KEBS Eurocode 0 - Training 2021-08-22

KEBS 2021‐08‐24
INTRODUCTION TO EUROCODES
by Muthomi Munyua
University of Nairobi
August 2021
STRUCTURAL DESIGN CODES
• CODE OF LAWS OF HAMMURABI (2200BC) KING OF BABYLONIA

• If a builder builds a house for a man and do not make its construction firm and the
house which he has built collapse and cause the death of the owner of the house –
that builder shall be put to death
• If it causes the death of the son of the owner of the house –
they shall put to death a son of that builder
• If it causes the death of a slave of the owner of the house –
he shall give to the owner of the house a slave of equal value.
• If it destroys property, he shall restore whatever it destroyed, and because he did
not make the house which he built firm and it collapsed -
he shall rebuild the house which collapsed at his own expense.
• If a builder builds a house for a man and do not make its construction meet the
requirements and a wall fall in –
that builder shall strengthen the wall at his own expense.
muthomi@uonbi.ac.ke 1
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Deuteronomy Chapter 22 Verse 8
• When you build a new house, make a parapet around your roof so that you may not
bring the guilt of bloodshed on your house if someone falls from the roof.
Eurocodes
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
EUROCODES
EN 1990 Eurocode 0 Basis of structural and geotechnical design
EN 1991 Eurocode 1 Actions on structures
EN 1992 Eurocode 2 Design of concrete structures
EN 1993 Eurocode 3 Design of steel structures
EN 1994 Eurocode 4 Design of composite steel and concrete structures
EN 1995 Eurocode 5 Design of timber structures
EN 1996 Eurocode 6 Design of masonry structures
EN 1997 Eurocode 7 Geotechnical design
EN 1998 Eurocode 8 Design of structures for earthquake resistance
EN 1999 Eurocode 9 Design of aluminium alloy structures
Eurocodes
Eurocode Equivalent
BS
EN 1990 Basis of structural design
ACTIONS
EN 1991-1-1 Densities, self weight and imposed loads

EN 1991-1-2 Actions on structures exposed to fire
EN 1991-1-3 Snow loads
EN 1991-1-4 Wind loads BS 6399
EN 1991-1-5 Thermal loads BS 5400
EN 1991-1-6 Actions during execution
EN 1991-1-7 Accidental actions
EN 1991-2 Traffic loads on bridges
CONCRETE
EN 1992-1-1 General rules and rules for buildings BS 8110
EN 1992-2 Bridges BS 5400
6
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Introduction
The introduction of the Eurocodes to Kenya is a major change for engineers working in
structural and civil engineering.
The Codes were introduced to eliminate technical obstacles to trade and harmonize
technical specifications, thus creating a more open marketplace.
Eurocodes are less prescriptive in nature and offer more flexibility in design.
Challenges of adopting the Eurocodes
There is a high number of standards
Referring to separate product and material standards

BREXIT
The need to accommodate the requirements of many different countries
They are claimed to be the most technically advanced construction standards in the world
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Support from other standards
Volume of changes
For the typical practising engineer, changing from using the BS (British Standard) system to
the Eurocode system requires an understanding of the new requirements for all
construction materials at the same time.
Previously, changing to a new standard for a single material was more manageable
BS 6399‐2:1977 Adopt
KS EN 1991‐1‐4:2005 KS EN 1990
KS EN 1991
Retain KS EN 1992
BS 8110:1997
Shift
CP3 Chapter V‐2:1972 BS 6399‐2:1997 BS 8110:1997
10
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Language and symbols
11
Language and symbols

the term ‘actions’ has been adopted when most engineers would think that ‘loads’ is more
appropriate
Some words have been chosen because they are more translatable to other languages
‘Actions’ has been used so that it can cover the effect of temperature changes, which are
not strictly speaking ‘loads’
There are a lot of symbols, and some of them do differ from those used in British
Standards
There is a system, which on the whole has been adopted across all of the Eurocodes
Therefore, once they become familiar it does become easier to turn to a new material
Eurocode and have a grasp of the symbols.
12
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Steel f
13
14
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
15
Eurocodes are standards – not design guides

To the user of a BS, the Eurocodes have a very technical feel to them. This is because they
are written to give the basic design requirements; setting out the rules which should be
adopted.
In BSs go a step further and provide design guidance, design aids and are in fact far more
like design manuals.
Many Europeans would expect the information found in BSs to be found in textbooks or
design manuals.
This approach means that it is often necessary to have a Eurocode and some guidance,
such as the relevant Published Documents, open at the same time.
𝑀 0.156𝑏𝑑 𝑓 𝑀 0.167𝑏𝑑 𝑓
16
KEBS 2021‐08‐24

