5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

Home

TechnicalPapers

UsefulStuff

Gallery

Links

www.anbeal.co.uk
Theoriginalcopyofthispaperisavailable
from
www.istructe.org/thestructuralengineer

Search

TheStructuralEngineer,Vol.87No.20,20thOctober2009
Eurocode2:Span/depthratiosforRCslabsandbeams
AlasdairNBealBScCEngMICEFlStructE,ThomasonsLLP,Leeds
Synopsis
Eurocode2introducesnewspan/depthrulesforthedesignofreinforced
concretebeamsandslabs.Theseareinvestigatedfrompracticalandtheoretical
pointsofviewandseriousproblemsfound.ThepresentUKNationalAnnex
imposesrequirementswhichareimpossibletocomplywith,makingEC2
unusableintheUKuntilitisrevised.TheproposedEC2recommendations
offerachoicebetweenanoverconservativesimpletable,oraformulafor
calculatingallowableratioswhichisimpracticaltouseandcontainsserious
errors.Inparticularitswordingisambiguous,whichmakestheeffectsof
varyingsteelstressunclear,anditexaggeratestheeffectthatincreasing
concretestrengthhasondeflection.Untiltheseproblemsaresortedout,itis
recommendedthatpresentBS8110limitsareretainedbutitisrecommended
thatanerrorintheseshouldbecorrectedtoimproveeconomy.
Introduction
Inreinforcedconcretedesign,deflectionisnormallycontrolledbylimitingthe
span/depthratioofabeamorslab.Thispaperconsidersthespan/depthrules
proposedbyEurocode2[1]andcomparesthemwithexistingUKpractice.
TomakethediscussioneasierforUKengineerstofollow,thenormalUKterms
loadsandfcuareusedratherthantheEurocodeterminologyofactionsand
fck,cube.Asdeflectionisaserviceabilitycondition,analysishasbeenbasedon
serviceloadsandthesearegenerallytakenasthedesigncharacteristicloads.
InEurocode0,characteristicloadscanbefactoreddownforserviceability
calculations.Forclarity,thesereductionfactorsarenotusedinthemain
analysis,sothattechnicalaspectsofthedesignrulescanbecomparedona
likeforlikebasis.TheeffectsoftheEC0proposedreductionfactorson
serviceloadsarethendiscussedseparately.
Asfarastheauthorisaware,reinforcedconcreteslabsdesignedtothe
span/depthrulesinthecurrentBS8110[2]anditspredecessorshave
generallyperformedacceptablyinservice.Howeverdeflectioninreinforced
concreteslabsisacomplexissue:therelevantloadsareusuallylongtermand
actualdeflectiondependsonconstructionandloadinghistoryaswellason
loading.Afullanalysisoftherelevanttestdataandtheorytotryestablish
exactlywhatthecorrectspan/depthratiosareforallsituationswouldbea
majorresearchproject,outsidethescopeofthepresentpaper.Theanalysisin
thepaperisbasedoncomparisonbetweenresultsfromtheproposedEurocode
2rules,resultsfromexistingcodesandbasictheoreticalconsiderations.
Span/depthlimitsplayacriticalroleindesign:theycommonlydeterminefloor
thicknessesandbeamdepths.Theseinturndictatetheweightofthestructure,
headroomandstoreyheightsandcanhaveamajoreffectonthecostofa
http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

