Integral Bridge Design to EN 1992-2

ge

Integral Bridge Design to EN 1992-2

Paul Jackson
 Integral Bridge Design to EN 1992-2

ge
Preacst beam and slab bridge chosen to illustrate as much of the
code as practical
To UK NA and PD but made clear where things come from.
Bridge is integral: brings in EN 1997PD which held it up!
Format: calc. sheets + text
Today, I will say a bit about the design calcs. concentrating on
areas most different from BS 5400!
 Image option 1

Detail of Bridge
• 2 span integral bridge, each span 20m long
• 7.3m wide c/way + 2m wide footways either side
• Superstructure – 8 standard precast, pretensioned concrete Y beams
with a 160mm deep in-situ rc deck slab; in-situ diaphragms at
abutments and pier
• Substructure – precast concrete piles with pile caps
Materials
Concrete
• EN 1992 uses cylinder strengths
• C50/60 used for precast beams
• C35/45 used for deck slab, diaphragms, pier, pile-cap &
precast piles
Prestressing steel
• BS 5896 (EN10138 was voted down so BS has been brought into
line with ENV 10138 and current practice!)
Reinforcement
• Uses BS EN 10080 & BS 4449:2005. Latter specifies
required properties for standardised grades
Analysis: Not much changed from BS 5400

Image option 1
Grillage model of bridge deck
Structural Model & Analysis
• Global analysis – deck (grillage model)
• Piers & abutment stiffness (rotational springs)
• 8 longitudinal members @ 1.5m c/c (precast beam + slab)
• Transverse members @ 1.85m c/c
• Possible to model superstructure & substructure together in a single 3D
model (practicalities of design process means that they are normally
considered separately)
Cover
• This bridge example is assumed to be passing over a
c/way, hence Class XD3 exposure (exposed to spray
containing chlorides)
• The bridge soffit (> 5m above c/way) - XD3 classification
not required (BS 8500), so XD1 (exposed to airborne
chlorides) applies
• Top of deck (protected by waterproofing) – XC3
• Min. cover requirements (BS 8500-1:2006)
• Nominal cover = Min. cover + allowance for deviation
 Cover
Element Surface Concrete Exposure cmin ∆cdev cnom
Grade class
mm mm mm
Slab Deck C35/45 XC3 35 10 45
Soffit C35/45 XD1 40 10 50
Beam C50/60 XD1 30 5 35
Diaphragm Deck C35/45 XC3 35 10 45
Soffit /
C35/45 XD1 40 15 55
Side
Pier wall C35/45 XD3 50 15 65

Stringcourse C35/45 XD3 50 15 65

Dcdev currently given in IAN 95: final HA position not yet fixed.
Actions

1) Permanent Actions
2) Variable Actions
3) Accidental Actions
Permanent Actions
• Self-weight – DL of beam & slab
• Differential settlement – 20mm max. assumed
• Differential shrinkage (SLS only) – deck is cast
after precast beams, hence causes tension within
the deck slab, compression within the beams &
an overall sagging within the deck
Variable Actions
• Wind
• Thermal
• Construction loads
• Traffic loads
EN 1991-2 Traffic Actions
1 2
α q1ψ 1,q q1 α q 2ψ 1,q q 2 α qrψ 1,q q r

α Q1ψ 1,Q Q1
UDL
TS

5m
α Q 2ψ 1,Q Q2
Remaining Area
Bridge Axis

SV / TS
SOV

5m

UDL

3.0m 3.0m
 Load Model 1
Tandem System (1 per lane) + UDL

0,5m

3m 1,2m
lane 2m

0,4 m square

Tandem system normally positioned as shown.

For local effects can be closer to adjacent one.
(wheels 0,5m c to c)
Load Model 1 (with UK NA)
UDL = 0,61 X 9,0 = 5,5kN/m2
3m Lane 11
TS Axle = 1,0 X 300 = 300kN