𝑓 25𝑁/𝑚𝑚 𝑓 20𝑀𝑃𝑎 𝑓 , 25𝑀𝑃𝑎
𝑓 460𝑁/𝑚𝑚 𝑓 500𝑀𝑃𝑎
Uncertainty of member resistances
Another challenge is knowing what sizes are appropriate at the start of the design process
and here an experienced engineer needs to know if their existing ‘rules of thumb’ are still
appropriate.
In practice, whichever code of practice is used the end result should be a design which
gives more or less the same sizes.
The Eurocodes represent an evolution, rather than a revolution and therefore some
reduction in member sizes might be an outcome, but any reduction of more than 10–20%
should be a warning sign.
An experienced engineer will still be able to use their rules of thumb and over time may
modify them.
17
Overcoming the challenges
The first step in overcoming these challenges is to acknowledge that the Eurocodes are
now British Standards and Kenya standards, and are increasingly being adopted around
the world
The next step is to actually make a start in using them; unfortunately there is no short cut.
It is only through use that they will become familiar and easier to use. 18
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Codes of practice are design tools
Any design standard can really be seen as a tool to assist an engineer in the design of
structure.
They are a convenient way of demonstrating that the design is safe and functional.
The Eurocodes are just an alternative way of justifying a design.
As they are more technical it does require that the engineer thinks more about the design
rather than just following a set of rules
19
Make use of design guidance

Alongside the introduction of the Eurocodes, every material industry has spent
considerable resources on developing design guides, web pages and worked examples.
Use the internet. There are many resources available.
20
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Make a plan
The best place to start is to plan how to introduce their use
Consider starting with one material and then move on to other materials
Determine which guidance and training is most appropriate
Identify a suitable simple project to start with – one without an urgent deadline
Plan the training so that it is put into practice as soon as possible afterwards
Start with hand calculations for some simple members
There is no need to design in parallel with a BS design – remember that rules of thumb
should still be appropriate
Appoint champions for particular materials – ensure that knowledge is shared

21
Recognising the benefits
Standardization
The development of the Eurocodes has followed a structured approach and so users will
KS EN 1990 find that there is a standard approach used throughout
1. Combinations of actions are consistent for all materials

BS 5950
BS 8110 2. Numbering of parts follow a pattern: part 1‐1 provides the general rules and rules for
buildings, part 1‐2 provides rules for fire resistance, part 2 is for bridge design and part
3 is for detailed design of other structural types
3. Clause headings in the material Eurocodes follow a pattern e.g. Clause 6 is for ultimate
limit state
4. Symbols are more consistent across different materials.
22
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Maximize overseas opportunities

For consultants working in Kenya it is not easy to see this as a benefit, but even SMEs will
get opportunities that require them to design for overseas projects. When this arises it
will be easier to accept the brief, knowing that it will be possible to obtain and use the
local National Annex.
23
Design guides written by a wider range of experts, including code

contributors
The quantity of design guides for the Eurocodes is far greater than for BSs
One reason for this is the widespread recognition of the fact that it is a major change
and so good guidance is required
Another reason is that the market for suitable guidance is far larger now that it covers
the whole of Europe and beyond
These guides have been written by a wide range of experts, which includes those
involved in writing the Eurocodes themselves
English language guides have also been written by overseas authors, which are
worthwhile reading as they can bring a fresh perspective.
24
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Recruitment – Eurocodes are now widely taught

Almost exclusively, where the code provisions are taught as part of a degree course the
Eurocodes will be used.
New graduates will have a knowledge of the Eurocodes
25
There will not be another major change in our standards for a

generation
Now that the Eurocodes are in place, it can be expected that the format and structure of
the system will be in place for many years to come. Updates are planned, but these will be
an evolution rather than a revolution.
It is also planned to reduce the number of Nationally Determined Parameters, which
means that over time there will be more convergence in the approach to design across
Europe.
An investment in time to understand the Eurocodes will pay dividends in the future.
26
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Technologically advanced
The Eurocodes are considered to be the most technologically advanced standards in the
world. They incorporate the latest available research. They often also cover more design
situations than might be covered in the BSs.
27
I‐beam shear
Material saving
area
The Eurocodes should be a catalyst for reducing member sizes and using materials more
efficiently. Any reduction will not be a step change because, as discussed previously, codes
of practice are a means of demonstrating that a design is satisfactory and all standards
should give broadly similar results.
However, it might be expected that the Eurocodes will give more efficient designs for two
reasons.
Firstly, overall the partial factors are slightly smaller (although there are exceptions) and
the combinations of actions give slightly lower design actions.
This is because a more rigorous statistical approach has been used to determine the values
to use
Secondly, as the Eurocodes are more advanced there is more opportunity to obtain the
maximum resistance from a given member section
28
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Design efficiency
Initially the Eurocodes can make everyday design more time consuming because they are
more technical and have less design aids embedded in them.
However, in making the change to Eurocodes there is an opportunity to make changes to
the design process to maximize design efficiency.
The Eurocodes are more suitable for use alongside computer software and whilst this does
require an investment in resources, if implemented in a considered way it can be the
catalyst for improving design efficiency.
29
Ensuring current standards are used

