Global Design India Bridges

Short Technical Guidance Note Series

Reference: STGN 00X Revision: 01

Prepared by: Pankaj Bhardwaj Date: September 2023

Approved by: Rajdeep Chakraborty Checked by: Viplaw Sharma

Subject: Guidance on Strut and Tie Modelling by Eurocode

1 Scope
The scope of this technical guidance note is to provide guidance to strut-and-tie modelling (STM) to those who
are new to it. It primarily focuses on the underlying theory, complemented by practical example showcasing Pile Cap
modelling and various checks involved in STM.

This technical guidance note does not replace or supersede any standards however gives some high-level
guidance and outlines the recommended approach.

This technical note is prepared based on the following standards and reference:

● BS EN 1992-1-1
● NA to BS EN 1992-1-1
● Goodchild, Charles H., J. Morrison, and R. L. Vollum. Strut-and-tie Models: How to design concrete
members using strut-and-tie models in accordance with Eurocode 2. Concrete Centre, 2014.

2 Technical Context
2.1 General
Strut-and-tie modelling (STM) is a straightforward approach that effectively represents the stress patterns
through triangulated models. It relies on the truss analogy and finds application in various concrete structure
components. Typically, STM is employed to design specific sections of concrete structures, such as pile
caps, corbels, deep beams (where depth exceeds one-third of the span), beams with openings, connections,
and similar cases where standard beam theory may not be suitable.

STM serves as an important engineering tool that puts engineers firmly in control. With a reasonable level of
experience, it enables design engineers to offer uncomplicated solutions to complex structural challenges.
STM adheres to a lower-bound plastic theory, ensuring safety provided that:

 Equilibrium is maintained.
 The structure exhibits sufficient ductility for the expected development of struts and ties.
 Struts and ties are sized to withstand their designated forces.

2.2 Key terminology

2.2.1 B- and D-regions

A structure can be divided into: -
 1) B-Regions (Beam or Bernoulli Regions): In these regions, plane sections remain plain after
bending, and the design primarily follows conventional beam theory. While Eurocode 2 permits the
use of strut-and-tie models (STM) in B-regions, however it is quite unusual to do so and it is
designers responsibility to compare the beam theory with STM and propose the feasible solution.

2) D-Regions (Discontinuity or Disturbed Regions): D-regions are areas where plane sections
deviate from their original planar state, proving traditional beam theory as inadequate. These regions
typically emerge due to discontinuities in loading or geometry and are designed using STMs.
Examples of D-regions is connections between beams and columns, corbels, beam openings, deep
beams, and pile caps, among others.

2.3 Choice of STM

2.3.1 Dispersion rule

it is often possible to create several potential alternative Strut-and-Tie Models (STMs) for a specific load
configuration, leading to uncertainties regarding the optimal model selection.

The orientation of an STM can be predicted through an elastic finite element analysis performed on the
element before concrete undergoes cracking. This analysis can also be easily performed in AstrutTie
software to understand the stress flow patterns inside the structure. However, following simple dispersion
rule can help the designer to predict accurately the stress flow. Basically, after cracking, the struts'
orientation undergoes changes due to variations in stiffness, which occur as the ties are put into action. This
orientation remains relatively stable post-cracking until the reinforcement reaches its yield point. Afterward,
further reorientation occurs as the applied loads increase, culminating in structural failure.

As mentioned above, in numerous instances, satisfactory STMs can be developed by adhering to a

straightforward 2:1 dispersion rule. The STM represented in Fig. 1a is suitable for use before tie 1 reaches
its yield point. After tie 1 yielding, angle 'β' increases as the load progresses, with the STM's geometry
converging toward that portrayed in Fig. 1b at the point of failure.

