CEN/TC 250/SC 7 N 1662

CEN/TC 250/SC 7 "Eurocode 7 - Geotechnical design"

Secretariat: NEN
Secretary: Kraijema Geert Mr

Part 1 integrated FE draft with all agreed CR’s incorporated (track changes)

Document type Related content Document date Expected action

General / Other 2022-08-22 INFO
 SC7_N1662 page 1

CEN/TC 250
Date: 2022-08-29

prEN 1997-1:2022
CEN/TC 250

Secretariat: BSI

Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design — Part 1: General rules

Eurocode 7: Entwurf, Berechnung und Bemessung in der Geotechnik — Teil 1: Allgemeine
Regeln

Eurocode 7: Calcul géotechnique — Partie 1 : Règles générales

ICS:

DATE Version Comment

2022-06-08 2022.01 CMCE version. Added tables for including CR
2022-06-09 2022.02 Added agreed CRs until 2022-05-17
2022-06-09 2022.03 Version sent to review group for confirmation
2022-08-26 2022.04 Additional CR from CRs on part 2 and 3. Update based on comments
from review group
2022-08-29 2022.05 F.E. Version with implemented agreed CR

In this document the changes that SC7.TG A2 have agreed has been implemented in the Formal
Enquiry version of prEN 1997-2.

SC7.TG A2 is a task group with one national representative from each NSB with the mandate to
vote on behalf of their mirror group. All changes is based on change requests proposed by the
Task groups within SC7. To ensure a correct implementation a review group has checked the
implementation. The agreed Change Requests, CR:s, that has been included are listed on next
page.
 SC7_N1662 page 2

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

CR Clause and action Added date Confirmed

(review team)
CR_0001 Annex B 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Delete
CR_0002 Annex C 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Change status to informative. Add some text.
CR_0003 Annex D 2021-11-01 2022-08-26
Action: Deleted in version sent to TC250.
CR_0004 Annex F 2021-11-01 2022-08-26
Action: Deleted in version sent to TC250.
Action: Clause 4.3.1.2 (2) reference
CR_0012 8.1.4.2 Hydraulic heave 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Add permission
CR_0024 10.2 Supervision 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Add note
CR_0030 4.7 Observational Method 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Revise 4.7 (7) and note
CR_0091 3.1.1.6 Weathered zone 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Revise definition
CR_0092 3.1.1.8 Foliation 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Revise definition
CR_0093 4.1.2.3 Different GC 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Add permission
CR_0094 8.1.2 Excessive deformation 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Add as relevant
CR_0095 4.3.3 Geometrical properties – discontinuities 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Revise (2) and (6)
CR_0096 8.1.3.1 Loss of rotational equilibrium 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Add – and part of structure
CR_0097 4.4.1.3 Table 4.8 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Revised partial factors rock
CR_0098 4.4.1.3 Partial factors 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Wording rock and rock mass
CR_0099 3.2.4 Symbols 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: Add missing symbol
CR_0111 4.4.1.1ULS 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Delete note 2, and add or approaches
CR_0112 7.1.1, 4.2.1, 4.2.3.2, 4.2.4 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: Clarification of level of reliability prEN1990
CR_0113 7.1.4 (2) Numerical Model 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Replace word reliability [Part of this CR for EN
1997-2]
CR_0131 4.4.1.3 Partial factor in transient situation 2022-07-26 2022-08-26
Action: Added permission reduction resistance factor
CR_0136 4.4.1.3 Partial factor in accidental situation 2022-07-26 2022-08-26
Action: Added note on accidental situation
CR_0145 3.1.9.7 Execution specification 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Revised definition
CR_0153 6.4 Representative values of groundwater pressures 2022-06-08 2022-08-26
Action: Rewording
CR_0155 4.3.2.1 Representative value of ground properties 2022-07-26 2022-08-26
Action: add a bullet point in the list

2
 SC7_N1662 page 3

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

CR_0157 5.5 Plain and reinforced concrete 2022-07-26 2022-08-26

Action: Add additional guidance and reference
CR_0164 6.1 Groundwater control system 2022-07-26 2022-08-26
Action: Design if no groundwater control
CR_0174 4.7 Observational Method 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: Add new subclause on "brittle behavior"
CR_0175 4.7 Observational Method 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: Deleted Serviceability criterion
CR_0177 10.1 Implementation of design 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: Delete note
CR_0181 8.2 Numerical Method 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: Revised notes
CR_0184 6.1 Pore water suction 2022-07-26 2022-08-26
Action: Change ground suction to pore water suction
CR_0185 4.4.1.1 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: Implicit demonstration of Ed≤Rd
CR_0186 8.2 Numerical Methods – Table 8.1 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: Added table notes
CR_0188 8.2 Numerical Methods 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: Added note on NA decision on EFA/MFA
CR_0189 8.2 Numerical Methods 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: PER to omit explicit verification of each failure
mechanism
CR_0206 4.3.2.1 Conversion factor 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: added missing words on
CR_0207 Annex A.4 – Scale of fluctuation 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: Added note
CR_0208 Annex A.4 – Editorial 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: Moved tables and updated wording
CR_0210 6.6 and 4.3.1.4 Freezing conditions 2022-08-25 2022-08-26
Action: Delete clause 6.6 and add in 4.3.1.4
CR_0212 8.2 Numerical models 2022-08-25 2022-08-26
Action: Revised with input and output
R1 Review groups comment Nov-draft 2022-06-09 2022-08-26
Action: revise 4.3.2.1, 4.3.2.2, 6.3, 6.5.1 and Table 8.1

