NA+A1 2014 To BS EN 1991-1-7 2006+A1 2014 (Inc Corr Aug 2014 Nov 2015)

NA+A1:2014 to BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014
Incorporating corrigenda August 2014 and November 2015
BSI Standards Publication

Licensed copy:Flint & Neill Limited, 04/12/2015, Uncontrolled Copy, © BSI
National Annex to Eurocode 1:

Actions on structures –
Part 1-7: Accidental actions

NA+A1:2014 to BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014 BRITISH STANDARD
Publishing and copyright information

The BSI copyright notice displayed in this document indicates when the
document was last issued.
© The British Standards Institution 2015.

Published by BSI Standards Limited 2015
ISBN 978 0 580 92295 4
ICS 91.010.30, 91.080.10, 93.040
The following BSI references relate to the work on this standard:

Committee reference B/525/1
Draft for comment 07/30128330 DC
Publication history
First published December 2008
Amendments/corrigenda issued since publication

Date Text affected
31 July 2014 National Annex revised due to CEN Amendment A1:2014

31 August 2014 Erroneous text in NA.2.34 removed
30 November Item iii) in Table NA.5 corrected
2015
BRITISH STANDARD NA+A1:2014 to BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014
Contents
Introduction 1
NA.1 Scope 1
NA.2 Nationally Determined Parameters 1
NA.3 Decision on the status of informative annexes 13
NA.4 References to non-contradictory complementary
information 14
List of tables
Table NA.1 – Equivalent static design forces due to vehicular impact
on members supporting bridges or CC3 buildings over or adjacent
to roads 3
Table NA.2 – Influence of class of road below bridge 4
Table NA.3 – Minimum traffic flows to be used to determine F2 5
Table NA.4 – Influence of speed limit under bridge 5
Table NA.5 – Influence of junctions 6
Table NA.6 – Influence of clearance 6
Table NA.7 – Number of columns for each support type 7
Table NA.8 – Deck stability 7

Table NA.9 – Equivalent static design forces Fdx due to impact on
superstructures. 9
Table NA.10 – Equivalent static design forces Fdy due to impact on
superstructures. 9
© The British Standards Institution 2014 • i

ii • © The British Standards Institution 2014 This page deliberately left blank
National Annex (informative) to

BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, Eurocode 1:
Actions on structures – Part 1-7: Accidental
actions
Introduction
This National Annex has been prepared by BSI Subcommittee B/525/1,
Actions (loadings) and basis of design and it is designed in the UK
to be used in conjunction with BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014.
The start and finish of text introduced or altered by national
amendment A1:2014 is indicated in the text by .
NOTE This National Annex refers to design values for accidental actions.
In the UK National Annexes to BS EN 1990:2002+A1:2005 Annex A1
and Annex A2, the safety factors for accidental actions are equal to 1.
Therefore the nominal value and the design value for accidental actions
are numerically the same. The nominal values and design values of an
action are defined in BS EN 1990:2002+A1:2005 1.5.2.2 and 1.5.3.21
respectively.
NA.1 Scope
This National Annex gives:
a) the UK decisions for the Nationally Determined
Parameters described in the following subclauses of
BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014:
— 2 (2) — 4.3.2 (3) — 4.6.1 (3)
— 3.1 (2) — 4.4 (1) — 4.6.2 (1)
— 3.2 (1) — 4.5 (1) — 4.6.2 (2)
— 3.3 (2) — 4.5.1.2 (1) — 4.6.2 (3)
— 3.4 (1) — 4.5.1.4 (1) — 4.6.2 (4)
— 3.4 (2) — 4.5.1.4 (2) — 4.6.3 (1)
— 4.1 (1) — 4.5.1.4 (3) — 4.6.3 (3)
— 4.3.1 (1) — 4.5.1.4 (4) — 4.6.3 (4)
— 4.3.1 (2) — 4.5.1.4 (5) — 4.6.3 (5)
— 4.3.1 (3) — 4.5.1.5 (1) — 5.3 (1)P
— 4.3.2 (1) — 4.5.2 (1) — A.4 (1)
— 4.3.2 (2) — 4.5.2 (4)
b) the UK decisions on the status of
BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014 informative annexes; and
c) references to non-contradictory complementary information.
NA.2 Nationally Determined Parameters