In theory, STMs should be formulated for both the Serviceability Limit States (SLS) and Ultimate Limit States
(ULS). However, in practice, it is often satisfactory to design the structure for ULS using an STM that is
deemed acceptable at the SLS, such as the one shown in Fig. 1a. Conversely, the STM in Fig. 1b is
unsuitable for application at the SLS because it can only be effectively employed after tie 1 has yielded,
which falls beyond the realm of elastic finite element analysis. However, it is advisable to use the Fig. 1b
model as it will be critical for the evaluating the tie forces in SLS. The designer can always back calculate the
permissible stress to limit the crack width requirements. It is also worthy to note that in case the pile cap is
governing in SLS quassi permanent combination designer can shift to 2:1 dispersion rule (Fig. 1a) bearing in
mind the proposed reinforcement (i.e., keeping the vertical shear ties location intact) and can reiterate the
model to check if there is any relaxation in the stresses. In conclusion, using the ULS model for stress
verification is not objectionable.
Source: Goodchild, Charles H., J. Morrison, and R. L. Vollum. Strut-and-tie Models: How to design concrete members using strut-and-
tie models in accordance with Eurocode 2. Concrete Centre, 2014.

Fig. 1 Dispersion rule to distinguish between good and bad STM at the SLS

2.3.2 Avoiding Diagonal Tension Ties

There will be many instances when diagonal tension ties will appear during the iterative process of
developing a STM model. It is important to reiterate the model by changing the strut orientation and ensure
at the end that no diagonal tension tie is present. The simple reason of avoiding diagonal tension tie is that
no diagonal reinforcement is provided in the concrete member. The Tension Tie should always be vertical or
Horizontal for RCC member or in other words the tension member should always represent the
reinforcement intention of the designer. For example, the arrangement shown below for a deep beam
member in Fig. 2 gives the diagonal tension, this arrangement can be reiterated to avoid the diagonal
tension by re-orienting the diagonal tie member as shown in Fig. 3

Fig. 2 Wrong arrangement – diagonal tension member (red: Tension members, blue:
compression members)
 Fig. 3 Correct arrangement – no diagonal tension member (red: Tension members, blue:
compression members)

2.3.3 Caution with Vertical ties

The vertical ties which represent the shear should be avoided in the beginning of the iteration. The first
primary focus of the designer should be to avoid the use of vertical stirrups and should utilise the concrete
compressive strength as far as possible. Therefore, the compressive strut should made be aligned as much
as possible to balance the truss members in equilibrium. It is advisable that the inclination of the strut should
not be less than 22.5 degree. I

Θ > 22.5

Fig. 4 Deep Beam member, - first iteration without vertical tie

If the compression strut is passing it simply means designer can provide the minimum shear reinforcement
and concrete shear strength is enough to take care the design shear. If the compression struts fail, then the
designer has the following options: -

1) Increase the depth of the member.

2) Increase the compressive strength of the concrete.
3) Provide the vertical reinforcement - shear reinforcements.

The first two options may not be economical solution so providing the vertical reinforcement as shown in Fig.
3 will be the optimum solution to pass the compression struts. Providing vertical tie in the centre increases
the strut angle and impacts its effective area. Further, it also divides the system in two compression bearing
struts.

Θ > 22.5

Fig. 5 Deep Beam member, - second iteration with vertical tie.

By adding one vertical tie, designer must ensure the design stirrups in tie region. This basically ensures the
struts which now will be formed will have higher angle, less force and improved effective widths.
3 Design of STM members
3.1 Struts
Struts are classified based on the shape of their associated stress fields, which can be described as
prismatic, bottle-shaped, or fan-shaped. Figure 4 illustrates these various types of struts alongside their
corresponding compressive stress distributions and allowable stress values, denoted as sRd. Prismatic
stress fields are commonly encountered in B-regions, while fan- and bottle-shaped stress fields manifest in
D-regions, resulting from the dispersion of stress pathways radiating outward from concentrated loads or
reactions.

Fig. 6 Types of struts. Showing compressive stress fields and allowable stress, s Rd.
3.1.1 Axial strength of prismatic struts
In accordance with Eurocode 2, the design concrete strength for a strut devoid of tensile transverse stress is
specified as fcd. Consequently, the strut's capacity is determined as

sRd = fcd ta Exp (6.55)

where:

t represents the thickness of the structural element and

a denotes the width of the strut.

