3198 37th IABSE Symposium Madrid 2014

Lessons from
Lessons from development development
of design standards inofSouth
design standards in South Africa
Africa

Jan A WIUM Johan RETIEF Celeste VILJOEN

Senior Lecturer
Professor Professor
Department of Civil
Department of Civil Department of Civil
Engineering
Engineering Engineering
Stellenbosch University
Stellenbosch University Stellenbosch University
South Africa
South Africa South Africa
[email protected]
[email protected] [email protected]
Celeste Viljoen, born 1979,
Jan Wium, born 1957, Johan Retief , born 1940,
received her civil engineering
received his civil engineering received his civil engineering
degree from Stellenbosch
degree from the Univ. of degree from the Univ. of
University in 2001.
Pretoria in 1979 Pretoria in 1962.

Summary
Structural design standards form the basis for the provision of sustainable infrastructure. Traditionally
some South African concrete design standards have been based on British Standards. However, South
African reference standards seized to exist with the withdrawal of British Standards BS 8110 (concrete
design for buildings) and BS 8007 (concrete water retaining structures).
A revision of South African building design standards commenced with the publication of a loading
code for buildings, based on the Eurocode, but adapted for South African conditions and preferences. A
revised concrete code is an adopted version of the Eurocode, with modifications only in the National
Annex, whilst the standard for concrete water retaining structures is an adapted version of the Eurocode,
augmented with extracts from BS8007. This paper provides background to the different approaches, and
describes salient aspects of the revision of these standards.
Keywords: Design standards, loading code, concrete, water retaining structures, code development

1. Introduction
Structural design standards form the basis for the provision of sustainable infrastructure. Traditionally
South African concrete design standards have been based on British Standards. However, South African
reference standards seized to exist with the withdrawal of British Standards BS 8110 (concrete design
for buildings)[1] and BS 8007 (concrete water retaining structures) [2] to be replaced by the Eurocodes.
South Africa is not a member country of the EU, and therefore not bound by the need to adopt
Eurocodes for structural design standards. On the other hand, the country does not have the resources,
nor the expertise available to develop its own national standards. It would only be logical to base
revisions of local standards on other reference standards.
A revision of South African building design standards commenced with the publication of a loading
code for buildings [3], based on the Eurocode, but adapted for South African conditions and preferences.
The paper gives an overview of the process.
Whereas the loading code is an adapted version of the Eurocode, the concrete code is an adopted
version, with modifications only in the National Annex. This paper reports on the modifications
required for the South African Annex, taking into consideration that the full suite of Eurocodes has not
been adopted in South Africa.
Having recognized that relevant information on the design of water retaining structures may have been
lost in the UK with the replacement of BS8007 by EN-1992-3 [4], the South African approach is once
again an adapted version of the Eurocode, by augmenting the contents with extracts from BS8007. The
process for the development of the code involved industry participants, and it was shown that by having
a specific target for a practical document, the usual lengthy process of code development can be

IABSE Madrid Symposium Report, Vol. 102

3199 37th IABSE Symposium Madrid 2014

accelerated when needed. This paper provides information on the process for the revision of this
standard, emphasizing modifications required to suit the requirements of the local industry.

2. The South African Loading Code

The South African Loading Code SANS 10160:2011 Basis of structural design and actions for
buildings and industrial structures [3] pioneered the application of Eurocode as South African standard
for structural design. The process of converting Eurocode to South African structural design practice
raised many issues which included not only the obvious differences in conditions and practice, but
particularly the institutional environments for the two respective processes.
Eurocode is the result of a development process which has taken several cycles and decades, resourced
through political and commercial commitment; resulting in a comprehensive suite of standards covering
the full scope of the design of buildings and civil engineering works. In contrast, the South African
sparse set of standards are directed mainly towards building structures, developed by special interest
groups, often with minimal coordination; with the SA Loading Code providing the most important
common basis for the design of structures. However, an independent standard is used for bridge loading
and concrete bridges. The best way of utilizing the advances made by Eurocode to address local needs
therefore required careful planning and execution.

