54 views

Uploaded by paikjg

.

- Fatigue strength of welded components
- Aerospace Engineering
- DNV-RP-C203
- Untitled
- Conversion of an Oil Tanker Into FPSO
- rp105
- rp-c203_2011-10[1]
- ABS Fatigue Assessment for Ship Type Floating Production Installations 2016 02
- 2001 Material Ease 16
- 413_p_H_man
- ESDEP
- Fatigue mechansim
- Full-Scale Measurements and Hull
- DNV-RP-C203 - Fatigue Design of Offshore Steel Structures (2012)
- INVESTIGATION OF CORE CLOSEOUTS IN FIBER-REINFORCED SANDWICH LAMINATE
- 2006_2p
- 4 Fatigue Influencing Factors
- IJMET_06_09_003
- CO26628632.pdf
- Splice Design

You are on page 1of 9

EURO NORMS

Ravindra Kumar Goel*

(Published in IRICEN Journal of Civil Engineering, Dec., 2008)

1.0

INTRODUCTION

Throughout the life of a bridge, constant road or rail traffic loading will

produce large numbers of repetitive loading cycles in bridge elements.

Both steel (reinforcing and pre-stressing) and concrete components which

are subjected to large numbers of repetitive loading cycles can become

susceptible to fatigue damage. As a consequence, fatigue assessment is

required to be undertaken for structures and structural components which

are subjected to regular load cycles. The design provisions are explicitly

given in Euro Code (EC 2-2). The relevant features of this code are

described in this paper for the general awareness of bridge designers of

Indian Railways.

2.0

Some exceptions, where fatigue verification is generally not required are

as under:

The most common cause of wind-induced fatigue is vortex shedding.

EN 1991-1-4 covers wind-induced fatigue.

Buried arch and frame structures with a minimum earth cover of 1.0 m

(road bridges) or 1.5 m (railway bridges). This assumes a certain

amount of arching of the soil, which suggests that span should also be

relevant.

Foundations.

Piers and columns not rigidly connected to bridge superstructures.

Rigid in this context is intended to refer to moment connection as

pinned connections will not usually lead to cycles of significant live load

stress range.

Retaining walls of embankments for roads and railways.

Abutments which are not rigidly connected to bridge superstructures

(with the exception of the slabs of hollow abutments)

Prestressing and reinforcing steel in regions where, under the frequent

combination of actions only compressive stresses occur at the extreme

concrete fibres. This is because the strain and hence stress range in

the steel is typically small while the concrete remains in compression.

216

3.0

3.1

cracked concrete sections, neglecting the tensile strength of the concrete.

Shear lag should be taken into account where relevant (2-1-1/5.3.2.1

refers). 2-1-1/6.8.2(2)P additionally requires the effect of different bond

behaviour of prestressing and reinforcing steel to be taken into account in

the calculation of reinforcement stress. This results in an increase in

stress in the reinforcing steel from that calculated using a cracked elastic

cross-section analysis by a factor, , given in 2-1-1/(6.64).

3.2

the design of shear reinforcement, which is a new check for UK practice.

Steel forces are calculated from the truss analogy using a compressive

strut angle of fat. For fatigue calculation, it is important to use a realistic

estimate of the stress range. It is therefore appropriate that this angle is

taken greater than that assumed for the ultimate limit state design (within

the angular limits of 2-1-1/6.2.3(2)), since the latter is the angle at the

ultimate limit state after a certain amount of plastic redistribution has taken

place to reduce the stress in the links and to use them optimally. As a

result, fat may be taken as:

2-1-1/(6.65)

assumed in the ultimate limit state shear design. For shear reinforcement

inclined at an angle to the horizontal, the steel force can be determined

by re-arranging 2-1-1/(6.13) thus:

V s

s

Asw z cot fat cot sin

where V is the shear force range.

4.0

COMBINATION OF ACTIONS

The calculation of the stress ranges for fatigue verification to EC2 requires

the applied load to be divided into non-cyclic and fatigue-inducing cyclic

action effects. The basic combination of the non-cyclic load is defined by

expressions (6.66) and (6.67) of EN 1992-1-1 and is equivalent to the

definition of the frequent combination for the serviceability limit state. The

cyclic action is then combined with the unfavourable non-cyclic action to

determine the stress ranges 2-1-1/(6.68) and (6.69) refer.