NA.2.1 Classification of accidental actions
[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 2 (2)]
All accidental actions are free actions unless otherwise stated in the
individual project.
© The British Standards Institution 2014 • 1

NA.2.2 Notional values for identified accidental actions

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 3.1 (2) Note 4]
Values for accidental actions should be as given in
BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014 and this National Annex.
NA.2.3 Level of acceptable risk

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 3.2 (1) Note 3]
The level of acceptable risk should be determined on a project specific
basis. Recommendations for acceptable risk levels for road, footway
and cycletrack bridges, are contained in PD 6688-1-7.
NA.2.4 Model of accidental action

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 3.3 (2) Note 1]
For building structures the recommended model should be used.
NA.2.5 Acceptable limit of localised failure

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 3.3 (2) Note 2]
For building structures, the indicative limits should be used. See A.4 of
BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014.
Text deleted
NA.2.6 Design approach for limiting the extent of localized

failure
[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 3.3 (2) Note 3]
For the design of building structures the three approaches given in 3.3
(2) of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014 may be used as appropriate and
as specified in Annex A of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014.
NA.2.7 Consequence classes

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 3.4 (1) Note 4]
For the design of building structures the categorization given in
Table A.1 of Annex A of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014 should be used.
NA.2.8 Design approaches

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 3.4 (2) Note]
For the design of structures for higher and lower consequence classes,
the requirements should be determined for the individual project.
NA.2.9 Accidental actions on lightweight structures

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.1 (1) Note 1]
Recommendations for accidental actions on lightweight road structures
are given in PD 6688-1-7.
NA.2.10 Impact forces to foundations

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.1 (1) Note 3]
Recommendations for transmission of impact forces to foundations
are given in PD 6688-1-7.
2 • © The British Standards Institution 2014

NA.2.11 Values of vehicle impact forces

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.3.1 (1) Note 1]
NA.2.11.1 Buildings adjacent to roads

For buildings adjacent to roads, and in the absence of mitigating
measures, the indicative equivalent static design force due to
vehicular impact given in Table 4.1 of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014
may be used, unless the structure is in Consequence Class 3 (CC3).
For CC3 buildings the equivalent static design force should be taken
from Table NA.1 and applied in accordance with NA.2.11.2.2.1. Other
sub-clauses from NA.2.11.2 are applicable to road structures and for CC3
building structures where approval is obtained on an individual project
basis. The adjustment factor for buildings should be taken as 1.0.
For buildings in CC1 and CC2 see also NA.2.13.
NA.2.11.2 Bridges over roads

NA.2.11.2.1 Introduction
For members supporting structures over or adjacent to roads the
equivalent static design forces due to vehicular impact should be in
accordance with NA.2.11.2.2 to NA.2.11.2.4. Alternatively, where safety
barriers are provided, recommendations are given in PD 6688-1-7.
Table NA.1 Equivalent static design forces due to vehicular impact on members supporting bridges or
CC3 buildings over or adjacent to roads
Force Fdx Force Fdy Point of application on bridge support

in the direction perpendicular to
of normal travel the direction of
normal travel
kN kN
Bridges over Motorways, Trunk and Principal Roads
Main component 1650 825 At the most severe point between 0.75 m
and 1.5 m above carriageway level
Residual component 825 415 At the most severe point between 1 m
and 3 m above carriageway level
Bridges over other roads where speed limit v 45 mph (72 kph): e.g. Other Rural Roads
Bridges over other roads where speed limit < 45 mph (72 kph): e.g. Other Urban Roads
Bridges over roads: minimum forces for robustness