3.1.2 Axial strength of unreinforced bottle-shaped struts

Any transverse tension reduces the compressive strength of a concrete strut to 0.6v’f cd. This scenario
arises in the context of bottle-shaped stress fields, characterized by the presence of transverse tensile
stresses occurring at a certain distance from the end nodes, concomitant with changes in the direction of
compressive stresses. Consequently, the compressive capacity of a bottle-shaped strut devoid of transverse
reinforcement is as follows:

sRd = 0.6v’fcd ta Exp (6.56)

where v’ =1-fck/250 Exp (6.57)

fcd = acc fck/gc Exp (3.15)

where acc = 0.85 * 3.1.6 (1) & NA

gc = 1.5 Table 2.1N

t = thickness of the element.

a = width of the strut (see Figures 3.2 and 3.4).

In terms of strength, a bottle-shaped strut might be considered as a relatively weak idealised prismatic strut
between nodes (see Figure 2.1a). However, transverse tensile forces and stresses must be checked and
where necessary, designed reinforcement must be provided (as outlined below). It should be noted that the
the area (ta) and shape of a strut may be different each end of a strut; both ends may need to be checked

3.1.3 Fan-shaped struts

Fan-shaped stress distributions commonly occur at the supports of deep beams that are subjected to
uniformly distributed loads, as illustrated in Fig. 7. The distribution of internal forces within the uniformly
loaded deep beam can be comprehended using either the principles of strut-and-tie action or through the
application of more complex discontinuous stress field analyses.
 Fig. 7 Fan shaped struts

3.2 Ties
Tensile forces within the structure are typically borne by reinforcement when the required reinforcement area
(As) satisfies the equation:

As = T / fyd

The reinforcement must be adequately anchored at the nodes to effectively resist the design tensile forces.
Anchorage methods may involve mechanical connectors, standard hooks, or straight development lengths.
As per Eurocode 2 guidelines, it is essential to ensure proper anchorage of reinforcement at the nodes.

In cases of highly stressed and concentrated nodes, it proves advantageous to employ multiple layers of
tensile reinforcement if the nodes are critical to design. This approach not only enlarges the node dimensions
but also enhances the load-bearing capacity of the incoming struts. Utilizing multiple smaller bars can reduce
the required anchorage lengths. However, any shifts in the position of the tie force's centreline should be
duly considered and accommodated. The figure below shows the effective width of the strut and impact of
reinforcement layers in nodal zones.
 Fig. 8 Nodes with one layer of reinforcement and with multi-layer of reinforcement showing the
nodal and extended zone.

3.3 Nodes
Nodes are defined as specific regions within a structural system where either the direction of struts changes
or where struts and ties intersect. Nodes can be further categorized into two types:

1) Smeared nodes and

2) Concentrated nodes.

Smeared nodes are typically found within the body of a structural member, where the orientation of a broad
stress field undergoes redirection. Examples of smeared nodes are presented in Figure 2.3b and can be
observed at either end of the tie T, as depicted in Fig. 9c. In the context of Strut-and-Tie Models (STMs), the
majority of nodes are smeared, or in other words, continuous nodes. In smeared nodes, concrete stresses
typically remain non-critical and, as a result, are not typically subjected to rigorous checks during the design
process.

Fig. 9 provides representative illustrations of concentrated nodes, which materialize at the junction of
concentrated struts and ties. Eurocode 2 classifies nodes into three categories: CCC (comprising three
compressive struts), CCT (comprising two compressive struts and one tie), and CTT (comprising one
compressive strut and two ties). In Figure 3.10b, forces are transmitted from the tie into the node through a
combination of bearing against the rear face of the node and the bond stresses acting within the extended
node."

Fig. 9 Compression node without ties (Figure 6.26, EN1992-1-1),

Compression tension node with reinforcement provided in one direction (Figure 6.27, EN1992-1-1),
Compression tension node with reinforcement provided in two directions (Figure 6.28, EN1992-1-1)
4 Example Calculation
Extend the design of the pile cap presented below where a two-pile cap supports a 500 mm.
square column carrying 2500 kN (ULS) on two 600 mm diameter piles. Assume that the self-weight of
the pile cap is included, fck = 30MPa and the minimum cover is 50 mm to B16 layers.