217

The non-cyclic action gives a mean stress level upon which the cyclic part

of the action effect is superimposed as illustrated in Figure-1 for

reinforcement. Mean stress is important as it determines whether the sign

of the stress in an element reverses in the course of a cycle of loading. In

Figure-1, the reinforcement stress range for a given cyclic action is less for

the smaller tensile mean stress as part of the cyclic loading then causes

compression in the concrete, which reduces the stress in the

reinforcement for that part of the cycle.

Bar

stress

Tension

(e.g. passage of fatigue load model)

for same vehicle

from non-cyclic loads

Compressio

n

Time

same cyclic action at different mean stress levels

5.0

VERIFICATION

PROCEDURE

PRESTRESSING STEEL

FOR

REINFORCING

AND

5.1

of the stress that each loading cycle induces in the component and the

type of component. Since the relationship of stress range () to the

number of cycles to failure (N) is exponential, the relationship is normally

plotted graphically in the form of a log log N curve. These types of

curve are commonly referred to as S-N curves.

5.2

single stress range of amplitude to be determined by using the

corresponding S-N curves for reinforcing and pre-stressing steel. The

form of these curves is illustrated in Figure-2 for reinforcement; the

diagram for prestressing steel is similar, using 0.1% proof stress in place

of yield stress. Recommended values defining the appropriate S-N curve

geometry for the steel component under consideration are given in 2-11/Tables 6.3N and 6.4N for reinforcement and pre-stressing steel

respectively. The recommended parameters therein may be modified in

the National Annex.

218

log

Rs

k

log fyk

b = k1

1

b = k2

1

log

N

steel

5.3

F,fat, to be applied to all fatigue loads when calculating the stress range.

The value for F,fat is defined in the National Annex and is recommended

by EC2 to be taken as 1.0. The resisting stress range at N* cycles, Rsk ,

given in 2-1-1/Tables 6.3N and 6.4N, also has to be divided by the

material partial safety factor s,fat. The recommended value for s,fat from

2-1-1/2.4.2.4(1) is 1.15.

5.3

In real fatigue assessment situations for concrete bridge design, there will

be more than one stress range acting on the steel element throughout its

design life. 2-1-1/6.8.4(2) allows multiple amplitudes to be treated by

using a linear cumulative damage calculation, known as the Palmgren

Miner summation:

DEd

i

n i

1.0

N i

2-1-1/(6.70)

where:

n(i) is the applied number of cycles for a stress range of i

N(i) is the resisting number of cycles for a stress range of i, i.e.

the number of loading cycles to fatigue failure

5.4

For most bridges, the above is a complex calculation because the stress

in each component usually varies due to the random passage of vehicles

from a spectrum. Details on a road or rail bridge could be assessed using

the above procedure if the loading regime is known at design. This

includes the weight and number of every type of vehicle that will use each

lane or track of the bridge throughout its design life, and the correlation

between loading in each lane or track. In the majority of cases this would

require lengthy calculations.

219

5.5

simplified fatigue Load Models 3 and 71, from EN 1991-2, for road and rail

bridges respectively, in order to reduce the complexity of the fatigue

assessment calculation. It is assumed that the fictitious vehicle/train alone

causes the fatigue damage. The calculated stress from the vehicle is then

adjusted by factors to give a single stress range which, for N* cycles,

causes the same damage as the actual traffic during the bridges lifetime.

This is called the damage equivalent stress and is discussed in section

below.

5.6

steel is exposed to fatigue loads, the calculated stresses shall not exceed

the design yield strength of the steel as EC2 does not cover cyclic

plasticity.

5.7

which is strictly outside the scope of EC2, so its inclusion is curious. Its

reference to corrosion is not explicit about either the degree of corrosion

or its nature (e.g. general or pitting) so a single value of stress exponent to

cover all situations is dubious. Nevertheless, it was not intended that any

such allowance for corrosion be made in new design.

2-2/6.8.4(107) permits no fatigue check to be conducted for

external and unbonded tendons lying within the depth of the concrete

section. This is because the strain, and hence stress, variation under

service loads is small in such tendons. Consideration should be given to

fatigue in external tendons which are outside the depth of the structure

(such as in extradosed bridges) as the fluctuation in stress might be more

significant here. This situation is covered by EN 1993-1-11.

