1.

A summary of essential
differences between EC2 and
BS8110

Prof Tan Kang Hai

Email: D-PTRC@ntu.edu.sg

Director of Protective Technology Research Centre (PTRC)

School of Civil & Environmental Engineering
All the rights of 11 lecture materials belong to Tan Kang Hai

1
Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2

Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination

Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis

Shear design of beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of members

2
Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2

Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination

Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis

Shear design of beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of members

3
 Similarities
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
of BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
- Ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state
Basis of design - Permanent actions, imposed loads and wind loads
and load
combination - Plane strain assumption for design of beams,
Global geometric slabs, columns, and walls
imperfections
- Linear elastic analysis
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic - Linear elastic analysis with limited distribution
analysis
- Plastic analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

4
 Differences
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
between BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour EC2 is phenomenon-based code unlike the BS8110
Basis of design Entire code is based on reliability index
and load
combination Based on Model Concrete Code 1978 and 1990
Global geometric
imperfections 1. Influence of material behaviour
Nonlinear versus 2. Basis of design and load combination
linear elastic
analysis 3. Global geometric imperfections
Shear design of
4. Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis
beams and slabs 5. Shear design of beams and slabs
Design of columns 6. Design of columns
Detailing of 7. Detailing of members
members

5
Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2

Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination

Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis

Shear design of beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of members

6
Similarities and
EC2 stress-strain relationships of
differences of
BS8110 and EC2 concrete under compression
Influence of max stress level for idealized curve must be below the max stress
material behaviour
of the schematic diagram for the same area under the curve
Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs
The design value of concrete compressive strength fcd is given by:
f
Design of columns
0.85fck
fcd cc ck 0.567fck (3.15)
Detailing of c 1.5
members
Where the factor allows for the difference between the
bending strength and the cylinder crushing strength of concrete,
and c 1.5 is the concrete material partial safety factor. 7
 Table 3.1 Strength and deformation
Similarities and
differences of characteristics for concrete
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination
Class 3
Class 1 Class 2
Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

8
Similarities and
EC2 stress-strain relationships of
differences of
BS8110 and EC2 reinforcing steel
Influence of k=ft/fy indicates ductility; the greater the k value, the longer is the
material behaviour
plateau or the plastic zone uk.
Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs The design value of the modulus of elastic Es is 200 GPa. In
Design of columns the ultimate limit state calculation, by taking a partial safety
factor of s 1.15 , design values of yield strength fyd and
yield strain y of reinforcing steel are respectively computed as:
Detailing of
members

fyk fyk 500 103

0.87fyk y 0.00217
s Es 1.15200 10
fyd 6
1.15
9
 Table C.1: Properties of reinforcement
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2 Product form Bars and de-coiled Wire Fabrics Requirement or
rods quantile value (%)
Influence of Class A B C A B C -
material behaviour Characteristic yield
strength fyk or f0.2k (MPa) 400 to 600 5.0
Basis of design
and load Minimum value of
combination k = (ft/fy)k 1.05 1.08 1.15 1.05 1.08 1.15 10.0
<1.35 <1.35
Global geometric
imperfections
Characteristic strain at 2.5 5.0 7.5 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0
Nonlinear versus
maximum force, (%)
linear elastic
Bendability Bend/Rebend test -
analysis
Shear strength - 0.3 A fyk (A is area of wire) Minimum
Shear design of
beams and slabs Maximum Nominal
deviation bar size 6.0 5.0
Design of columns from nominal (mm) 4.5
mass 8
Detailing of (individual >8
members bar of wire)
(%)

10
 7.2.3 Tensile properties BS 4449:2005
Similarities and
differences of
+A2:2009
BS8110 and EC2 The specified values for the tensile properties
Influence of
are given in Table 4.
material behaviour
Table 4 Characteristic tensile properties
Basis of design
and load Yield strength, Tensile/yield strength ratio, Total elongation at
combination Re Rm/Re maximum force, Agt
MPa %
Global geometric
imperfections B500A 500 1.05a 2.5b
B500B 500 1.08 5.0
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
B500C 500 1.15,<1.35 7.5
analysis a Rm/Re characteristics is 1.02 for sizes below 8mm.
b A characteristics is 1.0% for sizes below 8mm.
gt
Shear design of
Values of Re specified are characteristic with p = 0.95.
beams and slabs
Values of Rm/Re and Agt specified are characteristic with p = 0.90.
Design of columns Calculate the values of Rm and Re using the nominal cross sectional area.