3
 SC7_N1662 page 4

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

Contents Page

European foreword....................................................................................................................................................... 6
0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 7
1 Scope ................................................................................................................................................................. 10
1.1 Scope of prEN 1997-1.................................................................................................................................. 10
1.2 Assumptions................................................................................................................................................... 10
2 Normative references ................................................................................................................................. 11
3 Terms, definitions and symbols .............................................................................................................. 11
3.1 Terms and definitions ................................................................................................................................ 11
3.2 Symbols and abbreviations ...................................................................................................................... 19
4 Basis of design ............................................................................................................................................... 23
4.1 General rules.................................................................................................................................................. 23
4.2 Principles of limit state design ................................................................................................................ 30
4.3 Basic variables .............................................................................................................................................. 35
4.4 Verification by the partial factor method............................................................................................ 41
4.5 Verification by prescriptive rules .......................................................................................................... 45
4.6 Verification by testing ................................................................................................................................ 45
4.7 Verification by the Observational Method .......................................................................................... 45
5 Materials.......................................................................................................................................................... 46
5.1 Ground ............................................................................................................................................................. 46
5.2 Engineered fill ............................................................................................................................................... 46
5.3 Geosynthetics................................................................................................................................................. 47
5.4 Grout ................................................................................................................................................................. 47
5.5 Plain and reinforced concrete ................................................................................................................. 47
5.6 Steel ................................................................................................................................................................... 48
5.7 Timber.............................................................................................................................................................. 48
5.8 Masonry ........................................................................................................................................................... 49
6 Groundwater.................................................................................................................................................. 49
6.1 General ............................................................................................................................................................. 49
6.2 Properties of groundwater ....................................................................................................................... 50
6.3 Measurements ............................................................................................................................................... 50
6.4 Representative values of groundwater pressures ........................................................................... 51
6.5 Design values of groundwater pressures ............................................................................................ 53
6.6 Groundwater in freezing conditions ..................................................................................................... 54
7 Geotechnical analysis ................................................................................................................................. 54
7.1 Calculation models ...................................................................................................................................... 54
7.2 Model factors ................................................................................................................................................. 57
8 Ultimate limit states .................................................................................................................................... 58
8.1 Type of ultimate limit states .................................................................................................................... 58
8.2 Procedure for numerical models............................................................................................................ 64
9 Serviceability limit states .......................................................................................................................... 68
9.1 General ............................................................................................................................................................. 68
9.2 Serviceability criteria ................................................................................................................................. 68
9.3 Calculation of ground movements ......................................................................................................... 69

4
 SC7_N1662 page 5

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

9.4 Structural aspects ......................................................................................................................................... 70

9.5 Hydraulic aspects ......................................................................................................................................... 70
10 Implementation of design.......................................................................................................................... 71
10.1 General ............................................................................................................................................................. 71
10.2 Supervision of execution............................................................................................................................ 72
10.3 Inspection ........................................................................................................................................................ 72
10.4 Monitoring....................................................................................................................................................... 73
10.5 Maintenance ................................................................................................................................................... 74
10.6 Application of Observational Method ................................................................................................... 75
11 Testing .............................................................................................................................................................. 75
11.1 General ............................................................................................................................................................. 75
11.2 Testing to determine ground properties ............................................................................................. 77
11.3 Testing to determine parameters for use in design ......................................................................... 77
11.4 Testing to verify resistance ....................................................................................................................... 77
11.5 Testing to control quality .......................................................................................................................... 77
11.6 Testing to determine geotechnical behaviour ................................................................................... 77
12 Reporting ......................................................................................................................................................... 78
12.1 General ............................................................................................................................................................. 78
12.2 Ground Investigation Report .................................................................................................................... 79
12.3 Geotechnical Design Report ...................................................................................................................... 79
12.4 Geotechnical Construction Record ......................................................................................................... 80
12.5 Geotechnical test reports ........................................................................................................................... 80
Annex A (informative) Characteristic value determination procedure................................................. 82
Annex B (informative) Limiting values of structural deformation and ground movement ........... 89
Annex C (normative) Additional requirements and recommendations for reporting ..................... 95
Annex D (informative) Guideline on selection of Geotechnical Complexity Class .......................... 104
Bibliography .............................................................................................................................................................. 107

5
 SC7_N1662 page 6

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

European foreword

This document (prEN 1997-1:2022) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 250 “Structural
Eurocodes”, the secretariat of which is held by BSI. CEN/TC 250 is responsible for all Structural
Eurocodes and has been assigned responsibility for structural and geotechnical design matters by CEN.