Eurocodes are updated from time to time. After every 5 years.
To ensure that engineers do not refer to inaccurate documents it is important that current
versions are being used.
30
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Conclusion
Ensuring current standards are used

The draft Eurocodes were published in the early 1990s and their introduction has taken
considerably longer than planned
However, the Eurocodes and their supporting standards have replaced the equivalent BSs
and should now be used as best practice
Making the transition will require an investment in resources, but with the right attitude
and approach there are opportunities to minimize the costs and maximize the benefits of
flexibility in design
Futureproof the organisation
31
Reinforced Concrete Beam Example
by Muthomi Munyua
August 2021
32
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Reinforced Concrete Beam Example
• Design a 600mm deep by 200mm wide beam of Concrete C20/25, spanning 5m carrying a
design UDL of 50kN/m. Characteristic strength of steel is 460MPa. Cover to reinforcement is
30mm. For initial calculation, assume longitudinal reinforcement with a diameter of 25mm and
transverse reinforcement with a diameter of 8mm. Draw the free body diagram, shear force
diagram and bending moment diagram.
• 𝑉 125𝑘𝑁
• 𝑀 156.25𝑘𝑁𝑚
• 𝑐 30𝑚𝑚 ∅ 25𝑚𝑚 ∅ 8𝑚𝑚 ℎ 600𝑚𝑚
∅
• 𝑑 ℎ 𝑐 ∅
• 600 30 8 549.5𝑚𝑚
• 𝑀 0.167bd f 0.167 200 549.5 20 201.7kNm

• 𝑀 156.25kNm 𝑀 201.7kNm ⇒ singly reinforced
33
Area of steel required - Bottom
.
• 𝐾 0.129 𝐾′ 0.167 ⇒ 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑦 𝑟𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑑
.
• z 0.5 0.25 0.882K d
• 𝑧 0.5 0.25 0.882 0.129 𝑑 0.869𝑑 𝑧 0.95𝑑 ∴ 𝑂𝐾
. .
• A . . . . . .
818mm
34
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Area of steel provided - Bottom
• 818mm
• From Reinforcement Table,
• Provide BOTTOM 3T20 (942𝑚𝑚 or 2T25 (982𝑚𝑚 )

• Either of the two are right answers
35
Area of steel required - Top
• Calculations for TOP reinforcement
• 𝐴 , 0.13%𝑏𝑑 0.0013𝑏𝑑
.
• 𝐴 , 200 549.5 143𝑚𝑚
36
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Area of steel provided - Top
• 143 𝑚𝑚
• Eurocode limits the minimum diameter in a beam to 12mm.

• Provide TOP 2T12(226𝑚𝑚
• Provide Sketch (indicate steel areas in sketch)
37
INTRODUCTION TO EUROCODES
KS EN 1990
BASIS OF STRUCTURAL & GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN
by Muthomi Munyua
August 2021
38
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Brief
Basis of structural design
EN 1990 is the head key code for the harmonized Structural Eurocodes.
39
Introduction
Basis of structural design
EN 1990 provides comprehensive information and guidance for all the

Structural Eurocodes, the principles and requirements for safety and
serviceability, and provides the basis and general principles for the
structural design and verification of buildings and civil engineering
structures (including bridges, towers and masts, silos and tanks)
EN 1990 gives guidelines for related aspects of structural reliability,

durability and quality control. EN 1990 is based on the limit state concept
and used in conjunction with the partial factor method.
EN 1990 is used with every Eurocode part for the design of new
structures, together with:
EN 1991 1 – Eurocode 1 – Actions on structures
EN 1992 – EN 1997 – Material Design Codes
40
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Background to limit state design
 Ferrybridge Cooling Tower Collapse, Nov 1965
41
Background to limit state design
 Ferrybridge Cooling Tower Collapse, Nov 1965
42
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
43
Links between Eurocodes
44
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Introduction
This is different to the situation adopted by the present BS Codes
The requirements for achieving safety, serviceability and durability and

the expression for action effects for the verification of ultimate and
serviceability limit states and their associated factors of safety are only
given in EN 1990.
Eurocode
KS EN 1990
KS EN 1991
British Standards KS EN 1992
BS 8110:1997 KS EN 1997
45
Introduction
EN 1990 is the key Eurocode in setting recommended safety levels, EN