6.0

In the damage equivalent stress range method described by 2-1-1/6.8.5(1)

and 2-1-1/6.8.5(2), the real operational loading is represented by N* cycles

of an equivalent single amplitude stress range, s,equ(N*) which causes

the same damage as the actual traffic during the bridges lifetime. This

stress range may be calculated for reinforcing or prestressing steel using

2-2/Annex NN.

2-1-1/6.8.5(3) contains a verification formula for

reinforcing steel, prestressing steel and splicing devices:

Rsk ( N * )

2-1-1/(6.71)

F , fat s ,equ ( N * )

s , fat

where:

s,equ(N*)

Rsk(N*)

(converted to N* cycles) from 2-2/Annex NN.

is the resisting stress range limit at N* cycles from the

220

6.4N

6.2

Euro Norm 2-1-1/(6.71) does not cover concrete fatigue verification. 22/Annex NN3.2 provides a damage equivalent verification for concrete in

railway bridges but there is no similar verification for highway bridges. For

highway bridges, concrete can be verified using the methods in 2-2/6.8.7.

7.0

7.1

Euro Norm 2-1-1/6.8.6(1) and (2) give alternative rules for fatigue

verifications of reinforcing and prestressing steel components. These

methods are intended as an alternative to checking fatigue resistance

using 2-1-1/6.8.4 or 6.8.5.

7.2

or prestressing steel to be deemed satisfactory if the stress range under

the frequent cyclic load combined with the basic combination is less than

k1 for unwelded reinforcement or k2 for welded reinforcement. The values

of k1 and k2 may be given in the National Annex and EC2 recommends

taking values of 70 MPa and 35 MPa respectively. The meaning of

frequent cyclic loading is not explained but it implies a calculation based

on the fatigue load models in EN 1991-2. Assuming this to be the case, it

will usually be preferable to perform a damage equivalent stress

calculation using 2-2/Annex NN as this also uses the fatigue load models

of EN 1991-2 and will lead to a more economic answer.

7.3

calculated directly from the frequent load combination to avoid the need to

calculate stress ranges from fatigue load models or directly from traffic

data. However, the recommended allowable stress ranges above would

mean that elements would rarely pass such a check.

7.4

construction, 2-1-1/6.8.6(3) requires that no tension exists in the concrete

section within 200 mm of the prestressing tendons or reinforcing steel

under the frequent load combination when a reduction factor of k3 is

applied to the mean value of the prestressing force. The value of k3 is

defined in the National Annex. EC2 recommends taking a value of 0.9.

This value is increased to 1.0 in the UKs National Annex (in the same

manner as rsup and rinf in 2-1-1/5.10.9) to limit the number of load cases to

be considered for SLS and fatigue design. The criterion ensures that the

stress range for such details is kept small for the majority of cycles since

the concrete will generally remain in compression.

221

7.5

The general fatigue verification procedure for concrete given in 22/6.8.7(101) requires a cumulative damage summation, like that in 2-11/6.8.4, to be carried out using traffic data. For rail bridges, this lengthy

calculation can be avoided by using the simplified damage equivalent

stress verification of 2-2/Annex NN.3.2. Neither the Annex nor 22/6.8.7(101) itself, however, gives appropriate data for road bridges.

7.6

based on the non-cyclic loading used for the static design:

c ,max

c ,min

2-1-1/(6.77)

0.5 0.45

f cd , fat

f cd , fat

but limited to 0.9 for fck 50 MPa or 0.8 for fck > 50 MPa, where:

c,max

combination (compression measured as positive);

c,min

is the minimum compressive stress under the frequent load

combination at the same fibre where c,max occurs. c,min should be

taken as 0 if negative (in tension);

fcd,fat

is the concrete design fatigue compressive strength defined

in the code as:

f

f cd , fat k1 cc t 0 f cd 1 ck

2-2/(6.76)

250

Where

k1

cc(t0)

t0

fcd

by EC2 to be taken as 0.85;

is the coefficient for concrete strength at first cyclic loading from

2-1-1/3.1.2(6);

is the age of the concrete in days upon first cyclic loading i.e. the

age at which live load is first applied;

is the design compressive strength of concrete. A value for cc of

1.0 is intended to be used here in conjunction with k1 = 0.85, as k1

performs a similar function of accounting for sustained loading;

unlikely to govern design, other than possibly for very short spans where

the majority of the concrete stress is produced by live load. It will

therefore generally be appropriate to use this simplified check. No

guidance is given on the calculation of the concrete stresses; ignoring

concrete in tension will be a conservative assumption.