This document will partially supersede EN 1997-1:2004. Some content is migrated into prEN 1990:2021.

The first generation of EN Eurocodes was published between 2002 and 2007. This document forms part
of the second generation of the Eurocodes, which have been prepared under Mandate M/515 issued to
CEN by the European Commission and the European Free Trade Association.

The Eurocodes have been drafted to be used in conjunction with relevant execution, material, product
and test standards, and to identify requirements for execution, materials, products and testing that are
relied upon by the Eurocodes.

The Eurocodes recognize the responsibility of each Member State and have safeguarded their right to
determine values related to regulatory safety matters at national level through the use of National
Annexes.

6
 SC7_N1662 page 7

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

0 Introduction

0.1 Introduction to the Eurocodes

The Structural Eurocodes comprise the following standards generally consisting of a number of Parts:

— EN 1990, Eurocode: Basis of structural and geotechnical design

— EN 1991, Eurocode 1: Actions on structures

— EN 1992, Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures

— EN 1993, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures

— EN 1994, Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures

— EN 1995, Eurocode 5: Design of timber structures

— EN 1996, Eurocode 6: Design of masonry structures

— EN 1997, Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design

— EN 1998, Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance

— EN 1999, Eurocode 9: Design of aluminium structures

— New parts are under development, e.g. Eurocode for design of structural glass

The Eurocodes are intended for use by designers, clients, manufacturers, constructors, relevant
authorities (in exercising their duties in accordance with national or international regulations),
educators, software developers, and committees drafting standards for related product, testing and
execution standards.

NOTE Some aspects of design are most appropriately specified by relevant authorities or, where not specified,
can be agreed on a project-specific basis between relevant parties such as designers and clients. The Eurocodes
identify such aspects making explicit reference to relevant authorities and relevant parties.

0.2 Introduction to EN 1997 Eurocode 7

EN 1997 consists of a number of parts:

— EN 1997-1, Geotechnical design – Part 1: General rules

— EN 1997-2, Geotechnical design – Part 2: Ground properties

— EN 1997-3, Geotechnical design – Part 3: Geotechnical structures

EN 1997 standards establish additional principles and requirements to those given in EN 1990 for the
safety, serviceability, robustness, and durability of geotechnical structures.

Design and verification in EN 1997 (all parts) are based on the partial factor method or other reliability-
based methods, prescriptive rules, testing, or the observational method.

7
 SC7_N1662 page 8

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

0.3 Introduction to prEN 1997-1

prEN 1997-1 establish additional principles and requirements to those given in EN 1990 for the safety,
serviceability, robustness, and durability of geotechnical structures.

Design and verification in prEN 1997-1:2022 are based on the partial factor method, prescriptive rules,
testing, or the observational method.

0.4 Verbal forms used in the Eurocodes

The verb “shall" expresses a requirement strictly to be followed and from which no deviation is
permitted in order to comply with the Eurocodes.

The verb “should” expresses a highly recommended choice or course of action. Subject to national
regulation and/or any relevant contractual provisions, alternative approaches could be used/adopted
where technically justified.

The verb “may" expresses a course of action permissible within the limits of the Eurocodes.

The verb “can" expresses possibility and capability; it is used for statements of fact and clarification of
concepts.

0.5 National annex for prEN 1997-1

National choice is allowed in this standard where explicitly stated within notes. National choice includes
the selection of values for Nationally Determined Parameters (NDPs).

The national standard implementing prEN 1997-1:2022 can have a National Annex containing all
national choices to be used for the design of buildings and civil engineering works to be constructed in
the relevant country.

When no national choice is given, the default choice given in this standard is to be used.

When no national choice is made and no default is given in this standard, the choice can be specified by
a relevant authority or, where not specified, agreed for a specific project by appropriate parties.

National choice is allowed in prEN 1997-1:2022 through the following clauses:

3.1 Table 3.1 4.1.2.2 Table 4.1

4.1.2.3 Table 4.2 4.1.3 Table 4.3
4.1.8 Table 4.4 4.2.3 Table 4.5
4.2.4 Table 4.6 4.4.3 Table 4.7
4.4.3 Table 4.8 7.1.2 Table 7.1
8.2 Table 8.1 12.1 Table 12.1
A.4 Table A.2 A.4 Table A.3
D.3 Table D.1 E.3 Table E.1
E.3 Table E.2

8
 SC7_N1662 page 9

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

National choice is allowed in prEN 1997-1:2022 on the application of the following informative
annexes:
Annex A Annex B Annex D

The National Annex can contain, directly or by reference, non-contradictory complementary

information for ease of implementation, provided it does not alter any provisions of the Eurocodes.

9
 SC7_N1662 page 10

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

1 Scope

1.1 Scope of prEN 1997-1

(1) This document provides general rules for the design and verification of geotechnical structures.

(2) This document is applicable for the design and verification of geotechnical structures outside the
scope of prEN 1997-3:2022.

NOTE In this case, additional or amended provisions can be necessary.

