Basis of Structural Design

Course 13
EN 1990:
The partial factor method (cont.)

Course notes are available for download at

http://www.ct.upt.ro/users/AurelStratan/

Ultimate limit states

The following ultimate limit states shall be verified as
relevant:
EQU: Loss of static equilibrium;
STR: Internal failure or excessive deformation;
GEO: Failure or excessive deformation of the ground where the
strengths of soil or rock are significant in providing resistance;
FAT: Fatigue failure of the structure or structural members.

1
 Ultimate limit states

EQU: Loss of static equilibrium of the structure or any
part of it considered as a rigid body, where:
minor variations in the value or the spatial distribution of actions
from a single source are significant, and
the strengths of construction materials or ground are generally
not governing;

Example: a bridge deck launched with a counterweight
where loss of static equilibrium may be possible

Ultimate limit states

STR: Internal failure or excessive deformation of the
structure or structural members, including footings, piles,
basement walls, etc., where the strength of construction
materials of the structure governs;

Example: failure of a beam supporting a floor due to
excessive stresses

Mmax

2
 Ultimate limit states

GEO: Failure or excessive deformation of the ground
where the strengths of soil or rock are significant in
providing resistance;
Example: resistance of foundations like footings, piles,
etc.

Ultimate limit states

FAT: Fatigue failure of the structure or structural
members.
Examples: Cracks developing in steel bridges due to
repetitive loading generated by traffic

3
 Verifications of static equilibrium and resistance

When considering a limit state of rupture or excessive
deformation of a section, member or connection (STR
and/or GEO), it shall be verified that
Ed Rd
where:
Ed is the design value of the effect of actions such as
internal force, moment or a vector representing several
internal forces or moments;
Rd is the design value of the corresponding resistance.

ULS: Combination of actions

For each critical load case, the design values of the
effects of actions (Ed) shall be determined by combining
the values of actions that are considered to occur
simultaneously

Each combination of actions should include:
a leading variable action, or
an accidental action.

Where the results of a verification are very sensitive to
variations of the magnitude of a permanent action from
place to place in the structure, the unfavourable and the
favourable parts of this action shall be considered as
individual actions

4
 ULS: Combination of actions

Combinations of actions for persistent or transient
design situations (fundamental combinations)

The general format of effects of actions

and can be simplified as:

The combination of action in curly braces {} can be

expressed as:

where
"+" implies "to be combined with"
implies "the combined effect of"

ULS: Combination of actions

Gk,j - characteristic permanent action j

G,j - partial safety factor for permanent load Gk,j

P - prestressing

P - partial safety factor for prestressing action P

Qk,1 - leading variable action

Q,1 - partial safety factor for variable load Qk,1

Qk,i - variable action i

Q,i - partial safety factor for variable load Qk,i

0,i - takes into account the reduced probability of the
simultaneous occurrence of two (or more) independent
variable actions

5
 ULS: Combination of actions

Combinations of actions for accidental design situations

Ad - design value of the accidental action

Combinations of actions for seismic design situation

AEd - design value of the seismic action

permanent actions are taken with characteristic values
seismic action is taken with design value
variable loads are taken with the quasi-permanent value 2Qk

ULS: Combination of actions

Partial factors for actions and combinations of actions:
and factors are obtained from EN 1990 or CR0-2012:
permanent actions: G,sup = 1.35
permanent actions: G,inf = 0.9
variable actions: Q = 1.5
0,i = 0.7, with the exception of loads in storage facilities, water
pressure, etc, when 0,i = 1.0

Example of fundamental load combinations

The partial factors for properties of materials and

products should be obtained from EN 1992 to EN 1999

6
 Serviceability limit states

At the SLS it shall be verified that:
Ed Cd
where:
Cd is the limiting design value of the relevant serviceability
criterion.
Ed is the design value of the effects of actions specified in the
serviceability criterion, determined on the basis of the relevant
combination

Serviceability limit states in buildings should take into
account criteria related, for example, to floor stiffness,
differential floor levels, storey sway or/and building sway
and roof stiffness.

Stiffness criteria may be expressed in terms of limits for
vertical deflections and for vibrations.