1/13

5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

headroomandstoreyheightsandcanhaveamajoreffectonthecostofa
building.Slabthicknessesandbeamdepthsaregenerallydecidedearlyinthe
developmentofthedesignandaredifficulttochangelater,sodesignrulesare
neededwhichgivesensible,consistentresultsandcanbeappliedearlyinthe
designprocess.
Inthepast,thiswaseasy:CP114[3]gaveasimpletableofspan/depthratios
forbeamsandslabswhichcouldbeapplieddirectly,withoutanycalculations.
Therecommendationswererathercrudebutinmostcases,asfarastheauthor
isaware,theyproducedserviceable,reasonablyeconomicalstructures.
In1972,CP110[4]introducednewrecommendationsbasedonresearchby
Beeby[5].Inthese,theallowablespan/depthratiovarieddependingonthe
steeltensilestressandtheamountoftensileandcompressivereinforcement.
Thenewruleswereanimprovementfromatheoreticalpointofviewbut
unfortunately,becauseofthewaytheywerepresented,theengineercould
onlycheckwhetherthespan/depthratiowasacceptableafterthe
reinforcementdesignhadbeencompleted.Forinitialschemedesign,engineers
hadtoestimateslabthicknessesbyguessworkandtheytendedtomake
conservativeassumptionsinordertoavoidproblemslater.Intheory,slab
thicknessescouldhavebeenreducedlaterwhereappropriate,oncefull
calculationshadbeenpreparedbutinpracticethiswasrarelydone.Asaresult,
despitethetheoreticaladvantagesoftheCP110span/depthrules,theygained
areputationforproducingoverweight,uneconomicaldesignscomparedwithCP
114.
TheproblemwassolvedbychangingthepresentationoftheCP110rules:
insteadofrelatingthespan/depthfactorstoreinforcementareaandstress,
theywerepresentedintermsofM/bd,whichallowedthemtobechecked
earlierinthedesigncalculation[6]andCP110'ssuccessor,BS8110,adopted
thisapproach.ThederivationoftheBS8110recommendationsisexplainedin
theHandbooktoBritishStandardBS8110:1985[7].Basedonthiswork,
simpletablesofallowablespan/depthratiosforslabswerealsopublishedwhich
combinedtheaccuracyofCP110withthesimplicityofCP114[8]andthese
wereincludedintheICE/IStructEGreenBookforlimitstatedesign[9]and
theIStructEGoldBookforpermissiblestressdesignofreinforcedconcrete
buildingstructures[10].
Eurocode2
Eurocode2introducesanewmethodforcalculatingallowablespan/depthratios
forreinforcedconcretebeamsandslabs.
Cl.7.4.2Table7.4Ngivesspan/depthlimitsforbeamsandslabswithaservice
tensilestressfsof310N/mm.Atfirstsight,thislooksrefreshinglysimple:for
asimplysupportedbeamorslabwith0.5%tensilereinforcementtheL/dlimit
is20with1.5%reinforcementthelimitis14andcorrespondinglimitsare
specifiedforcontinuousbeams,flatslabsandcantilevers.Howeverthe
apparentsimplicityofTable7.4Ncomesataprice,asitslimitsare
conservativeforlightlyloadedslabs.ItalsosharestheweaknessoftheoldCP
110rules:forinitialsizingofslabsandbeamstheengineerhastorelyon
conservativeguesswork,astheallowablespan/depthratiocannotbechecked
untilthereinforcementdesigniscomplete.
Table1showsslabthicknessesrequiredtosupportanimposedloadof5kN/m
overaspanof4.5maccordingtoEC2Table7.4N.Thesearecomparedwith
thethicknessrequiredbyTable3intheIStructEGreenBook(whichgives
approximatespan/depthratiosforBS8110designs,basedonsuperimposed
load)andTable6cintheGoldBook,(whichgivesexactratiosbasedontotal
load).AsthetwoUKdocuments(whicharebothbasedonBS8110)use
differentdesigntensilestressesfromEC2,acomparisonisalsogivenofslab
thicknessesrequiredbyBS8110fordesigntotheEC2standardsteelservice
stressfs=310N/mm2.(ReinforcementbarsassumedH12with20mmcoverin
allcases.)

http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

2/13

5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

allcases.)

Table1Slabthicknessfor4.5mspan

Simply supported

Continuous

L/d

slabthickness

L/d

slabthickness

IStructE/ICEGreenBook

23

222

30

176mm

IStructEGoldBook

27

193

37

148mm

24.6

210

34.3

158mm

20

251

26

199mm

BS8110fs=310N/mm
EC2Table7.4N

TheGreenBooklimitsarebasedonfs=333N/mm,asperthecurrentedition
ofBS8110(whichisoverconservativeseelater)theGoldBookfiguresare
basedonfs=275N/mmandtheEC2figuresarebasedonfs=310N/mm.
Ascanbeseen,slabsdesignedtoEC2Table7.4Nwouldbe2329mmthicker
thansimilardesignstotheGreenBook,5158mmthickerthanGoldBook
designsand41mmthickerthanBS8110designsbasedonfs=310N/mm.
ThususingEC2Table7.4Nwouldincreasetheweightofthestructureandalso
storeyheights,substantiallyincreasingthecostofthebuilding.
AsanalternativetoTable7.4N,EC2allowsspan/effectivedepthlimits(L/d)to
becalculatedfromequations7.16a,7.16band7.17:
L/d=K(11+(1.5fckx0/)+3.2fck(0/1)1.5)if0
(7.16a)
L/d=K(11+(1.5fckx0/('))+fck(0'/))/12)if0>
(7.16b)
whereKisobtainedfromTable7.4N,withvalues1.0(simplysupported),1.5
(continuous),1.3(continuousendspan),1.2(flatslab),0.4(cantilever).
0=referencereinforcementratio=103fck
=requiredtensionreinforcementratio
'=requiredcompressionreinforcementratio
fck=concretecylinderstrength(N/mm)
Cl.7.4.2thengoesontostate:Expressions(7.16a)and(7.16b)havebeen
derivedontheassumptionthatthesteelstress...atSLSatacrackedsection
atthemidspanofabeamorslaboratthesupportofacantileveris310MPa
(correspondingroughlytofyk=500MPa).
Whereotherstresslevelsareused,thevaluesobtainedusingExpression(7.16)
shouldbemultipliedby310/s.Itwillnormallybeconservativetoassume
that:
310/s=500/(fykAsreq/Asprov)(7.17)where
s=tensilestressatmidspan(supportforcantilevers)underthedesignload
atSLS
Asprov=areaofsteelprovidedatthissection
Asreq=areaofsteelrequiredatthissectionforultimatelimitstate.
(ThecalculatedL/disreducedby7/Leffforbeamsandslabsspanningmore
than7mand8.5/Leffforflatslabsspanningmorethan8.5m.)
Fromapracticalpointofview,theserecommendationsareevenworsethanthe
oldCP110rules:notonlymustthereinforcementdesignbecompletedbefore
thespan/depthratiocanbecalculatedbuttherearenotabulatedvaluesto
streamlinetheprocess.Howevertheengineerwhowishestoproducean
economicaldesignhasnoalternativebuttotrytogettogripswithequations
http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