2.1 Guidance for the process of standards development for structural design
A conceptual framework of guidelines for standards development in terms of attributes such as authority
of standardization, technology base, strategic and operational objectives and stakeholders was
developed against which the reference to Eurocode was made in the development of the SA Loading
Code [5]. Such guidelines are particularly important to take account of the local situation where the
standards for structural design are used by the profession as principal stakeholder; to define acceptable
practice; to enable engineers to discharge their professional duties effectively and efficiently; with an
indirect regulatory function through recognition by authorities; development done voluntarily by experts.

2.2 Reference of SA Loading Code to Eurocode

Eurocode served as a coherent source of information for updating and upgrading the previous version of
the SA Loading Code [6]. From this source, previously existing procedures for imposed loads, wind
loads seismic design and crane induced loads could be substantially upgraded. New provisions for
actions induced by machinery, thermal actions and actions during execution could be added. Two
important additions were a separate self-contained standard on the basis of structural design as derived
from EN 1990 and a standard on the basis of geotechnical design and actions from EN 1997.
However, it was not possible to match the corresponding Eurocode Standards and Parts from EN 1990,
EN 1991, EN 1997 and EN 1998 to the scope of the SA Loading Code, even though the scope was
extensively extended from that of the 1989 version. The only reasonable option was to develop a local
set of eight standards referenced to the corresponding Eurocode Standards and Parts. In each case the
scope of application was reduced to standard design practice for buildings and similar industrial
structures.
The end result was a set of “simplified standards” along the lines of approach presently under discussion
in CEN TC250. Due to the wide tolerances allowed by Eurocode in the form of Nationally Determined
Parameter options, SANS 10160:2011[3] can essentially be considered to be compliant with Eurocode,
whilst maintaining continuity with previous practice. As a result it fully replaces the previous SA
Loading Code in its use together with materials based design standards consisting of a mixture of being
adopted from the UK, Canada, Australia, or developed locally. At the same time it opens up the
possibilities for adoption or adaptation of the respective Eurocode standards.

3. The South African Concrete Code

3.1 General
The SA Standard for the Structural use of Concrete SANS 10100-1 [7] was published in 1992 as the
first limit states concrete standard for the country. It was updated in 2000. The standard was based on
BS 8110 [8]. In 2007 a working group was formed to commence with the revision of the standard. The

IABSE Madrid Symposium Report, Vol. 102

3200 37th IABSE Symposium Madrid 2014

following paragraphs provide an overview of the revision process and the more salient aspects of the
revision.

3.2 Development process

Following the process through which the Eurocode was used as basis for the formulation of the SA
Loading code, it was decided to use the Eurocode [9] as basis for the revision of SANS 10100-1. The
lack of local expertise, resources and funds, motivated a decision to adopt the Eurocode and to use the
British National Annex as basis for the development of the local national parameters. The decision was
furthermore motivated by the historic connection of the local concrete standard with the British
Standard.
The process of adoption consisted of the allocation of sections of the code to champions, each
responsible for a section of the document, for which national parameters had to be defined. The new
document SANS 51992-1-1 [10] is due to be published in 2014. There will be a five year overlap period
allowed with the existing code.

3.3 Specific issues

3.3.1 Background
The scope of SANS 51992-1-1, as adopted from EN 1992-1-1, consequently have a much wider scope
than that of the present South African Concrete Code SANS 10100-1. For example, provision is made
for a much higher range of concrete strengths, lightweight aggregated concrete, even aspects of
prestressed concrete may be considered not to represent common practice. In many cases these topics
represent specialist fields of structural concrete, rather than an advancement of general or common
practice. Since the competence of both designers and constructors form a vital part of the reliability
basis of structural performance through the associated quality management programs, the distinction
between general practice and specialist competence is not clear from a comprehensive design standard.
A clear warning is therefore given not to take the inclusion of specialist fields of the structural use of
concrete in the SA Concrete Code as a license for use in general practice.

3.3.2 Reference standards in Eurocode

The Eurocode has a multitude of reference standards (either EN or ISO standards), not all of which have
been adopted in South Africa. To address this situation, reference is made in SANS 51992-1-1 to the
local accompanying standard for execution of concrete works, SANS 10100-2 [11] (currently being
revised). In this standard directives are provided for equivalent local specifications to be used.

