CHAPTER 11

Lightweight aggregate
concrete structures

This chapter deals with the design of lightweight aggregate concrete structures as covered in
section 11 of EN 1992-2 in the following clauses:
. General Clause 11.1
. Basis of design Clause 11.2
. Materials Clause 11.3
. Durability and cover to reinforcement Clause 11.4
. Structural analysis Clause 11.5
. Ultimate limit states Clause 11.6
. Serviceability limit states Clause 11.7
. Detailing of reinforcement – general Clause 11.8
. Detailing of members and particular rules Clause 11.9
No comments are made on the ‘Additional rules for precast concrete elements and struc-
tures’ in clause 11.10 as it makes no modifications to the rules of 2-1-1/clause 10.

11.1. General
The design recommendations discussed in the previous chapters and detailed in the
corresponding sections of EC2-2 have been developed for concrete made from normal-
weight aggregates. As naturally occurring aggregates become less abundant and increasingly
expensive, manufactured aggregates are increasingly used and most manufactured
aggregates are lightweight. The use of lightweight aggregate concretes (LWAC) also has
obvious advantages where it is desirable to reduce dead loads, such as in long spans that
are dead load dominated.
Lightweight aggregate concrete has been used throughout the world although less so in the
UK, particularly in bridge construction. There is extensive test data verifying the properties
of lightweight aggregate concrete and the implications its use has on the design verifications
of concrete structures. Section 11 addresses these implications on the use of the main general
sections for normal-weight aggregate concrete. All the clauses given in sections 1 to 10 and 12
of EC2 are generally applicable to lightweight aggregate concrete unless they are substituted
by special clauses given in section 11. The headings in section 11 are numbered 11, followed
by the number of the corresponding main section that it modifies, e.g. section 3 of EC2-2 is
‘Materials’ so 11.3 is similarly called ‘Materials’ and makes specific material requirements for 2-1-1/clause
lightweight aggregate concrete. 11.1.1(3)
2-1-1/clause 11.1.1(3) clarifies that section 11 does not apply to air-entrained concrete or 2-1-1/clause
lightweight concrete with an open structure. 2-1-1/clause 11.1.1(4) defines lightweight 11.1.1(4)
DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

aggregate concrete as concrete having a closed structure with an oven-dry density of no more
than 2200 kg/m3 , made with a proportion of artificial or natural lightweight aggregates with
a particle density of less than 2000 kg/m3 .

11.2. Basis of design

2-2/clause 2 is valid for lightweight aggregate concrete without modifications. This includes
the material factors for concrete.

11.3. Materials
11.3.1. Concrete
The strength classes of lightweight aggregate concrete are designated by adopting the
symbol LC in place of C for normal-weight aggregate concrete, thus a lightweight aggregate
concrete with characteristic cylinder strength of 40 MPa and cube strength of 44 MPa is
designated LC40/44. It should be noted that the ratio of cylinder strength to cube strength
is generally higher for LWAC than for normal-weight concrete. EC2 adopts an additional
subscript ðlÞ to designate mechanical properties for lightweight aggregate concrete. In
general, where strength values originating from 2-1-1/Table 3.1 have been used in
expressions elsewhere in the code, those values should be replaced by the corresponding
values for lightweight aggregate concrete given in 2-1-1/Table 11.3.1 (reproduced here as
Table 11.3-1 for convenience).
Lightweight aggregate is classified in EN 206-1 according to its density, as illustrated in
2-1-1/Table 11.1. Densities are given for both plain and reinforced concrete, the latter
2-1-1/clause assuming a reinforcement content of 100 kg/m3 . 2-1-1/clause 11.3.1(1) permits the quoted
11.3.1(1) reinforced concrete densities to be used for weight calculation. In heavily reinforced
bridges with low-density concrete, it may be more appropriate to calculate the reinforced
2-1-1/clause concrete weight more accurately according to 2-1-1/clause 11.3.1(2).
11.3.1(2) The tensile strength of concrete is affected by the moisture content, since drying reduces
2-1-1/clause tensile strength and low-density concretes undergo greater moisture loss. 2-1-1/clause
11.3.1(3) 11.3.1(3) introduces a coefficient,
1 , to take account of the reduction in tensile strength
with density:

1 ¼ 0:40 þ 0:60=2200 2-1-1/(11.1)
3
where  is the upper limit of the oven-dry density in kg/m from 2-1-1/Table 11.1. For a
given cylinder strength, the tensile strength for a lightweight concrete should be obtained by
multiplying the tensile strength given in 2-1-1/Table 3.1 by
1 , as indicated in Table 11.3-1.