NA.2.11.2.2 Accidental actions caused by road vehicles – Impact on

supporting substructures for road bridges
NA.2.11.2.2.1 The equivalent static nominal collision forces are given
in Table NA.1, together with their direction and height of application,
and should be considered to act horizontally on bridge supports. The
main and residual load components should be applied simultaneously.
Refer to NA.2.14 for the application rules for Fdx and Fdy. The controlling
class of road is the road under the bridge, i.e. the road that is carrying
the Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) that might impact on the support.
NA.2.11.2.2.2 The equivalent static design forces given in Table NA.1
should be multiplied by an adjustment factor Fa in accordance with
NA.2.11.2.4, which is based on the risk assessment procedure given in
NA.2.11.2.3.
NA.2.11.2.2.3 In all cases, the larger of the adjusted values for
the main and residual components, and the minimum forces for
robustness specified in Table NA.1 should be used.
NA.2.11.2.3 Risk ranking procedure for bridge supports

NA.2.11.2.3.1 A risk ranking factor Rde should be calculated for each
bridge support location.
NA.2.11.2.3.2 Where supports are exposed to impact from more than
one traffic stream containing HGVs, values of Rde should be calculated
independently for each traffic stream and the total Risk Ranking
Factor Rde should be obtained by taking the sum of these independent
Rde values.
NOTE 1 A “traffic stream” includes all traffic flowing in any one
direction on any one carriageway. Thus a support adjacent to a single
carriageway road with bi-directional flow would have a separate
contribution to Rde from two traffic streams. A support on one side of a
dual carriageway road would have contributions to Rde from one traffic
stream, whilst a support in the central reserve would have contributions
to Rde from two traffic streams.
NOTE 2 Where additional protection in lieu of strengthening is to be
provided, the risk from each side should be considered separately and
protection provided on each side appropriate to the risk on that side only.
NA.2.11.2.3.3 The risk ranking factor Rde is given by:
Rde " F1F2F3F4F5F6F7F8
The requirements for determination of F1 to F8 factors are given in
NA.2.11.2.3.4 to NA.2.11.2.3.11.
NA.2.11.2.3.4 Road class below bridge F1
The risk of a traffic accident, which might lead to an HGV impact on a
bridge support, depends on the class of road below the bridge.
Table NA.2 Influence of class of road below bridge
Road class below bridge F1

i) Motorways and dual carriageway Trunk Roads 0.66
ii) Single carriageway Trunk Roads 1.25
iii) Principal Roads (In Northern Ireland non trunk 1.25
A roads)
iv) All others 2.63

NA.2.11.2.3.5 Factor for HGV flow under bridge F2

F2 = (AADTunder × percentage of HGVs)/(25 000 × 7,8%)
The annual average daily traffic under the bridge (AADTunder)
includes all traffic in the traffic stream beneath the bridge for which
this contribution to the risk ranking factor is being assessed (see
NA.2.11.2.3.2). The traffic flow is expressed as 24 h annual average
daily traffic (AADT), i.e. total annual traffic divided by 365.
The value of AADTunder should be the higher of the measured flow and
of the assumed flow for the class of road, given in Table NA.3. Where
no existing flow information is available, the flows from Table NA.3
should be used. The AADT values presented in Table NA.3 are the
flows in one direction (for example one traffic stream on a two-way
road) as appropriate for the support under consideration.
The proportion of HGVs in the traffic should be obtained from
existing data where available. For example, the Department for
Transport (DfT) publishes maps to show AADT and percentage of
HGVs for motorways and trunk roads in England. Alternatively, the
proportion may be deduced from data for similar roads nearby. Where
no information on the proportion of HGVs is available (for example
from a traffic survey), 7,8% should be used.
NOTE HGV count is taken as equal to the number of all vehicles that
have three or more axles. It may be assumed that 40% of the UK HGV
population comprises two-axle rigid vehicles. Where the number of HGV
is obtained from published transport statistics, this number has to be
multiplied by 0.6 before being used in this National Annex.
Table NA.3 Minimum traffic flows to be used to determine F2
Carriageway Standard Assumed flow (AADT) in F2 assuming 7,8% of HGV