222

7.7

concrete to be applied to the compression struts of members subjected to

shear and requiring shear reinforcement. Since the compression struts

have transverse tension passing through them (see discussions in section

6.5 of this guide), fcd,fat has to be reduced by the factor , defined in 2-11/6.2.2(6) and the verification becomes:

c ,max

f cd , fat

f cd , fat

7.8

The stresses c ,max and c ,min can be calculated for reinforced concrete

beams, with shear reinforcement inclined at an angle to the horizontal,

from the following expression obtained by re-arranging 2-1-1/(6.14):

VEd 1 cot 2

c

bw z cot cot

VEd is the relevant shear force under the frequent load combination and

the other symbols are defined in 2-1-1/6.2.3. The concrete stress

increases with reducing strut angle so in this case it is conservative to

base on its ULS value in the above calculation rather than the larger

angle fat from 2-1-1/(6.65).

7.9

For members subjected to shear but not requiring shear reinforcement, 21-1/6.8.7(4) provides the following expressions for assuming satisfactory

fatigue resistance in shear:

For

VEd ,min

VEd ,max

0:

VEd ,max

VRd ,c

0.5 0.45

VEd ,min

VRd ,c

2-1-1/( 6.78)

but limited to 0.9 for fck 50 MPa or 0.8 for fck > 50 MPa,

or, for

VEd ,min

VEd ,max

0:

VEd ,max

VRd ,c

0.5

VEd ,min

VRd ,c

2-1-1/( 6.79)

where:

VEd,max

VEd,min

VRd,c

under the frequent load combination;

is the design value of the minimum applied shear force

under the frequent load combination in the cross-section

where VEd,max occurs;

is the design shear resistance from 2-2/(6.2.a).

223

8.0

CONCLUSION

It is seen that Euro norms contain explicit provisions for accounting fatigue

effects in concrete structures. The fatigue assumes special significance in

the design of railway bridges, where dynamic impacts are considerable.

Therefore, it is necessary to design the new concrete bridges on Indian

Railways taking into due consideration, the fatigue effects. Since existing

IRS Concrete Bridge Code does not contain such provisions, use of Euro

norms may be considered.

9.0

REFERNCES

9.1

organised by Indian Concrete Institute (New Delhi Centre).\

9.2

224

- Fatigue strength of welded componentsUploaded byVinit Ahluwalia
- Aerospace EngineeringUploaded bydhook_mmm
- DNV-RP-C203Uploaded byNoralia Amanina Osman
- UntitledUploaded byHarish Ganapathy
- Conversion of an Oil Tanker Into FPSOUploaded byIslam Hassan
- rp105Uploaded byChrisBurnett
- rp-c203_2011-10[1]Uploaded bymikefederal
- ABS Fatigue Assessment for Ship Type Floating Production Installations 2016 02Uploaded bymarchelo896
- 2001 Material Ease 16Uploaded byKesavg
- 413_p_H_manUploaded bysamichel
- ESDEPUploaded byElvis Osorio Santander
- Fatigue mechansimUploaded byapi-3764139
- Full-Scale Measurements and HullUploaded byTakeshi
- DNV-RP-C203 - Fatigue Design of Offshore Steel Structures (2012)Uploaded byNMV1234
- INVESTIGATION OF CORE CLOSEOUTS IN FIBER-REINFORCED SANDWICH LAMINATEUploaded byRussell Evertz
- 2006_2pUploaded byMEUBRO
- 4 Fatigue Influencing FactorsUploaded bykhanto
- IJMET_06_09_003Uploaded byIAEME Publication
- CO26628632.pdfUploaded byLarry Smith
- Splice DesignUploaded byErnesto Fidel Mandujano Cardenas
- Exploring Fatigue Behavior of Connecting Rod Made of Austempered Ductile IronUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Fabric Reinforcement SpecsUploaded byabj7
- Reese 2011Uploaded byAdolfo Valenzuela Bustos
- Pawan_syllabus2.pdfUploaded bySurendra Saini
- Spur Gear Fatigue LifeUploaded byGamini Suresh
- Design of Suspension Ball Joint Using FEA and Experimental MethodUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Kisssoft Tut 003 E KeyUploaded byreinaldosidejunior
- Mechanics and materials in Fretting Wear_1992Uploaded bydeathjester1
- Strength of Materials Refrehser SetUploaded byGracielle Nebres
- STM MODEL 3Uploaded byJester Abucay