1990 also introduces innovative aspects described as follows which
encourage the design engineer to consider the safety of people in the
built environment together with the responsible consideration of economy
by:
1. Allowing reliability differentiation based on the consequences of
failure:
2. Introducing the concept of using the representative values of actions
and not only the characteristic values as used for the UK codes of
practice.
46
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Introduction
The loads used in the EN 1990 load combinations recognize the

appropriate cases where:
1. Rare/Combination
2. Frequent
3. Quasi-permanent
Occurring events are being considered with the use of an appropriate

reduction coefficient 𝜓, applied to the characteristic load values as
appropriate.
An alternative load combination format, giving the choice to the designer
of using the expression 6.10 or 6.10a/6.10b for the combination of
actions for ultimate limit state verification.
The use of lower factors of safety for loads compared to BS, although
the effects of actions according the Eurocodes are lower than BS codes
for ULS and SLS verification, the new values are based on better
science and better research.
The use of advanced analytical techniques for the designer is encourage
and the use of probabilistic methods should the designer wish to use
these for the more specialist design problems.
47
Principal objectives of EN 1990
Principal objective in every Eurocode is given in the ‘Principles and

requirements’ are achieving:
Safety, serviceability and durability
EN 1990 provides information for safety factors of actions and the

combination for action effects for the verification of both ultimate and
serviceability limit states.
Its rules are applicable for the design of building and civil engineering
structures
48
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Requirements of EN 1990
To achieve safety, serviceability and durability for structures EN 1990

contains requirements to be adhered to by the complete Eurocode suite
and construction product standards on:
1. Fundamental requirements (safety, serviceability, resistance to fire and
robustness);
2. Reliability management and differentiation
3. Design working life
4. Durability
5. Quality assurance and quality control.
49
1. Fundamental requirements
a. A structure should be designed and executed in such a way that it will

be safe, during its intended life with appropriate degrees of reliability
and in an economic way:
i. Sustain all action and influences likely to occur during execution
and use. (safety requirement)
ii. Meet the specified serviceability requirements for a structure or a
structural element (serviceability requirement)
b. In the case of fire, the structural resistance should be adequate for the
required period of time.
c. A structure should be designed and executed in such a way that it will
not be damaged by events such as explosion, impact or consequences
of human errors, to an extent disproportionate to the original cause
(robustness requirement). EN 1990 provides methods of avoiding or
limiting potential damage.
50
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
2. Reliability differentiation
Design and execution according to the Eurocodes, together with

appropriate quality control measures, will ensure an appropriate degree
of reliability for the majority of structures.
51
Reliability differentiation
Modification by a reliability index

Modification of partial factors
Design supervision differentiation
Inspection during execution
52
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Categories
24 August 2021 53
Class 1
24 August 2021 54
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Class 1
24 August 2021 55
Class 2a
24 August 2021 56
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Class 2b
24 August 2021 57
Class 2b
24 August 2021 58
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Class 3
24 August 2021 59
Class 3
24 August 2021 60
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
3. Design working life

EN 1990 the design working life is the assumed period for which a
structure is to be used for its intended purpose with anticipated
maintenance but with major repair being necessary.
Table from UK NA
Design Indicative Examples
working life design
category working life
(years)
1 10 Temporary structures (1).
2 10 to 25 Replaceable structural parts, e.g. gantry girders, bearings
3 15 to 30 Agricultural and similar structures
4 50 Building structures and other common structures
5 100 Monumental building structures, bridges, and other civil
engineering structures
NOTES
(1) Structures or parts of structures that can be dismantled with a view to being re‐used
should not be considered as temporary.
(2) UK National Annex changed the working life of category 5 to 120 years. 61
4. Durability
EN 1990 stipulates that the structure should be designed such that

deterioration over its design working life does not impair the performance
of the structure
The durability of a structure is its ability to remain fit for use during the
design working life given appropriate maintenance.
62
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
5. Quality assurance and quality control
Appropriate quality assurance measures should be taken in order to

provide a structure that corresponds to the requirements and to the
assumptions made in the design by:
a. Definition of the reliability requirements
b. Organisational measures
c. Controls at the stages of design, execution, use and maintenance
63
Design situations
Design situations are sets of physical conditions representing the real

conditions occurring during the execution and use of the structure, for
which the design will demonstrate that relevant limit states are not
exceeded.
A relevant design situation needs to be selected to take account of the