3.3.3 Reliability performance of structural concrete resistance

A survey of the reliability basis of structural concrete design as implemented in EN 1992-1-1 was
performed in order to serve as basis for the selection of Nationally Determined Parameters for South
Africa. The main issues were identified as the general level of reliability achieved and shear link design
procedures [12]. In spite of differences in target levels of reliability taken as basis for Eurocode and
South Africa [13]; allowing for reduced partial materials factors [14]; no such reduction is employed
due to concerns about the local levels of quality performance as compared to European practice. This
issue is of particular concern with regard to specialist topics such as design for high strength or light
weight concrete, which goes beyond the scope of present standardized practice in South Africa. Shear
link design is discussed separately below.

3.3.4 High concrete strengths

Concrete with high resistances is being produced in South Africa only to a very limited extent. In
addition, there is insufficient information available on local material characteristics such as creep,
shrinkage and durability to justify the general use of concrete classes higher than C50/60 MPa. If
concrete classes higher than C50/60 are specified, then designers must be able to demonstrate that
specific quality control procedures will be applied during construction, and that relevant material
characteristics such as creep, shrinkage and modulus of elasticity values have been considered for the
specified concrete class.

IABSE Madrid Symposium Report, Vol. 102

3201 37th IABSE Symposium Madrid 2014

3.3.5 Concrete fire design

The Eurocode for concrete fire design was not adopted, and the South African National Annex now
include directives for concrete fire design, adopted from SANS 10100-1 (2000).

3.3.6 Deflection of flat slabs

There is a large difference between the span/depth ratios for deflection verification between SANS
10100-1 and EN 1992-1-1 for low reinforcement percentages. A recommendation is therefore made in
the National Annex to use the SANS 10100-1 (2000) values when percentage of tension reinforcement
in flat slabs is less than 0.5%.

3.3.7 South African mild steel

The use of mild steel (yield stress of 250 MPa) is commonly used as shear reinforcement in elements.
Although not defined in EN 1992-1-1, the National Annex of SANS 51992-1-1 will allow the use of this
steel within certain parameters.

3.4 Shear link design

It is generally known that the Variable Strut Inclination Method (VSIM) used in EN 1992-1-1 gives
relatively high shear resistance for a given amount of shear links [15]. This is confirmed by a
comparison between VSIM and the results of present South African design procedures shown in Figure
1(a), together with fib Model Code 2010 Levels of Approximation (LoA) I & III [16]. Using the
Modified Compression Field Theory (MCFT) R2k procedure as LoA IV best estimate for unbiased
mean shear resistance, it is demonstrated that VSIM appears to be unconservative for high values of
shear reinforcement (Figure 1(b)). This is confirmed by a comparison of VSIM mean shear prediction,
where design bias of material characteristic strength and partial factors are discounted, to a dataset of
222 experimental measurements, as shown in Figure 2 [17].

(a) Design Resistance (b) Mean Resistance

Fig. 1. Shear resistance as function of the amount of shear link reinforcement.

Fig. 2. Ratio of measured to VSIM predicted Fig. 3. VSIM shear resistance reliability β
shear resistance MFVSIM

IABSE Madrid Symposium Report, Vol. 102

3202 37th IABSE Symposium Madrid 2014

The reliability performance of VSIM shear design is subsequently determined, as based on an MCFT-
R2k reliability model of shear resistance, as shown in Figure 3 [17]. It is concluded that, depending on
the target reliability for resistance set as a function of the reliability class of the structure (RC-2 & 3),
the upper limit for shear link reinforcement should be set between 2.3MPa and 2.7MPa for South
African conditions.

4. The South African Code for concrete water retaining structures

4.1 Resources and process
The development of SANS 10100-3 [18] (design of concrete water retaining structures) is financially
supported by the South African Water Research Commission (WRC). This significantly reduces the
expected time to completion of the draft, for several reasons: The funding allowed a country-wide
recruitment of working group members through seminar presentations resulting in a well-represented
and fairly large working group; Dedicated project management ensures progress, although work by
experts is (still) done on a voluntary basis; Compilation of contributions from different WG champions
is done by WRC project members; A previous project [19], also supported by the WRC, compiled
relevant background material and an evaluation of the available reference standards and material models,
which expedited the initial progress of the working group in establishing the scope of work [20] [21] [22]
[23].
Finally, the South African Bureau of Standards (SABS) facilitates the WG meetings by providing
suitable meeting rooms and logistic support. SABS Technical Committee 98 Subcommittee 002 Design
of concrete structures will evaluate the final WG Draft Standard. Once the WG Draft is accepted as
Committee Draft (CD) through voting by TC98 SC2, SABS will drive the formatting, editing and type-
setting, public comment process as Draft South African Standard (DSS) and subsequent publication of
the standard as South African National Standard (SANS).