one traffic stream
i) Single Carriageway 2 lane 5 000 0,20
ii) Wide Single Carriageway 2 lane 7 000 0,28
iii) Dual 2 lane All Purpose 12 500 0,50
iv) Dual 3 lane All Purpose 19 000 0,76
v) Dual 2 lane Motorway 15 000 0,60
vi) Dual 3 lane Motorway 23 000 0,92
vii) Dual 4 lane Motorway 38 000 1,52
NA.2.11.2.3.6 Factor for speed limit under bridge F3
Table NA.4 Influence of speed limit under bridge
Speed Limit F3
i) 70 mph (113 kph) 1,25
ii) 60 mph (97 kph) 1,0
iii) 50 mph (80 kph) or less 0,75
This allows for differences in the severity of impact due to the

variation in speed limit for particular road types (for example urban
motorways). The next lower class of speed limit may be considered in
locations where speed is effectively restricted by specific features such
as, for example, roundabouts or traffic lights.

NA.2.11.2.3.7 Factor for distance (D) of bridge support from nearest

junction on the road under the bridge F4
Table NA.5 Influence of junctions
Distance, D F4
i) D < 50 m 3,0
ii) 50 m f D < 100 m 2,2
iii) 100 m f D < 200 m (including structures at 1,3
interchanges)
iv) D v 200 m (including sections of carriageway 0,95
remote from junctions)
v) Bridge over roundabout 3,0
Distance D is measured in a direction parallel to the line of the road

under the bridge from the nearest point at which lane markings for
the converging or diverging roads meet.

NA.2.11.2.3.8 Factor for clearance (C) F5
Table NA.6 Influence of clearance
Clearance, C F5
i) C f 10m 1,0
ii) 10m < C f 26m 1,5 – 0,05C
iii) C > 26m 0,2
Clearance C is measured from the centre of the nearest running lane

ordinarily used by HGVs to the front face of the support. Hence, on a
motorway, the hard shoulder is included in the clearance for supports
adjacent to the left hand lane and, for supports in the central
reservation, the right hand lane is included in the clearance if HGV
travel is legally prohibited from that lane.
Note that if a carriageway is only used in maintenance situations or
any part of the carriageway (for example the hard shoulder) is only
opened to normal traffic for a specific period, such as at times of peak
traffic flow, it should not be considered as a running lane for the
purposes of calculating F5.
The value of C should be determined by multiplying the horizontal
distance in metres by 0,6 if the ground level at the face of the support
is lower than the centre of the nearest running lane by more than
10% of the clearance, and by 1,6 if the ground level at the face of the
support is higher than the centre of the nearest running lane by more
than 10% of the clearance.
Additionally, the value of C should also be determined by multiplying
the horizontal distance by 0,6 if the support is alongside a road that
has a gradient greater than 4% downhill and by 1,6 if the support is
alongside a road that has a gradient greater than 4% uphill.

NA.2.11.2.3.9 Factor for number of columns F6
Table NA.7 Number of columns for each support type
Type of support F6
i) Single column 2,0
ii) Two columns 1,5
iii) Three columns 1,0
iv) Four or more columns 0,5
Risk of collapse of the bridge following partial failure of a support is

significantly reduced if the number of columns provided is more than
one (note that the use of longitudinally divided decks can increase the
value of F6).
Leaf piers (supports that have a length along the carriageway similar
to the width of the main structure above ignoring edge cantilevers)
are to be treated as single columns. The relatively high value of F6 for

leaf piers will usually be counteracted by their relatively high impact
resistance.
NA.2.11.2.3.10 Factor for stability of deck F7
Table NA.8 Deck stability
Form of Deck F7
i) Continuous spans:
a) With sufficient strength over the piers 1,0
to prevent bridge collapse after impact:
verified by quantitative assessment
b) With sufficient strength over the piers 1,5
to prevent bridge collapse after impact:
assessment by engineering judgement
c) Without sufficient strength over the 2,0
piers to prevent bridge collapse after
impact
iv) Simply supported spans, including spans 2,0
supported on cantilevers
NA.2.11.2.3.11 Consequence factor for road bridges F8

