Comparing reinforcement detailing provisions in EC 2 & BS 8110 - 2: Curtailment of beam reinforcement

John Cairns

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


    EC 2 provides a rational set of rules for curtailment of reinforcing bars that are in some respects simpler than those of BS 8110, even though the equations presented might at first sight appear more complex. The detailed EC 2 rules can readily be approximated to a very simple and conservative one for beams, in which the bars to be curtailed are taken a distance of 1.13 times the effective depth beyond the point at which they are calculated to no longer be required according to plane section theory. The multiple criteria of BS 8110 are more complex to use, and some aspects appear not to be well founded. Treatment of curtailment of compression bars is generally inconsistent with that of tension bars. The one concern identified in this review is the possible absence of margins to allow for approximations in analysis and tolerances or misplacement in construction in EC 2. This note has reviewed differences in the detailing rules contained in BS 8110 and in EC 2, but has not attempted to cover the many practical issues which are also to be considered in good detailing practice.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)40-42
    Number of pages3
    JournalThe Structural Engineer
    Issue number23-24
    Publication statusPublished - 2 Dec 2008


    Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing reinforcement detailing provisions in EC 2 & BS 8110 - 2: Curtailment of beam reinforcement'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this