Tables To Compare BS & EC
Tables To Compare BS & EC
1. Material Properties:-
The two materials whose properties must be known are concrete and steel
reinforcement. In the case of concrete, the property with which the designer is primarily
concerned is its compressive strength. For steel, however, it is its tensile strength
capacity which is important.
1.2 EN1992 : Eurocode 2 - Part 2: Concrete bridges - Design and detailing rules
Unlike BS 8110, the design rules in EC 2 are based on the characteristic (5 percent)
compressive cylinder strength of concrete at 28 days ( fck). Equivalent cube strengths
( fck,cube) are included in EC 2 but they are only regarded as an alternative method to
prove compliance. Generally, the cylinder strength is approximately 0.8 × the cube
strength of concrete i.e. fck ≈ 0.8 × fck,cube.
2. Partial Factors:-
*γfL shall be increased to at least 1.10 and 1.20 for steel and concrete respectively to compensate for inaccuracies
when dead loads are not accurately assessed.
+γfL may be reduced to 1.2 and 1.0 for the ULS and SLS respectively subject to approval of the appropriate
authority (see 5.2.2.1).
**Accidental wheel loading shall not be considered as acting with any other primary live loads.
Table 1 (continued)
each secondary live load shall be considered separately together with the other combination 4 loads as appropriate
SLS 1.15
associated primary live load: ULS 1.30
low, normal & high containment SLS 1.10
6.7.2 Global effects: parapet load
Massive structures:
bridge superstructures and non- ULS 1.25
elastomeric bearings
bridge substructures and wing ULS 1.00
& retaining walls
elastomeric bearings SLS 1.00
Light structures:
bridge superstructures & non- ULS 1.40
elastomeric bearings
bridge substructures and wing ULS 1.40
& retaining walls
elastomeric bearings SLS 1.00
associated primary live load:
Massive & light structures:
bridge superstructures, non- ULS 1.25
elastomeric bearings, bridge
substructures & wing &
retaining walls
elastomeric bearings SLS 1.00
6.8 Vehicle collision Effects on all elements ULS 1.50
loads on bridge excepting elastomeric
supports and bearings
superstructures: Effects on elastomeric SLS 1.00
bearings
6.9 Centrifugal load & associated primary live load ULS 1.50
SLS 1.00
6.10 Longitudinal load: HA & associated primary live ULS 1.25
load SLS 1.00
HB associated primary live load ULS 1.10
SLS 1.00
6.11 Accidental skidding load and associated primary live load ULS 1.25
SLS 1.00
7 Foot/cycle track live load & effects due to ULS 1.50 1.25 1.25
bridges: parapet load SLS 1.00 1.00 1.00
vehicle collision loads on ULS 1.50
supports and superstructures***
8 Railway bridges: type RU and RL, and SW/0 primary ULS 1.40 1.20 1.20
and secondary live loading SLS 1.10 1.00 1.00
***This is the only secondary live load to be considered for foot/cycle track bridges.
NOTE. For loads arising from creep and shrinkage, or from welding and lack of fit, see Parts 3, 4 and 5 of this
standard, as appropriate.
3. Loads:-
Weight of the supporting members (beams and slabs) directly assigned in the analysis
software by using self-weight command with the Weight of concrete as 25 kN/m3
The comparison of traffic loading and the actions of loads in accordance with the BS and
Eurocode copy attached.
Kindly refer to the respective pages in the detailed analysis and design in the original
design of bridge using BS code and structural validation report critical beam design
check & the conclusion.
3.2 Live Loads
The lane factor, βi, of KEL and UDL has considered similar value as in BD37. On the other hand, the UDL and TS
in EC are associated to their respective lane factor values which are defined as αq and αQ respectively. The adjustment
factors αQi and αqi depend on the class of the route and on the expected traffic type. In the absence of specific
indications, they are assumed as 1.0. It is observed that the U.K. National Annex has modified the αq-factor and
resulting to a constant intensity of 5.5 kN/m2 for UDL in all lanes. The application of the constant intensity of UDL
in all lanes across the carriageway offers considerable simplicity in the analysis of bridges to determine critical load
effects. Meanwhile, the αQ-factor values for the TS load remains unchanged as recommended in EN 1991-2. For the
abnormal traffic loading, Table 1 describes how HB and LM3 could be applied for the design purposes of different
classes of roads. The EC (EN 1991-2) provides a detail guideline in Annex A in the code to define the standardised
model of special vehicles (SV) that can be customised by specified country. U.K. National Annex defines its own SV
020037-2
vehicle and further defines for SOV vehicle as shown in Table 1. Basic longitudinal configuration for each SV model
vehicle can be referred in NA to BS EN 1991-2:2003.