circumstances in which the structure may be required to fulfil its function
64
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Principles of limit state design
EN 1990 is based on the limit state concept used in conjunction with the
partial safety factor method where limit states are the states beyond
which the structure no longer fulfils the relevant design criteria.
There are two types of limits states, ultimate and serviceability.
In the partial factor method the basic variable (actions, resistances and
geometric properties) are given design values through the use of partial
factors 𝜓, and reduction coefficients 𝛾, of the characteristic values of
variable actions.
EN 1990 allows for design directly based on probabilistic methods.
65
Ultimate limit state verification design situations
EN 1990 classifies design situations for ultimate limit state verification as

follows:
Persistent situations (conditions of normal use)
Transient conditions (temporary conditions, e.g. during execution)
Accidental situations
Seismic situations
66
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Serviceability limit state verification design situations
Serviceability limit states correspond to conditions beyond which specified

service requirements for a structure or structural element are no longer
met and the design situations concern:
1. The functioning of the construction works or parts of them;

2. Comfort of the people
3. Appearance
EN 1990 distinguishes between reversible and irreversible serviceability

limit states.
There are 3 expressions for serviceability design: characteristic, frequent
and quasi-permanent
67
Actions
Actions are sets of forces, imposed displacements or accelerations and

classified based by their variation in time:
1. Permanent actions G – self-weight of structures, fixed equipment,

indirect actions caused by shrinkage and uneven settlements;
2. Variable actions Q – imposed loads on structural elements
3. Accidental actions e.g. Explosions or impact from vehicles
68
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Variable Actions
A variable action has four representative values in decreasing order of

magnitude:
1. Characteristic value, Fk
2. Combination value, 0 Fk
3. Frequent value, 1 Fk
4. Quasi‐permanent value, 2 Fk
The reduction coefficients, , are applied to the characteristic load values

which are appropriate to cases where:
1. Combination (rare)
2. Frequent
3. Quasi-permanent
Occurring events are being considered.
69
Variable Actions
70
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Definitions of representative values, Frep
• Characteristic value, Fk
- Principal characteristic value with fixed probability of being exceeded during a reference
period (usually 5% in design life)
• Combination value, 0 Fk
- Reduced value of action representing the reduced probability of simultaneous
occurrence of its peak value with that of another action
• Frequent value, 1 Fk
- Value of action which will be exceeded only over short periods of time within the
reference period or will have fixed probability of exceedance in this period (of the order
of a few weeks)
• Quasi-permanent value, 2 Fk
- Value of action which will be exceeded about 50% of the time within the reference
period. More tangible definition is the average value
71
Verification by the partial factor method
Ultimate Limit States
The effects of design actions do not exceed the design resistance of the
structure at the ultimate limit state; and the following ultimate limit
states need to be verified.
Safety of the people, safety of the structures and protection of the

contents.
They are associated with collapse or with other similar forms of structural
failure.
72
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
EQU
Loss of static equilibrium of the structure or any part considered as a

rigid body.
The strengths of construction materials or ground are generally are not
governing.
It is verified that
The design value of the effect of destabilizing actions is less than the
design value of the effect of stabilizing actions
73
74
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
75
STR
Internal failure or excessive deformation of the structure or structural

member.
The strength of construction materials of the structure governs
The design value of the effect of actions is less than the design value of
the corresponding resistance
76
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
77
GEO
Failure or excessive deformation of the ground where the strengths of soil

or rock are significant in providing resistance
The design value of the effect of actions is less than the design value of
the corresponding resistance
78
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Dr Thuo
(Geotechnical Module) 79
FAT
Fatigue failure of the structure or structural members. The combinations

apply:
1. Persistent or transient design situation
2. Accidental design situation
3. Seismic design situation
80
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Limit State Design
Ultimate Limit State

Concerns the safety of people and/or safety of structure.
Limit states include:
 Loss of equilibrium, EQU
 Failure by excessive deformation of the ground; GEO
 Failure where material strength governs; STR
 Loss of stability of the structure or any part of it, including supports and foundations
 Failure caused by fatigue or other time-dependent effects; FAT
Serviceability Limit States

Concerns functioning of the structure or structural members under normal use, comfort of people or
appearance of the construction works
This limit state is a condition e.g. deflection, vibration or cracking, which is unacceptable to the
owners of the structure.
81
Key definitions of actions in EN 1990
- Principal characteristic value with fixed probability of being exceeded during a
reference period
- Usually 5% probability of exceedance in design life
- Determined as unfactored value from EN 1991
Probability density
Fm Fk
F
82
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Key definitions of actions in EN 1990
- Principal characteristic value with fixed probability of being exceeded during a reference period
• Nominal value
- Value fixed on non-statistical bases, for instance on acquired experience or on physical conditions
(typically dead loads, based on average dimensions and mean densities)
• Representative value, Frep

