where proportioning is sometimes done so 8 10 Keep tensile stresses in concrete at levels below its tensile strength, some minimum reinforcement is specified by Codes. Also, the designer is required to design the reinforcement to resist fully the applied tension, ignoring the tension-resisting capacity of concrete. * Statistically, with 90 percent confidence limit, in general.394 REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN tensile stress in the steel bars: thickness of concrete cover; diameter and spacing of bars; depth of member and location of neutral axis; and bond strength and tensile strength of concrete. ‘When a beam is subject to a uniform bending moment (Fig. 10.2] and when the limiting tensile strain of concrete is excceded (at the weakest location), a flexural ccrack will form, and the concrete in the regions adjoining the crack will no longer be ‘subject to tensile force. Due to the variability in tensile strength and ultimate tensile strain along the length of the beam, discrete cracks will develop at different stages of loading (within +10 percent of the ‘cracking moment’) (Ref. 10.18]. Experimental studies indicate that these initial cracks (sometimes referred to as ‘primary’ cracks) are roughly uniformly spaced. As discussed earlier (with reference to Fig. 10.2), the concrete in-hetween the cracks resist some tension, and the tensile strain is maximum midway between the cracks. With increase in loading, additional cracks (called ‘secondary cracks’) will form somewhere midway between these cracks, when the limiting tensile strain capacity is exceeded. Both primary and secondary cracks will widen with increase in loading, and additional cracks may form (as the loading ‘approaches the ultimate load), provided the bond between concrete and steel is capable of sustaining the development of significant tensile strain in the concrete (which can exceed the limiting strain capacity). A similar mechanism of development of primary and secondary cracks is found to occur in RC members subject to direct or eccentric tension (Ref. 10.18]. In all cases of applied loading, the width of the crack is found to be maximum at the surface of the member, reducing (tapering) to a near- zero value at the surface of the reinforcement’. Internal cracks (not visible from ‘outside) are also likely to develop in the tension zone, with the width increasing at distances remote from the reinforcing bar. ‘Studies have shown that the width of the crack at a point depends primarily on the following three key factors:4. the mean tensile strain (#0) {n the neighbouring reinforcement, 2 he efstanoe (az) to the naareat fongHtadinal bar that uns Berpendicular to the oraekg and . the distance to the neutral axs Idaalion tin the case of flexural cracke). From the point of view of crack-width contro, itis the surface crack-width that is of concern. The most obvious ways of minimising surface crack-widths at service loads are by (1) limiting the tensile stress in the steel (cracked section analysis), (2) minimising the spacing of reinforcing bars, and (3) providing bars as close as possible to the concrete surface in the tension zone (including side face reinforcement in relatively deep beams). ‘If, however, the member is very lightly reinforced, the crack-width may be significant at the surface of the reinforcement, and the bar may even yield at the erack location. ‘This condition is, of course, highly undesirable under normal service loads, and can be avoided by providing sppropriate minimam reinforcement. SERVICEABLITY UMIT STATES: DEFLECTION AND CRACKING 395 It may be noted that increased cover results in increased crack-widths at the surface. On the other hand, increased cover is highly desirable from the point of view of durability and protection against corrosion of reinforcement. These two aspects appear to be contradictory (Ref. 10.2], but it is always desirable to provide the requisite concrete cover for durability. and to control the crack-width by adopting ‘other measures such as increasing the depth of the flexural member, reducing the bardiameter and spacing. and maintaining low stress levels in the tension steel. ‘The use of low grade steel (mild steel) as tension reinforcement is particularly desirable in flexural members (such as bridge girders) where both control of crack-width and prevention of reinforcement corrosion are of extreme importance. In