UDL = 2,2 X 2,5 = 5,5kN/m2

3m Lane 21
TS Axle = 1,0 X 200 = 200kN

UDL = 2,2 X 2,5 = 5,5kN/m2

3m Lane 31
TS Axle = 1,0 X 100 = 100kN

UDL = 2,2 X 2,5 = 5,5kN/m2

3m Lane 41 (+)
No TS

Remaining Area2 UDL = 2,2 X 2,5 = 5,5kN/m2 No TS

1 Interchangeable for worst effect

2 Can be other side
Load Model 1 (with UK NA)
UDL = 0,61 X 9,0 = 5,5kN/m2
3m Lane 11
TS Axle = 1,0 X 300 = 300kN

UDL = 2,2 X 2,5 = 5,5kN/m2

3m Lane 21
TS Axle = 1,0 X 200 = 200kN

1.3m Remaining Area2 UDL = 2,2 X 2,5 = 5,5kN/m2 No TS

1 Interchangeable for worst effect

2 Can be other side

Much simpler than BS 5400/BD37 which has many

historical anomalies
Load Model 1 (LM1)
• Only one TS is applied to each lane, symmetrically around
the centreline of the lane and in the position that causes the
most severe effect on the element under consideration.

• The UDL should only be applied in the unfavourable parts of

the influence surface, both longitudinally and transversely.

• The nationally determined adjustment factors for the UDL

have been set so that a UDL of 5.5kN/m2 is applied to all lanes
and the remaining area, irrespective of the number of nominal
lanes simplifying the input of loading into the analysis model.

• In contrast to BS 5400, the magnitude of this load pressure

does not vary with loaded length.
Load Model 2 (LM2)

Single axle load = βQ * Qak = 400 kN

Where: Qak = 400 kN

2m
βQ = αQ1 = 1.00

0.4m • LM2 is not combined with other traffic models.

(NA) • Consider one wheel on its own if it is more
0.4m critical than the whole axle.
(NA) • Needs to be considered for local effects
Load Model 3 (LM3)
• LM3 represents Abnormal Vehicles. The NA defines a
series of load models to be used for the design of UK road
bridges, and these will be familiar to those who have used BD
86/07.
• The vehicles are applied in the worst position and are
combined with LM1 loads at their frequent values.
• They can be positioned within a notional lane OR partially
within a notional lane and the remaining width of the lane.
 SV 196

165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 180 180 100
kN kN kN kN kN kN kN kN kN kN kN kN
1.2m 1.2m 1.2m 1.2m 1.2m 1.2m 1.2m 4.0m 1.6m 4.4m

Direction of Travel
0.35m
0.35m
Overall Vehicle Width

Critical of
1.2m
or
3.0m
3.0m

5.0m
or
9.0m
Load Model 3 (LM3) – Model SV196

Basic Axle Dynamic Design Axle

Load (kN) Amplification Weight (kN)
Factor

100 1.20 120

165 1.12 185
180 1.10 198
Table 7.101N 7.101N) Recommended values of
wmax (mm) and relevant combination rules

Reinforced members and Prestressed

Exposure Class prestressed members members with
without bonded tendons bonded tendons

Quasi-permanent load Frequent load

combinationc combinationc

X0, XC1 0,3a 0,2

0,2
XC2, XC3, XC4 (+decompression
0,3 under quasi perm.)
XD1, XD2, XD3 0,2d and
XS1, XS2, XS3 Decompression

Means cracked section analysis needed for prestressed!

But rarely critical for XD case (except reversed moments!)
Cracking criteria
• Criteria more onerous for prestressed
• Does not actually say you can treat an element (e.g.
deck slab) as prestressed in one direction and RC in
another
• Neither does BS 5400!
• Can still do it
• Is not actually very logical (Said to be for durability but cracks
parallel to tendons more significant)
But: not clear using more severe criteria for
prestressed is logical!
Notes From 7.101 (UK NA version)
a For X0, XC1 exposure classes, crack width has no influence on
durability and this limit is set to guarantee acceptable appearance.
In the absence of appearance conditions this limit may be relaxed.
b For these exposure classes, in addition, decompression
should be checked under the quasi-permanent combination of
loads.
c For the crack width checks under combinations which include
temperature distribution, the resulting member forces should
be calculated using gross section concrete properties and
self-equilibrating stresses may be ignored.
d 0,2 applies to the parts of the member that do not have to be
checked for decompression
Plus
• The decompression limit requires that all
concrete within a certain distance of bonded
tendons or their ducts should remain in
compression under the specified loading. The
distance within which all concrete should remain
in compression shall be taken as the value of
cmin,dur (NA) determined for the relevant surface.
“Decompression” vs BS 5400 Class 1
ε ε

Tendons

Cracked

OK to either OK for decompression,

not class 1
Combinations of Actions
• 3 combinations of actions to be considered at SLS:
1) Characteristic combination (for stress checks)
2) Frequent combination (for cracking in prestrtessed)
3) Quasi-permanent combination (for cracking in RC)

