Eurocodes

Introduction and “Actions”

Paul Jackson
Gifford

Eurocodes

(EC0) Basis of Structural Design (EN 1990)

EC1 Actions ((EN 1991))
EC2 Concrete (EN 1992)
EC3 Steel (EN 1993)
EC4 Composite (EN 1994)
EC5 Timber (EN 1995)
EC6 Masonry (EN 1996)
EC7 Geotechnical (EN 1997)
EC8 Earthquake (EN 1998)
EC9 Aluminium (EN 1999)
Features of Eurocodes

• Consistent for Bridges and Buildings

• Consistent for all Materials
(makes composite easier!)

Result: Biggest change for us is probably

Geotechnics is Limit State with ((almost)) consistent load factors

• Have National Annexes

Split of Codes
(and Committees)
Example: Concrete Bridges

• BSI has a code (and committee) for Bridges

+ sub group for concrete bridges

• CEN has code (and committee) for Concrete

+ sub group for bridges

• Bridge part is add on

National Annexes

• Quite restricted in what they can do

• Give values for “NDPs” (Nationally Determined Parameters)
• Di ti where
Direction h N
National
ti lD
Determination
t i ti S Specifically
ifi ll allowed
ll d
• Decides which Annexes can be used
• As safety is a national responsibility, more NDPs in 1990 &1991
• Can refer to NCCIs (Non contradictory complimentary information)
• UK has “PDs” (Published Documents) which give background to NDPs +
give NCCI

Means we have:

• EN 1992-1-1 + NA + PD
• EN 1992
1992-2
2 + NA + PD
“Concise EC2” to be published by Concrete Centre combines these to
make it easier. Does not fully cover everything.
Normally use NA from country where bridge to be built.
ENs (usually) have “recommended values” for NDPs for use outside CEN
countries
Outside EU
• ENs normally give “recommended values”
• These are meant for use outside EU and would be normal starting point
(that is if nothing else given
given, e
e.g.
g by client)
• Means its actually easier to use ENs outside EU!
but
• NDPs that are genuine national differences (mostly environmental actions)
cannot have default “recommended values” so you (or client) have to
decide.

Variables, Languages and Subscripts

• English, French and German versions official (and therefore officially

interchangeable): all others are translations
• Variable names are the same in all and follow English language (e.g. d for
depth) or convention (e.g. f for stress)
• Italics = defined variable
• Uses consistent but often multiple subscripts:
d = “d
“design”
i ” ((with
ith safety
f t ffactors
t included)
i l d d)
c = concrete, s = steel, R = resistance, k = characteristic etc
• Uses decimal commas
Limit states
(§ 3.3 & 3.4)

• Ultimate limit state

– Safety of people
– Safety of structure

• Serviceability limit state

– Functioning of the structure / element under normal use
– Comfort of people
– “Appearance” of the construction works

Design situations
(§ 3.2)
• Persistent design situation
– Normal conditions of use
– Includes variable imposed loads
• Transient design situation
– Temporary conditions e.g. during execution or repair
• Accidental design situation
– Duringg or after exceptional
p conditions
– Fire, explosion, impact or localised failure
• Seismic
– Earthquakes
– Not (usually) applicable in UK
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
5400, y given separately

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
Design values of the effects of actions

Ed = γsdE{γf,iFrep,iad}i ≥ 1

γsd equiv γf3 in BS 5400

ad = design value of geometrical data

Usually (always?) simplified to:

Ed = E{γF,iFrep,iad}i ≥ 1
i.e. unlike BS 5400 equiv. of γf3 absorbed into γF,i

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
5400, y given separately
Combination of Actions
(Characteristic: ULS and SLS)

• Each Variable Action type in turn considered as “Leading Variable Action”

and combined with combination value (with y0) of others

• Gives a lot of combinations: But

Combination of Actions
(Characteristic)

Number reduced for bridges reduced as:

