Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
aciyath

Simplification of curtailment rules as per EC2.

6 posts in this topic

Hello people,

Do any one of you know how to come up with a simplified curtailment figure for beams and slabs for EC 2 as the one in bs 8110. Like which assumptions are made in taking the curtailment length and rebar percentages? What is the theory involved in it and so on. I need some help for my thesis work regarding it. Please share your thoughts. Any help will be very much appreciated. Thanks. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will try to explain the theory behind curtailment as good as I can...

Theoretically speaking, curtailment of reinforcing bars is the stopping of some of them (in tension or compression), where they are no longer required because the bending moment is reduced. This is the theoretical curtailment point/length.

However, the bars must be anchored by further extension (lbd) beyond the point which is required for flexural strength. Moreover, inclined cracks due to shear, especially at supports, may increase the forces subjected to the tensile reinforcement. According to the attached image, because of the shear crack, the force of the tensile reinforcement at position 1 is depended on the bending moment at position 2. In order to take this into account, the bending moment diagram is shifted in the direction of reducing moment by an amount al (=d in case of slabs). Therefore, the bars should be anchored for a distance lbd+al. This is the practical curtailment point/length!

It’s very important to mention that curtailment is applied mainly to multi-span slabs and beams because it is more economic compared to simply supported.

As for the simplified rules about curtailment according to Concrete Centre, British Standards etc is concerned, these are just simple tips based on the above theoretical background, experiments and everyday experience. I don’t think that these lengths and reinforcement percentages are derived only from mathematical expressions...

post-1-14570089575104_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply ion.. :)

Well suppose the simplified detailing diagrams were to be derived mathematically, can you please give a break down of working steps which can lead me to the simplified diagrams. I saw the simplified diagram posted on slabs based on EC2.. but i am quiet not sure how the lengths and percentages are derived.. :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem aciyath!

Curtailment lengths depend on the bending moment diagram and the geometry of the slabs (number of spans and supports) therefore the simplified rules are not based on one mathematical model. Practically you can not have only one theoretical model that simulates all the slabs you can have...

A very good approach would be to calculate the curtailment lengths for some characteristic slabs (simply supported, continuous with two spans, three spans etc) and then to check if these curtailment lengths are in accordance with the Concrete Centre's approach.

As for the procedure that you have to follow for the calculation of the curtailment lengths, check the following bibliography:

Worked Examples to Eurocode 2: Volume 1 (page 40)

How to Design Concrete Structures Using Eurocode 2 (page 84)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do any one of you know how to come up with a simplified curtailment figure for beams and slabs for EC 2 as the one in bs 8110

In EC2 there is no simplified curtailment figure like the 3.24&3.25/BS8110. In fact 3.25 for slabs is quite ok but for beams, analysis of moment diagrams is necessary.

Don't forget that in general, eurocodes are not a simplified code framework whatever that thing means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes indeed! In the UK, we say that the Eurocodes are "less prescriptive" than the former British Standards. This means the engineer is bit more 'on his/her own'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By a_geni
      The attached link is for Worked examples to Eurocode 2, hope that you find it useful.
      http://www.ermco.eu/documents/ermco-documents/worked-examples-ec2-def080723.pdf
    • By Triona
      Hello,
      In BS8110, clause 3.12.11.2.4 specifies a limit for clear spacing of reinforcement based on the relationship:
      Clear spacing ≤ 47000/fs
      where fs = estimated service stress in the reinforcement.
      Does anyone know of a similar limit in EC2, other than the simple rules for reinforcing in clause 8.2?
      Many thanks in advance,
    • By Seb3k
      Hello,
      I have a question regarding design of thick pile caps for punching.
      Slab is 2m thick and has 1m diameter circular piles on 3m centres.
      If i check punching on control perimiter 2d - the perimiter crosses over neighbouring piles - Does this have effect on calculations
      I checked reduced perimiter (only 90cm from pile face), and checked shear on pile face, and everything is ok there - no need for links
      Also checked flexural shear in pilecap and it is ok.
      Thanx for suggestions
    • By Mihai
      Hello,
      I just came across a 'problem'. I want to design a pilecap for 2 piles. I have seen in other books, that after the required steel area is calculates, its been multiplied by 2. Is this also available for this case, for 2 piles? Cheers.