4.2 Reference standards

In the case of concrete water retaining structures, two suitable international standards are available,
namely
a) BS8007:1987 Code of practice for design of concrete structures for retaining aqueous liquids [2]
is currently used by most South African designers as their reference of choice. In addition to the
necessary design provisions, it includes useful guidelines on aspects such as joints, concrete mix
design and testing of structures. BS8007 needs to be used in conjunction with BS8110
Structural use of concrete. SANS10100-1 Structural use of concrete: Design [7] is for all
practical purposes an adoption of BS8110 [1] and as such the use of BS8007 is consistent with
current South African provisions for the design of concrete structures. However, following the
adoption of the Eurocodes, the British Standards Institute has officially withdrawn BS8007. As
such, BS8007 will not be updated with evolvement of best practice and will eventually become
outdated.
b) EN1992-3 Liquid retaining and containment structures[4] captures design provisions not only
for concrete liquid retaining structures under a wide range of operating temperatures, but also for
silos containing granular and other materials. EN1992-3 is to be used in conjunction with
EN1992-1-1 Design of concrete structures [9]. In the latest developments related to the revision
of SANS10100-1, it was decided to adopt EN1992-1-1 as the new South African Standard for
the design of concrete structures, here referred to as SANS51992-1-1 [10]. This decision makes
it possible to also adopt or adapt EN1992-3, which can then be used in conjunction with the new
SANS51992-1-1.

4.3 Format
Careful consideration led the Working Group to conclude that the format of the new standard should be
to adapt (and not adopt) EN1992-3, for the following main reasons:
a) EN1992-3 embodies the latest body of knowledge, as part of an extensive suite of harmonised
standards, which will be revised regularly. Future improvements may thus be easily incorporated
in revisions of SANS10100-3.

IABSE Madrid Symposium Report, Vol. 102

3203 37th IABSE Symposium Madrid 2014

b) The scope of EN1992-3 is very wide. Sufficient expertise is firstly not available within local
practice to warrant adoption as is and is also not available within the working group to allow
revision of the whole content of EN1993-3.
c) BS8007 contains some useful guidelines which need to be retained. This is not possible if
EN1992-3 is adopted as is.
d) Several aspects require modification to account for local conditions.
The format of SANS10100-3 will thus closely follow that of EN1992-3, but additional provisions,
clauses, sections and informative annexes will be created as necessary. In this way useful information
and clauses from BS8007 will be incorporated in the new SANS10100-3, in addition to provisions to
account for local conditions.

4.4 Aspects that required consideration of local conditions

Loads on tanks containing liquids are outside the scope of the South African Loading Code SANS
10160:2011 which is primarily directed towards buildings and similar industrial structures. In Part 1
nominal provision is made for loads from fluids (levels controlled or uncontrolled) and in Part 5 for
hydrostatic loads in the geotechnical context. No explicit provision is however made for determining
characteristic load values. Furthermore, the indicated partial factors for hydrostatic loads are not
consistent with EN 1991-4. Consideration of EN 1991-4 therefore provided the opportunity to ensure
consistency and filling in of the gaps between SANS 10100-3 and SANS 10160. As an example,
floatation is regarded as an ultimate limit state (ULS) accidental load case. Here the general
SANS10160-1 value of γ = 1.2 was reduced to γ = 1.1, in line with the value specified in EN1991-4.
The crack width limits of EN1992-3 are stringent compared to that of BS8007, which will have
significant economic implications [24], currently deemed unacceptable. For this reason the limits of
BS8007 are retained in the new SANS10100-3. Cost optimisation studies may be useful to determine
suitable limits [25], while the suitability of the target reliability (βt = 1.5) for the serviceability limit
state (SLS) should be assessed by back calculating the achieved reliability for existing acceptable
practice. This is particularly important because the design of concrete water retaining structures is
typically governed by the crack considerations, unlike typical structural design, where ULS situations
are assumed to dominate the design and cracking is treated as a SLS reversible situation.
The crack width prediction model of EN1992-1-1 was compared to that of BS8007 in terms of its
complexity of use; underlying assumptions; and a comparison of predicted values over a range of design
situations. Predictions seem to be conservative, significantly so for tension dominated sections [24];
[26]. The prediction model of BS8007 is retained in SANS10100-3, subject to further investigation.
Design for restrained cracking is an important consideration. An informative annex is provided to give
guidance on concrete mix design for controlling the heat of hydration. Currently, estimates of the (T1)
temperature fall between the hydration peak and ambient temperature at the time of construction is
based on BS8007 values. This may need adaptation for the warmer South African climate. In addition,
maps of local ambient temperatures and seasonal variation (T2) are needed.
Drying shrinkage is strongly influenced by relative humidity. It is proposed to include related
guidelines and a humidity map for South Africa in an informative annex to the Standard.
The experience of the working group, many of who are active practitioners, was that problems with
water retaining structures often arise due to poor construction practice in South Africa. Useful
construction guidelines were added as an informative Annex to the new SANS10100-3 in an attempt to
address some of these concerns.

