REINFORCED

CONCRETE DESIGN I

Limit State Design

The Copyright of this document belongs to BCA. No part of this document may be used, disclosed, transferred, reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying recording or
otherwise to any person not authorized to use it without the express written permission of BCA
2.1 Limit State Design
Three basic methods of design using factor of safety
have been developed as follows:
 Permissible stress method: Ultimate strengths of
the materials are divided by a factor of safety to
provide design stresses within the elastic range.
 Load factor method: Working loads are multiplied
by a factor of safety.
 Limit state method: Working loads are multiplied by
a partial factor of safety and also the ultimate
strengths are divided by further partial factors of
safety. As this method can be used for both plastic
and elastic conditions, it is considered as more
flexible than the other two methods.
2
2.1 Limit State Design
 Limit state means a condition at which a
structure becomes unfit for its intended use.
 The aim of the design is to avoid such condition
being reached during the expected life of the
structure.
 The two principle types of limit state are as
follows:
1. Ultimate limit state: This requires that a
structure must be able to withstand the
designed loads with an adequate factor of safety
against collapse. Possibility of buckling,
overturning or accidental damages must also be
taken into account. 3
2.1 Limit State Design
2. Serviceability limit state: The most important
serviceability limit states are deflection,
cracking and durability.
 Deflection - the appearance or efficiency of any
part of the structure must not be adversely
affected by deflections.
 Cracking - local damage due to cracking and
spalling must not affect the appearance,
efficiency or durability of the structure.
 Durability - this must be considered in terms of
the proposed life of the structure and its
conditions of exposure.
4
2.1 Limit State Design
Other limit states that may be reached include:
 Excessive vibration - which may cause discomfort
or alarm as well as damage.
 Fatigue - must be considered if cyclic loading is
likely.
 Fire resistance - this must be considered in terms
of resistance to collapse, flame penetration and
heat transfer.
 Special circumstances - any special requirements
of the structure which are not covered by any of the
more common limit states, such as earthquake
resistance, must be taken into account.
5
 TOPIC 2 :
Limit State Design

TOPIC 2.2 :
Partial Factor of Safety
2.2 Partial Factor of Safety
 Possible variation such as constructional
tolerances are allowed for by partial
factor of safety applied to the strength of
the materials and to the actions.
 In practice, the values adopted are based
on experience and simplified calculation.

7
2.2 Partial Factor of Safety
Partial Factor of Safety for Material, m
 The values of m as recommended by EC2 are as below:

𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ (𝑓𝑘 )

Design Strength =
𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑦 (𝛾𝑚 )
 It should be noted that for precast factory conditions it
may be possible to reduce the value for concrete at the
ultimate limit state. 8
2.2 Partial Factor of Safety
Partial Factor of Safety for Actions, f
 Errors and inaccuracies may be due to design
assumptions and inaccuracy of calculation, possible
unusual increases in the magnitude of the actions,
unforeseen stress distributions or constructional
inaccuracies.
 These are taken into account by applying a partial factor
of safety, f on the characteristic action,

Design Action = Characteristic action × Partial

factor of safety (f)

9
2.2 Partial Factor of Safety
 Actions are categorised as below:
1. Permanent, Gk such as the self-weight of the
structure.
2. Variable, Qk such as the temporary imposed
loading arising from the traffic of people, wind and
snow loading and the like.
 Variable actions are also categorised as

a. Leading - predominant variable action(s) such as

an imposed crowd load, Qk,1
b. Accompanying - secondary variable action(s) such
as the effect of wind loading, Qk,i (where the
subscript ‘i’ indicates the i’th action).

10
2.2 Partial Factor of Safety
 The terms favourable and unfavourable refer to
the effect of the action(s) on the design situation
under consideration.
 For example, if a beam, continuous over several
spans is designed for the largest sagging bending
moment.
 The action that has the effect of increasing the
bending moment will be considered as
unfavourable whilst action that reduces the
bending moment will be considered to be
favourable.

11
2.2 Partial Factor of Safety

Table 2.2.1 Partial safety factors, f at the ultimate limit state

12
2.2 Partial Factor of Safety

Table 2.2.2 Partial safety factors, f at the serviceability limit state

13
2.2 Limit State Design

14
2.2 Limit State Design

15
2.2 Limit State Design

16
2.2 Limit State Design

17
2.2 Limit State Design

18
 TOPIC 2 :
Limit State Design

TOPIC 2.3 :
Combination of Actions
2.3 Combination of Actions
 Permanent and variable actions will occur in
different combinations.
 In cases where actions are to be combined it is
recommended that, in determining suitable design
values, each characteristic action is not only
multiplied by the partial factors of safety, but also
by a further factor given the symbol  (psi). This
factor is generally taken as 1.0 other than
described below:
a. Combination values of variable actions
b. Frequent values of variable actions
c. Quasi-permanent values of variable action
20
2.3 Combination of Actions
 Permanent and variable actions will occur in
different combinations.
 In cases where actions are to be combined it is
recommended that, in determining suitable design
values, each characteristic action is not only
multiplied by the partial factors of safety, but also
by a further factor given the symbol  (psi). This
factor is generally taken as 1.0 other than
described below:
a. Combination values of variable actions
b. Frequent values of variable actions
c. Quasi-permanent values of variable action
21
2.3 Combination of Actions
 The table below summaries the different combination of
actions and the variable actions grouped under it:
Type of Variable actions
Combination
Combination, 0 i. Ultimate limit state
ii. Irreversible serviceability limit states such as
irreversible cracking due to temporary but
excessive overloading of the structure

Frequent, 1 i. Ultimate limit states involving accidental actions

ii. Reversible limit states such as serviceability
limit states of cracking and deflection where
actions causing these effects are of a short
transitory nature

Quasi-permanent, 2 i. Ultimate limit states involving accidental actions

(almost permanent) ii. Actions that may be sustained over a long
period but are not necessarily permanent, such
22
as snow at high altitudes
2.3 Combination of Actions

Table 2.3.1 Values of  for different load combinations

23
2.3 Combination of Actions
 Figure a and b below illustrates how the factors in
Table 2.2.1 and Table 2.3.1 can be applied.
(accompanying) (leading)

(leading) (accompanying)

Figure 2.3.1 Office building subjected to overturning about point B24

2.3 Combination of Actions
 In general terms, for transient design situations,
the design value can be taken as:
Design value = factored permanent actions +
factored single leading variable action +
factored remaining accompanying variable actions
 The standard design loading cases will often
consist of combinations of the permanent action
with a single leading variable action and possibly
with wind as the accompanying variable action.
 The reverse may also be possible, therefore, both
scenarios must be considered.
25
2.3 Combination of Actions
 Table 2.3.2 can be used to determine the design
value of the actions.
 The value 1.35 for unfavourable permanent actions
is conservative and used throughout for simplicity.
 The design values of actions at the serviceability
limit state can be expressed in a similar way as for
the ultimate limit state.
 In the case of serviceability, the partial factor of
safety, f will be taken as 1 as shown in Table
2.2.2.

26
2.3 Combination of Actions

Table 2.3.2 Combination of actions and load factors at the ultimate limit state
27
References
1. Reinforced Concrete Design to Eurocode 2,
6th Edition by B.Mosley, J.Rbungey and Ray
Hulse,
2. How to Design Concrete Structures Using
Eurocode 2,
3. Design of Concrete Structures by Arthur H.
Nilson et al.
4. Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete by
F.K.Kong and R.H-Evans.
5. Design of Structural Elements, 3rd Edition by
Chanakya Arya.
6. BS EN 1992-1-1:2004 – EC2. 28