11.3.2. Elastic deformation

The elastic modulus is strongly influenced by the relative oven-dry density of the aggregate
2-1-1/clause used. 2-1-1/clause 11.3.2(1) therefore introduces a coefficient,
E , to take account of the
11.3.2(1) reduced modulus of elasticity for lightweight aggregate concrete. For a given cylinder
strength, the values for Ecm given in 2-1-1/Table 3.1 should be multiplied by
E for light-
weight aggregate concrete where:

E ¼ ð=2200Þ2 2-1-1/(11.2)
Tests give considerable scatter for Ecm , so, where more accurate determination of concrete
stiffness is needed, 2-1-1/clause 11.3.2(1) requires tests to be carried out on the specific mix
proposed to determine the modulus of elasticity in accordance with ISO 6784.28
The coefficient of thermal expansion for lightweight aggregate concretes varies widely
depending on the type of aggregate, but is typically less than that of normal-weight concrete.
2-1-1/clause 2-1-1/clause 11.3.2(2) permits a value of 8
106 /K to be used in design where thermal
11.3.2(2) movements are ‘not of greatest importance’. This value should be of general applicability.
Exceptions might include bridges where movement ranges are predicted to be at the limit of

296
 CHAPTER 11. LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE CONCRETE STRUCTURES

Table 11.3-1. Stress and deformation characteristics for lightweight concrete according to 2-1-1/Table 11.3.1

Strength classes for lightweight aggregate concrete Formulae/notes

flck (MPa) 12 16 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 70 80
flck;cube (MPa) 13 18 22 28 33 38 44 50 55 60 66 77 88
flcm (MPa) 17 22 28 33 38 43 48 53 58 63 68 78 88 For flck  20 MPa
flcm ¼ flck þ 8 (MPa)
flctm (MPa)  flctm ¼ fctm

1 !
1 ¼ 0:40 þ 0:60/2200
flctk;0:05 (MPa)  flctk;0:05 ¼ fctk;0:05

1 ! 5% fractile
flctk;0:95 (MPa)  flctk;0:95 ¼ fctk;0:95

1 ! 95% fractile
Elcm (GPa)  Elcm ¼ Ecm

E !
E ¼ ð=2200Þ2


"lc1 (%) "lc1 ¼ k flcm =ðElci
E Þ  k ¼ 1:1 for sanded lightweight aggregate concrete !
 k ¼ 1:0 for all other lightweight aggregate concrete
"lcu1 (%)  "lcu1 ¼ "lc1 !
"lc2 (%)  2.0 ! 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5
"lcu2 (%)  3.5
1 ! 3.1
1 2.9
1 2.7
1 2.6
1 j"lcu2 j  j"lc2 j
n  2.0 ! 1.75 1.6 1.45 1.4
"lc3 (%)  1.75 ! 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.2
"lcu3 (%)  3.5
1 ! 3.1
1 2.9
1 2.7
1 2.6
1 j"lcu3 j  j"lc3 j

an expansion joint’s capacity or for integral bridges where temperature movement is restrained.
In such cases, a range of coefficients of thermal expansion could be considered in the design.
2-1-1/clause 11.3.2(2) also allows the differences between the coefficients of thermal expansion
of reinforcing steel and lightweight aggregate concrete to be ignored in design.
The reduced elastic deformation properties for lightweight aggregate concrete have the
following implications on bridge design:
. Stresses arising from restrained thermal or shrinkage movements are generally less than
for normal-weight aggregate concrete.
. Elastic losses in prestressed concrete members can be significantly greater than for
normal-weight aggregate concrete members, although this loss is often a relatively
small fraction of the total loss.
. Deflections of members and hence also second-order effects will be greater than for
normal-weight aggregate concrete members. This can be significant for slender columns.