5. Conclusions
South African structural design standards are directed mainly towards building structures, developed by
special interest groups, often with minimal coordination. An independent bridge loading code and
concrete bridge code is also used. Eurocode, on the other hand, is the result of a development process
which has taken several cycles and decades, resourced through political and commercial commitment,
resulting in a comprehensive suite of standards covering the full scope of the design of buildings and
civil engineering works.

IABSE Madrid Symposium Report, Vol. 102

3204 37th IABSE Symposium Madrid 2014

Three South African structural standards have been revised, by making careful use of the advances
made by Eurocode. For each of the revised standards, a unique process has been followed, being a result
of the needs, expertise, and prevailing local conditions.
The revisions vary from adapting of the Eurocode, for the Loading Code and for Concrete Water
Retaining Structures, to adopting of the Eurocode for concrete buildings, with a South African National
Annex. The process for the revision of each standard demonstrates how an international reference
standard can be used to establish local standards by allowing for local conditions and requirements.
Some observations can be made from the South African experience regarding both the utilization of
Eurocode beyond Europe and the possible future evolvement of Eurocode within Europe. Such
observations are related to the main features of Eurocode, being comprehensive in terms of its scope of
application; representing an advanced level of standardized design practice; unified throughout the
range of structural materials and classes; devised to be harmonized between member countries whilst
allowing for local jurisdiction on safety and performance levels.
No clear advantage can be discerned between the options of either adoption or adaptation of selected
Eurocode Parts to provide for local application and conditions. A significant technical effort is required
for both options; technical advances are balanced by the need to accommodate the range of conditions
amongst member countries; the possibility of providing for specific local conditions from the wide
scope of Eurocode conditions is neutralized somewhat by the tight arrangement of Eurocode Parts
needed to cover the scope without any duplication.
The South African experience can be interpreted as an exercise in simplification of Eurocode for a
limited scope of application. It appears however that a substantial technical effort would be required to
do so across the Eurocode member countries; at the same time resulting in substantial loss in the degree
of allowance for local setting of performance levels or accommodating other national preferences.
Conversely an exercise of developing a simplified version of Eurocode could contribute to reducing the
diversity of the Nationally Determined Parameters posted in the National Annexes by the respective
member countries.