3/13

5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

economicaldesignhasnoalternativebuttotrytogettogripswithequations
7.16a,7.16band7.17.
ComparisonwithUKpractice
BeforecomparingEC2withUKpractice,itisnecessaryfirstofalltodealwith
anerrorinthecurrenteditionofBS8110.InCP110,theservicestress
associatedwith460N/mmreinforcementwasfs=0.58fy=267N/mmthis
correspondedtoamaterialsfactoroffy=1.15andanaverageloadfactorof
(1.4+1.6)/2=1.5.InthefirsteditionofBS8110thiswasincreasedtofs=
0.625fy=288N/mm(averageloadfactor1.39).Thenin2002anamendment
reducedthematerialfactorto1.05andfswasincreasedto0.667fy=
307N/mm.
In2005,followingtheincreaseinhightensilesteelfyto500N/mm,BS8110
wasagainamended:thematerialfactorrevertedto1.15butunfortunatelythe
formulaforfsinTable3.10wasleftunchangedat0.667fyincreasingfsto
333N/mm.Thiswasclearlyamistake,asitwouldcorrespondtoanaverage
loadfactorofonly1.3,whichislessthantheminimumpossibleforabeamor
slabsupportingdeadloadandimposedloads.Restoringtheservicestresstoits
1985valueof0.625fy(loadfactor1.39)wouldreduceittofs=0.625x500=
312N/mmbuteventhisisunnecessarilyconservative:therealisticminimum
averageloadfactorisabout1.45,whichwouldgivefs=0.6fy=300N/mm.
CorrectingthiserrorinthecurrentBS8110wouldsignificantlyreduceslab
thicknessesandimproveeconomy.

Table2ComparisonofL/dlimitsforsimplysupportedslabdesign
(fs=310N/mm)
TotalServiceLoading(DL+LL)

5kN/m

10kN/m

20kN/m

BS8110

28

24.6

21.5

EC27.4N(0.5%steel)

20

20

20

36.1

27.9

21.8

EC2Eq.7.16(fcu=30N/mm)

Table2comparestheallowablespan/effectivedepthratiosforslabsdesigned
toBS8110andEC2basedonfcu=30N/mmandtheEC2standardsteel
stressfs=310N/mm.
Ascanbeseen,EC2Table7.4Nisveryconservativeinmostcases.Forslabs
supportingveryheavyloading,EC2Eq.7.16andBS8110giveverysimilar
resultsbutforlightandmediumloadings,EC2Eq.7.16allowssubstantially
thinnerslabsthanBS8110.
Effectofconcretestrength
InEC2Eq.7.16,increasingtheconcretestrengthincreasestheallowable
span/effectivedepthratio.Table3showstheresultsforfcu=30N/mmand
50N/mm(fs=310N/mm).
Ascanbeseen,inEC2,increasingfcufrom30N/mmto50N/mmincreases
theallowableL/dby14%.Whenthisiscombinedwithotherfactors,theresult
isthatalightlyloadedslabmadewithhighstrengthconcreteanddesignedto
EC2couldhaveaneffectivedepthlessthan70%ofacomparableslab
designedtoBS8110.

Table3VariationofL/dlimitswithconcretestrength
(simplysupportedslab)
TotalServiceLoading(DL+LL)
BS8110
EC2Eq.7.16(fcu=30N/mm)
http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

5kN/m

10kN/m

20kN/m

28

24.6

21.5
4/13

5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

EC2Eq.7.16(fcu=30N/mm)

36.1

27.9

21.8

EC2Eq.7.16(fcu=50N/mm)

41.1

31.7

24.7

Effectofreinforcementstress
InBS8110,theallowablespan/effectivedepthratiomaybeincreasedby
reducingthetensilestressinthereinforcement.(Compressionreinforcement
mayalsobeusedbutthisislesscommonandnotconsideredinthepresent
analysis.)Thisisoftendonewhereonespanofaslabisoverthelimitandit
hasbeenclaimedthatinsomecasesmaximumeconomyisobtainedby
reducingthesteelservicestresstoaslowas200N/mm,tominimiseslab
thickness[11].
InEC2,iffsvariesfrom310N/mm,Eq.7.17isusedtoadjusttheallowable
L/d.Howeverthereinforcementratioalsoappearsinequations7.16aand
7.16bandEC2doesnotmakeclearhowthisshouldbecalculatedwhenfs
variesfrom310N/mm.Themostobviousinterpretationwouldbetoassume
thatistheactualtensilereinforcementratio(i.e.Asprov/bd).Table4shows
theresultsfromEC2ifitisinterpretedinthiswayforasimplysupportedslab
withatotalloadof10kN/mandthesearecomparedwithBS8110.