• 1 combination of action to be considered at ULS

Ed = E { ∑γG,j * Gk,j + γQ,1 * Qk,1 + ∑γQ,i * ψ0,i * Qk,i } j ≥ 1; i > 1

Design values of actions (§ 6.3.1)

Fd = γf Frep = γfyFk
γf equiv. to γf.1 in BS 5400
y= “psi factor” equiv. to γf.2 in BS 5400 =
– 1,0 for permanent loads
– y0, y1, y2 in the case of variable/accidental actions
– Choice of “psi factor” depends on limit state and
design situation
Unlike BS 5400, y given separately
y
y0 = combination value
(most directly equivalent to γf2 in BS 5400)

y1 = frequent value, used for some SLS checks

(prestressed cracking) + with accidental

y2 = quasi permanent value, mainly used

for some other SLS checks (RC cracking)
+ with accidental
Characteristic Combination

∑G k, j + P + Q k ,1 + ∑ψ 0,i Q k ,i
i >1
Permanent + full leading variable action + yo times others
(combination)

At SLS we have yfactors but all g factors are 1.0

Frequent Combination

∑G k, j + P +ψ Qk,1 + ∑ψ 2,iQk,i
1,1
i>1
Permanent + y1 times leading variable action + y2 times others
(frequent) (quasi perm)

At SLS we have y factors but all g factors are 1.0

Quasi Permanent Combination

∑G k, j + P + ∑ψ Q
2 ,i k ,i
i >1
Permanent + y2 times variable
(quasi perm)

At SLS we have y factors but all g factors are 1.0

Combination of actions – road bridges
Action ψ0 ψ1 ψ2
Traffic loads on bridges (EN 1991-2)
gr1a (LM1 + TS 0.75 0.75 0
pedestrian or UDL 0.40 0.40 0
cycle) Pedestrian and cycle 0.40 0.40 0
gr1b (Single axle) 0 0.75 0
gr2 (Horizontal forces) 0 0 0
gr3 (Pedestrian loads) 0 0 0
gr4 (LM4 – Crowd loading) 0 0.75 0
gr5 (LM3 – Special vehicles) 0 (1.0) 0
Snow loads (EN 1991-1-3)
Qsn,k (during erection) 0.8 - -
Wind loads (EN 1991-1-4)
FWk (persistent design situations) 0.6 0.2 0
FWk (during erection) 0.8 - -
F*W (with traffic actions – wind speed 1.0 - -
limited)
Thermal actions (EN 1991-1-5)
Tk 0.6 0.6 0.5
Construction loads
Qc 1.0 - 1.0
Creep and Shrinkage

• BS EN 1992-1-1 Clause 3.1.4 and Annex B gives

prediction models (also applies to high strength concrete)
• Shrinkage calculation:

εcs = εcd + εca

Total
shrinkage
strain Drying Autogeneous
shrinkage shrinkage
strain strain
A notable difference from past practice! (based on more
recent CEB than BS 5400 appendix)
EC2-1-1 CREEP AND SHRINKAGE MODEL PARAMETERS
FOR PRECAST BEAM

3.1.4 &
Annex B Mean compressive cylinder strength fcm = fck + 8

58 MPa
Cross-section area of concrete member A = 410191 mm2

Perimeter in contact with the atmosphere u = 3128 mm

Equ. B.6 Notional size of member h0 = 2Ac / u = 262 mm

Relative humidity of ambient environment RH = 75 %

Equivalent concrete age at release of prestress t0,eq = 1 days

Concrete age at construction t1 = 30 days

Concrete age when bridge is opened for traffic t2 = 180 days

 CREEP MODEL

α1 = (35 / 58)0.7 = 0.70 -

Coefficients
Equ. B.8c α2 = (35 / 58)0.2 = 0.90 -
allowing for
concrete strength
α3 = (35 / 58)0.5 = 0.78 -

Factor allowing for relative

Equ. B.3 ϕRH = 1.15 -
humidity
Factor allowing for concrete
Equ. B.4 β(fcm) = 2.21 -
strength
Modification to t0 to allow for type
Equ. B.9 t0 = 4.0 days
of cement
Factor allowing for concrete age
Equ. B.5 β(t0) = 0.70 -
at loading
Coefficient dependent on Relative
Equ. B.8 βH = 647 -
humidity
=
Equ. B.2 Notional creep coefficient ϑ0 = 1.15 x 2.21 x 0.7
ϕRH.β(fcm).β(t0)