Detailing of The absolute maximum permissible value of yield strength is 650 MPa.
members

11
 7.2.3 Tensile properties
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs
BS 8666:2005 - Scheduling, dimensioning, bending and cutting of steel
Design of columns reinforcement for concrete Specification has been revised to incorporate:
Detailing of (i) Shape codes available under BS EN ISO 3766:2003; (ii) Revised
members notation in accordance with BS 4449:2005 and BS EN 10080:2005; (iii)
Revisions to BS 4449:2005 (including the omission of grade 250 and grade
460 reinforcement)
. 12
 Similar to BS specification
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination
BS system:
Global geometric
imperfections
notation is T
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

13
Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2

Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination

Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis

Shear design of beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of members

14
 Load combinations
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
according to EC0
Influence of
material behaviour Leading variable action and accompanying variable action:
Basis of design
and load
combination (6.10)
Global geometric
imperfections
Comparison of partial factors for loading
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic Design situations BS 8110 EC2
analysis With one variable action
1.4DL + 1.6LL 1.35Gk + 1.5Qk
(Live load)
Shear design of With one variable action
beams and slabs 1.4DL + 1.6W 1.35Gk + 1.5Wk
(Wind load)
Design of columns With two variable
actions
Detailing of 1.2DL + 1.2LL + 1.35 Gk + 1.5 Qk + 0.75Wk
members (leading and
1.2W Or 1.35 Gk + 1.05 Qk + 1.5Wk
accompanying)
(Wind & live loads)
0.7x1.5Qk for office or 0.5x1.5Wk
residential buildings 15
 Load combinations
Similarities and To be applied together
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
according to EC0
Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
(6.10a)
and load
combination
(6.10b)
Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus Ultimate states Combinations of actions

linear elastic
analysis Eq. (6.10)
1.35 Gk + 1.5 Qk + 1.5*0.5Wk
For EQU, STR,
Shear design of Or 1.35 Gk + 1.05 Qk + 1.5Wk
beams and slabs
GEO
Eq. (6.10a) 1.35 Gk + 1.5*0.5Wk +1.5*0.7 Qk
Design of columns
For STR, GEO 1.35 Gk + 1.5*0.5Wk
Detailing of
members
Eq. (6.10b) 0.925*1.35Gk + 1.5Wk +1.5*0.7 Qk
For unfavourable
For STR, GEO Or 0.925*1.35 Gk + 1.5Wk permanent
actions single
source principle
in EC0 - Table
16
A1.2 (B) Set B
 Load combinations
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
according to EC0
Influence of
material behaviour Instantaneous value of Q
Basis of design
Characteristic value Qk
and load
combination
t 1 t 2 t 3
Global geometric
imperfections
Combination value 0Qk
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic Frequent value 1Qk
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs Quasi-permanent value 2Qk
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

Time

Fig. Representative values of variable actions

17
 1. BS EN 1990:2002 (EC0)
OTHER REPRESENTATIVE VALUES OF VARIABLE ACTIONS:

Combination Value 0Qk Frequent Value 1Qk Quasi-permanent Value 2Qk

For: For: For:

1) ULS involving accidental actions, 1) ULS involving accidental
1) ULS and
and actions, and
2) Irreversible SLS 2) Reversible SLS 2) Reversible SLS

3) Apply to non-leading variable
actions
(consider the reduced probability
simultaneous occurrences of two or
more independent variable actions.)
3) Apply to leading variable actions
(e.g. for buildings, the frequent value is
of chosen so that the time it is exceeded is
0.01 of the reference period of 50
years)
3) Used for calculation of long-
term effects.
(e.g. for loads on building floors, the
quasi-permanent value is chosen
so that the proportion of the time it
is exceeded is 0.50 of the reference
period.)

18
 Load combinations
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
according to EC0
Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design Combinations of actions for the Serviceability Limit State

and load
combination

Global geometric Permanent action

imperfections Combination Variable action Qd
Gd
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
Leading Others
analysis Characteristic Gk,j Qk,1 0,iQk,i
Shear design of Frequent Gk,j 1,1Qk,1 2,iQk,i
beams and slabs
Quasi-
Design of columns Gk,j 2,1Qk,1 2,iQk,i
permanent
Detailing of
members

19
 Load combinations
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
according to EC0
Influence of Crack width limit w wmax
material behaviour
UK Annex Table NA.4 Recommended values of wmax (mm)
Basis of design
and load Exposure Reinforced members and Prestressed
combination
prestressed members members with
Global geometric
imperfections without bonded tendons bonded tendons
(quasi-permanent load (frequent load
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic combination) combination)
analysis

Shear design of X0, XC1 0.3a 0.2

beams and slabs
XC2, XC3, XC4 0.3 0.2b
Design of columns XD1, XD2, XD3, XS1, XS2, 0.2 and decompressionc
XS3
Detailing of a For X0, XC1 exposure classes, crack width has no influence on durability and this limit is set to produce
members
acceptable appearance. In the absence of specific requirements for appearance this limit may be relaxed.
b For these exposure classes, in addition, decompression should be checked under the quasi-permanent
combination of loads.
c wmax = 0.2 mm applies to parts of the member that do not have to be checked for decompression.
20
 Failure conditions under ULS
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
according to EC0
Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