1.2 Assumptions

(1) In addition to the assumptions given in prEN 1990:2021, the provisions of prEN 1997:2022 (all
parts) assume that:

— ground investigations are planned by personnel or enterprises knowledgeable about potential

ground and groundwater conditions;

— ground investigations are executed by personnel having appropriate skill and experience;

— evaluation of test results and derivation of ground properties from ground investigation are carried
out by personnel with appropriate geotechnical experience and qualifications;

— data required for design are collected, recorded, and interpreted by appropriately qualified and
experienced personnel;

— geotechnical structures are designed and verified by personnel with appropriate qualifications and
experience in geotechnical design;

— adequate continuity and communication exist between the personnel involved in data-collection,
design, verification and execution.

(2) This document is intended to be used in conjunction with prEN 1990:2021, which establishes
principles and requirements for the safety, serviceability, robustness, and durability of structures,
including geotechnical structures, and other construction works.

(3) This document is intended to be used in conjunction with prEN 1997-2, which gives provisions rules
for determining ground properties from ground investigations.

(4) This document is intended to be used in conjunction with prEN 1997-3, which gives specific rules for
the design and verification of certain types of geotechnical structures.

(5) This document is intended to be used in conjunction with the other Eurocodes for the design of
geotechnical structures, including temporary geotechnical structures.

10
 SC7_N1662 page 11

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For
undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.

NOTE See the Bibliography for a list of other documents cited that are not normative references,
including those referenced as recommendations (i.e. in ‘should’ clauses), permissions (i.e. in ‘may’
clauses), possibilities (i.e. in ‘can’ clauses), and in notes.

EN 206, Concrete - Specification, performance, production and conformity

prEN 1990:2021, Eurocode - Basis of structural and geotechnical design

prEN 1991-2:2021, Eurocode 1: Actions on structures

prEN 1992-1-1:2021 Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures - Part 1-1: General rules, rules for buildings,
bridges and civil engineering structures

prEN 1993-1-1:2020, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures - Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings

prEN 1993-5, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures - Part 5: Piling

prEN 1995-1-1, Eurocode 5: Design of timber structures - Part 1-1: General - Common rules and rules for
buildings

prEN 1996 (all parts), Eurocode 6 Design and masonry structures

prEN 1997-2:2022, Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design - Part 2: Ground properties

prEN 1997-3:2022, Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design - Part 3: Geotechnical structures

3 Terms, definitions and symbols

3.1 Terms and definitions

For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in prEN 1990:2021 and the
following apply.

3.1.1 Terms relating to the ground

3.1.1.1
ground
soil, rock, and fill existing in place prior to execution of the construction works

[SOURCE: prEN 1990:2021]

3.1.1.2
soil
aggregate of minerals and/or organic materials including fills which can be disaggregated by hand in
water

[SOURCE: EN ISO 14688]

11
 SC7_N1662 page 12

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

3.1.1.3
rock
naturally occurring assemblage or aggregate of mineral grains, crystals or mineral based particles
compacted, cemented, or otherwise bound together and which cannot be disaggregated by hand in water

[SOURCE: EN ISO 14689]

3.1.1.4
rock mass
rock comprising the intact material together with the discontinuities and weathering weathered zones SC7 NOTE [#1]: CR 0091
To be consistent with
[SOURCE: EN ISO 14689] revised 3.1.1.6

3.1.1.5
rock material (intact rock)
intact rock between the discontinuities

[SOURCE: EN ISO 14689]

3.1.1.6
weatheriedng zone
distinctive layer zone of weathered ground material, differing physically, chemically, and/or
mineralogically from the layers above and/or belowsurrounding ground SC7 NOTE [#2]: CR 0091
Revised definition
3.1.1.7
discontinuities
bedding planes, joints, fissures, faults and shear planes

[SOURCE: EN ISO 14688]

3.1.1.8
foliation
planar arrangements of constituents such as crystals in any type of rock, especially the parallel
structure that results from flattening, segregation and other processes undergone by the grains in a
metamorphic rock in geology refers to repetitive layering in metamorphic rocks SC7 NOTE [#3]: CR 0092
Revised definition
[SOURCE: EN ISO 14689]

3.1.1.9
interface
surface where two systems of ground interact or surface where ground and structure interact

3.1.1.10
infill
material that fills or is used to fill a space, hole or discontinuity

3.1.1.12
fill (or made ground)
ground that has been formed by using material to fill in a depression or to raise the level of a site

[SOURCE: EN ISO 14689]

12
 SC7_N1662 page 13

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

3.1.1.12
engineered fill
material placed in a controlled manner to ensure that its geotechnical properties conform to a
predetermined specification

3.1.1.13
non-engineered fill
material placed with no compaction control and likely to have heterogeneous and anisotropic
geotechnical properties within its mass

3.1.2 Terms relating to geotechnical reliability

3.1.2.1
desk study
analysis of information about the construction site from existing documentation

Note 1 to entry: A desk study includes, for example, the history of the site, observations of neighbouring
structures, previous construction activities, information from aerial photographs, satellite observations, local
experience in the area, and seismicity