Fig. 10 Pile cap (Two Pile System) with proposed STM

4.1 SOLUTION

5.1.1 Define D-regions.

The whole element is within h of a support or load so may be treated as a D-region.
5.1.2 Proposed STM

Pile cap (Two Pile System) with proposed STM

Angle of strut, b = tan-1(1300/900) = 55.3°

Force per strut = 1250/sin 55.3° = 1520 kN
Force in tie = 1250 cot 55.3° = 866 kN
5.1.3 Check node stresses
Check at node 1

Fig. 11 Elevation on node 1

sEd,1-0 = 2500 x 103/5002 = 10.0 MPa

a1-2 = (500/2)/sin 55.3° = 304 mm
sEd,1-2 = 1520 x 103/ (304 x 500) = 10.0 MPa
 Fig. 12 Geometry at node 1*

sEd,1-3 = 10.0 MPa (as above)

sRd, max,1 (for CCC node) = 1.0v 'fcd = 1.0(1-fck/250)accfck/gc
= 1.0 x (1-30/250) x 0.85 x 30/1.5
= 0.57 x (1-30/250) x 30
= 15.0 MPa
sRd, max,1 > sEd OK

Check at node 2 (and 3)

sEd,2 = 1250 x 103/(p x 3002) = 4.4 MPa
sRd, max,2 (for CCT node) = 0.85 x (1-30/250) x 0.85 x 30/1.5 = 12.7 MPa
sRd, max,2 > sEd OK

5.1.4 Check struts

Check strut at node 1

sEd, 1-2 = 10.0 MPa (as above)
sRd, max = fcd (for regions with no or some compressive transverse stress)
= 0.85 x 30/1.5 = 17.0 MPa
sRd, max, > sEd OK

Check strut at node 2 (and 3)

sEd, 2-1 = 4.4 MPa (as above)
sRd, max = 0.6v 'fcd (for cracked compression zones, i.e. with transverse tension)
= 0.6 (1-fck/250)accfck/gc
= 0.6 x (1-30/250) x 0.85 x 30/1.5 = 9.0 MPa
sRd, max, > sEd OK

5.1.5 Tie
The area of steel in the tie:
As, reqd = 866 x 103/(500/1.15)= 1991 mm2

Provide 5 H25s (2455 mm2)

(designer can reduce the layer by providing B32 bars)
5.1.7 Shear As by inspection av<1.5d So no beam shear check is necessary. Punching shear check is
inappropriate in this case.

5.1.8 Minimum reinforcement

To control cracks, provide transverse bars based on requirements for minimum steel*:
Asmin = kckfct, effAct / ss
Where,
kc = 1.0
k = 0.65
fct,eff = fct,mf = 0.30fck2/3 = 0.30 x 302/3 = 2.9 MPa
Act = b x min (2.5(h-d), (h-x)/3, h/2)
= 1000 x min (2.5(1400-1300), (1400-say 0.3 x 1300)/3, 1400/2)
= 1000 x min (250, 336, 700)
= 250000 mm2
ss = fyk = 500 MPa
Asmin = 1.0 x 0.65 x 2.9 x 250000 / 500 = 507 mm2/m
Provide min B16@300 cc (670 mm2/m)

5 Key References
BRITISH STANDARDS, 2004. BS EN 1992-1-1: Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures — Part 1-1:
General rules and rules for buildings. BSI Standards Publication.

NATIONAL ANNEX, 2014. NA+A2:2014 to BS EN 1992-1-1:2004 +A1: UK National Annex to Eurocode 2:

Design of concrete structures — Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings. BSI Standards Publication.

BRITISH STANDARDS, 2021. BS EN 206:2013+A2: Concrete — Specification, performance, production and

conformity. BSI Standards Publication.

MORRISON, J, A guide to Strut-and-tie Modelling, Buro Happold, Bath, 2005.