21
 Load combinations
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
according to EC2 Cl 5.1.3
Influence of
material behaviour
Single source for Gk

Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
1.35Gk + 1.5Qk
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
1.35Gk + 1.5Qk 1.35Gk + 1.5Qk 1.4Gk + 1.6Qk 1.4Gk + 1.6Qk
Shear design of 1.35Gk 1.0Gk
beams and slabs

Design of columns
1.35Gk + 1.5Qk 1.4Gk + 1.6Qk
Detailing of 1.35Gk 1.35Gk
1.0Gk 1.0Gk
members

22
Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2

Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination

Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis

Shear design of beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of members

23
 When to consider
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
geometric imperfections?
Influence of
material behaviour In EC2, there is no notional
Basis of design
horizontal load.
and load
combination Global geometric imperfections due
Global geometric to out-of-plumbness of vertical
imperfections
elements must be modelled by
Nonlinear versus equivalent loads in two design
linear elastic
analysis situations:
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Persistent design situations:
Possible extreme loading condition
Design of columns
of wind, imposed loads.
Detailing of
members
Accidental design situations: fire,
impact.
24
 When to consider
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
geometric imperfections?
Influence of
material behaviour Imperfection loads are quantified by three considerations:
Basis of design
and load Global analysis of building structures.
combination

Global geometric
Analysis of isolated vertical members.
imperfections
Analysis of floor diaphragms as horizontal elements
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic transferring forces to bracing members.
analysis
Only imperfection loads in global analysis are similar to
Shear design of
beams and slabs notional horizontal loads, although they are very different in
Design of columns the way to be considered.
Detailing of Imperfections need not be considered for serviceability limit
members
states.

25
 How to consider
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
geometric imperfections?
Influence of
material behaviour The structure is assumed with inclination l, given by:
Basis of design
and load
combination
where: 0 is the basic value (0 = 1/200)
Global geometric
imperfections h is the reduction factor for height
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs m is the reduction factor for number of members:
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

where m is the number of vertically continuous members

in the storey contributing to total horizontal forces on the
floor. 26
 How to consider
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
geometric imperfections?
Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs To design for slab
(member transferring
Design of columns forces to bracing
elements)
Detailing of
members The imperfection on each floor may be represented by a
force acting on the floor where Na and Nb are the factored
axial forces above and below the floor considered. (see
EC3 Figure 5.3) 27
 How to consider
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
geometric imperfections?
Influence of
material behaviour
Lateral load case: in BS 8110: Hdesign = Max(HN, 1.2Wk)
However, in EC 2: Hdesign = 1.0 Hi + FWk
Basis of design
and load
combination
where Hi is horizontal loads for geometric imperfection
Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

28
Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2

Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination

Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis

Shear design of beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of members

29
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Different types of analysis
Influence of
material behaviour First order elastic analysis: represents conditions at
Basis of design normal service loads very well (Section 5.4)
and load
combination First order elastic analysis with limited redistribution:
Global geometric
excluded nonlinearity, represents conditions at normal
imperfections service loads very well (Section 5.5)
Nonlinear versus First order inelastic analysis: Plastic analysis with no
linear elastic
analysis geometrical nonlinearity (Section 5.6)
Shear design of Second order elastic analysis: Effects of finite
beams and slabs
deformation considered. Good representation of P- effect
Design of columns (Section 5.7)
Detailing of
members
Second order inelastic analysis: Both geometrical and
material nonlinearities are considered. Model can faithfully
reflect the behavior of structures up to ultimate limit state
30
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Different types of analysis
Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination
e

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

Source: Fig. 8.1 of Matrix Structural Analysis, Second Edition, William

McGuire, Richard H. Gallagher and Ronald D. Ziemian, John Wiley & Sons, Inc,
2000, ISBN 0-471-12918-6
31
 Local second order effects
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Cl 5.8.7 or Cl 5.8.8
Influence of
material behaviour Taken from EC2
Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

32
 Local second order effects
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Cl 5.8.7 or Cl 5.8.8
Influence of
material behaviour
States that if there are additional action effects caused by
Basis of design structural deformations under the influence of significant axial
and load
combination load, second order effects should be considered.
Global geometric
imperfections Global second order effect
Local second order effect
Nonlinear versus on isolated members (P-) on whole structure (P-)
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

33
 Local second order effects
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Cl 5.8.7 or Cl 5.8.8
Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs
How to account for second order effects?
Design of columns
Local second order effects
Detailing of
members - Method based on nominal stiffness (EC2 Clause 5.8.7)
- Method based on nominal curvature (EC2 Clause 5.8.8)
Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2

Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination

Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis

Shear design of beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of members