Table4VariationofEC2L/dlimitswithsteelservicestress(simply
supportedslab,(fcu=30N/mm),totalserviceloading10kN/m)
fs(N/mm

150

200

250

310

BS8110

31.1

29.4

27.4

24.6

EC2Eq.7.16InterpretationA

31.5

28.1

27.6

27.9

EC2Eq.7.16InterpretationB

36.1

31.7

29.6

27.9

Ascanbeseen,inBS8110theallowableL/dincreasessteadilywithreducing
tensilestress:reducingfsfrom310N/mmto200N/mmincreasesthe
allowableL/dby20%.OntheotherhandinEC2,ifInterpretationAis
applied,reducingfsfrom310N/mmto200N/mmmakesalmostnodifference
atalltotheallowableL/d.
HoweveritispossibletointerpretthispartofEC2inadifferentway:ifEq.
7.16wasderivedontheassumptionofasteelstressof310N/mmthen,rather
thanbeingtheactualreinforcementratio(Asprov/bd),couldbethe
reinforcementratiowhichwouldhavebeenrequiredifthesteelservicestress
hadbeen310N/mm,i.e.(Asprov/bd)x(s/310)?TheallowableL/dratiosfor
varioussteeltensilestressesbasedonthisinterpretationforasimply
supportedslabwithatotalloadof10kN/mareshowninTable4.
Ascanbeseen,ifInterpretationBofEC2iscorrect,theallowableL/dwould
increaseinamorebelievablewayassteelstressisreduced.However,whereas
inInterpretationAtheeffectwasmuchlessthaninBS8110,inInterpretation
BitisgreaterthaninBS8110:reducingfsfrom310N/mmto150N/mm
increasestheallowableL/dby26%inBS8110butinEC2itincreasesby29%.
Table5showshowthemodificationfactoronallowablespan/effectivedepth
ratiovarieswithchangingsteeltensilestressforabeamorslab,compared
withabasicL/dratioof20.Thefactorsarecalculatedforasectionwitha
concretecubestrengthfcu=30N/mmandMSLS/bd=1.

Table5VariationofallowableL/dmodificationfactorwithsteelservice
http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

5/13

5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

Table5VariationofallowableL/dmodificationfactorwithsteelservice
stress(MSLS/bd=1,fcu=30N/mm,basicL/dratio20)
fs(N/mm

150

200

250

310

BS8110

1.69

1.51

1.34

1.13

EC2Eq.7.16InterpretationA

1.69

1.4

1.3

1.35

EC2Eq.7.16InterpretationB

2.79

2.09

1.67

1.35

Ascanbeseen,ifInterpretationAisadopted,theEC2figuresfollowavery
peculiartrend:thefactorisalmostconstantbetween310N/mmand
200N/mmbutthenitrisesquitesharplyoncefsdropsbelow200N/mm2.EC2
interpretationBproducesamorebelievablegeneraltrendbuttherisein
allowableL/dasfsreducesisveryrapid:inEC2halvingthesteelstress
increasestheallowableL/dby100%,whereasinBS8110thecorresponding
increaseislessthan50%.
EC2Cl.7.4.2(2)increasestheallowableL/dbytheratio310/s,wheresis
thesteelservicestress,sodoublingthereinforcement(i.e.halvingthesteel
servicestress)doublestheallowablespan/depthratio.Thisrelationshipwould
betrueforasteelbeam.Howeverinacrackedsectionreinforcedconcrete
beamincreasingthereinforcementareanotonlyreducesthesteeltensile
stressbutitalsoshiftstheneutralaxis.Thereforeinacrackedreinforced
concretesection,thereductionindeflectionwillbelessthanthereductionin
steelstress.Inanuncrackedsection,thesteelstresswillhaveevenlesseffect
ondeflection.
ThereforeEC2Cl.7.4.2(2)isclearlyincorrectandoverestimatestheeffectthat
reducingsteelstresshasonbeamdeflection,particularlywhereconcrete
tensionzonestiffeninghasbeenincludedintheanalysis.
Allowanceforconcretetensionzonestiffening
Effectsrelatedtoconcretetensionzonestiffeningare:(i)itincreasesstiffness
whenconcretestressesarelow(lowM/bd)and(ii)whenconcretestrengthis
high,thisincreasesleverarmanditalsoincreasesconcretetensilestrength,so
theeffectoftensionzonestiffeningeffectisgreater.
Forasimplysupportedbeamwithfcu=30N/mm,fs=310N/mmanda
servicemomentintensityofMSLS/bd=1.21(i.e.amoderatelyloadedbeam
oraheavilyloadedslab),BS8110andEC2bothrecommendthesameL/d
limit:21.3.Table6showshowthemultipliersonthisbasicspan/depthratioof
21.3varyfordifferentloadintensities(expressedasMSLS/bd).Table7shows
thevariationfordifferentconcretestrengthrelativetofcu=30N/mm(M/bd
=1.21,fs=310N/mm).

Table6VariationofmodificationfactoronL/dwithMSLS/bd
(fcu=30N/mm,fs=310N/mm,basicL/dratio21.3)
M/bd

0.3

0.5

1.21

BS8110

1.48

1.31

1.06

0.85

0.76

EC2

8.04

3.59

1.27

0.76

.66

Table7VariationofallowableL/dmodificationfactorwithfcurelative
tovalueatfcu=30N/mm,fs=310N/mm)

BS8110

fcu(N/mm)

20

30

40

60

M/bd0.5

http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

6/13

5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

2
EC2

M/bd0.5

0.59

1.36

2.39

0.67

1.37

2.25

2
0.86
1
1.14
1.48
AscanbeseenfromTables6&7,althoughBS8110andEC2giveverysimilar
resultswhenfcu=30N/mmandMSLS/bdof11.5,awayfromthese
conditionsthedifferencesarequiteremarkable:

