Shear enhancement at short shear spans in EN 1992
Date published

N/A

Price

Standard: £10 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

Back to Previous

Shear enhancement at short shear spans in EN 1992

Tag
Author
Date published
N/A
Price

Standard: £10 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

The Structural Engineer
Citation

The Structural Engineer, Volume 85, Issue 23, 2007

Date published

N/A

Citation

The Structural Engineer, Volume 85, Issue 23, 2007

Price

Standard: £10 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

The approach to shear enhancement at short shear spans for members without designed links in EN 1992 has been changed since early drafts. The revised rule works well for cases with single point loads but a number of problems have been identified for cases with multiple or distributed loads. For these, the rule appears to be over-conservative and difficult to use. It is proposed that the shear enhancement rules in EN 1992 are not applicable for the design of members with multiple loads or design for envelopes of load cases and that alternative rules should be provided. The proposed rules are based on the approach adopted in previous drafts of EN 1992. They have effectively been introduced in the UK
EN 1992-2 (bridges) National Annex and could possibly also be used in other structures.
The rules for short shear span enhancement in members with designed links suffer from many of the same problems but in addition are over-conservative, often more conservative than the normal rules. It appears that the resistance provided by the links to the shear at short shear spans was originally meant to be used in combination with a concrete contribution to the resistance but the current approach has no concrete contribution. It is proposed that this change should be reversed.
There are two other ways of getting short shear span enhancement for members with designed links in EN 1992. Strut and tie analysis gives good consistent results but can be difficult to use for many cases. The other method is to use the rule that allows the links in an increment to be designed for the minimum shear in the increment. This rule needs clarification and modification as the restrictions on its use are unclear. It also appears to be over-generous for inclined links but this is being corrected by an editorial change.

Paul Jackson, BSc, PhD, CEng, FIStructE, FICE
Technical Director, Gifford

Stephen Salim, BEng, PhD
Engineer, Scott Wilson, Formerly Gifford

Jon Shave, MEng, MA, PhD, CEng, MICE
Principal Engineer, Parsons Brinckerhoff

Steve Denton, BA, PhD, CEng, MICE
Technical Director, Parsons Brinckerhoff

Additional information

Format:
PDF
Publisher:
The Institution of Structural Engineers

Tags

Issue 23/24

Related Resources & Events

The Structural Engineer
<h4>Viewpoint: Toplis</h4>

Viewpoint: Toplis

Price – £10
The Structural Engineer
<h4>Verulam</h4>

Verulam

Price – £10
The Structural Engineer
<h4>Thomas Young and the theory of structures 1807-2007</h4>

Thomas Young and the theory of structures 1807-2007

As the the Institution of Civil Engineers celebrates the birth of Thomas Telford and the Institution of Structural Engineers celebrates its own centenary, engineers might be forgiven for overlooking another significant anniversary: 2007 is the bicentenary of a remarkable scientific publication which set out much of the structural theory modern engineers rely on today in their daily work: Thomas Young’s A Course of Lectures on Natural Philosophy and Mechanical Arts. Alasdair N. Beal, BSc, CEng, MICE, FIStructE Thomasons LLP

Price – £10