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

QUIZ
Which is the most challenging hurdle in migration from
BS8110 to EC2?
What is the highest grade of concrete in EC2?
How are notional horizontal loads represented in EC2?

What are the essential differences in shear design

between BS 8110 and EC2?
What is the main difference in column design in EC2?
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

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
4

Similarities
of BS8110 and EC2

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

Ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state

Permanent actions, imposed loads and wind loads
Plane strain assumption for design of beams,
slabs, columns, and walls
Linear elastic analysis

Linear elastic analysis with limited distribution

Plastic analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of
members

Differences
between BS8110 and EC2

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

EC2 is phenomenon-based code unlike the BS8110

Entire code is based on reliability index
Based on Model Concrete Code 1978 and 1990

1. Influence of material behaviour (Concrete grade

90/105)
2. Basis of design and load combination
3. Global geometric imperfections
4. Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis
5. Shear design of beams and slabs
6. Design of columns
7. Detailing of members

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
7

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

EC2 stress-strain relationships of

concrete under compression
max stress level for idealized curve must be below the max stress
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
Design of columns
Detailing of
members

The design value of concrete compressive strength fcd is given by:

f
0.85fck
fcd cc ck
0.567fck
(3.15)
c
1.5
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.
8

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Table 3.1 Strength and deformation

characteristics for concrete

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections

Class 1

Class 2

Class 3

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of
members

EC2 stress-strain relationships of

reinforcing steel

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

k=ft/fy indicates ductility; the greater the k value, the longer is the
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
Design of columns
Detailing of
members

The design value of the modulus of elastic Es is 200 GPa. In

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:

fyd

fyk
fyk
500 103

0.00217

0.87fyk y
6
s Es 1.15200 10
1.15
10

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination

Table C.1: Properties of reinforcement

Product form
Class
Characteristic yield
strength fyk or f0.2k (MPa)
Minimum value of
k = (ft/fy)k

Bars and de-coiled

rods
A
B
C

Wire Fabrics
A

400 to 600

Requirement or
quantile value (%)
-

5.0

1.05

1.08

1.15
<1.35

1.05

1.08

1.15
<1.35

10.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of
members

Characteristic strain at
maximum force,
(%)
Bendability
Shear strength
Maximum
deviation
from nominal
mass
(individual
bar of wire)
(%)

Nominal
bar size
(mm)
8
>8

Bend/Rebend test
-

0.3 A fyk (A is area of wire)

6.0
4.5

Minimum

5.0

11

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

The specified values for the tensile properties

are given in Table 4.
Table 4 Characteristic tensile properties

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

BS 4449:2005
+A2:2009

7.2.3 Tensile properties

B500A

Yield strength,
Re
MPa
500

Tensile/yield strength ratio,

Rm/Re

Total elongation at
maximum force, Agt
%

1.05a

2.5b

B500B

500

1.08

5.0

B500C

500

1.15,<1.35

7.5

Rm/Re characteristics is 1.02 for sizes below 8mm.

b A characteristics is 1.0% for sizes below 8mm.
gt
Values of Re specified are characteristic with p = 0.95.
Values of Rm/Re and Agt specified are characteristic with p = 0.90.
Calculate the values of Rm and Re using the nominal cross sectional area.

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

12

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

7.2.3 Tensile properties

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

BS 8666:2005 - Scheduling, dimensioning, bending and cutting of steel

reinforcement for concrete Specification has been revised to incorporate:
(i) Shape codes available under BS EN ISO 3766:2003; (ii) Revised
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) (iv) The provisions of BS EN 1992-1-1 (including the
preclusion of wire to BS 4482:2004 for structural purpose).
.

13

Similar to BS specification
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections

BS system:
notation is T

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of
members

14

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
15

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

Load combinations
according to EC0
Leading variable action and accompanying variable action:

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

(6.10)

Comparison of partial factors for loading

Design situations
With one variable action
(Live load)
With one variable action
(Wind load)
With two variable
actions
(leading and
accompanying)

BS 8110

EC2

1.4DL + 1.6LL

1.35Gk + 1.5Qk

1.4DL + 1.6W

1.35Gk + 1.5Wk

1.2DL + 1.2LL +
1.2W

1.35 Gk + 1.5 Qk + 0.75Wk

Or 1.35 Gk + 1.05 Qk + 1.5Wk

(Wind & live loads)

0.7x1.5Qk for office or
residential buildings

0.5x1.5Wk
16

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Load combinations
To be applied together
according to EC0

Influence of
material behaviour

(6.10a)

Basis of design
and load
combination

(6.10b)

Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of
members

Ultimate states
Eq. (6.10)

Combinations of actions
1.35 Gk + 1.5 Qk + 1.5*0.5Wk

For EQU, STR,

GEO
Eq. (6.10a)

1.35 Gk + 1.5*0.5Wk +1.5*0.7 Qk

For STR, GEO

1.35 Gk + 1.5*0.5Wk

Eq. (6.10b)
For STR, GEO

0.925*1.35Gk + 1.5Wk +1.5*0.7 Qk

Or 0.925*1.35 Gk + 1.5Wk

Or 1.35 Gk + 1.05 Qk + 1.5Wk

For unfavourable
permanent
actions single
source principle
in EC0 - Table
17
A1.2 (B) Set B