(i)reducingMSLS/bdfromthereferencevalueof1.21to0.3increasesthe
L/dmultiplierinBS8110from1.0to1.48butinEC2itincreasestoan
astonishing8.04
(ii)increasingconcretestrengthdoesnotaffectallowableL/dinBS8110butin
EC2,forMSLS/bdupto1.0,allowableL/disroughlyproportionalto
concretestrength:reducingfcufrom30N/mmto20N/mmreduces
allowableL/dfactorto5967%andincreasingitto60N/mmmorethan
doublesit.
TheL/dratiospermittedbyBS8110andEC2canbecomparedwithwhat
wouldbeexpectedfromsimpleanalysisofcrackedanduncrackedreinforced
concretesections.IftheallowabledeflectionisL/250,itcanbeshownthat
allowableL/d=(24E/625)x(1/bd)/(MSLS/bd),
whereEisYoung'sModulus.
Iflisinconcreteunits,misthemodularratioand
E=200kN/mm,then
L/d=(7680/m)x(1/bd)/(MSLS/bd)
BasedonthetabulatedconcretepropertiesandcreepfactorsinEC2forlong
termloading,m=21forfcu=30N/mmandm=13forfcu=60N/mm.
Figure1showscalculatedL/dlimitsforfcu=30N/mm(simplysupported
beam)forcrackedanduncrackedsectionsandcomparesthesewithBS8110
andEC2limitsFig.2showsthecorrespondingfiguresforfcu=60N/mm.

Fig.1CalculatedL/dlimitsforfcu
=30N/mm(simplysupported
beam)forcrackedanduncracked
sectionscomparedwiththeBS8110
andEC2limits

http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

7/13

5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

Fig.2CalculatedL/dlimitsforfcu
=60N/mm(simplysupported
beam)forcrackedanduncracked
sectionscomparedwiththeBS8110
andEC2limits

Ascanbeseen,EC2ismoreconservativethanBS8110athighvaluesof
MSLS/bdbutatlowMSLS/bdEC2givesmuchhigherL/dratios.When
MSLS/bd<0.5(fcu=30N/mm),orMSLS/bd<1(fcu=60N/mm),EC2
Eq.7.16givesresultswhichapproximatetothetheoreticalresultsforan
uncrackedconcretesection.
Beeby,ScottandJoneshavereviewedtensionzonestiffeningeffectsin
concrete,followingrecenttestsatLeedsandDurhamUniversities[12].They
foundthatlongtermtensilestrengthwasmuchlowerthantheshortterm
valueandthattherateofdecayoftensionstiffeningismuchmorerapidthan
haspreviouslybeenassumed.TheyrecommendedthatinBS8110theoretical
deflectioncalculationstheassumedconcretetensionatthelevelofthe
reinforcementshouldbelimitedto0.55N/mm2.WhenthemoreexactICE
TechnicalNote372methodforcalculatingdeflectionisusedthey
recommendedthattheconcretetensilestressattheouterfaceoftheconcrete
shouldbelimitedtoamaximumof0.55ft,whereftistheconcretetensile
strength.
Table8showsthecalculateduncrackedsectionconcretetensilestressat
MSLS/bd=0.5(fcu=30N/mm)and1.0(fcu=60N/mm)andcompares
thiswiththetensilestresslimitsrecommendedbyBeeby,Scott&James.The
limitingstressforICENote372istakenas0.55fctm,wherefctmisthemean
concretetensilestrengthfromEC2.

Table8Uncrackedsection:concretetensilestresscomparedwithrevised
BS8110andICETechnicalNote372(ref.Beeby,Scott&Jones)
calculatedconc.tension
atsteel
rev.BS8110limit

fcu=30N/mm,MSLS/bd=
0.5
1.55N/mm

fcu=60N/mm,MSLS/bd=
1
3.05N/mm

0.55N/mm

0.55N/mm

calculatedconc.tension,
2.11N/mm
4.16N/mm
Ascanbeseen,inallcasesthetensilestressintheuncrackedsectionwould
bottomface
exceedtherecommendedlimits.Forfcu=30N/mm,itis32%greaterthan
rev.ICEnote372limit
1.60N/mm
2.42N/mm
thevaluerecommendedbyBeeby,Scott&JamesforICENote372analysis
andfor60N/mmitis72%greater.Thereforeitisquestionablewhether
tensionzonestiffeningcanbereliedontotheextentassumedinEC2.It
shouldalsobenotedthatthequotedconcretetensilestrengthsarebasedon
meanconcretetensilestrength,withoutanysafetyfactors,andthequestionof
whetherasectioniscrackedcanalsobeaffectedbyfactorssuchas
constructionandloadinghistory.

