See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/260096044

The 2010 fib MODEL CODE FOR

CONCRETE STRUCTURES: A NEW
APPROACH IN STRUCTURAL
ENGINEERING
CONFERENCE PAPER MAY 2010

DOWNLOADS

VIEWS

128

205

2 AUTHORS, INCLUDING:
Agnieszka Bigaj-van Vliet
TNO
27 PUBLICATIONS 82 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

Available from: Agnieszka Bigaj-van Vliet

Retrieved on: 29 July 2015

The 2010 fib MODEL CODE FOR CONCRETE

STRUCTURES: A NEW APPROACH IN STRUCTURAL
ENGINEERING
Joost Walraven, Agnieszka Bigaj
*Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
** TNO Built Environment and Geosciences, Delft, The Netherlands
Keywords: Concrete , Concrete Structures, Recommendations, fib, Future developments
Abstract: The fib Model Code is a recommendation for the design of reinforced and
prestressed concrete which is intended to be a guidance document for future codes. Model
Codes have been published in 1978 and 1990. A new Model Code will be published in
2010. The most important new element in this Model Code is Time in the sense of service
life. Additionally the Model Code gives an extended state of the art chapter on the
structural materials concrete and steel but regards as well non-metallic reinforcement and
fibres as reinforcement. Many loading conditions are considered, ranging from static
loading to non-static loading, considering earthquake, fatigue and impact/explosion. Five
methods are offered to verify structural safety. Attention is given to verification of limit
states associated to durability, robustness and sustainability. Finally verification assisted
by numerical methods and by testing is considered. Other elements which are parts of the
life cycle approach are construction and conservation. In the part on conservation the
conservation strategy is treated in combination with conservation management, condition
survey and assessment, and evaluation and decision making.

1. PAST AND FUTURE OF THE MODEL CODE FOR CONCRETE

STRUCTURES
1.1 History of the Model Code for Concrete Structures
In 1953 the Euro-International Concrete Committee (CEB - Comit Euro-International du
Bton) was founded. The founders Balency-Barn, Nennig, Base, Rsch, Torroja and
Wstlund, had the vision that post-war Europe needed a common approach in concrete
design and construction. The greatest concern was the enormous disparity between codes in
Europe and their very limited scientific basis. Therefore, the main goal of CEB has been
from the start the development of a European code, based on a more scientific approach.
The idea of a harmonized Model Code was born. During writing the first Model Code,
contact was sought with another large international organization, the International
Federation for Prestressing (FIP - Fdration Internationale de la Prcontrainte) FIP which
was founded in 1952 by the pioneers of prestressing: Freyssinet, Torroja and Magnel ,
aimed at the promotion of the prestressing philosophy, design and techniques on a world
wide scale. Experts from CEB and FIP started working together on preparing international
recommendations. The most important milestones which have been achieved are the
following:
1964: 1st CEB International Recommendations (covering reinforced concrete structures)
1970: 2nd CEB/FIP International Recommendations (covering structures in plain, reinforced
and prestressed concrete)
1978: 1st CEB/FIP Model Code
1990: 2nd CEB/FIP Model Code
The 2nd CEB/FIP International Recommendations were an important step forward since it
was the first time that a common basis was created for new national codes, which were up
to then extremely different. The most important break-through was the introduction of a
new safety philosophy based on limit states and on partial safety factors. Next, in the
seventies, safety concepts were developed with semi-probabilistic approaches, and later-on
real probabilistic analyses were made as a basis for a better evaluation of structural safety
and for a more scientifically based definition of the partial safety factors.
In the Model Codes 1978 and 1990 improved models were developed for a more accurate
representation of the structural behaviour of reinforced and prestressed concrete structures
and new chapters were introduced to cover new fields. In the Model Code 1990 an
important chapter was introduced on concrete material properties, inspired by the new
option to analyse the behaviour of structures by non-linear finite element methods. The
Model Codes became the basic reference documents for the development of Eurocode 2 by
the Commission of the European Communities, and to a large extent influenced the
updating of design codes in many countries, which were then still individual.
In 1998 CEB and FIP have merged into a new organization, the International Federation for
Structural Concrete (fib - fdration internationale du bton). One of the major aims of fib
is to produce international recommendations for the design of concrete structures, reflecting
the newest insights and design philosophy. In the following years numerous documents

accompanying the Model Code 1990 were elaborated and published by fib such as
application manuals, trial calculations, etc. In particular, the background of the Model Code
1990 was extensively treated in the so-called Model Code Text Book, published in the first
three volumes of the new fib Bulletin (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. CEB-FIP Model Code 1990 (left) and Model Code Text Book (right)