F8 = (1 200 + AADTunder × 0,006 + AADTover × 0,2)/6 300
Values of AADT should be calculated in a similar manner to that used
in deriving F2. However, in this case AADTover includes all traffic in the
stream or streams that use the part of the bridge deck structure that
might collapse following failure of the support, and AADTunder also
includes all traffic in the traffic stream or streams whose passage will
be obstructed following the collapse.
NOTE Where the bridge over can be split into separate decks for each
carriageway, the AADTover over will be for one traffic stream.
In cases where many pedestrians are expected to use the footway(s)
at frequent intervals, for example for access to major public assembly
facilities such as schools, sport stadiums, and public transportation
facilities, the value of F8 should be increased by adding a value of 5.

NA.2.11.2.4 Adjustment factor Fa for Table NA.1

NA.2.11.2.4.1 The adjustment factor Fa should be applied to the
values in Table NA.1 for all classes of roads but should not be applied
to the minimum robustness requirement. The threshold values, used
to determine whether the risk to the piers is high, normal or low,
Ta and Tb as described below are defined for the individual project.
Unless otherwise specified for the individual project, the values for Ta
and Tb may be taken as 2,4 and 0,5 respectively.
NA.2.11.2.4.2 If the risk-ranking factor Rde is greater than Ta (i.e. the
risk is high), the adjustment factor Fa should be taken as 2.
NA.2.11.2.4.3 If the risk-ranking factor Rde is less than or equal to Ta
and more than or equal to Tb (i.e. the risk is normal), the adjustment
factor Fa should be taken as 1.
NA.2.11.2.4.4 If the risk-ranking factor Rde is less than Tb (i.e. the risk is
low), the adjustment factor Fa should be taken as 0,5.
NA.2.12 Impact force as a function of lateral distance s from

traffic lanes
[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.3.1 (1) Note 2]
For buildings where the minimum distance s from the centre-line of
the nearest trafficked lane to the nearest face of the structural member
is v10m, the equivalent static design force. See also NA.2.13.
For road bridges, the procedure described in NA 2.11.2.3 should be
followed.
NA.2.13 Structures for which vehicular collision need not be

considered
[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.3.1 (1) Note 3]
Vehicle collision need not be considered for buildings in CC1 and
CC2 provided that the design advice in BS EN 1991-17:2006 Annex A
is applied.
Recommendations for ramps and stairs of footbridges are given in
PD 6688-1-7.
Vehicle collisions for bridge supports need not be considered where,
on the basis of judgement or experience, the structure is considered
to have sufficient mass to withstand the effects of collision for global
design purposes.
NA.2.14 Rules for Fdx and Fdy

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.3.1 (2) Note]
The recommended approach should be used.
NA.2.15 Conditions of impact

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.3.1 (3) Note]
For buildings, except those in CC3, the recommended values should
be used.
For CC3 buildings and road bridges, the recommended values should
be used for the application area. The point of application for impact
forces on bridge supports is given in Table NA.1.

NA.2.16 Clearances and protection measures and design

values
[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.3.2 (1) Note 1]
For buildings, where vehicle impact needs to be considered in the
absence of mitigating measures, the equivalent static design force due
to vehicular impact given in Table 4.2 of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014
may be used, unless the structure is in Consequences Class 3. For CC3
the equivalent static design force should be taken from Table NA.9.
For road bridges, the equivalent static design forces due to vehicular
impact on the superstructure are given in Table NA.9 and Table NA.10.
Table NA.9 Equivalent static design forces Fdx due to impact on superstructures.
Class of road under bridge Equivalent static design

(or near structure†) force Fdx in the direction (x)
of travel
kN
Motorways, trunk and principal 825

roads (in Northern Ireland non-trunk
A roads)
Other rural roads 620
[speed limit > 45 mph (72 kph)]
Other urban roads 415
[speed limit f 45 mph (72 kph)]
Courtyards and parking garages 75
(car parks)
† These equivalent static design forces are applicable outside a
building; for columns inside any multi-storey building used for car parking
the value must be taken from BS EN 1991-1-1:2002 Annex B.
Table NA.10 Equivalent static design forces Fdy due to impact on superstructures.
Class of road under bridge Equivalent static design