= 1.78 -
 SHRINKAGE MODEL
Age of concrete at beginning of drying shrinkage ts = 6
Equ. 3.12 Final value of the autogenous shrinkage strain εca(∞) = 100
Equ. B.12 Factor allowing for relative humidity βRH = 0.90
Table 3.3 Coefficient depending on notional size kh = 0.79
Equ. B.11 Basic drying shrinkage strain εcd,0 = 354
Equ. 3.9 Final value of the drying shrinkage strain εcd,∞ = 279
 Time development of Creep and Shrinkage
At
At stress At con- opening Long
transfer struction for term
traffic
t day 1 31 181 ∞

t-ts day 0 30 180 ∞

t-t0 day 0 30 180 ∞

Equ. B.7 βc(t,t0) - 0.00 0.39 0.63 1.00

Equ. 3.13 βas(t) - 0.18 0.67 0.93 1.00

Equ. 3.10 βds(t,ts) - 0.00 0.15 0.51 1.00

Equ. B.1 Creep coefficient, ϕ(t, t0) - 0.00 0.70 1.13 1.79
Equ. 3.11 Autogenous shrinkage strain, εca(t) µs 18 67 93 100
Equ. 3.9 Drying shrinkage strain, εcd(t) µs 0 42 143 279
Total shrinkage strain, εcs(t) = εcs(t)
µs 18 109 237 379
+ εcd(t)
Global Design at SLS
• SLS criteria governs for most prestressed
structures
• 3 checks are required:
- Decompression (near tendons)
- Crack widths (elsewhere + in RC)
- Stress limits
Global Design at SLS
• For XD (chloride) exposure, decompression limit is
checked for the frequent load combination (without LM3)
& requires that all concrete within a certain distance of the
tendons remain in compression (Table NA.1 to EN 1992-2
specifies the distance to be the minimum cover required
for durability).
• Parts of the prestressed beam outside this limit may go
into tension, but should be checked against a crack width
limit of 0.2mm.
• Stress limits – both in concrete and tendons, must be
checked under the characteristic load combination
• Can treat sections as uncracked if stress less than fct,eff
Summary of critical sections & checks, in service
Section Likely to be critical Location Load
for: Combination
Midspan ULS - Characteristic
Decompression Bottom of beam Frequent
Stress Limit Top of beam Characteristic
Slab
Tendons
Over pier ULS - Characteristic
Crack width Slab Quasi-permanent
(RC crack limit)
Stress limit Slab Characteristic
reinforcement
Note: This is an example, hence incomplete
Decompression at mid span
BEAM SLAB

30mm below Top Bottom Top

lowest
tendon EC35 / EC60
0.92
=

MIDSPAN - FREQUENT LOAD COMBINATION, LONG TERM, COOLING

Normal force (kN) on SSLBM 3379 8.2 8.2

Moment (kNm) on SSLBM -75 0.7 -1.2

Moment (kNm) on CGM 1327 -7.8 4.6 4.2 6.1

Non-linear temp. diff. component -0.7 0.1 0.1 -0.5
Diff. shrinkage local component 0.1 0.1 -0.2 -0.2
Total Normal Stress (MPa) 0.6 11.9 4.1 5.4
Stress Limits
• Concrete compressive stress limit = 0,6fck

• Reinforcement stress limit = 0,8fyk

• Prestressing tendon stress limit = 0,75fpk

(Note: only critical for cracked section analysis, otherwise
governed by jacking limits as BS 5400)