Note 2 to entry: See also prEN 1997-2:2022, Annex B

3.1.2.2
Geotechnical Complexity Class
classification of a geotechnical structure on the basis of the complexity of the ground and ground-
structure interaction, taking account of prior knowledge

3.1.2.3
comparable experience
documented previous information about ground and structural behaviour that is considered relevant
for design, as established by geological, geotechnical and structural similitude with the design situation

3.1.3 Terms relating to ground properties

3.1.3.1
ground property
physical, mechanical, geometrical, or chemical attribute of a ground material

[SOURCE: modified from ISO 6707-1]

3.1.3.2
derived value of a ground property
value of a ground property obtained by theory, correlation or empiricism from test results or field
measurements

3.1.3.3
nominal value of a ground property
cautious estimate of the value of a ground property that affects the occurrence of a limit state

Note 1 to entry: Further explanation of ‘cautious estimate’ is given in 4.3.2.

13
 SC7_N1662 page 14

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

3.1.3.4
characteristic value of a ground property
statistical determination of the value of a ground property that affects the occurrence of a limit state
having a prescribed probability of not being attained

Note 1 to entry: This value corresponds to a specified fractile (mean, superior or inferior) of the assumed
statistical distribution of the particular property of the ground.

3.1.3.5
representative value of a ground property
nominal or characteristic value including the conversion factor

Note 1 to entry: Further explanation on representative value is given in 4.3.2.

3.1.3.6
best estimate value of a ground property
estimate of the most probable value of a ground property

Note 1 to entry: Further explanation about best estimate value is given in 4.3.2.

3.1.4 Terms relating to actions and resistance

3.1.4.1
ground resistance
capacity of the ground, or part of it, to withstand actions without failure

3.1.4.2
ground strength
mechanical property of the ground indicating its ability to resist actions

3.1.4.3
overall stability
failure mechanism in the ground that encompasses the entire geotechnical structure

3.1.4.4
local stability
failure mechanism that encompasses only a certain part of the entire geotechnical structure without
failure of the entire geotechnical structure

3.1.4.5
cyclic actions
variable load that can induce significant stiffness and strength degradation, generation of excess pore
pressure, liquefaction, or permanent settlements

3.1.4.6
creep
increase in strain during sustained load

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1]

14
 SC7_N1662 page 15

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

3.1.5 Terms relating to verification methods

3.1.5.1
Observational Method (-)
continuous, managed, integrated process of design; construction control, monitoring and review that
enables previously defined modifications to be incorporated during or after construction as appropriate

[SOURCE: CIRIA Report 185, 1999]

3.1.5.2
prescriptive rules
pre-determined, experienced-based, and suitably conservative rules for design

3.1.5.3
verification assisted by testing
testing of a structural element to verify design ground properties or resistance

Note 1 to entry: Verification assisted by testing includes, the determination of shaft friction and end bearing of
piles; pull-out strength of anchors; and shear strength of lime-cement columns, for example.

3.1.5.4
verification by testing
testing performed to verify that the performance of the geotechnical structure (or part of the structure)
is within the limiting values

Note 1 to entry: Verification by testing includes full-scale or reduced-scale tests.

3.1.5.5
design variant
describes the anticipated behaviour of the geotechnical structure, given that the relevant ground
properties lie in a predefined range

3.1.6 Terms relating to analysis and models

3.1.6.1
zone of influence
zone where construction works or the geotechnical structure can induce adversely affects in terms of
safety, serviceability, robustness, durability or sustainability on the geotechnical structure itself, other
structures, utilities, ground, or groundwater

3.1.6.2
geotechnical analysis
procedure or algorithm for determining effects-of-actions in and resistance of the ground

3.1.6.3
geotechnical system
term describing the ground and the structure interacting with it

3.1.6.4
Geotechnical Design Model
conceptual representation of the site derived from the ground model for the verification of each
appropriate design situation and limit state

Note 1 to entry: Guidance on the contents of a Geotechnical Design Model are given in Clause 12 and Annex C.

15
 SC7_N1662 page 16

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

3.1.6.5
geotechnical unit
volume of ground or ground layer that is defined as a single material in a Geotechnical Design Model

3.1.6.6
Ground Model
site specific outline of the disposition and character of the ground and groundwater based on results from
ground investigations and other available data

3.1.6.7
numerical models
calculation models involving numerical approximation to obtain solutions

Note 1 to entry: Numerical methods include, but are not limited to, finite-element, finite-difference, boundary-
element, discrete-element and subgrade reaction methods.

3.1.6.8
validation
process of determining the degree to which a calculation model and its input parameters represent a
real design situation

3.1.6.9
robustness
ability of a structure to withstand unforeseen adverse events without being damaged to an extent
disproportionate to the original cause

[SOURCE: prEN 1990:2021]

Note 1 to entry: The aim of designing for robustness is either to prevent disproportionate consequences as a
resulting from an adverse or unforeseen event or to provide some additional resistance to reduce the likelihood and
extent of such an event.