(or near structure†) force Fdy perpendicular (y)
to the direction of travel
kN
Motorways, trunk and principal 415
roads (in Northern Ireland non-trunk
A roads)
Other rural roads 310
[speed limit > 45 mph (72 kph)]
Other urban roads 205
[speed limit >45 mph (72 kph)]
Courtyards and parking garages Not required
(car parks)
† These equivalent static design forces are applicable outside a
building; for columns inside any multi-storey building used for car parking
the value must be taken from BS EN 1991-1-1:2002 Annex B.

NA.2.17 Values of rF, h0 and h1

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.3.2 (1) Note 3]
h1 should be taken as 5.7 m. Recommendations for provision of
allowance for vertical sag curves are given in PD 6688-1-7.
h0 should be taken as h1.
rF should be taken as 1 and 0 for h < h1 and for h v h1 respectively.
NA.2.18 Direction of impact actions on underside of bridge

decks
[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.3.2 (1) Note 4]
The loads Fdx and Fdy on the underside of structures should be applied
in any direction between the horizontal and vertically upwards in
order to produce the most unfavourable effects in the element being
considered.
NA.2.19 Use of Fdy

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.3.2 (2) Note]
The recommended approach should be used.
Recommendations for vertical sag curve compensation and maximum
deflection of the structure, are given in PD 6688-1-7.
NA.2.20 Dimension and position of impact areas

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.3.2 (3) Note]
The recommended area for impact should be used.
NA.2.21 Value of impact forces from forklift trucks

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.4.(1) Note]
For the design of buildings where forklift trucks are used the
recommended values in 4.4(1) of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006 should be used.
NA.2.22 Types of rail traffic

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.5 (1) Note]
The types of rail traffic for which the design rules are applicable are
described in UIC 777-2R [2].
NA.2.23 Structures in Classes A or B, 4.5.1.2 (1) Note 1]

Structures to be included in Class A or B are to be agreed for the
individual project. Guidance on the classification of structures is
provided in UIC 777-2R [2].
NA.2.24 Classification of temporary structures

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.5.1.2 (1) Note 2]
Classification of temporary structures and auxiliary construction works
should be agreed for the individual project.

NA.2.25 Static equivalent forces and their identification

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.5.1.4 (1) Note]
The indicative values in Table 4.4 of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014
should be used.
NA.2.26 Reduction of impact forces where supporting

members are protected (by for example solid plinths
or platforms)
[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.5.1.4 (2) Note]
The reduction of impact forces, should be agreed for the individual
project. Guidance for reduction of impact forces for supports on
platforms is provided in UIC 771-2R [2].
NA.2.27 Height of impact forces above track level

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.5.1.4 (3) Note]
The recommended value should be used.
NA.2.28 Amount of reduction of impact force where rail

traffic speed is f 50 km/h
[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.5.1.4 (4) Note]
The values of the static equivalent forces for design where rail traffic
speed is f 50 km/h are provided in UIC 771-2R [2].
NA.2.29 Values for Fdx and Fdy where rail traffic speed
> 120 km/h
[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.5.1.4 (5) Note]
The values of Fdx and Fdy, taking into account additional preventative
and/or protective measures, should be agreed for the individual project.
NA.2.30 Information for Class B structures

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.5.1.5 (1) Note]
Structure supports within the hazard zone should be designed to
resist the effects of collision loading. Hazard zones should be assumed
to extend for a width of 4.5 m from the cess rail and to include
anywhere between the tracks.
Where individual columns are located within a hazard zone, the design
of the span over the railway should incorporate sufficient continuity
such that the loss of any one column will not lead to collapse of the
remainder of the structure under the permanent load, the primary
traffic (road or rail) load and any footway/cycleway live loads.
Additionally, all columns within a hazard zone should be designed
to withstand, without collapse, a single horizontal design force of
2000 kN acting at a height of 1.2 m above the adjacent ground level
and a single horizontal design force of 500 kN acting at a height of
3 m above the adjacent ground level. The two forces can act in any
direction but need not be considered to act simultaneously.
The requirements for the factors and measures to be considered
within the risk assessment should be agreed for the individual project.