By comparing the abnormal traffic load between BD37 and U.K. NA, it is noteworthy that there is a reduction
from 150 tonnes and 120 tonnes to 100 tonnes and 80 tonnes accordingly based on road classes on maximum gross
weight for principal and public roads. However, the maximum gross weight for motor way and trunk roads classes is
observed to increase from 180 tonnes to 196 tonnes. There are another two load models mentioned in EC, viz. LM2
and LM4. LM2 is a single axle load applied on specific tyre contact area which covers the dynamic effects of the
normal traffic on short structural members predominantly in the range of loaded lengths from 3 m to 7 m. Meanwhile,
LM4 is a crowd loading that intended only for general verification and applied particularly for bridges located in or
near towns when its effects are not considered in LM1. Nevertheless, these two load models are not discussed further
in this paper and further references can be made in EN 1991-2. In brief, the shifting of bridge codes application from
BD37 to EN 1991 especially in Malaysia would give some implications on the analysis and design of road bridges.
Perhaps, it would also give some implications towards the cost aspect on bridges construction in Malaysia in future.
020037-3
3.3 Wind Loads
Introduction
The scope of the following calculation is to present the wind actions and effects usually applied
on a bridge based on BS EN 1991-1-4: General Actions-Wind actions and BD37/01.
Where:
vb is the basic wind velocity
vb,0 is the fundamental value of the basic wind velocity
Cdir is the directional factor; the recommended value is 1.0
Cseason is the season factor; the recommended value is 1.0
where:
cr(z) is the roughness factor, and is recommended to be determined according to (Clause4.3.2)
co(z) is the orography factor, taken as 1.0.
Terrain Roughness (Clause 4.3.2)
cr(z) is the roughness factor, and is recommended to be determined according to the following formuls:
where:
z0 is the roughness length [Table 4.1]
kr terrain factor depending on the roughness length and evaluated according the following formula:
Wind Turbulence (Clause 4.4)
Iv(z): is the turbulence intensity at height z, as the ratio of the standard deviation of
the turbulence divided be the mean velocity, and is expressed by the following formula
where:
The peak velocity pressure qp(z) at height z, includes the mean and the short-term (turbulent)
fluctuations and is expressed by the formula:
where:
ρ: is the air density (which depends on the altitude, temperature and barometric pressure to be
expected in the region during wind storms; the recommended value, used in this calculation, is
1.25 kg/m3
Where:
Cs, Cd is the structural factor taken as 1.0
qp(ze) is the peak velocity pressure at reference height ze, which is usually taken as the height
z above the ground of the C.G. of the structure subjected to the wind action
dtot represents the depth of the parts of the deck which are considered to be subjected to the wind
pressure.
Wind actions on the deck BS EN 1991-1-4: General Actions-Wind actions.
basic wind velocity vb,0 = 45 m/s. It is also considered that cdir = 1.0 and cseason = 1.0.
Concerning the reference height of the deck ze, this may be considered more or less equal to the
mean distance z between the centre of the bridge deck and the soil surface. In the general
case of a sloppy valley it is more conservative to use a lower (deeper) point of the soil surface (or the
water) beneath the bridge deck. It has been considered, for simplicity, that ze = z = 8.25m.
For terrain category 0, z0 = 0.003 and zmin = 1 m < 8.25 m = z [Table 4.1], thus:
0.05 0.07
𝐾𝐾𝑟𝑟 = 0.19 × � � = 0.23
0.003
8.25
𝐶𝐶𝑟𝑟 (8.25) = 0.19 × 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � � = 0.97
0.05
1
𝐼𝐼𝑣𝑣 (8.25) = � � = 0.196
8.25
1 × ln � �
0.05
And,
qp (z) = (1+7 × Iv (z)) × 0.5 × ρ × vm 2 (z) = ce (z) × qb = ce (z) × 0.5 × ρ × vb2
qp (8.25) = (1+7 × 0.196) × 0.5 ×1.25 × 43.65 2 = 2824.65N/m2
Wind Forces (Clause 5.3)
The general expression of a wind force Fw (Clause 5.3) acting on a structure or structural member is given by
the following formula:
Actions due to wind shall be calculated in accordance with BD37/01 with basic hourly wind speed
45m/s
Basic hourly mean wind speed, Vb = 45m/s 5.3.2.2.1
Probability factor, Sp = 1.05 5.3.2.2.2
Altitude factor, Sa = 1.003 5.3.2.2.3
Direction factor Sd = 1.00 5.3.2.2.4
Site hourly wind speed, Vs = 47.4m/s
Total wind force applied in our calculations based on BD37/01 (Fw = 3.72 × A) kN/m2 is more than the total
wind force accordance to Eurocode standard BS EN 1991-1-4 which is equal to (Fw = 3.64 × A) kN/m2 ,
Hence SAFE
3.4 Temperature Load
Road Bridge
Page 57 of 75
Page 58 of 75
Page 59 of 75
Page 60 of 75
Page 61 of 75
Page 62 of 75
Page 63 of 75
Page 64 of 75