1.2 Model Code 2010: initiative and preparation

In 2002 the work for Eurocode 2 Concrete Structures (EC-2) was practically finished. As
mentioned, for the production of this new European Code, the Model Code 1990 had been
an important source of information. Already in the finalizing state of EC-2, the fib council
expressed the wish to start the preparation of a new Model Code for Concrete Structures,
taking due notice of technical and societal developments. A general exploring discussion on
the philosophy, direction and content of a new Model Code was held in 2002 in Patras,
Greece, at the occasion of a fib Technical Committee meeting. During this meeting
representatives of all member countries got the opportunity to express their ideas and to
formulate their wishes for the treatment of new aspects and for the level of sophistication
with which these should be regarded. An interesting collection of unsorted wishes was
collected, like:
- improved consistency between design methods (shear, strut & tie models, deep and
slender members, crack width control and deformation), and provide a basis for design on
the basis of transparent and coherent models.
- extend the validity of the code to higher concrete strengths
- allow performance-based design
- allow design and control by testing
- introduce a basis for service life design
- introduce a link between reliability of structures and quality control
- make increased construction quality an attractive investment
- make a code which is not only valid for new structures but allows as well diagnosis and

retrofitting of existing structures

- extend the formulation of constitutive equations for the structural materials to give
impetus to a better basis for nonlinear analysis (especially focussing on numerical
calculations)
- introduce robustness of structures as a design criterion
- give more attention to non-static loading
- introduce a balanced safety concept
- regard a wider range of loads on structures, including fire, cryogenic, fatigue, impact and
accidental loads
- create a solid basis for the analysis of degradation of structures (due to e.g. chloride
penetration, carbonation, ASR, stress corrosion)
- facilitate the use of recycled materials
- introduce a basis for taking account of criteria regarding sustainability
- introduce of a birth certificate for new structures, with data important for maintenance
and repair
- emphasize the significance of conceptual design
This led to the installation of a small working group, which had to develop a framework for
the new Model Code and make proposals for the procedure and the experts to be involved.
This group met in 2002. As a next step Special Activity Group SAG 5 New Model Code
was installed intended to carry out the work for a new Model Code. This Special Activity
Group started its work with a first meeting in Delft in 2003.

2. BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR A NEW MODEL CODE

Discussions on basic requirements for a code have been held at various occasions. In SAG
5 there was agreement on a number of principles that should at least be respected in a
Model Code.
The code should be well-founded
The code should be based on clear and scientifically well founded theories and models,
corresponding to a good representation of the structural behaviour and of the material
physics. On the other hand, due account should be taken of good engineering practice from
the past.
The code should be flexible
A code should be open-minded, which means that it is not necessarily based on one theory,
excluding the others. Preferably a code should offer different degrees of sophistication,
where models a different complexity may be offered. For simple mass-production practical
rules should be given, leading to conservative and robust designs. For more challenging
structures, and structures with large importance, as an alternative more advanced rules
should be offered, which may require more calculation time, but would result in more
economic solutions, meanwhile assuring an adequate level of safety.
The models used in the code should be transparent
Design calculations should be based on clear models, whereas the flow of forces and the
behaviour under various types of boundary conditions is simply traceable for an engineer

with reasonable education. Empirical equations should be replaced by understandable

