EN1990&EN1997 1 General Rules

Eurocodes:
Background & Applications

GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN with worked examples
13-14 June 2013, Dublin
Basis of design
EN 1990 and EN
1997-1 General Rules
Dr Andrew Bond
Director, Geocentrix Ltd
Chairman TC250/SC7
Eurocodes:
GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN with
ith worked
k d examples
l
Outline of talk
Overview
Design requirements
Limit states
Actions and design situations
G t h i ld
Geotechnical
design
i
Parameters for design
Supervision, monitoring, and maintenance
Summary of key points
2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Eurocodes:
Basis of design
EN 1990 and EN 1997
1997-1
1 General Rules
OVERVIEW
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
The Eurocode family (Bond and Harris, 2008)
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
EN 1990: Basis of structural design (Bond &

Harris 2008)
Harris,
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
EN 1997-1: General rules (Bond & Harris,

2008)
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Role of Eurocode 7 in UK practice (after Bond

& Harris
Harris, 2008)
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Role of Eurocode 7 in German practice
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Role of Eurocode 7 in French practice
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Role of Eurocode 7 in Italian practice
10
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Role of Eurocode 7 in Irish practice
11
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Designers Guide to EN 1997-1 by Frank et

al (2004)
Book published 2004
Key features
Detailed guide to new geotechnical design Eurocode
Describes and explains many unique features of ground engineering
Comprehensive checklists of aspects to be considered in design
Authors: Roger Frank, Christophe Bauduin, Richard Driscoll, Mike

Kavvadas, Neils Krebs Ovesen, Trevor Orr, and Bernd Schuppener
Published by Thomas Telford in hardback
ISBN: 07277-3154-8
12
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
ETC 10 International Workshop in Dublin

(2005)
10 examples presented
Pad foundation with vertical central load
Pad foundation with inclined eccentric load
Pile foundation designed from soil parameter values
Pile
Pil foundation
f
d ti
designed
d i
d from
f
pile
il load
l d tests
t t
Cantilever gravity retaining wall
Embedded retaining wall
Anchored retaining wall
Uplift of deep basement
Failure by hydraulic heave
Road embankment on soft clay
www.tcd.ie/civileng/pdf/Eurocode 7.pdf
13
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Decoding Eurocode 7 by Bond and Harris

(2008)
Book published August 2008
Key features
Covers ENs 1997-1 and -2
Plus relevant parts of other Eurocodes
Also covers associated execution and testing standards
Explains key principles
Illustrates application rules with real-life case studies
Material extensively tested on training courses over 5 years
Authors Andrew Bond (Geocentrix) and Andy Harris (ex-Geomantix)

Published by Taylor and Francis in hardback, with colour section
ISBN: 9780415409483
www.decodingeurocode 7.com
14
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
EC7 for geo. design a model code for nonEU countries?

countries?
Paper published at 17th Int. Conf. On Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering,
g
g, October 2009
Subjects covered
Eurocode 7Geotechnical design
Applicability of Eurocode 7 Part 1: design examples from the 2005 Dublin
Workshop
Comments of non-European countries
Authors:
B. Schuppener
A.J. Bond
R Frank
R.
T.L.L. Orrr
G. Scarpelli
B Simpson
B.
15
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Modern geotechnical design codes of practice

(2013)
International Workshop on Safety Concepts and Calibration of Partial Factors
in European and North American Codes of Practice, Delft University in
December
b 2011
Book includes several papers devoted to Eurocode 7:
Implementation and evolution of Eurocode 7 by Andrew Bond
I
Implementation
l
t ti
off E
Eurocode
d 7 in
i German
G
geotechnical
t h i l design
d i
practice
ti by
b K
Kerstin
ti
Lesny
Implementation of Eurocode 7 in French practice by means of national additional
standards by Jean-Pierre Magnan and Sbastien Burlon
Implementing Eurocode 7 to achieve reliable geotechnical designs by Trevor Orr
The safety concept in German design codes by Bernd Schuppener
British choices of geotechnical design approach and partial factors for EC7 by Brian
Simpson
Dutch approach to geotechnical design by Eurocode 7, based on probabalistic
analyses by Ton Vrouwenvelder, Adriaan va Seter, and Geerhard Hanni
16
Eurocodes:
Basis of design
EN 1990 and EN 1997
1997-1
1 General Rules
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Eurocode design (Bond & Harris, 2008)
18
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Complexity of design
In order to establish minimum requirements for the extent and content of
geotechnical investigations, calculations and construction control checks,
the
h complexity
l
off each
h geotechnical
h
l design
d
shall
h ll b
be identified
d
f d together
h
with associated risks
EN 1997-1 2.1(8)P
a distinction shall be made between light and simple structures and small
earthworks for which ... the minimum requirements will be satisfied by
experience
p
and q
qualitative g
geotechnical investigations,
g
, with negligible
g g
risk;;
[and] other geotechnical structures
EN 1997-1 2.1(8)P continued
For structures and earthworks of low geotechnical complexity and risk, such
as defined above, simplified design procedures may be applied
EN 1997-1 2.1(9)
19
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Geotechnical categories
GC
20
Includes
Design requirements
Design procedure
Small and relatively