1. Traffic Actions considered in “Groups” (in EN1991-2: later)

2. EN1990 A2 (and NA) have quite a lot of “0,0” and “-” y factors

3. 1990 A2 (+ NA) 2.2.2 (road) and 2.2.3 (foot) + note to Table A2.1 and A2.2
tells you some you do not have to consider, notably wind + thermal and
(
(usually)
ll ) anything
thi with
ith thermal
th l att ULS (2
(2.2.4
2 4 and
d TTable
bl A 2
2.3
3ddo nott give
i
all the same relaxations for Rail but not clear why)
 Design value of actions ULS– STR/GEO

∑γ
j ≥1
G, j G k , j "+ " γ p P "+ " γ Q ,1Q k ,1 "+ " ∑ γ Q ,iψ 0 ,i Q k ,i
i >1
(6.10)

or, alternativ ely the less favourable of :

∑γ
j ≥1
G, j G k , j "+ " γ p P "+ " γ Q ,1ψ 0 ,1Q k ,1 "+ " ∑ γ Q ,iψ 0 ,i Q k ,i
i >1
(6.10a)

∑ξ
j ≥1
j γ G , j G k , j "+ " γ p P "+ " γ Q ,1Q k ,1 "+ " ∑ γ Q ,iψ 0 ,i Q k ,i
i >1
(6.10b)
Not for UK Bridges
where :
"+ " implies " to be combined with"
∑ implies " the combined effect of"
ξ is a reduction factor for unfavourab le permanent actions G

Design value of actions - EQU

∑γ
j≥1
Gk, j"+"γ pP"+"γ Q,1Qk,1"+"∑γ Q,iψ 0,iQk,i
G, j
i >1
(6.10)

where:
"+" implies" to be combinedwith"
∑ implies" the combinedeffectof"

S
Same principle
i i l as ULS str b t g factors
t but f t different
diff t
Characteristic Combination (SLS)

∑G k, j + P + Qk,1 + ∑ψ 0,iQk,i
i >1
Permanent + full leading variable action + yo times others

(combination)

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

Combination of Actions
(Frequent: SLS)

Same principle with

y1 (frequent) times leading and
y2 (quasi perm) time rest

Traffic Action Groups given in Separate Tables

In practice

• You tend to end up with one less combination than BS 5400

(no more severe normal traffic on its own case)

But it does seem to make building loading more complicated than before

Quasi Permanent Combination

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

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

 EN 1990 A2 (§ A2.1)

• Gives rules for establishing combinations of actions for bridges

• Gives the recommended design factors for permanent, variable and
accidental actions
• Gives y factors to be used in the design of bridges (not Groups: these are
in 1991-2)
• Must be read in conjunction with the National Annex (bit of an
g
understatement for UK highway:y yyou hardly
y need the EN!))

EN Load Combinations:
Comparison with BS 5400 (ULS)
EN 1990
Y and γf given separately
γsd and γf absorbed into γF
Each Leading variable action in turn
combined with others at accompanying
value (with y factor)
Equ and Geo
BS 5400
γf1 and γf2 absorbed into γfL
γf3 and γfL given separately
Explicit specific load combinations
Equ is equiv. special case for γfL for
perm for overturning.
Geotech not fully covered
EN Load Combinations:
Comparison with BS 5400 (SLS)
EN 1990 BS 5400

3 combinations: Part 2 appears to only have 1 set

of factors equivalent to
Characteristic

Characteristic IIn Part

P t 4 there
th are crackk checks
h k
Frequent under “modified combination 1”
and creep etc are considered
Quasi permanent, under permanent

Factors (str/geo) (Set B)