NA.2.31 Areas immediately beyond track ends

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.5.2 (1) Note]
The area affected by overrunning of railway traffic beyond the
end of the track, should be based on the requirements of GI/RT7016
‘Interface between Station Platforms, Track and Trains’.
NA.2.32 Particular measures and alternative design values for

the impact force
[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.5.2 (4) Note]
The recommended values of static equivalent design forces due to
impact on end impact walls should be used.
NA.2.33 Classification system for ships on sea waterways

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.6.1 (3) Note 1]
The characteristics of ships on sea waterways to be taken into account in
the case of ship impact on structures should be agreed for the individual
project. The recommended indicative classification may be used. Text
deleted
NA.2.34 Values of frontal and lateral dynamic

forces from river and canal traffic
[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.6.2 (1) Note]
Values of frontal and lateral dynamic forces from river and canal
traffic should be agreed for the individual project. The recommended
indicative values may be used. Text deleted
NA.2.35 Friction coefficient μ

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.6.2 (2) Note]
NA.2.36 Application area of impact

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.6.2 (3) Note 1]
The height of application of the impact force and the impact area
should be agreed for the individual project. The recommended
indicative values may be used. Text deleted
NA.2.37 Impact forces on bridge decks from ships

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.6.2 (4) Note]
The equivalent static force should be agreed for the individual project.
The recommended indicative values may be used. Text deleted
NA.2.38 Dynamic impact forces from seagoing ships

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.6.3 (1) Note]
Values of frontal and lateral dynamic impact forces from seagoing
ships should be agreed for the individual project. The recommended
indicative value may be used. Text deleted

NA.2.39 Friction coefficient μ

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.6.3 (3) Note]
NA.2.40 Area and position of impact areas

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.6.3 (4)P Note]
The limits on area and position of force range should be agreed for
the individual project. The recommended indicative values may be
used. Text deleted
NA.2.41 Forces on superstructure

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 4.6.3 (5) Note 1]
The force should be agreed for the individual project. The recommended
indicative range of values may be used for preliminary design.
NA.2.42 Procedures to be used for types of internal explosions

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, 5.3 (1)P Note]
Buildings need to be designed to resist progressive collapse
in accordance with the procedure described in Annex A of
BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014. Provided the procedure described in
Annex A is followed, no specific consideration of internal explosions is
required for CC1 or CC2.
See NA.3.4 in relation to the use of Annex D to determine loads
from internal explosions.
The design requirements for dealing with internal explosions in
road and rail tunnels should be specified for the individual project.
Annex D of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014 provides recommendations
for determination of pressures due to explosions.
NA.2.43 Effective anchorage

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, A.4 (1) Note 1]
For buildings of Consequences Class 2a (lower group), details of
effective anchorages and horizontal tying requirements may be
found in BS EN 1992 to 1996 and associated non-contradictory
complementary information (NCCI).
NA.3 Decision on the status of informative

annexes
NA.3.1 Design for consequences of localized failure

in buildings from an unspecified cause
[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, Annex A]
Guidance in Annex A of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014 should be
used in the absence of specific requirements in BS EN 1992-1-1 to
BS EN 1996-1-1 and BS EN 1999-1-1 and their National Annexes.
In the case of lightweight building structures (e.g. those whose
primary structure is timber or cold formed thin gauge steel) the values

for minimum horizontal tie forces in expressions A.1 and A.2 should
be taken as 15 kN and 7.5 kN respectively.
NA.3.2 Information on risk assessment

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, Annex B]
Annex B of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014 may be used
where alternative provisions are not included in the body of
BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, this National Annex, or PD 6688-1-7.
NA.3.3 Dynamic design for impact