the earlier version of the Code, no explicit recommendations were given regarding procedures to calculate crack-widths. However, in the recent revision (2000) of the Code, a procedure is given in Annex F for the estimation of flexural crack-widths (in beams and one-way slabs). Unfortunately, the Code does not emphasise sufficiently on the need to estimate crack-widths, especially where relatively large cover is used. Instead, the Code has retained a rather outdated clause from the old Code (which was perhaps valid in earlier times when admissible minimum clear covers were 15mm in slabs and 25mm in beams). According to this clause (Cl. 43.1), explicit calculations of crack-widths are required only if the spacing of reinforcement exceeds the nominal requirements specified for beams and slabs [refer Section 5.2}, regardless of the cover provided. To make matters worse, the ‘clause in the earlier code, limiting the maximum clear cover in any construction to 75 mm has, for some reason, been eliminated. Of course. the highest figure given in Table 16 of the Code for the nominal cover is 75 mm, however, since this is the ‘minimum required cover and there is no upper limit specified, a designer may be tempted to give a larger cover. However, as highlighted in a recent study Ref. 10.21}, increased cover implies increased crack-widths, particularly in flexural members,10.5.4 Estimation of Flexural Crack-width The estimation of the probable maximum width of surface cracks in a flexural member is a fairly complex problem, and despite a fair amount of research in this field over the past four decades, the different equations evolved over the years predict values of crack-widths that are, in some cases, widely different. Different methods (with semi-empirical formulations) have been adopted by different intemational ‘codes, and these too have undergone revisions over the years. Experiments have shown that the average spacing $4, of surface cracks is directly proportional to the distance a., from the surface of the main reinforcing bar. Cracks 396 REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN are most likely to form on the surface in the tensile zone mid-way between two adjacent bars, as shown in Fig. 10.16. The value of a.,, in terms of the bar spacing s, bar diameter d, and effective cover dis given by: a= Yonye td -d,/2 (10.30)‘maximum crack-width Cross section of stab Fig. 10.16 Geometrical parameters of relevance in determining flexural crack-width Ina slap In the case of a typical rectangular beam, the locations for determining maximum surface crack-widths are mainly at the soffit of the beam (when subject to sagging curvature), at distances where the value of a, is likely to be maximum (points P; and P2 in Fig. 10.17]. Also, points on the side of the beam section, mid-way between the neutral axis and the centreline of reinforcement, should be investigated (point P3 in” Fig. 10.17}. We, = constant X dg, X Ly 4031) where €,, is the mean strain at the level considered and the constant has a value of 3.33 for deformed bars and 4.0 for plain round bars, and the cracks are likely to occur ‘ata mean spacing of 1.67¢,,. Fig. 10.17 Critical locations for determining flexural crack-width in a typical beam section400 REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN 5 = 125 mm, A, = 628 mm‘/m (10g @ 125 mm cc), p, = 0.3806, y= 415 MPa, fix = 25 MPa, fox = 0.55 MPa, ‘M (at midspan, under service loads) = 21.63 KNnv/m. a) Based on detailed procedure for calculating x and ¢, ‘The procedure for calculating the neutral axis depth x is identical to the one described in Example 10.1. except that allowable tensile stress in steel f. needs to be altered, in order to account for the long-term effects due to creep. fey = 0.55 MPa [refer Fig. 10.4(b)]. Also, the modular ratio" m may be taken as: ‘m= 280/(3 Gere) = 2803 x 8.5) = 11.0 Trial: Assume x =d/3 = 165/3=55 mm. = fa (= joss =0.725 MPa 165—x => Son =[2essesoe eee cares = 158.7 MPa A, +05KD-2f., O.5bx e165 1+ fom MIF.) Trial 2; Assuming an average value x = (55 + 45.8/2 = 50.4and repeating the procedure, = f= 0.718 MPa = fm = 155.5 MPa = f= 6.0MPa = =49.2 mm. >f.