Note 2 to entry: There is a distinction between design for identified accidental actions and design for robustness.
In design for accidental actions, a target level of reliability is expected to be achieved whereas design for robustness
aims to increase the safety margin without aiming for a specified target reliability.

3.1.6.10
toppling
loss of static equilibrium due to rotation of the structure

3.1.6.11
overturning
rotation of the structure involving failure of the ground

3.1.7 Terms relating to structural deformation and ground movement

Definitions of some terms for foundation movement and deformation are given in Figure 3.1.

16
 SC7_N1662 page 17

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Key
S settlement ∆/L deflection ratio
δs differential settlement ω tilt
θ rotation β angular distortion
α angular strain 1 original position and shape
∆ relative deflection 2 deformed position and shape

Figure 3.1 — Definitions of foundation movement

3.1.8 Terms relating to groundwater

3.1.8.1
groundwater level
level of the water surface in the ground

3.1.8.2
piezometric level
level to which water would rise in a standpipe designed to detect the pressure of water at a point
beneath the ground surface

3.1.8.3
surface water level
level of water above the ground surface

17
 SC7_N1662 page 18

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

3.1.9 Terms relating to implementation of design

3.1.9.1
limiting value
value of the serviceability criteria

Note 1 to entry: Expressed for example as, deformation, stress, strain, or vibration.

3.1.9.2
threshold value
value that, with an appropriate safety margin, defines the point at which contingency measures is
applied to avoid exceeding the limiting value

3.1.9.3
acceptance criteria
acceptable variation of material, ground and geometrical properties expressed as tolerances to avoid
exceeding the serviceability criteria or the ultimate limit state

3.1.9.4
supervision
measures or activities during execution to check that the construction work follows the process,
including execution methods and construction stages, set by the execution specification

3.1.9.5
inspection
measures or activities during execution to check the compliance of the execution with the execution
specification and the validity of the design assumptions in relation to encountered ground conditions at
the site

3.1.9.6
monitoring
measuring/observation of the behaviour of the ground and/or structure, to check compliance with the
serviceability criteria

3.1.9.7
execution specification
synthesis of the requirements on material, products, dimensions, execution methods, control and
construction stages from the Geotechnical Design Report set of documents comprising drawings, a
description of the works, product choices, execution classes, tolerance classes and other technical data
and requirements necessary for the execution of the works SC7 NOTE [#4]: CR 0145
Revised definition
Note 1 to entry: An execution specification can include method statements, supervision plan, inspection plan,
monitoring plan, maintenance plan, contingency plan, material specification, technical description etc. The
information can be presented in text, drawings, models or databases, for example.

3.1.10 Terms relating to reporting

3.1.10.1
Ground Investigation Report
factual report that compiles the results of ground investigation

18
 SC7_N1662 page 19

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

3.1.10.2
Geotechnical Design Report
report that complies verification and design process of all construction phases and final design of the
geotechnical structure

3.1.10.3
Geotechnical Construction Record
collection of documents of construction, supervision, monitoring and inspection of the final structure and
each phase of execution

3.2 Symbols and abbreviations

For the purposes of this document, the following symbols and abbreviations apply.

NOTE 1 The symbols commonly used in all Eurocodes are defined in prEN 1990:2021.

NOTE 2 The notation of the symbols used is based on ISO 3898:1997.

3.2.1 Symbols

Latin upper-case letters

Aw,d accidental component of groundwater pressure

E modulus of elasticity (Young’s modulus)

G shear modulus

Gd,dst design value of any permanent destabilising force (upwards) not caused by groundwater
pressures
Gd,stb design value of any stabilising (downward) force

Gw permanent component of groundwater pressure

Gwk characteristic value of Gw

Gwk,inf characteristic lower value of Gw

Gwk,sup characteristic upper value of Gw

Gw,rep representative value of groundwater pressure

K hydraulic conductivity

KF consequence factor applied to actions

KM consequence factor applied to material properties

KR consequence factor applied to resistance

Ktr reduction factor for a transient design situation

N95 normal distribution, evaluated for a 95% confidence level and infinite degrees of freedom

19
 SC7_N1662 page 20

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

NSPT blow count measured in Standard Penetration Test

Qd,dst design value of any variable destabilising force (upwards) not caused by groundwater
pressure
Qw variable component of the groundwater pressure

Qw,comb combination value of Qw

Qw,freq frequent value of Qw

Qw,k characteristic value of Qw

Qw,qper quasi-permanent value of Qw

Qw,rep representative value of Qw

Rd design value of resistance

Ud,dst design value of destabilising (uplift) force due to groundwater pressures

VX coefficient of variation of the ground material property X

VX,inh coefficient of variation of a ground material property X due to inherent ground variability

VX,quality coefficient of variation of the measurement error

VX,tran coefficient of variation of the transformation error

X ground material property

Xd design value of a ground property X

Xk characteristic value of a ground property X

Xmean mean value of a ground property X from test results

Xnom nominal value of a ground property X

Xrep representative value of X

Ymean Mean value of the logarithmic values of a ground property Y from text results.