Persistent Permanent actions Prestress Leading Accompanying
and variable variable
transient action(*) actions(*)
design
situation
Unfavourable Favourable Main Others
(Eq. 6.10) γ Gj,supGkj,sup γ Gj,inf Gkj,inf γ PP γ Q,1Qk ,1 γ Q,iψ 0,i Qk ,i
NOTE 1 Eq. 6.10 of BS EN 1990 should be used.
NOTE 2 For persistent design situations the recommended set of values for γ are:
Permanent Actions (contributions from the following components should be combined
as appropriate)
Concrete self weight γG,sup = 1,35 γG,inf = 0,95
Steel self weight
g γG,sup
G sup = 1,20
, γG,inf
G inf = 0,95
,
Super-imposed dead γG,sup = 1,20 γG,inf = 0,95
Road surfacing γG,sup = 1,20 γG,inf = 0,95
Weight of soil γG,sup = 1,35 γG,inf = 0,95
Self weight of other materials listed in BS EN γG,sup = 1,35 γG,inf = 0,95
1991-1-1 Tables A.1-A.6
Creep and shrinkage γG,sup = 1,35 γG,inf = 0,00
Settlement (linear analysis) γG,set = 1,20 γG,inf = 0,00
Settlement (nonlinear analysis) γG,set = 1,35 γG,inf = 0,00
Prestressing (EN 1992NA) γP,fav = 0,9 γP,unavf = 1,1
 Factors (str/geo) (Set B)
Persistent Permanent actions Prestress Leading Accompanying
and variable variable
transient action(*) actions(*)
design
g
situation
Unfavourable Favourable Main Others
(Eq. 6.10) γ Gj,supGkj,sup γ Gj,inf Gkj,inf γ PP γ Q,1Qk ,1 γ Q,iψ 0,i Qk ,i
NOTE 1 Eq. 6.10 of BS EN 1990 should be used.
NOTE 2 For persistent design situations the recommended set of values for γ are:
Permanent Actions (contributions from the following components should be combined
as appropriate)
Concrete self weight γG,sup = 1,35 γG,inf = 0,95
Steel self weight
g γG,sup
G sup = 1,20
, γG,inf
G inf = 0,95
,
Super-imposed dead γG,sup = 1,20 γG,inf = 0,95
Road surfacing γG,sup = 1,20 γG,inf = 0,95
Weight of soil γG,sup = 1,35 γG,inf = 0,95
Self weight of other materials listed in BS EN γG,sup = 1,35 γG,inf = 0,95
1991-1-1 Tables A.1-A.6
Creep and shrinkage γG,sup = 1,35 γG,inf = 0,00
Settlement (linear analysis) γG,set = 1,20 γG,inf = 0,00
Settlement (nonlinear analysis) γG,set = 1,35 γG,inf = 0,00
Prestressing (EN 1992NA) γP,fav = 0,9 γP,unavf = 1,1

Some points on permanent load factors

Does not have BS 5400 large g for surfacing
But same effect obtained by applying a factor to the thickness. This is given in EN
1991-1.1 NA clause 5.2.3(3). (1.4 or 1.55 where post execution finish not included
in nominal)
Means strictly you could use increased wheel load spread and reduced
temperature difference with it. This effectively means you could ignore it in thin
deck slabs although strictly also have to check -40%,

gP applied to prestress (strictly prestrain)

Given by 1992 (etc). Unlike BS 5400 this is applied in the ULS flexural analysis.
Gives a similar effect to the BS 5400 1.15 factor for “brittle” sections without the
horrible step!
 Table A2.4(A) (BS) – Design values of actions (EQU) (Set A)
Persistent and Permanent Actions Prestress Leading Accompanying variable
Transient Design variable actions(*)
Situation action(*)
Unfavourable Favourable Main Others
(if any)

(Eq. 6.10) γ Gj , sup G kj , sup γ Gj , inf G kj , inf γ PP γ Q ,1 Q k ,1 γ Q , iψ 0 , i Q k , i

NOTE 1: For persistent design situations the recommended set of values for γ are:
Permanent Actions (contributions from the following components should be combined as appropriate)
Concrete Self Weight γG,sup = 1,05 γG,inf = 0,95
Steel Self Weight γG,sup = 1,05 γG,inf = 0,95
Super-Imposed Dead γG,sup = 1,05 γG,inf = 0,95
Road Surfacing γG,sup = 1
1,05
05 γG,inf =00,95
95
Weight of Soil γG,sup = 1,05 γG,inf = 0,95
Hydrostatic Effects
(1)
γG,sup = 1,00 γG,inf = 1,00
Self weight of other materials
listed in BS EN 1991-1-1 Tables A.1-A.6 γG,sup = 1,05 γG,inf = 0,95
Prestressing γP as defined in the relevant design Eurocode or for the
individual project and agreed with the relevant authority
Factors less onerous than for str/geo but alternate spans at 1.05/0.95 do have to be considered
Hydrostatic effects based on conservative estimate of level