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Load combinations
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

18

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Load combinations
according to EC2 Cl 5.1.3

Influence of
material behaviour

Single source for Gk

Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections

1.35Gk + 1.5Qk

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs

1.35Gk + 1.5Qk

1.35Gk

1.35Gk + 1.5Qk

1.4Gk + 1.6Qk

1.0Gk

1.4Gk + 1.6Qk

Design of columns
Detailing of
members

1.35Gk + 1.5Qk
1.35Gk

1.35Gk

1.0Gk

1.4Gk + 1.6Qk

1.0Gk

19

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
20

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

When to consider
geometric imperfections?
In EC2, there is no notional
horizontal load.
Global geometric imperfections due
to out-of-plumbness of vertical
elements must be modelled by
equivalent loads in two design
situations:
Persistent design situations:
Possible extreme loading condition
of wind, imposed loads.
Accidental design situations: fire,
impact.
21

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

When to consider
geometric imperfections?
Imperfection loads are quantified by three considerations:
Global analysis of building structures.
Analysis of isolated vertical members.
Analysis of floor diaphragms as horizontal elements
transferring forces to bracing members.
Only imperfection loads in global analysis are similar to
notional horizontal loads, although they are very different in
the way to be considered.
Imperfections need not be considered for serviceability limit
states.
22

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections

How to consider
geometric imperfections?
The structure is assumed with inclination l, given by:
where: 0 is the basic value (0 = 1/200)
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
23
floor.

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

How to consider
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
Design of columns
Detailing of
members

To design for slab

(member transferring
forces to bracing
elements)

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
24
EC3 Figure 5.3)

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections

How to consider
geometric imperfections?
Lateral load case: in BS 8110: Hdesign = Max(HN, 1.2Wk)
However, in EC 2: Hdesign = 1.0 Hi + FWk
where Hi is horizontal loads for geometric imperfection

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of
members

25

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
26

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination

Different types of analysis

First order elastic analysis: represents conditions at
normal service loads very well (Section 5.4)

Global geometric
imperfections

First order elastic analysis with limited redistribution:

excluded nonlinearity, represents conditions at normal
service loads very well (Section 5.5)

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

First order inelastic analysis: Plastic analysis with no

geometrical nonlinearity (Section 5.6)

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Second order elastic analysis: Effects of finite

deformation considered. Good representation of P- effect
(Section 5.7)

Design of columns
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
27

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Different types of analysis

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

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
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
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination

Methodology
EC2 uses The Variable Strut Inclination Method for shear
design.
BS 8110 uses Truss Analogy with truss angle = 450
DC : the concrete acts as the
diagonal struts;

Global geometric
imperfections

VT: the stirrups act as the

vertical ties;

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

BT: the tension reinforcement

forms the bottom chord;

Shear design of
beams and slabs

TC: the compression

steel/concrete forms the top
chord.

Design of columns
Detailing of
members

(a) Beam and reinforcement

(b) Analogous truss

= 21.80 450 (strut angle)

(EC2 6.2.3(2))
30

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

Comparison of shear design

BS 8110

EC2

1. = 45o

1. = 21.8o 45o

2. BS 8110 compares shear 2.

stresses.
3.
3. The maximum shear
stress is limited to 5
N/mm2 or 0.8fcu,
4.
whichever is the lesser.
4. The design shear force
must be less than the
sum of the shear
resistance of concrete
plus shear links.

EC 2 compares shear forces.

The maximum shear capacity
of concrete VRd,max cannot be
exceeded.
Where the applied shear
exceeds the min shear
resistance of concrete VRd,c,
the shear reinforcement
should be capable of resisting
all the shear forces.

31

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

Punching shear design of slabs

Control perimeters
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

32

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
33

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Differences in symbols

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

34

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Differences in symbols

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
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Differences in design

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

36

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Differences in design

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

37

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
38

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)
For the effect of concrete minimum
cover 2=0.7~1.0 (in comp. is 1.0)
For the effect of confinement by tied
transverse bars along the design anc.
length 3=0.7~1.0 (in comp. is 1.0)
For the effect of confinement by welded
transverse bars along the design anc. length
4=0.7
For the effect of confinement by transverse
pressure along the design anc. length 5=0.7

Basic anchorage length

Design stress of the bar:
Design ultimate stress:
For the quality of bond condition 1=0.7
(poor) - 1=1.0 (good)
For the bar diameter 2=1.0 for 32mm
2=(132-)/100 for >32mm
The design concrete tensile strength (<C60/75)
fctd=fctk,0.05/c

39

Detailing of members
DESIGN ANCHORAGE LENGTH lbd

40

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);

Mild steel 250 MPa is no longer allowed.

41

QUIZ
Which is the most challenging hurdle in migration from
BS8110 to EC2?
What is the highest grade of concrete in EC2?
How are notional horizontal loads represented in EC2?

What are the essential differences in shear design

between BS 8110 and EC2?
What is the main difference in column design in EC2?
42

Thank You!

43