Takingthesefactorstogether,theEC2assumptionsonconcretetensionzone
stiffeningappeartobeoptimistic,particularlywherehighstrengthconcreteis
http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

8/13

5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

stiffeningappeartobeoptimistic,particularlywherehighstrengthconcreteis
used.
UKNationalAnnextoEurocode2
IntheUKNationalAnnex[13],TableNA.5includesNote5,whichmodifiesEC
2equations7.16and7.17:
Theratioofareaofreinforcementprovidedtothatrequiredshouldbelimited
to1.5whenthespan/depthratioisadjusted.Thislimitalsoappliestoany
adjustmentstospan/depthratioobtainedfromExpressions(7.16a)or(7.16b)
fromwhichthistablehasbeenderivedforconcreteclassC30/37.
ThemeaningofthefirstsentenceofNote5isclearenough:inEq.7.17,
Asprov/Asreqshouldbelimitedto1.5.Howeverthisiswrong,astheresults
wouldvarydependingontheyieldstressofthesteel.Thelimitshouldbe
appliedtothecalculatedratio310/s,nottoAsprov/Asreq.Onitsown,thisis
arelativelyminorproblembutunfortunately,thesecondsentenceofNote5
doesnotmakesenseeither.InEC2Equations7.16aand7.16b,thebasic
span/effectivedepthfactorforasimplysupportedbeamisK=1andthisis
multipliedbyamodificationfactorwhichvarieswithconcretestrengthand
reinforcementratioandistypicallybetween15and30.Thiscannotpossiblybe
limitedto1.5,asrequiredbyNote5.
Thereforeitisimpossibletodesignreinforcedconcretebeamsandslabsto
complywithEC2eq.7.16andthecurrentUKNationalAnnex.
SincethispaperwassubmittedforpublicationadraftamendmenttotheUK
NationalApplicationDocumenthasbeenpublishedforcomment.Thisproposes
arevisiontoNote5sothatthelimitof1.5isappliedto310/s,asproposed
above,whichwouldremovethesteelservicestressanomalyinthepresent
NA.Italsoproposestoremovetheunworkablelimitationontheapplicationof
Eq.7.16.Howevertheproposedamendmentwoulddonothingtolimitthevery
highspan/depthratiospermittedbyEq.7.16whenconcretestrengthishigh
orM/bdislow.
Designloadings
IncurrentUKpractice,deflectionisnormallycheckedatthefullworkingor
characteristicload.HoweverEurocode0Clauses1.5.3.17,1.5.3.18,4.1.3
and6.5.3definetwootherloadingconditions:afrequentloadinganda
quasi
quas permanentloading.AccordingtoEurocode2Cl.7.4.1,deflection
calculationsshouldbebasedonthequasi
quas permanentloading.(Thisis
inconsistentwiththeUKNationalAnnexesforEurocodes3(steel)and5
(timber),whichstatethatdeflectionshouldbecheckedunderthefull
characteristicserviceload.)
Eurocode0TableA1.1,statesthatthequasi
quas permanentloadcanbeassumed
tobethefollowingproportionsofcharacteristicimposedloads:
roof,snowandwindloads:0%,
domesticandoffices:30%,
retail,assemblyandvehicles:60%,
storage:80%.
LikemanyoftheinnovationsinEurocodes,thisisaplausiblesoundingidea
whichhasnotbeenproperlythoughtthrough.Ifaconcretebeamcarries
almostentirelypermanentloads,itmaynotmakemuchdifferencetothe
designifweignoredeflectioncausedbyshorttermliveloads.Howeverisit
appropriatetofollowtheadviceofEurocode0andcompletelyignore
deflectionscausedbywind,snowandliveloadswhendesigningalightweight
roofstructure?Isitsensibletocompletelyignorethedeflectioncausedby
lateralwindloadwhendesigningastructuralframe?
Eveniftheprincipleofusingareducedimposedloadingwhenchecking

http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

9/13

5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

Eveniftheprincipleofusingareducedimposedloadingwhenchecking
deflectionisaccepted,cautionwouldbeinorder:ifreducedloadingisapplied
withthesamedeflectionlimitsasbefore,thiswouldhavetheeffectof
increasingstructuraldeflectioncomparedwithpastpractice.
Table9showstheservicestressfortypicalstructuresunderquasi
quas permanent
loading,comparedwiththenominalEC2servicestressofof310N/mm2under
fullcharacteristicload.

Table9Eurocode2Quasi
Quas permanentloading
Usage/
Loading
kN/m

DL

LL

DL+LL

DL

LL

DL+
LL

DL+
2LL

fs

fs/310

Roof

0.75

4.75

5.4

1.13

6.53

267

0.86

Domestic

1.5

5.5

5.4

2.25

7.65

4.45

253

0.82

Domestic

1.5

8.5

9.45

2.25

11.7

7.45

277

0.89

Office

2.5

7.5

6.75

3.75

10.5

5.75

238

0.77

Office

2.5

10.5

10.8

3.75

14.55

8.75

262

0.84

Retail

6.75

12.75

7.4

252

0.81

Retail

12

10.8

16.8

10.4

269

0.87

Storage

7.5

12.5

6.75

11.25

18

11

266

0.86

Storage

7.5

15.5

10.8

11.25

22.05

14

276

.89

Ascanbeseenfromthetable,changingfromcharacteristicloadtoquasi
quas
permanentloadtypicallyreducesthemaximumsteelservicestressfrom
310N/mmto240275N/mm.Thiswouldalsoreducetherequiredsteel
percentageinEC2Cl.7.16correspondingly.Ifthequasi
quas permanentsteel
servicestressis(275/310)timesthestressundercharacteristicload,theEC2
allowablespan/effectivedepthratios(basedonInterpretationBofequations
7.16)wouldthenbeasshowninTable10.