• These stress limits are checked for the Characteristic

Combination of Actions
Stress Checks
Normal stress (MPa)
BEAM SLAB TENDON

BOTTOM TOP TOP BOTTOM

EC35 / EC50 = Ep / EC50 =

0.92 5.27

Cross section area (beam only) (mm2) 4.10E+05 4.10E+05 - 4.10E+05

Limiting stress (-4.1) 30 21 -1395

CHARACTERISTIC LOAD COMBINATION, AT OPENING, HEATING

Initial prestress - - - -1163
Normal force on SSLBM 3801 9.3 9.3 0.0 -
Prestressing moment on SSLBM -1016 10.6 -16.0 0.0 -
Dead load moment on SSLBM 803 -8.4 12.6 0.0 -38
Moment on CGM 1904 -11.6 6.6 8.7 -55
Non-linear temp. diff. component 2 0.5 -0.4 0.9 -
Diff. shrinkage local component 3 0.1 0.1 -0.2 -
Total 0.6 12.2 9.4 -1256
Stress Checks
CHARACTERISTIC LOAD COMBINATION, AT OPENING, COOLING
Initial prestress - - - -1163
Normal force on SSLBM 3801 9.3 9.3 0.0 -
Prestressing moment on
-1016 10.6 -16.0 0.0 -
SSLBM
Dead load moment on
803 -8.4 12.6 0.0 -38
SSLBM
Moment on CGM 1844 -11.2 6.4 8.4 -53
Non-linear temp. diff.
-0.8 0.1 -0.6 -
component
Diff. shrinkage local
0.1 0.1 -0.2 -
component
Total -0.4 12.5 7.6 -1254
Pretensioned Beam: Transfer

• Tension (critical for top at ends)

No specific rule:
Decompression checked if tendons close,
(assuming chloride) otherwise crack width?
Gives a paradox: top strand provided to control
tension but checks not needed if no top strand.
Precast Manual proposes using a tensile stress
Pretensioned Beam: Transfer

• Compression (critical for soffit)

BS 5400 0.5fci not greater than 0.4fcu
EN1992 0,6 fck(t) 0,7 fck(t) (subject to NDP)
for pretensioned elements “if it can be justified
by tests or experience that longitudinal cracking
is prevented.”
Transfer Stress: Comparison
• 0,7 fck(t) = 0.56fci ??
• But fci = “cube strength at transfer”
• fck(t) = “Characteristic…”
• Gives c16,8 cf 20 for BS 5400 if fck(t) from fcm(t) and
Table 3.1
• But: with good concrete quality control, and
records to prove it, fck(t) would be greater and
result similar to BS 5400
Summary of critical sections & checks, at transfer

Section Likely to be critical Location

for:
Mid span Nothing!
(strictly strand after
jacking)
End of transmission Compression Bottom of Beam
length Decompression?* Cmin,dur above top
(+ debond positions) strand?*
Crack width (or fct) Top*
All Strand tension at All
jacking
* Depends on strand layout
Check for top of Section

Decompression
Check required
here!
Strand Pattern
• Came out identical to BS 5400 design
• If you had no XD/XS (Chloride) Exposure
could save c 25% prestress
• Similar conclusions for rail bridge
Critical Condition for Prestress Design in service
EN 1992 BS 5400 (+BD24)

Decompression under Class1 under full HA

frequent LM1 + Quasi perm
temperature
0.75 TS + 0.4 udl + 0.4 1.2 HA + pedestrian
pedestrian + 0.5 temperature

Class 2 under full HA + HB

for other combinations
With reduced prestress (no chloride)

• ULS might govern

• Increase in tendon force under live loading is
much greater so fatigue or limit on tendon
service stress could govern
In our examples
• ULS did not govern
• Upper limit on in service tendon stress did affect
rail example (i.e. jacking stress had to be
reduced)
• Fatigue limit check did not govern
• Since less prestress is needed and transfer is
the critical condition for concrete compression,
you could reduce section.
For Rail Loading

Design code Initial Number Tendon

and exposure prestress of stress during
class force Strands tensioning
(kN) (N/mm2)
BS 5400 4599 21 1460
EN 1992, XD 4637 22 1405
exposure
EN 1992, XC 2976 16 1240
exposure
ULS
Flexure:

Similar: γ applied to prestress but no equiv to BS 5400

15% rule

Shear:

RC and Prestressed treated the same

Addition principle not used: use concrete contribution or
links based on varying angle truss
In our case interface governs
Upper limit is significantly greater
Designed Links
Variable Angle Truss Analogy

Concrete Struts

θ
Steel Ties
Link Design Comparison (Prestressed)
3000

2500 EN 1992 For

S tre n g th (k N )

2000 250X1100 beam

1500 BS 5400 50/60 concrete

(uncracked in flexure) 14N/mm2 prestress
1000

500

0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Links
Fatigue
For reinforcement making bridge continuous
Stress range under frequent load = 128
Allowable to EN 1992-1-1 = 70
Allowable to PD for this case = 85
Not OK

But Using Annex NN

Range under fatigue load model 4 = 96
Damage equivalent range gives allowable = 141
OK
For this case PD value is very conservative but:
When it works it saves significant calcs.
Integral Bridge Design to EN 1992-2

ge

Integral Bridge Design to EN 1992-2

Will Be Published Soon!