35
Similarities and Methodology
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
EC2 uses The Variable Strut Inclination Method for shear
material behaviour design.
Basis of design BS 8110 uses Truss Analogy with truss angle = 450
and load
combination
DC : the concrete acts as the
Global geometric
imperfections diagonal struts;
Nonlinear versus VT: the stirrups act as the
linear elastic vertical ties;
analysis
BT: the tension reinforcement
Shear design of
beams and slabs
forms the bottom chord;

Design of columns
TC: the compression
steel/concrete forms the top
Detailing of chord.
members
(a) Beam and reinforcement = 21.80 450 (strut angle)
(b) Analogous truss
(EC2 6.2.3(2))
36
Similarities and Comparison of shear design
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
material behaviour BS 8110 EC2
Basis of design 1. = 45o 1. = 21.8o 45o
and load
combination 2. BS 8110 compares shear 2. EC 2 compares shear forces.
Global geometric
stresses. 3. The maximum shear capacity
imperfections 3. The maximum shear of concrete VRd,max cannot be
Nonlinear versus stress is limited to 5 exceeded.
linear elastic
analysis
N/mm2 or 0.8fcu, 4. Where the applied shear
whichever is the lesser. exceeds the min shear
Shear design of
beams and slabs 4. The design shear force resistance of concrete VRd,c,
must be less than the the shear reinforcement
Design of columns
sum of the shear should be capable of resisting
Detailing of resistance of concrete all the shear forces.
members
plus shear links.

37
Similarities and Punching shear design of slabs
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Control perimeters
Influence of
material behaviour
Basic control perimeter u1:
Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

38
Similarities and
differences of Control perimeters
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of For slabs with a rectangular column with a rectangular head

material behaviour
with lH < 2hH, the value rcont may be taken as the lesser of:
Basis of design
and load
combination rcont 2d 0.56 l1l2 and rcont 2d 0.69l1
Global geometric
imperfections l1 c1 2lH1; l2 c2 2lH 2 ; l1 l2
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

39
Similarities and
differences of Control perimeters
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of For slabs with enlarged column heads where lH > 2hH, the
material behaviour
control sections both within the head and in the slab should
Basis of design be checked. For circular columns:
and load
combination
rcont,ext lH 2d 0.5c
Global geometric
imperfections rcont,int 2 d hH 0.5c
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

40
Similarities and
differences of Punching shear stress VEd (EC2 6.4.3 (3))
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
material behaviour How to calculate b?
MEd u1
Basis of design b 1 k
and load
combination
VEd W1
Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns
For rectangular columns:
c12
Detailing of
members W1 c1c2 4c2d 16d 2 2 dc1
2

41
Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2

Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination

Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis

Shear design of beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of members

42
Similarities and Differences in symbols
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

43
Similarities and Differences in symbols
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

44
Similarities and Differences in design
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

45
Similarities and Differences in design
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

46
Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2

Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination

Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis

Shear design of beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of members

47
 Minimum cover due to
Similarities and
differences of environmental conditions cmin,dur
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

48
 Minimum cover due to
Similarities and
differences of environmental conditions cmin,dur
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

49
 Minimum cover due to
Similarities and
differences of environmental conditions cmin,dur
BS8110 and EC2

Influence of
material behaviour

Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

50
Detailing of members
DESIGN ANCHORAGE LENGTH

For the effect of the form of the

bars assuming adequate cover
1=0.7~1.0 (in comp. is 1.0) Basic anchorage length

For the effect of concrete minimum

Design stress of the bar:
cover 2=0.7~1.0 (in comp. is 1.0)

For the effect of confinement by tied Design ultimate stress:

transverse bars along the design anc.
length 3=0.7~1.0 (in comp. is 1.0)
For the quality of bond condition 1=0.7
For the effect of confinement by welded (poor) - 1=1.0 (good)
transverse bars along the design anc. length
4=0.7 For the bar diameter 2=1.0 for 32mm
2=(132-)/100 for >32mm

For the effect of confinement by transverse

The design concrete tensile strength (<C60/75)
pressure along the design anc. length 5=0.7
fctd=fctk,0.05/c

51
Detailing of members
DESIGN ANCHORAGE LENGTH lbd

52
SUMMARY on Differences between BS and EC
Complex load combinations due to leading and accompanying
variable load cases;
In EC0 - Eq 6.10 compared with Eq 6.10(a) and Eq 6.10(b).
Definition of member types and the choice of suitable elements;
Represent global geometrical imperfection load by horizontal
loads and consider in all ULS;
Need to consider global second order effect unless structure
satisfies Clause 5.8.3.3;
Calculation model should reflect realistic global and local
behaviour of the designed RC structure
High strength concrete is permitted (above 50 MPa till 90 MPa);

53
Thank You!

54