Table10Allowablespan/effectivedepths:quasi
quas permanentloading
Totalcharacteristicservice
loading

5kN/m

10kN/m

20kN/m

28

24.6

21.5

EC2(fcu=30N/mm)
(characteristicload)

36.1

27.9

21.8

EC2(fcu=30N/mm)(quasi
quas
perm.load)

38.9

30.1

23.6

BS8110(characteristicload)

Ascanbeseenfromthetable,checkingdeflectiononthebasisofquasi
quas
permanentloadingratherthanfullcharacteristicloadingwouldhavetheeffect
ofincreasingallowablespan/depthratiosby8%.Ifthisisdone,evenatnormal
concretestrengthsEC2wouldallowslabssupportinglightandmedium
loadingstohavespan/depthratios2040%greaterthancurrentUKpractice.
Conclusions
Theimportanceofspan/depthrulesforcontrollingdeflectioninreinforced
concretedesignisoftenunderestimated.Themosteconomicaldesignforaslab
willdependonloading,layout,relativecostsofmaterialsetc.,butinmost
casesslabsshouldbemadeasthinasthedeflectionlimitsallow.Howeverif
designrulesallowexcessivedeflection,theresultcanbesaggingfloors,
http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

10/13

5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

designrulesallowexcessivedeflection,theresultcanbesaggingfloors,
crackedpartitionwallsandanunhappybuildingowner.
Theengineerneedstobeabletodeterminethecorrectslabthicknessesand
beamdepthsearlyinthedesignprocess,asthesearedifficulttochangelater.
Thereforeweneedcodeofpracticespan/depthrulesthataresimple,abletobe
appliedatthestartofthedesignprocessandgivereliable,sensibleresults.
The2005amendmenttoBS8110span/depthrecommendations(Table3.10)
containsanerror:theformulaforfshouldhavebeenrevisedfollowingthe
changeinsteelmaterialfactorfrom1.05to1.15.Ratherthan0.667fy=
333N/mm,itshouldbefs=0.6fy=300N/mm.Correctingthiserrorwould
allowthinnerslabsandmoreeconomicalconcretestructures.
TherecommendationsinEurocode2takeintoaccounttheresultsofrecent
research,sotheyshouldbemoreaccuratethanBS8110.Howevertheir
presentationleavesmuchtobedesired.Whatisneededisatableof
recommendedspan/depthratiosbasedonslabtypeandloading(similarto
IStructEGoldBookTable6c[10])sothateconomicaldesignschemescanbe
producedquicklyandeasily.
TheEC2simplemethodforspan/depthratiosinCl.7.4.2Table7.4Niseasy
tousebutifguessworkisrequiredwhendesigningastructuralschemeinmost
situationsitproducesoverconservative,uneconomicalresults.
(Unfortunately,theIStructE/ICEManualtoEC2[14],towhichmostengineers
willturniftheyareaskedtodesignaprojecttoEC2,onlyincludesspan/depth
rulesbasedonTable7.4N.)
EC2Cl.7.4.2doesalsoofferanalternativemethod,whereallowableL/dlimits
arecalculatedusingequations7.16and7.17.Unfortunately,ascurrently
draughted,thispartofEC2suffersfromseriouspracticalandtheoretical
problems.
(a)Equations7.16and7.17canonlybeappliedattheendofthedesign,after
thereinforcementhasbeendesigned,soforschemedesigntheengineeris
forcedtorelyonguesswork.
(b)Accordingtoequations7.16(a)and(b),increasingconcretestrengthhasa
majoreffectonslabdeflection.Howeverthisreliesheavilyonconcretetension
zonestiffening,withtensilestresseswhicharesubstantiallyhigherthan
recommendedbyrecentresearch,whichshowsthatconcretetensileresistance
reducesrapidlyundersustainedloading.ItthereforeappearsthattheEC2
span/depthratiosareexcessiveforlightlyloadedbeamsandslabs,orwhen
highstrengthconcreteisused.
(c)ItisnotclearhowEq.7.16(a)and(b)areintendedtobeappliedwhenthe
reinforcementservicestressvariesfrom310N/mmasitisnotclearhowthe
reinforcementratioineq.7.16istobecalculated.Isittheactualamountof
reinforcementpresent,orisitthereinforcementwhichwouldhavebeen
requiredforadesignstressof310N/mm?Ascurrentlydrafted,itisnotclear
whichoftheseinterpretationsiscorrect.
(d)NotonlyisEq.7.16ambiguousforsteelstressesotherthan310N/mmbut
analysisrevealsthatthereareproblemswithbothofthepossible
interpretations.Ifistheactualsteelratio(interpretationA,=Asprov/bd),
thentheallowableL/disalmostconstantforfsdownto200N/mm,soifaslab
orbeamfailsaspan/depthratiocheck,increasingthereinforcementwillmake
nodifference.Thiscannotbecorrect.Ontheotherhand,ifissupposedtobe
thetheoreticalsteelratiowhichrequiredforasteelservicestressof310N/mm
regardlessofactualstress(interpretation'B',=(s/310)x(Asprov/bd)),
thensteelstresshasmoreeffectontheallowableL/dratiothaninBS8110.EC
2Eq.7.17assumesthatdoublingthesteelreinforcementwillreducethe
deflectionbyhalf.
Howeverthisisincorrect,becauseofconcretetensionzonestiffeningand