- Value used within a particular combination of actions
- Takes account of low probability of more than one action having its characteristic value at the
same time
- Also takes account of reduction in maximum likely value of an action if considered over periods of
less than the design life
• Design value
Factored value of load which can confusingly be defined as both:
- Fd = F Frep where F = f × Sd and Sd is a partial factor to account for modelling uncertainties
- Fd = f Frep
83
EN 1990 ULS combinations
• Persistent
- Design situation during a period of the same order as the design working life of
the structure
- Represents normal use
• Transient
- Design situation during a period much shorter than the design working life of the
structure
- e.g. during construction or repair
• Accidental
- Design situation involving exceptional conditions for structure
- e.g. fire, explosion, impact etc.
• Seismic
- Design situation involving exceptional conditions for structure during seismic
event
84
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
EUROCODES TERMINOLOGY
85
86
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
ULS combinations – persistent
Persistent combination – normal design conditions during service:

E(ΣγG,j . Gk,j + γP . P + γQ,1 . Qk,1 + ΣγQ,i .ψ0,i . Qk,i) (6.10)
permanent prestress leading other actions in

actions action combination
or worst of……….
E( ΣγG,j . Gk,j + γP . P + γQ,1 .ψ0,i . Qk,1 + ΣγQ,i .ψ0,i . Qk,i) (6.10a)
E( Σξj . γG,j . Gk,j + γP . P + γQ,1 . Qk,1 + ΣγQ,i .ψ0,i . Qk,i) (6.10b)
In UK National Annex, both are allowed for buildings, but only (6.10) allowed for bridges.
Equations (6.10a) and (6.10b) usually more economic.
87
ULS combinations – accidental & seismic action
Structure during application of accidental action e.g. impact
E( ΣGk,j + P + Ad + ψ1,1 or 2,1 Qk,1 + Σψ2,i . Qk,i)
permanent prestress accidental other leading Quasi-permanent

actions action action values of other
actions
ULS combinations – seismic

E ( ΣGk,j + P + AEd + Σψ2,i . Qk,i)
permanent prestress seismic Quasi-permanent

actions action values of other
actions
88
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
EN 1990 SLS combinations
Characteristic
‐normally used for irreversible limit states
exceeded in reference period
‐e.g. stress checks for reinforcement at SLS

Reducing probability of being
Frequent
‐normally used for reversible limit states
‐e.g. crack width and decompression checks in prestressed
concrete at SLS
Quasi‐permanent
‐normally used for long‐term effects and the appearance of
the structure
‐e.g. crack width checks in reinforced concrete
89
SLS combinations – characteristic
• Characteristic combination – typically used for checking limitations

on stresses in materials at SLS:
E( ΣGk,j + P + Qk,1 + Σψ0,i . Qk,i)
permanent prestress leading other actions in

actions action combination
90
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
SLS combinations – frequent
• Frequent combination – typically used for checking decompression

and cracking in pre-stressed members at SLS:
E( ΣGk,j + P + ψ1,1Qk,1 + Σψ2,i . Qk,i)
permanent prestress Frequent Quasi-permanent

actions value of values of other
leading actions
action
91
SLS combinations – quasi-permanent
• Quasi-permanent combination – typically used for checking crack

widths in reinforced concrete at SLS:
E( ΣGk,j + P + Σψ2,i . Qk,i)
permanent prestress Quasi-permanent