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, Annex C]
Annex C of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014 may be used.
NA.3.4 Internal explosion

[BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014, Annex D]
Annex D of BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014 can be used only if it is

complemented further by guidance available in PD 6688-1-7:2014.
Further guidance can be found in PD 6688-1-7.
NA.4 References to non-contradictory

complementary information
The following reference contains non-contradictory complementary
information for use with BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014.
PD 6688-1-7, Non-contradictory and complementary information to be
used with the UK National Annex to BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014
Text deleted
[1] International Union of Railways, 2001. UIC Code 777-2 R,
Structures built over railway lines – Construction requirements in
the track zone, 2nd Edition, September 2002. Paris. (UIC 777-2R).


NA+A1 2014 To BS EN 1991-1-7 2006+A1 2014 (Inc Corr Aug 2014 Nov 2015)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NA+A1 2014 To BS EN 1991-1-7 2006+A1 2014 (Inc Corr Aug 2014 Nov 2015)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

NA+A1 2014 To BS EN 1991-1-7 2006+A1 2014 (Inc Corr Aug 2014 Nov 2015)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NA+A1:2014 to BS EN 1991-1-7:2006+A1:2014

Incorporating corrigenda August 2014 and November 2015

BSI Standards Publication

National Annex to Eurocode 1:

Part 1-7: Accidental actions

Publishing and copyright information

© The British Standards Institution 2015.

ISBN 978 0 580 92295 4

ICS 91.010.30, 91.080.10, 93.040

The following BSI references relate to the work on this standard:

Amendments/corrigenda issued since publication

Date Text affected

31 July 2014 National Annex revised due to CEN Amendment A1:2014

Table NA.8 – Deck stability 7

© The British Standards Institution 2014 • i

National Annex (informative) to

NA.2 Nationally Determined Parameters

© The British Standards Institution 2014 • 1

NA.2.2 Notional values for identiﬁed accidental actions

NA.2.3 Level of acceptable risk

NA.2.4 Model of accidental action

NA.2.5 Acceptable limit of localised failure

NA.2.6 Design approach for limiting the extent of localized

NA.2.7 Consequence classes

NA.2.8 Design approaches

NA.2.9 Accidental actions on lightweight structures

NA.2.10 Impact forces to foundations

2 • © The British Standards Institution 2014

NA.2.11 Values of vehicle impact forces

NA.2.11.1 Buildings adjacent to roads

NA.2.11.2 Bridges over roads

Force Fdx Force Fdy Point of application on bridge support

© The British Standards Institution 2014 • 3

NA.2.11.2.2 Accidental actions caused by road vehicles – Impact on

NA.2.11.2.3 Risk ranking procedure for bridge supports

Table NA.2 Inﬂuence of class of road below bridge

Road class below bridge F1

4 • © The British Standards Institution 2014

NA.2.11.2.3.5 Factor for HGV ﬂow under bridge F2

Table NA.3 Minimum trafﬁc ﬂows to be used to determine F2

Carriageway Standard Assumed ﬂow (AADT) in F2 assuming 7,8% of HGV

NA.2.11.2.3.6 Factor for speed limit under bridge F3

Table NA.4 Inﬂuence of speed limit under bridge

This allows for differences in the severity of impact due to the

© The British Standards Institution 2014 • 5

NA.2.11.2.3.7 Factor for distance (D) of bridge support from nearest

Table NA.5 Inﬂuence of junctions

Distance D is measured in a direction parallel to the line of the road

the converging or diverging roads meet.

Table NA.6 Inﬂuence of clearance

Clearance C is measured from the centre of the nearest running lane

6 • © The British Standards Institution 2014

NA.2.11.2.3.9 Factor for number of columns F6

Table NA.7 Number of columns for each support type

Risk of collapse of the bridge following partial failure of a support is

are to be treated as single columns. The relatively high value of F6 for

Table NA.8 Deck stability

NA.2.11.2.3.11 Consequence factor for road bridges F8

© The British Standards Institution 2014 • 7