11.3.3. Creep and shrinkage

Test data on the creep characteristics of lightweight aggregate concrete shows considerable
scatter with some tests suggesting that LWAC exhibits more creep than normal-weight aggre-
gate concretes and others suggesting the opposite. 2-1-1/clause 11.3.3(1) recommends that the 2-1-1/clause
creep coefficient, , is taken as the value for normal-weight aggregate concrete multiplied by a 11.3.3(1)
factor of ð=2200Þ2 . Since the elastic modulus is also reduced by the same factor in 2-1-1/clause
11.3.2(1), the calculated creep strains produced for a given stress are, therefore, the same for
lightweight concrete and normal-weight concrete (as creep strain ¼ elastic strain
creep coef-
ficient). The creep strains so derived have to be multiplied by a further factor,
2 , but this is 1.0
for concrete grades of LC20/22 and above (i.e. all structural bridge concretes).
Shrinkage strains for lightweight aggregate concretes also vary greatly. 2-1-1/clause
11.3.3(2) allows the final drying shrinkage values for lightweight aggregate concrete to be 2-1-1/clause
obtained by multiplying the values for normal density concrete by a factor,
3 , which is 11.3.3(2)
1.2 for concrete grades of LC20/22 and above (i.e. all structural bridge concretes). 2-1-1/
clause 11.3.3(3) allows the autogenous shrinkage strain to be taken equal to that for 2-1-1/clause
normal density concrete, but it notes that this can be an over-estimate for concretes with 11.3.3(3)
water-saturated aggregates.

297
DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

11.3.4. Stress strain relations for non-linear structural analysis

2-1-1/clause 11.3.4(1) requires the appropriate strain limits for LWAC from 2-1-1/Table 3.1
2-1-1/clause to be used with 2-1-1/Fig. 3.2. LWAC values should also be used for flcm and Elcm .
11.3.4(1)
11.3.5. Design compressive and tensile strengths
The values of the design compressive and tensile strengths of lightweight aggregate concrete
are defined in 2-1-1/clauses 11.3.5(1) and 11.3.5(2) as:
flcd ¼ lcc flck =c 2-1-1/(11.3.15)
and
flctd ¼ lct flctk =c 2-1-1/(11.3.16)
respectively, where c is the partial safety for concrete and lcc and lct are coefficients to
account for the long-term effects on the compressive strength. lcc and lct are equivalent
to cc and ct , i.e. in 2-1-1/clause 3.1.6. The values of lcc and lct may be given in the
National Annex to EC2-1-1 – there is no equivalent National Annex provision in EC2-2.
Both are recommended to be taken as 0.85. It is not recommended in this guide to take
lcc as 1.0 for shear, as is appropriate for normal-weight concrete, until more test evidence
is available to support this for LWAC.

11.3.6. Stress strain relations for the design of sections

2-1-1/clause 11.3.6(1) requires the appropriate strain limits for LWAC to be used with 2-1-1/
2-1-1/clause Figs 3.3 and 3.4. This should also apply to the rectangular stress block in 2-1-1/Fig. 3.5, but
11.3.6(1) this has been omitted. LWAC values should also be used for flcd .

11.3.7. Confined concrete

An increased compressive strength is allowed for lightweight aggregate concrete elements
under triaxial stress, but a given confining pressure gives less strength increase for LWAC
than for normal density concrete. This, together with the reduction of tensile strength
for LWAC, leads to the need for modification to the partially loaded area rules, as given
in 2-1-1/clause 11.6.5.

11.4. Durability and cover to reinforcement

The same environmental exposure classes used for normal-weight aggregate concrete are
appropriate for use with lightweight aggregate concrete. However, 5 mm needs to be
added to the minimum cover obtained from 2-1-1/Table 4.2, which relates to the cover
necessary to provide adequate bond stress for anchorage and laps.

11.5. Structural analysis

The structural analysis of lightweight aggregate concrete structures is affected mainly by the
reduced elastic deformation properties discussed above. In addition, 2-1-1/clause 11.5.1
2-1-1/clause requires that the rotation capacities, pl;d , given in 2-1-1/Fig. 5.6N are multiplied by a
11.5.1 factor ð"lcu2 ="cu2 Þ. Since rotation capacity depends on the limiting strain for reinforcement
as well as that of the concrete (see section 5.6.3.1 of this guide), multiplying the rotation
capacity by this ratio is conservative as the limiting reinforcement strain is unchanged.

11.6. Ultimate limit states

This section makes direct modifications to most of the ULS resistance rules with the
exception of bending.