actions values of other
actions
92
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Combination of actions – for buildings
Action 0 1 2
Imposed loads in buildings (EN 1991-1-1)
A: domestic, residential areas 0.7 0.5 0.3
B: office areas 0.7 0.5 0.3
C: congregation areas 0.7 0.7 0.6
D: shopping areas 0.7 0.7 0.6
E: storage areas 1.0 0.9 0.8
F: traffic area, vehicle weight ≤ 30kN 0.7 0.7 0.6
G: traffic area, 30kN ≤ vehicle weight ≤ 160kN 0.7 0.5 0.3
H: roofs 0 [0.7] 0 0
Snow loads on buildings (EN 1991-1-3)
Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden 0.7 0.5 0.2
CEN member states, H > 1000m asl 0.7 0.5 0.2
CEN member states, H ≤ 1000m asl 0.5 0.2 0
Wind loads (EN 1991-1-4)
Wind loads on buildings 0.6 [0.5] 0.2 0
Temperature loads (EN 1991-1-5)
Temperature (non-fire) in buildings 0.6 0.5 0
Values in [brackets], given in NA to BS EN 1990, replace values in EN 1990
93
Combination of actions – road bridges
Action 0 1 2
Traffic loads on bridges (EN 1991-2)
gr1a (LM1 + pedestrian TS 0.75 0.75 0
or cycle track loads) UDL 0.40 0.40 0
Pedestrian and cycle 0.40 0.40 0
track
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 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 limited) 1.0 - -
Thermal actions (EN 1991-1-5)
Tk 0.6 0.6 0.5
Construction loads
Qc 1.0 - 1.0
94
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Worked Example
95
Example of load combination for a building frame
Figure 1: Frame Configuration
Characteristic load / frame:
Wk – Wind loads – roof (r) or floor (f)
96
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Load cases
The fundamental combination of actions that should be used is for example, expression
(6.10) from clause 6.4.3.2:
∑ 𝛾 , 𝐺 , 𝛾 𝛾 , 𝑄 , ∑ 𝛾 ,𝜓 ,𝑄 , (6.10)
As the stability of the structure will be sensitive to a possible variation of self weights,
it will be necessary to allow for this in accordance with Table A1.25(B) of EN 1990. The
values of partial factors are the values recommended in Annex A1 of EN 1990. Thus,
𝛾 , 1.0
𝛾 , 1.35
𝛾 1.5
ψ0 = 0.7 for imposed loads (offices) (from Table A1.1)
ψ0 = 0.6 for wind action for buildings (from Table A1.1)
97
Depending on the cross-section of structural elements under consideration, the effects of self-weight
are multiplied by 1.00 or 1.35 (see Table A1.2(B), note 3, in EN 1990).
The variable action is a free action as is applied on the unfavourable part of the line of influence
corresponding to the effect under consideration.
Load Case 1
Treat the wind action as the dominant action
Load case 2
Treat the imposed load on the roof as the dominant load
Load case 3
Treat the imposed load on the floors as the dominant action
Load case 4
Consider the case without wind loading, treating the imposed roof loading as the primary load
Load case 5
Consider the case without wind loading, treat the imposed floor load as the primary load
Note: when the wind loading is reversed, another set of arrangements will need to be considered.
98
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Load Case 1
Treat the wind action as the dominant action
99
Load case 2
Treat the imposed load on the roof as the dominant load
100
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Load case 3
Treat the imposed load on the floors as the dominant action
101
Load case 4
Consider the case without wind loading, treating the imposed roof
loading as the primary load
102
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Load case 5
Consider the case without wind loading, treat the imposed floor
load as the primary load
103
Envelope
104
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Balance
Column design Examples
• The following example should reinforce our understanding.

• A non-slender axially loaded reinforced concrete column of clear height 3.2m
and a section dimension of 500 x 500 is to be designed to carry an ultimate
axial load of 4 000kN. It supports deep beams at the top and a pad
foundation at the bottom. The concrete specified for use is C25/30. Provide
the main steel reinforcement and the stirrups. Assume a cover of 40mm,
25mm main bars and 8mm stirrups. The characteristic strength of rebar is
460MPa.
∅
• 𝑑 𝑐 ∅ 40 8 60.5
• 𝑏 500 𝑁 4 000𝑘𝑁 𝑀 0 𝑓 460𝑀𝑃𝑎

ℎ 500
End End condition at top
condition at 1 2 3
1 – Full fixity bottom
2 – Partial fixity 1 0.75 0.80 0.90
3 – Nominal restraint 2 0.80 0.85 0.95
3 0.90 0.95 1.00
• 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 0.9 3200 2880mm
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Eccentricity
107
• 𝑖. 16.7𝑚𝑚
• 𝑖𝑖. 7.2𝑚𝑚
• 𝑖𝑖𝑖. 20𝑚𝑚
• 𝐴𝑑𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑁𝑒 4 000𝑘𝑁 0.020𝑚
80𝑘𝑁𝑚
• 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 80 80𝑘𝑁𝑚
• N 4 000𝑘𝑁
• M 80𝑘𝑁𝑚
Column Design Chart

108
• N 4 000𝑘𝑁
• M 80𝑘𝑁𝑚
.
• 0.121
• 𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑡 0.15
• 0.64
• 0.0256
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Column Design Charts
𝑁
0.64
𝑏ℎ𝑓
𝑀
0.0256
𝑏ℎ 𝑓
Longitudinal Reinforcement
110
• 0.18
• Rearranging:
.
• 𝐴
.
• 𝐴 2 446𝑚𝑚
. .
• 𝐴 , 1 000𝑚𝑚
. .
• 𝐴 , 𝐴 , ∴ 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐴 ,
• 𝐴 , 2 446𝑚𝑚
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Longitudinal Reinforcement
111
A 2 446mm
• PROVIDE 4T32 (3216𝑚𝑚