models as much as possible. In this respect it is important to realize, that in the past
calculation time was an important criterion: therefore in older codes often expressions and
calculation methods have been offered which gave speed of calculation on the cost of
transparency. The numerical calculation programs in use nowadays, do provocatively
speaking -basically the same, which implies the danger that the designer is not totally aware
of what he/she is doing. This emphasizes the need for clear formulations, on the one hand
used as a basis for the numerical calculations, but on the other hand as well for simple
control of the results of any design calculation.
The models used should reflect the state of the art
New developments should be introduced as much as possible, but not on the cost of
unnecessary complexity. Since a Model Code is intended to be future-oriented the
challenge is as well to carry out an orientation to a future state of the art. This unavoidably
contains an element of speculation. In such a respect new developments should be
introduced even in a more abstract way as a signal to invest time and effort in research and
development, in order to achieve a solid basis in future. An example of this is the
development of criteria for sustainable design.
The code should be as simple as possible but not simpler
A code should be simple enough to be handled by practitioners without considerable
problems. On the other hand simplicity should not lead to lack of accuracy. Moreover, it
should be realized, that very so-called accurate formulations, derived by prominent
scientists, do not necessarily lead to very accurate results, if the input values cannot by
assessed with great accuracy. An example of this is the prediction of long term
deformations due to creep, influenced by ambient temperature and humidity, variation of
loads and construction sequence. Another example is the prediction of the speed of the
deterioration process on the basis of sophisticated diffusion models, where the input
parameters are based on short term compliance tests. As well known, those results show
considerable scatter, due to a number of influencing parameters which are difficult to
quantify like microclimate and construction quality. Here Einsteins famous statement A
theory should be as simple as possible but not simpler is certainly an appropriate guiding
principle.
Scope
The applicability of the Model Code should be as wide as possible. A basis should be given
from where simplifications are possible. Wide means here especially that due
recognition should be given to the influence of all aspects which determine the overall
quality of the structure. This starts with a good conceptual design leading to optimum use
of materials, esthetical quality, maintainability, accessibility, robustness, adaptability and
service life. In this respect design for a specified service life is indispensable. Furthermore
due attention should be given to the procedural side of designing a structure, which even
might imply administrational aspects. Designs should be made in due collaboration with the
contractor and future owner. This asks for a more holistic approach than used to in the past.

3. CONTENT OF MODEL CODE 2010

Model Code 2010 is built-up in five major parts:
Part I:
Principles

Part II: Design input data

Part III: Design
Part IV: Construction
Part V: Conservation
The individual parts will be treated in the following survey.
3.1 Part I: Principles
This part is structured according to the following sections and clauses:
1. Scope
2. Terminology
3. Basic principles
3.1 General
3.2 Performance based design
3.3 Performance requirements for serviceability and structural safety
3.4 Performance requirements for sustainability
3.5 Life cycle management
4. Principles of structural design
4.1 Design situations
4.2 Design strategies
4.3 Design methods
4.4 Probabilistic safety format
4.5 Partial factor format
4.6 Global resistance format
4.7 Deem-to-satisfy format
4.8 Design by avoidance
Chapter 2 Terminology gives definitions. This is important not only because of textual
clarity, but as well because legal aspects play nowadays a much more important role than in
the past. Expressions like Upgrading, Retrofitting, Refurbishment, Strengthening,
Restoration and Repairing are often used in the same context with slightly different
meaning, which may be unnecessarily confusing. Chapter 3 deals with the basic principles,
including the new aspects Performance Based Design, Design for Sustainability and Life
Cycle Management. The general idea behind this is that new structures are designed for
structural safety, serviceability and sustainability, for a defined period of time. Structural
safety and serviceability have to satisfy limit states with a defined degree of reliability. The
reliability level depends on the consequences of failure and on the time that this reliability
level should apply. At this moment performance requirements for sustainability can still be
given only in general terms, because this area is in the beginning of its development.
Section 3.5 Life Cycle Management (LCM) is a way to facilitate choices between various
design, construction and conservation options for structures on the basis of economics,
sustainability and/or other criteria. Important aspects of the quality management involved
are:
- The Quality Project Plan, defining the tasks of all parties involved
- The Life Cycle File (LCF), which is a living document, which continues to be developed
throughout the entire life of the project. The LCF should be populated with information
from the following sub-documents: Design File, As Built Documentation (Birth
Certificate), Service Life File and the Dismantlement Document.