298
 CHAPTER 11. LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE CONCRETE STRUCTURES

Bending
The rules for bending are only indirectly modified for the use of lightweight aggregate
concrete; the limiting concrete strains and the stress–strain relationship for concrete is
adjusted by 2-1-1/clause 11.3.6. The stress block comparisons illustrated in Table 3.1-4 of
section 3.1.7 of this guide are not therefore applicable to lightweight aggregate concrete,
although the formulae presented there for average stress in the compression zone, fav , and
depth of centroid of compressive force, , can still be used for LWAC. For the parabolic-
rectangular and bi-linear stress blocks, the reduction in failure strain, "lcu2 , for LWAC
leads to a reduction in fav (and a relatively smaller reduction in ) compared to the values
for normal-weight concrete. These values are unaffected for the rectangular block, making
it even more relatively economic for bending calculation than for normal-weight concrete.
This was probably not intended and it is therefore safer to use one of the other two more
realistic stress blocks, although they will only produce a significant difference to the
rectangular block for heavily over-reinforced members.

Shear and torsion (2-1-1/clauses 11.6.1 to 11.6.3)

Significant research has been undertaken in assessing the shear behaviour of lightweight
aggregate concrete. The tests indicate that, where shear cracks develop in lightweight
aggregate concrete members, they often pass through the aggregate rather than around it,
resulting in significantly smoother shear surfaces. This results in less shear force being
transmitted by aggregate interlock and thus the shear strength of LWAC is reduced com-
pared to normal-weight concrete. The expressions defined in section 6.2 of EN 1992-2 are
therefore modified for use with lightweight aggregate reinforcement as discussed below.
In 2-1-1/clause 11.6.1, the design value of shear resistance of a member without shear
reinforcement is replaced by: 2-1-1/clause
1=3 11.6.1
VlRd;c ¼ ðClRd;c
1 kð100l flck Þ þ k1 cp Þbw d  ðvl;min þ k1 cp Þbw d 2-1-1/(11.6.2)
where:
ClRd;c is a nationally determined parameter. EN 1992 recommends taking a value of
0:15=c

1 is defined in 2-1-1/clause 11.3.1(3)
vl;min is a nationally determined parameter. EN 1992 recommends taking a value of
1=2
vl;min ¼ 0:030k3=2 flck
k1 is a nationally determined parameter with recommended value ¼ 0.15
All other parameters are as for normal-weight concrete. Note that the reduced shear strength
of lightweight aggregate concrete discussed above is reflected in lower recommended
values of ClRd;c and vl;min and the use of the reduction factor
1 . It should be noted that
2-1-1/Expression (11.6.2) does not include the parameter
1 with vl;min , whereas it is
present in 2-1-1/Expression (11.6.47) for punching shear. This omission was not intended.
For members with shear reinforcement, 2-1-1/clause 11.6.2(1) simply states that the
reduction factor for the crushing resistance of concrete struts for LWAC is 1 , a nationally 2-1-1/clause
determined parameter with recommended value 1 ¼ 0:5
1 ð1  flck =250Þ. (Note that the 11.6.2(1)
density-dependent reduction factor
1 is again used here.) This compares with
1 ¼ 0:6ð1  fck =250Þ from 2-1-1/clause 6.2.3(3) for normal-weight concrete. This LWAC
value of 1 is then used with expression (6.9) of EC2-1-1. No reduction is necessary for
the shear resistance in expression (6.8) of EC2-1-1, as it contains only a reinforcement
contribution. For members without shear reinforcement, 2-1-1/clause 11.6.1(2) explicitly
gives the shear crushing resistance for LWAC as 0:5
1 bw d 1 flcd compared to the normal- 2-1-1/clause
weight concrete value of 0:5bw d fcd from 2-1-1/clause 6.2.2. Since
1 appears both explicitly 11.6.1(2)
in the expression for shear strength itself and also within 1 , the strength is reduced by

12 , which was not intended.
2-1-1/clause 11.6.3.1(1) also applies the reduction factor 1 ¼ 0:5
1 ð1  flck =250Þ to
the crushing resistance of concrete struts in torsion calculations, by replacing with 1 in 2-1-1/clause
2-1-1/Expression (6.30). 11.6.3.1(1)

299
DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

Punching shear (2-1-1/clause 11.6.4)