Sway criteria may be expressed in terms of limits for
horizontal displacements.

Serviceability limit states

EN 1990: "The serviceability criteria should be specified
for each project and agreed with the client".

Schematic representation of vertical deflections:

wc - Precamber in the unloaded structural member
w1 - Initial part of the deflection under permanent loads of the
relevant combination of actions
w2 - Long-term part of the deflection under permanent loads
w3 - Additional part of the deflection due to the variable actions of
the relevant combination of actions
wtot - Total deflection as sum of w1, w2, w3
wmax - Remaining total deflection taking into account the
precamber

7
 Serviceability limit states

Horizontal displacements can be
represented schematically:
u - Overall horizontal displacement
over the building height H
ui - Horizontal displacement over a
storey height Hi

SLS: Combination of actions

Three categories of combinations of actions are
proposed in EN:
characteristic (normally used for irreversible limit states, e.g. for
exceeding of some cracking limits in concrete)
frequent (is normally used for reversible limit states) and
quasi-permanent (is normally used for assessment of long-term
effects)

The appropriate combinations of actions should be
selected depending on serviceability requirements and
performance criteria imposed for the particular project,
the client or the relevant national authority

8
 SLS: Combination of actions

Characteristic
combination

Frequent
combination

Quasi-permanent
combination

For serviceability limit states the partial factors M for the

properties of materials should be taken as 1.0 except if
differently specified in EN 1992 to EN 1999.

Examples of
limiting
values for
vertical
deflections

9

Examples of limiting values for horizontal deflections

Example: multistorey frame

Objective: design using the partial factor method a steel
multistorey frame

For the design of the structure, the STR category of limit

states is relevant

10
 Example: multistorey frame

Self-weight (Gk,1) Dead load on floors (Gk,2) Exterior cladding (Gk,3)

The following
actions can be
identified:
Permanent loads Gk Snow load (Sk) Wind load (Wk )

Imposed loads Qk
Snow load Sk
Wind load Wk
Seismic action Aed
Imposed load -
Imposed load (Qk,1) Seismic load (Aed )
chessboard (Qk,2)

Example: multistorey frame

Of the four possible design situations,
Persistent design situations,
Transient design situations, most
Accidental design situations, relevant
Seismic design situations.

Two categories of limit states need to be considered:
Ultimate limit states (ULS)
Serviceability limit states (SLS)

Persistent design Seismic design

situation situation

ULS SLS ULS SLS

11
 Example: multistorey frame
Load cases (combinations of actions)

Persistent design situation
Ultimate limit states (ULS)

Serviceability limit states (SLS)

Seismic design situation

Ultimate limit states (ULS)

Serviceability limit states (SLS) see EN 1998-1

Example: multistorey frame

Load cases (combinations of actions)

Persistent design situation
Ultimate limit states (ULS)
1.35(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + 1.5Qk,1
1.35(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + 1.5Qk,2
1.35(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + 1.5Sk,1 check
1.35(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + 1.5Wk strength and
0.9(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + 1.5Wk stability of
1.35(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + 1.5Qk,1 + 1.05Sk members
1.35(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + 1.5Sk + 1.05Qk,1 and
1.35(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + 1.5Qk,1 + 1.05Sk + 1.05Wk connections
1.35(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + 1.5Sk + 1.05Qk,1 + 1.05Wk
1.35(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + 1.5Wk + 1.05Qk,1 + 1.05Sk

12
 Example: multistorey frame
Load cases (combinations of actions)

Persistent design situation
Serviceability limit states (SLS)
(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + Qk,1
check beam
(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + Qk,2
deflections
(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + Sk,1
(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + Wk check lateral storey
(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + Wk + 0.7Qk,1 + 0.7Sk deformations

Seismic design situation

Ultimate limit states (ULS) check strength, stability
(Gk,1 + Gk,2 + Gk,3) + 0.4(Qk,1 + Sk) + Aed and ductility of members
and connections

Serviceability limit states (SLS) check lateral storey

displacements determined according to specific requirements of
EN 1998-1

13