y
simple structures
with negligible risk
Negligible
g g
risk of instability
y
or ground movements
Ground conditions known to
be straightforward
No excavation below water
table (or such excavation is
straightforward)
Routine design
g &
construction methods
Conventional types
of structure &
foundation with no
exceptional risk or
difficult soil or
l d
loading
conditions
d
Quantitative geotechnical
data & analysis to ensure
fundamental requirements
are satisfied
Routine field & lab testing

Routine design & execution
Structures or parts
of structures not
covered above
Include alternative provisions and rules to those in

Eurocode 7
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Examples of structures in Geotechnical

Categories 2 and 3
GC
Risk
Examples
Negligible
g g
None g
given in Eurocode 7
No exceptional
2.1(19) Spread; raft; & pile foundations; walls & other

structures retaining or supporting soil or water; excavations;
bridge piers & abutments; embankments & earthworks; ground
anchors & other tie-back
tie back systems; and tunnels in hard,
hard nonnon
fractured rock and not subjected to special water tightness or
other requirements.
Exceptional
2.1(21) Very large or unusual structures; structures involving

abnormal risks, or unusual or exceptionally difficult ground or
loading conditions; structures in highly seismic areas; and
structures in areas of probable site instability or persistent ground
movements that require separate investigation or special
measures
21
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Example Geotechnical Categories

(Bond & Harris,
Harris 2008)
Category 1
Low height cut slope
in London clay
Category 3
Embedded bored pile retaining
walls over underground tunnel
Category 2
Embedded retaining wall and
bored piles in London clay
Category 3
Underground running tunnels
22
Eurocodes:
Basis of design
EN 1990 and EN 1997
1997-1
1 General Rules
ACTIONS AND DESIGN

SITUATIONS
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Design situations from basis of design

Design situations are:
sets
sets of physical conditions representing the real conditions occurring
during a certain time interval for which the design will
demonstrate that relevant limit states are not exceeded
EN 1990 1.5.2.2
1 5 2 2
Persistent (conditions of normal use)
P i d = same order
Period
d as design
d i
working
ki
life
lif (DWL) off structure
t
t
Transient (temporary conditions, e.g. execution or repair)

Period << DWL and high probability of occurrence
Accidental (exceptional conditions)

e.g. fire, explosion, impact, local failure
Seismic ((exceptional
p
conditions during
g earthquake)
q
)
24
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Actions according to EN 1990: Basis of design

Action
Duration
Permanent
Variable
Accidental
Likely to act
throughout
reference
period
Usually short
Variation w/
time
Negligible or
monotonic
Neither
negligible nor
monotonic
Significant
magnitude
Examples
Self weight of structures, fixed
Self-weight
equipment and road-surfacing;
indirect actions caused by
shrinkage and uneven settlements
Imposed loads on building floors,
beams and roofs; wind*; snow*
Explosions, vehicle impact*,

seismic* (AE, due to earthquake
seismic
ground motions)
*may be variable or accidental depending on statistical distribution
may be permanent or variable
25
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Structural and geotechnical actions (Bond &

Harris 2008)
Harris,
26
Eurocodes:
Basis of design
LIMIT STATES
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Key design requirement

For each geotechnical design situation it shall be verified that no
relevant limit state is exceeded
EN 1997-1 2.1(1)P
Limit states should be verified by one or a combination of
of
Use of calculations
Adoption of prescriptive measures
E
Experimental
i
t l models
d l and
d lload
d ttests
t
An observational method
28
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Design by calculation (Bond & Harris, 2008)
29
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Overview of limit state design (Bond & Harris,

2008)
30
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Ultimate limit states for strength: STR/GEO