Similar modifications to those for the flexural shear resistances are made to the punching
shear resistances. The punching shear design stress of a slab is from 2-1-1/clause 11.6.4.1:
2-1-1/clause
vlRd;c ¼ ClRd;c
1 kð100l flck Þ1=3 þ k2 cp  ð
1 vl;min þ k2 cp Þ 2-1-1/(11.6.47)
11.6.4.1
and k2 is recommended to be 0.08. The values of ClRd;c ,
1 , flck and vl;min are as given above
for flexural shear. All other parameters are as for normal-weight concrete. Unlike for flexural
shear, EC2 considers a proportion of the concrete resistance component in the punching
shear design of elements with punching shear reinforcement. Therefore the above reductions
in punching shear strength are also made in 2-1-1/clause 11.6.4.2(1) for the concrete terms in
2-1-1/clause the design resistance of slabs with shear reinforcement.
11.6.4.2(1) 2-1-1/clause 11.6.4.2(2) makes a reduction to the maximum punching shear stress in the
2-1-1/clause same way as for flexural shear, such that:
11.6.4.2(2) VEd
vEd ¼  vlRd;max ¼ 0:5 1 flcd 2-1-1/(11.6.53)
u0 d

Partially loaded areas (2-1-1/clause 11.6.5)

The mechanism for the development of enhanced bearing pressures in partially loaded areas
is discussed in section 6.7 of this guide. The maximum bearing pressure depends on both the
concrete’s tensile strength (to generate confinement to the loaded area) and the concrete’s
compressive resistance when confining pressure is present. Both of these are lower for a
given concrete grade for LWAC than for normal-weight concrete. 2-1-1/clause 11.6.5(1)
2-1-1/clause therefore modifies the expression in 2-1-1/clause 6.7 as follows:
11.6.5(1)  

FRdu ¼ Ac0 flcd ½Ac1 =Ac0 =4400  3:0 flcd Ac0 2-1-1/(11.6.63)
2200

Strut-and-tie models
No modifications are made in 2-1-1/clause 11 to the resistances of concrete struts in 2-1-1/
clause 6.5.2. However, for consistency with the LWAC shear modification in 2-1-1/clause
11.6.3.1(1), it is recommended here that the design strength given in 2-1-1/clause 6.5.2(2)
for struts with transverse tension be reduced from 0:6 0 fcd to 0:5
1 0 flcd , where
0 ¼ ð1  flck =250Þ. A similar inclusion of
1 might be considered appropriate for the
resistance of node types (b) and (c) in 2-1-1/clause 6.5.4 due to the presence of transverse
tension.

Worked example 11.1: Reinforced lightweight aggregate concrete deck slab

The bending resistance and shear resistance of the 250 mm-thick deck slab considered in
Worked examples 6.1-1 and 6.2-1 is found. Cover to the 20f bars at 150 mm centres is
40 mm. Concrete class is LC35/38 with lightweight aggregate of class 1.6.
From 2-1-1/Table 11.1, the upper-bound oven-dry density for class 1.6 lightweight
aggregate,  ¼ 1600 kg/m3 ; thus from 2-1-1/Expression (11.1):

1 ¼ 0:40 þ 0:60=2200 ¼ 0:40 þ 0:60
1600=2200 ¼ 0:836
First, the bending resistance is considered using the parabolic-rectangular stress–strain
block (which is less economic than the rectangular block):
From 2-1-1/Table 11.3.1, for LC35/38 concrete, flck ¼ 35 MPa.

From 2-1-1/Expression (11.3.15): flcd ¼ lcc flck =c and using lcc ¼ 0:85 and c ¼ 1:5 as
recommended gives flcd ¼ 0:85
35=1:5 ¼ 19:833 MPa.
From 2-1-1/Table 11.3.1, "lcu2 ¼ 3:5
1 ¼ 3:5
0:836 ¼ 2:927%, "lc2 ¼ 2:0% and n ¼ 2.
Using these values in equations (D3.1-4) and (D3.1-5), it can be shown that the average

300
 CHAPTER 11. LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE CONCRETE STRUCTURES

concrete stress is fav ¼ 15:316 MPa centred at a ratio of depth to neutral axis from the
compression fibre of  ¼ 0:403 (compared to fav ¼ 16:056 MPa and  ¼ 0:416 for equiva-
lent normal-weight aggregate concrete):
1000
d ¼ 250  40  10 ¼ 200 mm; b ¼ 1000 mm and As ¼

102
¼ 2094:4 mm2
150
Therefore, from equation (D6.1-4):
As 2094:4
¼ ¼ ¼ 0:0105
bd 1000
195
From equation (D6.1-3):
x fyk 500
¼ ¼
0:0105 ¼ 0:297
d fav s 15:316
1:15
Check against limit from equation (D6.1-8) to ensure reinforcement yields:
1 1 x
 ¼  ¼ 0:574 
fyk 500 d
þ1 þ1
s Es "lcu2 1:15
200
103
0:002927

therefore the steel yields.