- Analysis and Design of Shallow and Deep Foundations - LC REESEUploaded byRene Robles
- Mix Design 7 Day With P With Metal FibersUploaded bypaikjg
- Foundations on Rock PresentationUploaded byMehdi Mir
- 교량 및 수로관련 보고자료Uploaded bypaikjg
- 1006841Uploaded bypaikjg
- 교면배수_시스템_개선(최종)Uploaded bypaikjg
- 콘크리트강의노트(3월1일)Uploaded bypaikjg
- Rock Sheds-Japanese Design PresentationUploaded bypaikjg
- Beam Design Formulas With Shear and MomentUploaded byMuhammad Saqib Abrar
- Beam Design Formulas With Shear and MomentUploaded byMuhammad Saqib Abrar
- SETRA-US 0643A-Road Bridges FootbridgesUploaded byzoranmiskovic
- Comparison of Various Procedures for Progressive Collapse AnalysisUploaded bypaikjg
- Eurocode 2_Application to Concrete Highway BridgesUploaded bypaikjg
- 강구조설계기준-2014Uploaded bypaikjg
- Session1FundamentalsofVIV DaltonUploaded byAhmed Ibrahim
- Workshop Tennis Racket[1]Uploaded bytaniapaloma
- Fiber reinforcmentUploaded byAfrim Tahiraj
- ABAQUS Lecture NotesUploaded bypaikjg
- Rock Fall Control - Japan PresentationUploaded bypaikjg
- BTM Bridges LowUploaded bypaikjg
- FFL Project 소개Uploaded bypaikjg
- ASTRA12006d_2008V2.03Uploaded bypaikjg
- Dynamic Analysis BasicsUploaded byimtiyaz_baadil
- Dynamic Analysis BasicsUploaded byimtiyaz_baadil
- Ground ConditionsUploaded bypaikjg
- Håndbok 185 (2009)Uploaded bykarlhols
- Trelleborg GinaUploaded bypaikjg
- USM Presentation 7.06.11Uploaded bypaikjg
- abaqus_2Uploaded byHilmy Echsan

- Course Syllabus, world university of bangladeshUploaded byХрабрый Истребитель
- 1-s2.0-S0950061899000215-main (1).pdfUploaded byCelino Carril
- Turkish Construction Equipment and MachineryUploaded byHuseyin TASKIN
- Accounting for Residual DeformationsUploaded bytrabajosic
- IES OBJ Civil Engineering 2007 Paper IUploaded byravi maharaj
- Rough Collection of Data for ThesisUploaded byshubham2395
- durabilityofconcrete.pptxUploaded byRavindra Kumar Goliya
- 302 Dr. Fixit Super LatexUploaded bymcg
- Guiacivil iUploaded byolimac007
- School Paspels OlgiatiUploaded byMiguel Acuña
- AS NZS 4020 2005.pdfUploaded bycalidad1340
- Appendix B - Technical Specification for Plain & Reinforced Concrete WorksUploaded byPankaj Priyadarshi
- Types of FramesUploaded byHéctor Morán Gallegos
- GOS MESSUploaded byeescdcpwd
- FYP2_184573Uploaded byshamsukarim2009
- New Crc Tables 2011-06-30 Rev 00Uploaded bySJSZCGRDHS
- 2A New Ductile Moment-resisting Connection for Precast Concrete FramesUploaded byalexitomichael
- CivilUploaded byDipak Bodade
- Beam Design FunctionsUploaded bydraganug
- Cement Effects on the Physical Properties of Expansive Clay Soil and the Compressive Strength of Compressed Interlocking Clay BlocksUploaded bySam Chong
- Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Evaluation of Cementitious MaterialsUploaded byManuel Regildo
- Database of Embodied Energy and Water Values for MaterialsUploaded byMax Yanac Telleria
- TP11Uploaded bymcwong_98
- 1-s2.0-S0167663610001249-mainUploaded byRifqi Anra
- 4455.1-2008Uploaded byZhi Ming Cheah
- Basement WaterproofingUploaded bylallanasaints
- Aqua Cure VoxUploaded bypravi3434
- Brickform Stamped Concrete Guide Specifications B24121Uploaded byfady
- Durability Study on Basalt Fibre ReinforcedUploaded byRohan Shivasundar
- Microbial Carbonate Precipitation ReviewUploaded byvempadareddy