Factors (str/geo & equ) (Set B & A)

Variable actions
Road traffic actions (gr1a, gr1b, γQ = 1,35 (0 where favourable)
gr2,gr5,gr6)
Pedestrian actions (gr3, gr4) γQ = 1,35 (0 where favourable)
Rail traffic actions γQ = (0 where favourable)
1,45/1,4/1,7
Wind actions Foot and Execution (γQ = 1,55) (0 where favourable)
Road and Rail1 γQ = 1,7
Thermal actions Foot and Execution (γQ = 1,45) (0 where favourable)
Road and Rail1 γQ = 1,55

1. Thermal actions include factor to correct for 120 year life when
characteristic given for 50

Note live load factor for LM1/LM2 < BS5400 factor for HA
EN 1991: Actions main parts for bridges
• 1.1 Densities, Self-weight
• 1.4 Wind Actions
(Similar to BS and not critical for short span)
• 1.5 Thermal Actions
(Gives options but, with UK NA, similar to BS)
• 1.6 Actions During Execution
• 1.7
17 Accidental Actions Due to Impact
(Some significant changes and significant NA)
• 2 Traffic Actions
(significant changes: next. Includes parapet loads)

Snow loading can generally be ignored

EN 1991-2 Traffic Actions
1 2
α q 1ψ 1, q q 1 α q 2ψ 1, q q 2 α qr ψ 1, q q r

α Q 1ψ 1,Q Q 1
UDL
TS

5m
α Q 2ψ 1, Q Q 2 ning Area
ge Axis

SV / TS
Remain
Bridg

SOV

5m

UDL

3.0m 3.0m

Lanes

• 3m lanes + remaining area

• Exception for width 5,4 to 6m: 2 equal lanes

• Much simpler than BD 37

• Lane positions can move

 Load Model 1
• UDL + “Tandem Axle”
• Use of severe Tandem Axle avoids the need
for higher UDL for shorter spans aQ1 Q1k = 1,0 x 300kN Axle Load

1200

• No need for special rules for transverse Lane 1

3000

2000
members (but LM2) aq1 q1k = 0,61 x 9 kN/m2 = 5.5 kN/m2 UDL

• Used for general and local verification

• Does not allow for statistical reductions for aQ2 Q2k = 1,0 x 200kN Axle Load

long lengths so scope limits it to 200m Lane 2

• Conservative for longer loaded lengths and aq2 q2k = 2,2 x 2,5 kN/m2 = 5.5 kN/m2 UDL

NA extends it to 1500m
• NA brings it closer to BD 37 with Lane 1&2 aQ3 Q3k = 1,0 x 100kN Axle Load

similar. Lane 3

aq3 q3k = 2,2 x 2,5 kN/m = 5.5 kN/m2 UDL

2

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

3
3m L
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 spread for all wheel loads

Surfacing

45o
Slab

Slightly more than BS 5400

45o does not apply to fill (use 30o?)
Load Model 2
400mm Sq
• Single axle load
• Only
O l one per bridge
b id
• Applied at any location on
carriageway
• National Annex alters wheel

2000
shape to as LM1 Bridge
longitudinal axis
• Can consider 1 wheel

Qak = 400kN Axle Load

Load Model 1 and 2

• Considerably
Considerabl simpler than HA (which
hi h h
had
d numerous hi
historical
t i l
anomalies)

• General (No need for special rules for transverse spanning

members etc)

• Includes dynamic effects

Beware!
• Use of constant UDL makes loading multiple spans more likely to
be critical