Fig. 2. Life cycle management as a basic element for service life design
This chapter gives not only guidance for quality management in the design of new
structures, but as well for conservation and (provisionally) dismantlement.
This clearly demonstrates the intention of Model Code 2010 to introduce Time as an
important parameter in design.
Chapter 4 gives the Principles of Structural Design. With regard to reaching the required
safety level the following methods are offered:
- The probabilistic safety format
This format allows explicitly the inclusion of reliability requirements in terms of the
reliability index and the reference period. This approach may be used for structures to be
designed and for existing structures in cases where such an increased effort is economically
justified. However, it will seldom be used for the design of new structures due to lack of
statistical data. The probabilistic format is more suited for the assessment of existing
structures, in particular for the calculation of residual service life.
- The partial safety format
This well-known method, which is used today for most designs, may in future be also
applicable for the verification of service life, provided that sufficient long-term experience
will be gained or a sufficient amount of data will be available for calibration by the
probabilistic method.
- The global resistance format
In this format the resistance is considered on a global structural level, as compared to local
verification of sections with partial safety factors. It is especially suitable for design
combined with nonlinear analysis, where verification of limit states is performed by
numerical simulations.
- The deemed-to-satisfy approach
This method includes a set of predetermined alternatives given in a standard. It is still the
normal way of verifying the service life of new structures.
- Design by avoidance
This method is applicable both for the verification of traditional design and design for
service life.

3.2 Part II: Design input data

This part is structured according to the following sections and clauses:
5. Materials
5.1 Concrete
5.2 Reinforcing steel
5.3 Prestressing steel
5.4 Prestressing systems
5.5 Non-metallic reinforcement
5.6 Fibres and fibre reinforced concrete
6. Interface characteristics
6.1 Bond of embedded steel reinforcement
6.2 Bond of non-metallic reinforcement
6.3 Concrete to concrete
6.4 Concrete to steel
In chapter 5, Section 5.1 Concrete is the most extended part. It treats the concrete
properties including their constitutive equations for strength classes up to C120. Under
concrete properties those properties are meant which are important to design structures
with sufficient reliability with regard to structural safety, serviceability and durability. The
formulations are such that they can as well be used in finite element analysis. The
properties are regarded for a range of temperatures and loading types (static, non-static,
long term, short term). With regard to properties relevant for durability aspects are treated
like permeation, diffusion and capillary suction, taking due account of carbonation
progress, ingress of chlorides and leaching. The sections 5.2-5.4 bring an upgraded state of
the art in the field of what meanwhile can be denoted as classic reinforcement. Nonmetallic reinforcement (section 5.5) mostly consists of a high number of directed, organic
or inorganic fibres, typically embedded in a polymeric matrix. For materials like CFRP,
AFRP and GFRP, the most relevant properties are treated, including important aspects like
creep, relaxation and temperature effects. In section 5.6 the basis for design with fibre
reinforced concrete is given. It is shown how the properties of fibre reinforced concrete can
be determined by a simple bending test and how the structural design relations can be
derived from those tests. To this aim structural design classes have been defined.
The chapter 6 Interface characteristics has been written with a special intention. Interface
characteristics are essential for strengthening of structures. In this respect overlays, applied
on structures, can play an important role. The interface between old and new concrete
therefore is a crucial design aspect. Furthermore bond between (old) concrete and modern
strengthening materials like FRP is essential for strengthening existing structures. Moreover
there is a tendency to combine different structural materials in so-called hybrid structures.
Therefore guidance for the interface between steel and concrete is given, from the point of
view of concrete structures. Since bond of classical reinforcement and concrete is still a
topic of great interest, both for new and for old structures, this is treated as well in this
chapter.
3.3 Part III: Design
This part is structured according to the following sections and clauses:
7. Design
7.1 Conceptual design

7.2 Structural analysis and dimensioning

7.3 Verification of structural safety (ULS) for predominantly static loading
7.4 Verification of structural safety for non-static loading
7.5 Verification of structural safety (ULS) for extreme thermal conditions
7.6 Verification of serviceability of reinforced and prestressed structures
7.7 Verification of safety and serviceability of fibre reinforced structures
7.8 Verification of limit states associated to durability
7.9 Verification of robustness
7.10 Verification of sustainability
7.11 Verification assisted by numerical simulations
7.12 Verification assisted by testing
7.13 Detailing
This part contains both classical and non-classical parts. Starting with a section on
conceptual design was considered to be essential for emphasizing the need of making good
decisions before analysis and dimensioning. In all respects the choice of the most
appropriate alternative is largely decisive for the quality and behaviour of the structure and
its functionality, durability, economy and appreciation by the public during lifetime.