Latin lower-case letters

c'p peak effective cohesion

c'r residual effective cohesion

cu undrained shear strength of soil

ch coefficient of horizontal consolidation

cv coefficient of vertical consolidation

20
 SC7_N1662 page 21

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

fs sleeve friction in a CPT

hw,z piezometric level at elevation z

ic,d design value of critical hydraulic gradient (when soil particles begin to move)

id design value of the hydraulic gradient

kn coefficient that depends on n used to determine Xk

n number of sample test results or of site-specific data

pl pressuremeter limit pressure

p′v,rep representative value of any effective vertical overburden or surcharge pressure at the ground
surface
qc cone resistance in a CPT

qu unconfined compressive strength of soil or rock (for foundation purposes)

sx standard deviation of the sample derived values

t95 student’s t-factor, evaluated for a 95% confidence level and (n – 1) degrees of freedom

u groundwater pressure at a point in the ground

u0 Groundwater pressure in the absence of flow

ud design value of groundwater pressure at a point in the ground

ud,dst design value of destabilising (uplift) groundwater pressures

z vertical distance or depth of the point in the ground below the ground surface (not including
any overlying fill)

Greek upper-case letters

∆ relative deflection

∆/L deflection ratio

∆ud design excess groundwater pressure

Greek lower-case letters

β angular distortion

γ′ buoyant weight density (effective density) of the ground

γc,x partial factor on effective cohesion (x=p for peak, x=r for residual)

γcu partial factor on shear strength in total stress analysis

21
 SC7_N1662 page 22

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

γE partial factor on effect-of-actions

γF partial factor on action

γHYD partial factor for hydraulic heave

γM partial factor on material, applied to ground properties

γpv partial factor for effective vertical overburden pressure

γqu partial factor on unconfined compressive strength

γrep representative value of the weight density of the ground

γtanδ partial factor on coefficient of ground/structure interface friction

γtanϕ,x partial factor on tan ϕ,x where x is replaced by p for peak friction, cs for critical state, dis for
along discontinuity
γw weight density of groundwater

γw,rep representative weight density of groundwater

γτf partial factor on the shear strength of soil in effective stress analysis

γτr partial factor on the shear strength of rock and rock mass

γτdis partial factor on the shear strength of rock discontinuities SC7 NOTE [#5]: CR 0099
Added the missing partial
factors for rock in list of
δ ground/structure interface angle of friction symbols

δs differential settlement

δX vertical scale of fluctuation of the property

η conversion factor

τf shear strength of soil in effective stress analysis

ϕ′ effective angle of friction of the ground

σv,d design value of the (stabilizing) vertical total stress at the base of the layer that is subject to
uplift.
Σx standard deviation of a ground property X

τf shear strength at failure

tanδ coefficient of the ground/structure interface friction

tanϕ′ coefficient of effective friction

22
 SC7_N1662 page 23

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

ω tilt

3.2.2 Abbreviations
CC Consequence Class

DC Design Case

DCL Design Check Level

DQL Design Qualification (and experience) Level

EFA Effects Factoring Approach

GC Geotechnical Category

GCC Geotechnical Complexity Class

GCR Geotechnical Construction Record

GDM Geotechnical Design Model

GDR Geotechnical Design Report

GIR Ground Investigation Report

GM Ground Model

IL Inspection Level

MFA Material Factor Approach

NDP National Determined Parameter

OCR Over Consolidation Ratio

OM Observational Method

RFA Resistance Factor Approach

4 Basis of design

4.1 General rules

4.1.1 Basic requirements

(1) The assumptions given in this document (1.2) shall be verified.

(2) The design of geotechnical structures shall comply with prEN 1990:2021, prEN 1997-1:2022,
prEN 1997-2:2022 and prEN 1997-3:2022.

(3) The following models shall be used to verify the requirements for safety, serviceability, robustness,
and durability of geotechnical structures:

23
 SC7_N1662 page 24

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

— Ground Model, as specified in prEN 1997-2:2022, Clause 4;

— Geotechnical Design Model, as specified in 4.2.3 and Annex C.

4.1.2 Geotechnical reliability

4.1.2.1 Zone of influence

(1) The extent of the zone of influence shall be defined.

(2) When defining the extent of the zone of influence consideration should be given, but not limited, to:

— the structure and its elements;

— any transient or persistent changes in ground conditions;

— all relevant ultimate limit states of surrounding ground;

— all relevant serviceability limit states;

— all relevant hydraulic or hydrogeological effects;

— relevant redistribution of the in-situ stress states; and

— the influence of work undertaken during execution.

(3) The extents of the zone of influence should also take account of:

— environmental impact;

— pollution;

— vibrations; and

— noise.

(4) The extents of the zone of influence shall be estimated prior to the ground investigation.

(5) The extents of the zone of influence should be updated based on the results of the ground
investigation and during the design process.

(6) The extent of potential failure surfaces and the potential occurrence of significant ground
displacements shall be determined.