For Sag

For Hog

Fatigue Load
5 Fatigue Load Models!
Used for checking against non
non-
• FLM1 based on LM1 (0.7 TS and propagating stress range in steel only
0.3 UDL) (Frequent used for equivalent check
in concrete)
• FLM2 set of frequent lorries

• FLM3 “single” vehicle Used for full fatigue check

• FLM4 sett off standard
t d d llorries
i
• FLM5 actual data

You only have to use 1 (1-5 give increasing complexity/work but

increasing economy)
LM3: Abnormal Vehicles
• Not enough
g agreement
g across Europe
p
• Transferred to “Informative Annex”
• UK uses its own vehicles which are in NA to EN 1991-2
• These will be familiar if you know BD 86
• SV equiv HB
• SOV equiv AIL
• Does not say what vehicles to use

SV 80 (from NA)
130 130 130 130 130 130
kN kN kN kN kN kN

1.2m 1.2m 1.2m 1.2m

0.35m
0.35m
Overall Vehiccle Width

Critical of
Track

1.2m
or
Overall T
3.0mm
3.0m

5.0m
or
9.0m
 SV 100 and 196
165 165 165 165 165 165
kN kN kN kN kN kN

1.2m 1.2m 1.2m 1.2m

0.35m

5m
Overall Vehicle Width
h

0.35
Critical of

Overall Track
1.2m
or
3.0m
3.0m

5.0m
or
9.0m

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

Table NA.4: Dynamic Amplification Factors for the SV and SOV

vehicles

Basic Axle Load DAF

100 kN 1.20

130 kN 1.16

165 kN 1.12

180 kN 1 10
1.10

225 kN 1.07

Simpler than BD 86 (BD 86 has two cases and a separate overload factor)
SOV Extra Abnormal Vehicles
( this one is 850 tonnes)

SOV (250 shown) equivalent to AIL

100kN 165kN 165kN 165kN 6 axles X 225kN @ 1.5m 5 axles X 225kN @ 1.5m 100kN 165kN 165kN 165kN

1.85m 1.35m 1.35m 5.0m 1.5m to 40m 5.0m 1.85m 1.35m 1.35m

Tractor-1 Trailer Bogie-1 Trailer Bogie-2 Tractor-2

0.70 m 1.05 m 0.70 m

0.25m 0.25m 0.25m 0.25m

Total Vehicle Width = Outside Track = 3.0 m

Load Model 1 + SV/SOV
(4 or 3) (1) (2) Basic Axle Dynamic Axle Load
Load (kN) Amplification (kN)
Factor
100 1.20 120
165 1.12 185
180 1.10 198

Note that lanes of LM1 are

interchangeable and case shown rarely
critical!
For short spans where TS in lane of
SV/SOV is off bridge, lanes more likely
to be as numbered in red

LM4 (crowd)

• 5kN/m2
• In EN 1992-2 mainly to cover fact that LM1 UDL can be < crowd
load
• Due to increased lane 2+ factor in NA, this never arises in UK
• Appears UK only needs it if crowd load considered likely on central
reserve
• Not Often!
 Footway Loading (NA)

LM4 (crowd) Footway

With risk of a continuous dense Otherwise
crowds
120
q fk = 2,0 + kN / m2
(e.g. footbridges serving a sports L + 10
stadium)
2,5kN / m2 ≤ q fk ≤ 5,0kN / m2
2
Load Model 4 qfk = 5,0 kN/m
where L is the loaded length in [m].
(= 5,0 for L < 30 )
1. EN uses different load for road and foot bridges but NA uses this
load for footway on own but 0,6 times in gr1a with LM1 (see
Groups: later)
2. When you use LM4, it still counts as “footway” (otherwise you would
not put it on footbridges!).
3. For footbridges and footways protected from c.way, there is also
concentrated load and service vehicles but considered separately

Main Groups of Traffic Loads: Characteristic

Table NA 3 (in 1991-2 NA)