Fig. 3. Appreciation of the public for a structure as an element of sustainability

In the sections 7.3 the classical design tasks like design for shear, torsion, punching are
found. Especially the chapter on shear shows the idea of a multi-level approach. 4 levels are
distinguished varying from very simple to advanced. Chapter 7.4 treats design for nonstatic loads like fatigue, impact/explosion and seismic loading. It was believed to be
appropriate to treat an important design aspect like design for seismic loading as a part of
the general design code and not as an isolated part. The part on verification of limit states
associated with durability (section 7.8) is a new contribution. It finds its roots in fib
Bulletin 34: 2006 Model Code for Service Life Design and treats carbonation-induced
corrosion, chloride-induced corrosion, freeze-thaw attack and chemical attack. As
verification methods, the probabilistic approach, the partial safety method, the deemed-tosatisfy approach and the avoidance-of deterioration design are offered as alternatives.
Especially the probabilistic method asks for further elaboration, with calibrations using site
data, in order to come to a powerful tool in future. In 7.10 the basics of verification of
sustainability are given. Up to now this part can only be descriptive, since it touches a new
development, which will get due attention in the years to come. The section 7.11 gives, for
the first time, guidance to carry out nonlinear finite element verifications, particular with
regard to the reliability aspect. The method is based on the format of global safety, which is

extensively treated here. Section 7.12 on Verification by testing gives the basic strategy
to set up experimental series and to come to conclusions using adequate statistical methods.
During discussion in SAG 5 it turned out that combining verification by testing and by
numerical analysis is another option to be further explored.
3.4 Part IV: Construction
This part is structured according to the following sections and clauses:
8. Construction
8.1 General
8.2 Reinforcing steel works
8.3 Prestressing works
8.4 Falsework and formwork
These clauses are especially involved in the code in order to stress the significance of
quality of execution.
3.5 Part V: Conservation
This part is structured according to the following sections and clauses:
9 Conservation
9.1 Conservation objectives
9.2 Conservation strategies and tactics
9.3 Conservation management
9.4 Condition survey
9.5 Condition assessment
9.6 Condition evaluation and decision-making
9.7 Interventions
9.8 Recording
This chapter provides a general basis for the conservation of concrete structures and their
components, during their planned and/or extended service life, so as to ensure that the
performance level of the structure remains above that for structural safety and
serviceability. Two different conservation objectives are distinguished:
- to make sure that the intended service life will be reached.
- to upgrade the structure in order to reach revised performance requirements.
The through-life conservation process for a structure involves the following types and
sequence of activities:
- condition survey: gathering information on the current condition (Fig. 3).
- condition assessment: make a prognosis of future performance, including identification of
deterioration mechanisms and prediction of damage
- condition evaluation and decision making with regard to potential conservation options
and appropriate intervention options.
- execution and prevention of remedial works
- undertaking through-life condition survey and monitoring including recording of
information required for life cycle management.
The general flow of the conservation process procedures for new structures is shown in Fig.
4.

Fig. 3. Condition survey of an existing structure

Specification of conservation strategy

Determination of tactic and regime for condition control

Condition survey
(after construction or re -design )
Condition assessment
(after construction or re -design )

Review conservation strategy and tactic

Finalise inspection regime
Recording

Start/continue through life condition monitoring

Condition survey
Condition assessment
i=1n
Condition evaluation
and decision -making

Execution of chosen intervention

Fig. 4. Conservation management: through-life conservation process and recording of

information.

3.6 Part VI : Dismantlement

This chapter is added for the sake of completeness as a closure of the life cycle approach.
This has to be further elaborated.

4. CONCLUSIONS
1. The fib Model Code for Concrete Structures is a document that anticipates on future
developments. It is supposed to be guiding for future developments and to be a basis for
further modernization of design codes.
2. The most important characteristic of the Model Code 2010 is the introduction of Time
as an important design parameter. Time stands for aging of structures and the way in
which to apply appropriate measures to meet requirements with regard to structural safety,
functionality and sustainability.
3. MC 2010 offers various types of methods to carry out verifications. Verifications can be
accomplished on the basis of a probabilistic approach, partial safety factors, on a global
safety format, on the deemed-to-satisfy approach and on design by avoidance. The most
appropriate model depends on the case considered and the state of development of
knowledge in the area considered.
4. Extensive information is given with regard to the behaviour of structural concrete and
reinforcing steel. This is intended to serve both the analysis of structural behaviour by
nonlinear finite element analysis and the verification of service life.
5. MC 2010 is a code that applies to new concrete structures and to existing structures.
Moreover it gives a basis for defined performance design and for the appropriate use of new
materials like non-metallic reinforcement, fibre reinforced concrete and high strength
concrete.