6. References
[1] BS 8110:1997, British Standard: Structural use of concrete. Part 1. Code of practice for design
and construction. British Standards Institute, London, 1997.
[2] BS 8007:1987, British Standard: Code of practice for design of concrete structures for retaining
aqueous liquids, British Standards Institute, London, 1987.
[3] SANS 10160 Basis of structural design and actions for buildings and industrial structures.
South African Standard, South African Bureau of Standards, Pretoria, 2011.
[4] EN 1992-3:2006, Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures Part 3 Liquid retaining and
containment structures, 2006. European Committee for Standardization (CEN), Brussels.
[5] RETIEF JV, WIUM JA (2012). Principles and application of Structural Design Code
development in South Africa. Structural Engineering International 2012; 22(2) : 182-189.
[6] SABS 0160:1989 (Rev 1993). Code of practice for the general procedures and loadings to be
adopted in the design of buildings. South African Bureau of Standards, Pretoria, 1990.
[7] SANS 10100-1. Code of practice for the structural use of concrete Part 1: Design. South
African Bureau of Standards, Pretoria, 2001.
[8] BS 8110:1985, British Standard: Structural use of concrete. Part 1. Code of practice for design
and construction. British Standards Institute, London, 1985
[9] EN 1992-1-1:2004, Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures, General rules and rules for
building, 2004. European Committee for Standardization (CEN), Brussels.[10] SANS
51992-1-1. Design of concrete structure. Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings. Draft.
South African Bureau of Standards, Pretoria, 2013.
[11] SANS 10100-2, The Structural Use of Concrete Part 2: Materials and Execution of Work. South
African Bureau of Standards, Pretoria, 2013.

IABSE Madrid Symposium Report, Vol. 102

3205 37th IABSE Symposium Madrid 2014

[12] MENSAH KK, RETIEF JV AND BARNARDO-VILJOEN C. Review of the reliability basis of
structural design and its application to structural concrete in South Africa. ACCTA 2013,
Johannesburg, South Africa.
[13] RETIEF JV, DUNAISKI PE.(2009). Review of provisions for General Actions in SANS 10160.
In Background to SANS 10160 - Basis of Structural Design and Actions for Buildings and
Industrial Structures, pp 105-128. Sun Media, South Africa, ISBN 978-1-920338-10-7
[14] HOLICKY M, RETIEF JV AND WIUM JA (2010). Partial factors for selected reinforced
concrete members: Background to a revision of SANS 10100-1. Journal of the South African
Institution of Civil Engineering 2010; 52(1) : 36-44.
[15] CLADERA, A., & MARI, A.R. (2007). Shear strength in the new Eurocode 2: A step forward?.
Structural concrete, 8 (2), 57-66.
[16] MENSAH KK, RETIEF JV AND BARNARDO-VILJOEN C (2013) A comparison of the
Variable Strut Inclination and alternative stirrup design methods. SEMC 2013, Cape Town,
South Africa. (ISBN 978-1-138-00061-2)
[17] MENSAH KK, BARNARDO-VILJOEN C AND RETIEF JV (2013). Reliability based
application of Eurocode 2’s variable strut inclination method for shear. ICOSSAR 2013. June
16 – 20, 2013, New York. CRC Press
[18] SANS 10100 Part 3 — Design of concrete water retaining structures. DRAFT.South African
Bureau of Standards, Pretoria, 2013.
[19] WRC K5-1764 (2010). Water Research Commission – The development and calibration of
South Africa’s National Standards for Water Retaining Structures. Institute of Structural
Engineereing (ISE), University of Stellenbosch.
[20] WRC K5-2154-1 (2012). Water Research Commission – The implementation of a South
African National Standard for the design of Water Retaining Structures: Guidelines for the
Working Group. Institute of Structural Engineereing (ISE), University of Stellenbosch.
[21] WRC K5-2154-1 (2012). Water Research Commission – The implementation of a South
African National Standard for the design of Water Retaining Structures: Background to
SANS10100-3. Institute of Structural Engineereing (ISE), University of Stellenbosch.
[22] WRC K5-2154-1 (2012). Water Research Commission – The implementation of a South
African National Standard for the design of Water Retaining Structures: Pre-working group
workshop. Institute of Structural Engineereing (ISE), University of Stellenbosch.
[23] WRC K5-2154-1 (2012). Water Research Commission – The implementation of a South
African National Standard for the design of Water Retaining Structures: Definition of scope for
SANS10100-3 Working Group. Institute of Structural Engineereing (ISE), University of
Stellenbosch.
[24] MCLEOD CH. Investigation into cracking in reinforced concrete water retaining structures.
Masters thesis, University of Stellenbosch, 2013
[25] KRUGER HG. EC2 crack width calculation method: a South African perspective. Presentation
at the Advanced seminar on the design of liquid retaining structures, Midrand, South Africa,
2013.
[26] KRETCHMAR MM. Reliability based optimisation of the crack width limit for water retaining
structures. Final year project, University of Stellenbosch, 2013

IABSE Madrid Symposium Report, Vol. 102