= =554MPa =45.8mmTrial 3: Assuming an average value x ~ (50.4 + 49.2)/2 = 49.8 mm, and repeating the procedure, = f= 0.717 MPa = Sq = 155.0 MPa = f= 6.1 MPa =9x = 49.8 mm, which indicates convergence. © We= Bay EU + 2dr — Cap MD =] ey = (6/2)? +d,? -d,/2 = (12512)? +5)? -5 = 66.6 mm * According to BS 81110, the value of m should be based on E,/ E,., considering E., as half the short-term elastic modulus of concrete. ‘SERVICEABILITY LIMT STATES: DEFLECTION ANO CRACKING 401 = fon, D=x _ 155.0, 200-498 "E, d=x 2x108 165-498 Wer = (3 X 66.6 x 0.00101)/[1 + 2(66.6 ~ 30)/(200- 49.8)] 0.136 mm =0.00101b) Based on ‘Approximate’ procedure of IS 456 (Annex F) ‘This calls for the conventional cracked section analysis, with the modular ratio’ m taken as: m= 280/G 0,4. = 280/(3 x 8.5) = 10.98 k= ¥2(pm)+ (pm)? -(pm) where p =p/100 = 0.3806x10 = k= 0.2443 = x = kd = 0.2443 x 165 = 40.3 mm (1000)(40.3)°/3 + (11.0 x 628)(165 ~ 40.3)? = 1.29041 (21.63 x 10°) x (165: 1.2904x108 (which is within 230 MPa, the allowable stress for FE 415 steel, as per working stress design) 129.5 MPa 229.5 200-403 2x10% 165-403 ej — Dee +) 1000(200-40.3)? gj aogs43 3E,Ay(d—x) — 3(2x105 (628)(165 40.3) = Eq =) —€2= 0.000927 >0 > Wer = Baer En U1 + 2p — Ci (D — 29] = (3 x 66.6 x 0.000927) / [1 + 2(66.6 ~ 30)/(200 ~ 40.3) =0.127 mm (which compares reasonably with the value of 0.136mm obtained by the ‘exact’ procedure). 0.001470 AJjn=125 x 70 = 8750 mn? 2m) anes | | = 35 1940 125 cc. = $2125 2d,=70Fig. 10.19 Example 10.7 * According to BS 8110, the value of m should be based on E,/ E., considering Eze as half the short-term elastic modulus of concrete. 402 REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN ‘Crack-width calculation using Gergely & Lutz formula . eee 1x 109 Yd ATI 2 fy (Eq. 10.38) where 30+ 10/2 = 35 mm [refer Fig. 10.14) effective concrete area in tension per bar s(2d,) = 125 x 70 = 8750 mm? 200-403 Wer = (11 10%) Y35%8750 —————= x (229.5) 3 we, = (11 10) 935% ina) = 0.218 mm (which is larger than the value of 0.13 mm obtained by the IS/BS Code formula), Note: It is clear that the maximum probable crack-width is less than 0.3 mm, and hence is acceptable.EXAMPLE 10.8 Determine the maximum probable crack-widih for the doubly reinforced beam designed in Example 5.4. SOLUTION © From Example 5.4, ‘D=400 mm, b = 250 mm, d= 348 mm, Cyiq = 30 mm, d’ = 48 mm, A= 1848 mm’, (3 - 28 6), Ay = 942.5 mm? (3 - 20 4), Mp; (at midspan, under service loads) = 124 kNm, fx = 25 MPa, f, = 415 MPa. The cross-sectional details are shown in Fig. 10.20. © Depth of neutral axis: x = kd m=280 / (3x85) = 11 ‘Taking moments of areas of the cracked-transformed section about the NA [refer Section 4.6.5}, (VN + (1.5m ~1) Ag (x— d’ = mAy(d-2) => 250 (x)'/2 + (15.5 x 942.5) (x 48) = (11.0 x 1848) (348 - x) = 125 @)* + 34936.75 (x) - 7775364 =0 Solving, x = 146.14 mm ® (b) Fig, 10.20 Example 10.8‘SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES: DEFLECTION AND CRACKING 403 © Depth of neutral axis: x = kd m=280/ (3%8.5) = I ‘Taking moments of areas of the cracked-transformed section about the NA [refer Section 4.6.51, b (x2 (1 5m~1) Ay (r= d= mA, (d ~ 2) => 250 (xJ/2 + (23 x 942.5) (x — 48) = (16 x 1848) (348-3) =) 125 (x)? + 51245,5 (x) - 11330184 =0 Solving, x = 159.24 mm. Tensile stress in steel under service loads: fx fy=mld=a) where M = 124 kNm per m width. I, = 250 (146.14)'73 + (11.0 x 1848) (348 - 146.14) + (15.5 x 942.5) x (146.14 — 48)? = 12.29 x 10% mm* ° ws fam X2410*) X34 224.0 MPa (which, incidentally, is slightly less than o, = 230 MPa allowed as per working stress design). ‘Crack-width calculation using IS Code formula The approximate procedure is followed here. The reader may verify that the detailed procedure yields roughly the same results, Crack-widths are calculated at the three. critical positions (P,, P2 and Ps) indicated in Fig. 10.17. For position Py a, = (6/2) +4,7 ~ay/2 4,,= voz? +(52)? -14= 51.91 mm witha’ =D1 Dx bD-») . a ao 10.37 eae ail a | Eq. 10.37] 1 400-146.14 224.0 - 250(400-146.14) 2x10) 348-146.14 “ 31848 = 1.336% 107 Baber Em MUL + 2(der — Cig — 2) 3 x 51.91 x 1.336 x 10°) [1 + 2(51.91 ~ 30)/ (400 146.14)] 177 mm For position P, ae, = (2) +42 4,/2406 REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN method) prescribed for crack-width prediction under pure flexure [Eq. 10.34-10.36] to situations of flexure combined with axial tension. When axial tension predominates, the entire section is likely to be under tension with the neutral axis lying outside the section, as shown in Fig. 10.22. In such cases, the neutral axis depth X will have a negative value, and this must be taken special