Thus x ¼ 0:297
200 ¼ 59:5 mm and, from equation (D6.1-5), z ¼ 200  0:403

59:5 ¼ 176 mm. From equation (D6.1-1):
fyk 500
M¼ As z ¼
2094:4
176
106 ¼ 160:2 kNm
s 1:15

This is a 0.2% reduction in bending resistance compared to the resistance of

160.6 kNm/m, which is obtained for an equivalent normal-weight aggregate concrete.
Second, the shear resistance is considered:
As 2094:4
Again; l ¼ ¼ ¼ 0:0105 < 0:02 limit as required
bd 1000
200
Taking c = 1.5 and ClRd;c ¼ 0:15=c as recommended gives ClRd;c ¼ 0:15=1:5 ¼ 0:10.
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
From equation (D6.2-1): k ¼ 1 þ 200=200 ¼ 2:0 (the limit).
The shear resistance is given by 2-1-1/Expression (11.6.2):

VlRd;c ¼ ClRd;c
1 kð100l flck Þ1=3 bw d in the absence of axial load, thus

VlRd;c ¼ 0:10
0:836
2:0
ð100
0:0105
35Þ1=3
1000
200
103
¼ 111:2 kN=m

It is checked that this exceeds the minimum shear strength for lightweight aggregate
concrete considering:
1=2
vl;min ¼ 0:030k3=2 flck ¼ 0:030
2:03=2
351=2 ¼ 0:502 MPa

so the minimum value of resistance according to 2-1-1/Expression (11.6.2) is:

vl;min bw d ¼ 0:502
1000
200
103 ¼ 100 kN=m < 111:2 kN=m

(but see the comment in the main text regarding the absence of the parameter
1 ).
This shear resistance of 111.2 kN/m represents a 30% reduction compared to the
resistance of 159.9 kN/m from Worked example 6.2-1 for an equivalent normal-weight
aggregate concrete.

301
DESIGNERS’ GUIDE TO EN 1992-2

11.7. Serviceability limit states

2-1-1/clause 11.7(1) modifies the span-to-depth ratios in 2-1-1/clause 7.4.2(2) that are
2-1-1/clause deemed to satisfy deflection criteria. This is necessary because of the reduction in the
11.7(1) modulus of elasticity for LWAC. 2-1-1/clause 7.4.2(2) is, however, intended for use in build-
ing design.

11.8. Detailing of reinforcement – general

2-1-1/clause 11.8.1(1) effectively requires the minimum mandrel sizes in 2-1-1/Table 8.1N
2-1-1/clause to be increased by 50%. This is necessary because the reduced tensile strength of LWAC
11.8.1(1) leads to splitting of the concrete inside bends of bars at a lower bearing pressure than for
normal-weight aggregate concrete.
2-1-1/clause 11.8.2(1) requires the ultimate bond stress to be calculated using flctd in place
2-1-1/clause of fctd , as bond stress is strongly dependent on concrete tensile resistance. There appears to
11.8.2(1) be no need for this clause as 2-1-1/clause 11.1.1(1) states that, unless clause 11 provides
otherwise, all normal-weight concrete expressions apply to LWAC when the relevant
strength parameters are taken from 2-1-1/Table 11.3.1. A similar modification should
therefore apply to the anchorage and transmission lengths of pre-tensioned tendons in
2-1-1/clause 8.10.2, but this is not specifically identified in 2-1-1/clause 11.8.2(1).

11.9. Detailing of members and particular rules

2-2/clause 11.9(101) requires that reinforcement bars should not normally exceed 32 mm
2-2/clause diameter and bundles should not contain more than 2 bars (with a maximum equivalent
11.9(101) diameter of 45 mm). These restrictions reflect the lack of test data for the use of
larger diameter bars in lightweight aggregate concrete.

302