Carriageway Footway
Load system LM1 (TS LM2 LM3 UDL
& UDL) (Single axle) (Special
vehicles)
Group of gr1a Characteristic - - 0,6X
loads Characteristic
gr1b - Characteristic - -

gr3 - - - Characteristic
gr5 Frequent - Characteristic

2 is braking /centrifugal, normal traffic, (applied with LM1)

4 is LM4 (crowd) rarely relevant in UK,
6 is braking /centrifugal for SV/SOV
 Groups of Traffic Loads Frequent

Table 4.4 b (in 1991-2 not changed by NA)

Carriageway Footway
Load system LM1 (TS LM2 (Single LM3 UDL
& UDL) axle) (Special
vehicles)
Group of gr1a Frequent - - -
loads
gr1b - Frequent - -

gr3 - - - Frequent

This is all of them (group no.s match Characteristic Table)

Table NA 2.1– Recommended values of ψ factors

for road bridges
Action Group Load Components ψ0 ψ1 ψ2
Traffic gr1a(1) TS 0,75 0,75 0
UDL 0 75
0,75 0 75
0,75 0
Pedestrian and cycle-track loads(2) 0,40 0,40 0
gr1b(1) Single Axle 0 0,75 0
gr2 Horizontal Forces 0 0 0
gr3 Pedestrian Loads 0 0.40 0
gr4 Crowd Loading 0 0,75 0
gr5 Vertical Forces from SV Vehicles 0 - 0
gr6 Horizontal Forces from SV Vehicles 0 0 0
Wind FWk Persistent design situations 0,50 0,20 0
During execution 0,80 - 0
F*W “During execution” (actually reduced 1,0 - 0
with no traffic: typo!)
Thermal Tk 0,60 0,60 0,50
Snow QSn,k 0,80 - -
Construction Qc 1,0 1,0

Lots of zero/- values: reduces no. of combinations

(LM3 & Horizontal only ever leading variable)
Accidental Actions (EN 1991-1-7)

Accidental Situations
Accidental Action Leading Variable Accompanying
Variable

∑G k, j + P + AEd +ψ1,1Qk,1 + ∑ψ 2,iQk,i (6.1lb)

i >1

Imposed (Gr1a & b except Ped + crowd) 0,75

Imposed (Pedestrian + cycle) 0,4 Imposed
p ((All)) 0,0
,
Imposed (Gr5 SV - Vertical) 1,0 Thermal 0,5
Thermal 0,6 (0,0)
Wind 0,0 Wind 0,0
Accidental Actions
• Vehicle collision with deck and p
pier g
given in 1991-1-7
• Accidental wheel loads and parapet loads given in 1991-2
• All count as accidental actions
• There is a PD for 1991-7 but not (yet)1991-2
• Material factors also reduced for accidental actions

Rail Actions
• Both BS 5400 and EN 1991-2 based on UIC documents
• Very similar although names different
• EN 1991-2 does not have light rail loading Dynamic factors
different
Rail Dynamic Factors
BS 5400 EN 1991-2

Written when designers

g could not always
y Assumes (like NR Underbridge code) you can
easily determine natural frequency d t
determine
i natural
t l ffrequency (Modern programs
give you this easily but remember to apply permanent
mass, inc ballast, as mass not force.)

Factors only valid when stiffness within Gives flow chart to decide if dynamic analysis
limits set by UIC document (not self required
sufficient)

Does nott ttellll you what

D h t tto d
do when
h outside
t id Hence looks more complicated but only really
criteria because it is more comprehensive

Actions: Conclusions
• A lot of new terminology
• Combinations different from current practice but more logical and
comprehensive?
• Important to understand when each combination is used – e.g.
characteristic for stress checks, quasi-permanent for RC crack width checks: see
later
• Calculation of permanent actions, wind, temperature and rail load
very similar to current practice
• Normal road traffic actions different but simpler
• Abnormal
Ab l vehicles
hi l more realistic
li ti and
d comprehensive
h i
• “Different, but not more difficult”
• Often get one less combination (no more severe traffic alone case)
• Combinations not as different as they look!