• Kindly note that this is only one right answer out of several others that may
be adopted
• Provide sketch (Show areas)
Transverse Reinforcement
112
• 𝑆𝑡𝑖𝑟𝑟𝑢𝑝𝑠 𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑒:
𝟏
• 𝝓𝒎𝒂𝒊𝒏 20 5𝑚𝑚
𝟒
• 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑇8 𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑟𝑟𝑢𝑝𝑠
• 𝑉𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔:
• 𝒊. 𝟐𝟎 𝝓𝒎𝒂𝒊𝒏 𝟐𝟎 𝟐𝟎 𝟒𝟎𝟎
• 𝒊𝒊. 𝑳𝒆𝒂𝒔𝒕 𝒄𝒐𝒍𝒖𝒎𝒏 𝒅𝒊𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝟓𝟎𝟎
• 𝒊𝒊𝒊. 𝟒𝟎𝟎𝒎𝒎
• 𝐴𝑑𝑜𝑝𝑡 400𝑚𝑚 𝑠𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔
• 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑇8@400
• Provide Sketch
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
Conclusion
EN 1990 is a fully operative code and the concept of a fully operative

material-independent.
It is key to designing structures that have an acceptable level of
safety and economy, with opportunities for innovation.
113
References
1. Eurocodes Training Manual – KS EN1990 (2020), Kenya Bureau of Standards (KEBS), Nairobi, Kenya.
2. EN 1990 Eurocode - Basis of structural design. European Committee for Standardisation, 04/2002.
3. EN 1991-1-1 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-1: General actions – Densities, self-weight,
imposed loads for buildings. European Committee for Standardisation, 04/2002.
4. Gulvanessian, H. Calgaro A., & Holicky M., Designers’ Guide to EN 1990 Eurocode: Basis of Structural
Design (1992). Thomas Telford Publishing, London.
5. Couchman, G.H. Steel Building Design. Introduction to the Eurocodes (2017). SCI Publication P361,
Berkshire, UK.
6. Handbook 1 – Basis of Structural Design. Available at:

https://eurocodes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/showpublication.php?id=62 accessed in October 2020.
114
KEBS 2021‐08‐24
THANK YOU
115

KEBS Eurocode 0 - Training 2021-08-22

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

KEBS Eurocode 0 - Training 2021-08-22

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

KEBS Eurocode 0 - Training 2021-08-22

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

KEBS 2021‐08‐24

STRUCTURAL DESIGN CODES

• CODE OF LAWS OF HAMMURABI (2200BC) KING OF BABYLONIA

Deuteronomy Chapter 22 Verse 8

EN 1990 Eurocode 0 Basis of structural and geotechnical design

EN 1991 Eurocode 1 Actions on structures

EN 1992 Eurocode 2 Design of concrete structures

EN 1993 Eurocode 3 Design of steel structures

EN 1994 Eurocode 4 Design of composite steel and concrete structures

EN 1995 Eurocode 5 Design of timber structures

EN 1996 Eurocode 6 Design of masonry structures

EN 1997 Eurocode 7 Geotechnical design

EN 1998 Eurocode 8 Design of structures for earthquake resistance

EN 1999 Eurocode 9 Design of aluminium alloy structures

EN 1991-1-1 Densities, self weight and imposed loads

Challenges of adopting the Eurocodes

There is a high number of standards

Referring to separate product and material standards

Support from other standards

Challenges of adopting the Eurocodes

Challenges of adopting the Eurocodes

Language and symbols

Challenges of adopting the Eurocodes

Language and symbols

Challenges of adopting the Eurocodes

Challenges of adopting the Eurocodes

Challenges of adopting the Eurocodes

Challenges of adopting the Eurocodes

Eurocodes are standards – not design guides

Challenges of adopting the Eurocodes

Overcoming the challenges

Overcoming the challenges

Codes of practice are design tools

The Eurocodes are just an alternative way of justifying a design.

Overcoming the challenges

Make use of design guidance

Use the internet. There are many resources available.

Overcoming the challenges

Determine which guidance and training is most appropriate

Start with hand calculations for some simple members

Appoint champions for particular materials – ensure that knowledge is shared

Recognising the benefits

1. Combinations of actions are consistent for all materials

4. Symbols are more consistent across different materials.

Recognising the benefits

Maximize overseas opportunities

Recognising the benefits

Design guides written by a wider range of experts, including code

Recognising the benefits

Recruitment – Eurocodes are now widely taught

New graduates will have a knowledge of the Eurocodes

Recognising the benefits

There will not be another major change in our standards for a

Recognising the benefits

Recognising the benefits

Recognising the benefits

Recognising the benefits

Ensuring current standards are used

Ensuring current standards are used