(Bond & Harris,
Harris 2008)
31
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Verification of strength
Verification of strength is expressed in Eurocode 7 by:
E d Rd
Ed = design effect of actions; Rd = corresponding design resistance
GEO: Failure or excessive deformation of the ground, in which the
strength of soil or rock is significant in providing resistance
EN 1997
1997-1
1 2.4.7.1(1)P
2 4 7 1(1)P
STR: Internal failure or excessive deformation of the structure or
structural elements in which the strength
g of structural materials
is significant in providing resistance
EN 1997-1 2.4.7.1(1)P
32
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Degree of utilization vs overdesign factor

Bond and Harris (2008) recommend using the ratio of the design
effect of actions to the corresponding
p
g resistance to verify
y
strength:
GEO
= degree of utilization
Ed
=
100%
Rd
Frank
k et. al.
l ((2004)) d
define
f
the
h ratio off the
h design
d
resistance to the
h
corresponding design effect of actions:
Rd
ODF =
1.0
Ed
ODF = overdesign
overdesign factor
factor = 1/
33
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Verification of strength for STR in structural

design (Bond and Harris
Harris, 2008)
34
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Verification of strength for STR/GEO in

geotechnical design (Bond & Harris,
Harris 2008)
35
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Design Approaches for STR/GEO

The manner in which equations [for GEO/STR] are applied shall be
determined using
g one of three Design
g Approaches
pp
Design Approaches apply ONLY to STR and GEO limit states
Each nation can choose which one (or more) to allow
EN 1997
1997-1
1 2.4.7.3.4.1(1)P
36
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Design Approaches explained

Design Approach
1
Combination 1
Combination 2
Actions
Material
properties
Actions/effects
& resistances
Structural
actions/effects
& material
properties
A1 + M1 + R1
A2 + M2 + R1
A1 + M1 + R2
A1/A2 + M2 + R3
(Major) factors >> 1.0; (minor) factors > 1.0

A1-A2
A1
A2 = factors on actions/effects
M1-M2 = factors on material properties
R1-R3 = factors on resistances
37
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
National choice of Design Approach for

shallow foundations (Bond,
(Bond 2013)
38
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
National choice of Design Approach for slopes

(Bond 2013)
(Bond,
39
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Partial factors for limit states GEO/STR

Parameter
Symbol
Permanent
action (G)
Unfavourable
Variable
action (Q)
Action
factors
A1
A2
1.35
(G,fav)
1.0
Unfavourable
1.5
1.3
F
Favourable
bl
(0)
(0)
Shearing resistance (tan )
Effective cohesion (c)
Undrained shear strength

g ((cu)
cu
Unconfined compressive
strength (qu)
qu
Weight density ()
Bearing resistance (Rv)
Rv
Sliding resistance (Rh)
Rh
Favourable
Earth resistance
(Re)
Walls
Material
factors
M1
M2
Resistance factors
R1
R2
R3
R4
1.0
(1.0)
1.0
1.25
1.0
1.4
1.0
Re
Slopes
Pile resistance
Factors given for persistent and transient design situations
40
14
1.4
1.0
1.1
1.4
1.1
See separate table
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Ultimate limit states for stability:

EQU/UPL/HYD (Bond & Harris,
Harris 2008)
41
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Limit state EQU (EN 1997-1 version)

Ultimate limit state EQU is defined as
Loss of equilibrium
q
of the structure or the g
ground considered as a
rigid body, in which the strengths of structural materials and the
ground are insignificant in providing resistance
EN 1997-1 2.4.7.1(1)P
Verification of static equilibrium
Edst ;d Estb;d + Td
Exxx;d = e
effects
ects of
o actions
act o s (here,
( e e, overturning
o e tu
g moments)
o e ts)
Subscripts dst and stb signify de-stabilising and stabilising
Td = total shearing resistance that develops around the part of the
ground
structure in contact with the g
42
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Verification of stability for EQU (Bond &

Harris 2008)
Harris,
43
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Partial factors for limit state EQU for buildings

Parameter
Permanent action (G)
Symbol
Unfavourable
Favourable
Variable action (Q)
Unfavourable
Favourable
Coeff. of shearing resistance (tan )
Effective cohesion (c)
U d i d shear
Undrained
h
strength
t
th (c
( u)
Unconfined compressive strength (qu)
Weight density ()
All resistances ((R))
G,dst
G,stb
Q,dst
Q dst
c
cu
qu
Partial factors on
Actions
Resistances
Material
properties
1.1
0.9
1.5
0
1.25 [1.1]
1.4 [1.2]
1.0
Values underlined provide safety (i.e. are 1.0)