http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

11/13

5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

Howeverthisisincorrect,becauseofconcretetensionzonestiffeningand
neutralaxisshift,thestiffnessofareinforcedconcretebeamdoesnotvaryin
proportiontotheareaoftensilereinforcement.Asaresult,Eq.7.17
exaggeratestheeffectthatvaryingfshasontheallowablespan/depthratio.
(e)TheUKNationalAnnexmodifiestheEC2recommendationstotryto
minimiseproblems(b)and(d).Howeverunfortunately,ascurrentlywritten,
thesectionrelatingtoEC2Eq.7.17containsalogicalerrorandthesection
relatingtoEq.7.16imposesalimitwithwhichitisimpossibletocomply.Asa
resulttheUKNAisunusableinitspresentform.AdraftrevisiontotheUKNA
whichhasbeenpublishedwouldsolvetheproblemwithEq7.17.Howeverit
wouldstillleavetheproblemofexcessivespan/depthratiosinEC2whenhigh
strengthconcreteisused.
(f)Inadditiontoitsnewspan/depthrules,EC2alsoproposesthatdeflection
shouldbecalculatedusingareducedquasi
quas permanentloading.Ifthisisdone,
EC2wouldconsistentlypermitgreaterspan/depthratiosthancurrentUK
practice.Withoutgoodevidencethattheseshallowerbeamsandslabswill
performsatisfactorily,thereisariskthattherecouldbedeflectionproblems.
ProblemsmayalsoarisefromtheEC2proposaltoallowdeflectioncausedby
roofliveloadsandthelateralwinddeflectionofframestobecompletely
ignoredinserviceabilitydesign.Toavoidtheseproblems,itwouldbeprudent
fortheUKNationalAnnexforEC2toadoptthesameapproachasthoseforEC
3(steel)andEC5(timber)andrequiredeflectiontobecheckedunderfull
characteristicloads.
Clearlyasubstantialamountofresearchwouldberequiredtoexploreand
resolvealltheanomaliesandproblemswhichhavebeenidentifiedandthisis
outsidethescopeofthispaper.However,untilthisisdoneitwouldbeprudent
totakeaconservativeapproachintheUKNationalAnnexandtopressstrongly
forearlyamendmentstoEC2toremovetheambiguityinitsrecommendations
andrectifythemostobviouserrors.Inthecircumstancesitwouldbehelpfulif
BSIcouldreconsideritsdecisiontodeclareBS8110obsolescentandissuean
amendmenttocorrectthepresenterrorinthesteelservicestressformulain
Table3.10.
Acknowledgments
ThanksareduetoCharlesGoodchildforhelpfulcommentsonthefirstdraftofthispaper.
References
1.BSEN199211:2004Eurocode2:DesignofconcretestructuresPart11:Generalrules
andrulesforbuildings,BritishStandardsInstitution,London,2004,revised2008
2.BS8110:1985,StructuralUseofConcrete,BritishStandardsInstitution,London,1985
3.CP114:1969,TheStructuralUseofConcreteinBuildings,BritishStandardsInstitution,
London,1969
4.CP110:Part1:1972,Thestructuraluseofconcrete,BritishStandardsInstitution,London,
1972
5.Beeby,A.W.:Modifiedproposalsforcontrollingdeflectionsbymeansofratiosofspanto
effectivedepth,TechnicalReport456,Cement&ConcreteAssociation,WexhamSprings,
1971
6.Beal,A.N.:Span/depthratiosforconcretebeamsandslabs,TheStructuralEngineer,
61A/4,April1983,pp121123,InstitutionofStructuralEngineers,London
7.Roweetal,HandbooktoBritishStandardBS8110:1985StructuralUseofConcrete,Palladian
Publications,London,1987
8.Beal,A.N.,Beale,F:Controlofdeflectioninreinforcedconcrete,Verulam,TheStructural
Engineer,62A/3,March1984,InstitutionofStructuralEngineers,London
9.InstitutionofStructuralEngineers/InstitutionofCivilEngineersManualforthedesignof
reinforcedconcretebuildingstructures,2ndEdition,InstitutionofStructuralEngineers,
London2002
10.InstitutionofStructuralEngineers,Recommendationsforthepermissiblestressdesignof

http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

12/13

5/10/2016

Eurocode2Span/DepthratiosforRCslabsandbeams

10.InstitutionofStructuralEngineers,Recommendationsforthepermissiblestressdesignof
reinforcedconcretebuildingstructures,InstitutionofStructuralEngineers,London,1991,
revised2002
11.Goodchild,C.:EconomicConcreteFrameElements,Publication97.358,BritishCement
Association,Crowthorne,1997,p.15
12.BeebyA.W.,ScottR.H.,JonesA.E.K.:Revisedcodeprovisionsforlongtermdeflection
calculations,ICEProc.,Structures&Buildings,158/1,February2005,pp.7175,
InstitutionofCivilEngineers,London,2005
13.NAtoBSEN199211:2004,UKNationalAnnextoEurocode2:Designofconcrete
structuresPart11:Generalrulesandrulesforbuildings,BritishStandardsInstitution,
London,2005
14.ManualforthedesignofconcretebuildingstructurestoEurocode2,InstitutionofStructural
Engineers,London,2006(revised2008)

<<Returntotop

AlasdairsEngineeringPagesA.N.Beal2016www.anbeal.co.uk

http://anbeal.co.uk/ec2spantodepth.html

13/13