note of, while applying Eq. 10.34 and 10.36. In the extreme case of pure tension (ic., x—> -c), it is ‘suggested that it suffices to consider x= - D. "Ye, tn = 8 D4K 7 Es d+x « (©) ‘Section subjected to direct tension N distribution of mean tensile strains ‘and bending moment M Fig. 10.21 Analysis for crack-width under eccentric tension BS 8007 (Ref. 10.19] suggests an alternative empirical formula for the probable surface crack-width in members subject to direct tension: Wer = 3 dy En (1039)which has the form given by Eq. 10.31, with the terms a,, and ¢,, as defined earlier. The constant, ‘3” is based on a probability of exceedance of the calculated value of cerack-width being equal to about | in 100. The expression for the mean tensile strain Eq 8 the same as given in Eq, 10.35: Ey, Ei Ep where, as in the case of flexure, ¢; is the ‘apparent strain’ (tensile strain in steel at the crack location) given by Eq. 10.34 and e, is the reduction in strain due to the tension stiffening effect, which is given by: Say e, =e 10.40) 2 AE, ¢ ) where A,, is the gross area of the cross-section, Ay the area of tension steel, and f, is the allowable tensile stress in concrete. While the above formulas can be used to compute the crack width for an applied tensile force, conversely it can also be used to SERVIGEABILITY LIMIT STATES: DEFLECTION AND CRACKING 407 compute the admissible f, (and hence the tension admissible) for permissible crack width. For such calculations, the allowable value of ji, is specified as 1.0 MPa if the permissible crack-width is 0.1 mm, and 0.67 MPa if the permissible crack-width is 0.2 mm. For other crack-widihs, values of f, have not been specified by BS 8007 (which is the British code for design of water retaining structures), and linear interpolation or extrapolation are not permitted.Unlike the British codes (BS 8110 and BS 8007), the ACI codes (ACI 318 for general RC design and ACI 350 for liquid retaining structures) do not specifically recommend any procedure for the estimation of crack-widths under direct or eccentric tension. However, reference is made to the formula given in the ACI 224 Committee Report [Ref. 10.26], which is based on a formula by Broms and Lutz (similar to the one by Gergely and Lutz for flexure). In SI units, this equation takes the following form 7 3 rap = 0-02 op X10 (10.41) where w,, is the maximum probable surface crack-width (in mm), fy, is the tensile stress (in MPa) in the steel at the crack, and ¢, is the ‘effective concrete cover’, which may be taken as: (10.42) where s is the spacing of bars, located at an effective cover d,. EXAMPLE 10.9 Consider a cylindrical water tank, whose wall is subject 10 hoop tension on account of hhydrostatic pressure. If the wall is 250 mim thick, and reinforced with 12 mm dia bars @ 150 mm cic, determine the allowable hoop tension (per unit widih of wall) corresponding to a permissible crack-width of 0.2mm. Assume M 30 concrete and Fe 415 steel. Assume aclear cover of 40 mm. SOLUTION © D=250 mm, C,,,= 40 mm, d= 12 mm, s= 150mm, d= 46 mm Ag = (201X10°) / 150 = 1340 mm/m The allowable hoop tension is given by N= f,,A,,, where the allowable value of fais to be determined.BS.8007 formula Wer = 3 di(€1 ~&3) = 0.2mm where a,, = (5/2)? +4,2 —d, /2= y(150/ 2)? + (46)? —6 = 82.0 mm _ fry _ (0.67)(1000%250) = 0.000625 E,Ag — (2x10°)(1340) & 408 REINFORCED CONCRETE DESION 02 3(82.0) + 0.000625 = 0.001438 = fu = E, € = (2X10°)(0.001438) = 287.6 MPa (which incidentally is higher than 230 MPa assumed in usual working stress design, but is well within the yield strength). = N= f,,A,,= 287.6 Nimmt)(1340 mm*/m) = 385,384 N = 385.4 kNBS8100 procedure My Em 142(4., ~Cynis /(D— Ey, =0.2(142 (4, Cyin)/(D= 2} ley where, x = -D = -250mm for pure tension [refer Section 10.5.5) 250 - 40 - 6 = 204 mm {1-+2 (82 —40)/(250 +250)}/(3x82) = 0.0009496 . 1000(250-+250)? BEAg(d x) 3(210°)(1340)(204 + 250) £) = &, + €2 = 0.0016345 = 0.006849 (2x10°)(0,0016345)(204+250)(500) = 2968 MPa og Meg = (296.8 N/mnma?)(1340 mm*im) = 397745 N = 397.7 kN (which compares very well with the solution obtained by the BS 8007 formula). ACI Committee 224 procedure ‘The effective concrete cover is given by 150 — | =59.35mm Eq. 10.42} aay a } Wp, =002F,1, x10 = 0.2 mm (Eg. 10.41} => fy = 168.5 MPa = N= fgAg = (1685 N/mn?)(1340 mm’/m) = 225790 N = 225.8 KN (which is a conservative estimate in comparison to the BS codes).