Values in (rounds brackets) are not explicitly given in EN 1997-1 but can be inferred
Partial factors = 0 mean that the corresponding action is omitted from design calculations
Values in [square brackets] from NA to BS EN 1997-1
44
((1.0))
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Serviceability limit states (Bond & Harris,

2008)
45
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Verification of serviceability
Verification of serviceability is expressed in Eurocode 7 by:
Ed Cd
Ed = d
design
i
effect
ff t off actions
ti
(e.g.
(
displacement,
di l
t distortion)
di t ti )
Cd = design constraint (i.e. limiting value of design effect)
partial factors should normally be taken equal to 1.0
EN 1990 2.4.8(2)
46
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Verification of SLS (Bond & Harris, 2008)
47
Eurocodes:
Basis of design
EN 1990 and EN 1997
1997-1
1 General Rules
SUPERVISION, MONITORING,
AND MAINTENANCE
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Requirement for supervision, monitoring, and

maintenance
To ensure the safety and quality of a structure, the following shall be
undertaken,, as appropriate:
pp p
the construction processes and workmanship shall be supervised
the performance of the structure shall be monitored during and after
construction
the structure shall be adequately maintained
EN 1997-1 4.1(1)P
49
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Overview of supervision, monitoring, and

maintenance (Bond & Harris,
Harris 2008)
50
Eurocodes:
Basis of design
EN 1990 and EN 1997
1997-1
1 General Rules
SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS
Eurocodes:
ith worked
k d examples
l
13 14 June,
13-14
J
Dublin
D bli
Summary of key points

Design requirements:
Complexity
p
y of design
g
Geotechnical Categories (GC1-3)
Geotechnical design by...

Prescriptive measures
Calculation
Observation or testing
Limit states
Overall stability
Ultimate limit states (GEO, STR, EQU, UPL, and HYD)
Serviceability limit states
52
Eurocodes:
blog.eurocode7.com
g
www.decodingeurocode2.com
www.decodingeurocode7.com
DECODING THE EUROCODES
Eurocodes:
Geotechnical design
with
ith worked
k d
examples
eurocodes.jrc.ec.europa.eu

EN1990&amp;EN1997 1 General Rules

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

EN1990&amp;EN1997 1 General Rules

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Eurocodes:

Background & Applications

13-14 June 2013, Dublin

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

13-14 June 2013, Dublin

The Eurocode family (Bond and Harris, 2008)

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

EN 1990: Basis of structural design (Bond &

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

EN 1997-1: General rules (Bond & Harris,

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Role of Eurocode 7 in UK practice (after Bond

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Role of Eurocode 7 in German practice

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Role of Eurocode 7 in French practice

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Role of Eurocode 7 in Italian practice

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Role of Eurocode 7 in Irish practice

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Designers Guide to EN 1997-1 by Frank et

Authors: Roger Frank, Christophe Bauduin, Richard Driscoll, Mike

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

ETC 10 International Workshop in Dublin

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Decoding Eurocode 7 by Bond and Harris

Authors Andrew Bond (Geocentrix) and Andy Harris (ex-Geomantix)

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

EC7 for geo. design a model code for nonEU countries?

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Modern geotechnical design codes of practice

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

13-14 June 2013, Dublin

Eurocode design (Bond & Harris, 2008)

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Small and relatively

Routine field & lab testing

Include alternative provisions and rules to those in

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Examples of structures in Geotechnical

2.1(19) Spread; raft; & pile foundations; walls & other

2.1(21) Very large or unusual structures; structures involving

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Example Geotechnical Categories

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

ACTIONS AND DESIGN

13-14 June 2013, Dublin

Design situations from basis of design

Transient (temporary conditions, e.g. execution or repair)

Accidental (exceptional conditions)

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Actions according to EN 1990: Basis of design

Explosions, vehicle impact*,

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Structural and geotechnical actions (Bond &

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

13-14 June 2013, Dublin

Key design requirement

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Design by calculation (Bond & Harris, 2008)

2005-13. Geocentrix Ltd. All rights reserved

Overview of limit state design (Bond & Harris,

EN1990&EN1997 1 General Rules

EN1990&EN1997 1 General Rules