(7) In addition to (4), the extents of the zone of influence shall include the extent of any transient or
persistent changes in the representative groundwater or piezometric levels.

4.1.2.2 Geotechnical Complexity Class

(1) The Geotechnical Complexity Class (GCC) shall be selected using engineering judgement, taking into
account complexity and uncertainty in the ground, groundwater conditions and ground-structure
interaction.

NOTE 1 General features to consider when selecting GCC are given in Table 4.1(NDP) unless the National Annex
gives different features.

24
 SC7_N1662 page 25

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

NOTE 2 Specific features to consider when selecting the GCC are given in Annex E.

Table 4.1(NDP) — Selection of Geotechnical Complexity Class

Geotechnical Complexity General features

Complexity
Class
GCC 3 Higher Any of the following apply:
— considerable uncertainty regarding ground conditions
— highly variable or difficult ground conditions
— significant sensitivity to groundwater and surface water conditions
— significant complexity of the ground-structure interaction
GCC 2 Normal GCC2 applies if GCC 1 and GCC3 are not applicable

GCC 1 Lower All the following conditions apply:

— negligible uncertainty regarding the ground conditions
— uniform ground conditions
— low sensitivity to groundwater and surface water conditions,
— low complexity of the ground-structure-interaction
NOTE The terms ‘considerable’, ‘significant’, ‘highly’, etc. are relative to any comparable experience that exists for the
particular geotechnical structure, design situation, and ground conditions.

(2) A preliminary GCC should be selected as part of the desk study (prEN 1997-2:2021, 5.2.1).

(3) As an alternative to (2), a preliminary GCC may be selected based on a site inspection.

(4) The GCC shall be reviewed and, if appropriate, changed at each stage of design and execution.

(5) The GCC shall be assumed to be GCC3 unless a different class has been determined by the desk study
or by preliminary, or design investigation.

4.1.2.3 Geotechnical Category

(1) Geotechnical structures shall be classified into a Geotechnical Category that combines the
uncertainty and complexity of the ground and ground-structure interaction with the consequence of
failure of the structure.

(6)(2) Different parts of a structure may be classified in different Geotechnical Categories if the
geotechnical complexity of the consequence of failure differ between the parts. SC7 NOTE [#6]: CR 0093
Added permission
(7)(3) The Geotechnical Category (GC) should be determined from a combination of the Consequence
Class of the structure (CC) and Geotechnical Complexity Class (GCC).

NOTE 1 The relationship between Geotechnical Category, Consequences Class, and Geotechnical Complexity
Class is given in Table 4.2(NDP) unless the National Annex gives a different relationship or specifies a direct
determination of the Geotechnical Category.

NOTE 2 Guidance on classification of geotechnical structures in Consequence Class is given in 4.1.3.

25
 SC7_N1662 page 26

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

Table 4.2(NDP) — Relationship between Geotechnical Category, Consequences Class, and

Geotechnical Complexity Class

Consequence Class Geotechnical Complexity Class (GCC)

(CC) Lower Normal Higher
(GCC1) (GCC2) (GCC3)
Higher (CC3) GC2 GC3 GC3
Normal (CC2) GC2 GC2 GC3
Lower (CC1) GC1 GC2 GC2

(8)(4) To ensure the appropriate level of reliability required by prEN 1990:2021, 4.2 is obtained, the
Geotechnical Category shall be used to specify the extent and amount of the following measures:

— measures to achieve appropriate representation of parameters for design, including:

— appropriate extent of ground investigation (prEN 1997-2:2022);

— validation of available information from Ground investigations (4.2.4);

— validation of the Geotechnical Design Model (4.2.3);

— measures to achieve accuracy of the calculation models used and the interpretation of their results,
including:

— validation of calculation models (7.1);

— measures to prevent errors in design and execution, and the occurrence of gross human errors,
including:

— designer qualifications and experience (4.1.8 and prEN 1990:2021, Annex B);

— quality management measures (4.1.8);

— amount and type of reporting (12 and Annex C);

— measures to ensure appropriate implementation of design according to procedures specified in the

project documentation, including:

— supervision (10.2);

— inspection (10.3);

— monitoring (10.4);

— maintenance (10.5).

(9)(5) If the measures in (3) are insufficient to obtain the appropriate level of reliability required by
prEN 1990 additional measures should be taken.

26
 SC7_N1662 page 27

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

4.1.3 Consequences of failure

(1) In addition to prEN 1990:2021, 4.3, the classification of the consequences of failure of a geotechnical
structure should account for effects on structures, utilities, and ground within the zone of influence.

NOTE 1 Table 4.3(NDP) gives examples of geotechnical structures in Consequence Classes CC0 to CC4 unless the
National Annex gives other examples.

NOTE 2 The provisions in prEN 1997:2022 (all parts) do not entirely cover design rules needed for geotechnical
structures classified as CC4. For these structures, additional or amended provisions to those given in
prEN 1997:2022 (all parts) can be needed.

Table 4.3(NDP) — Examples of geotechnical structures in different Consequence Classes

Consequence Description of Examples

class consequence

CC4 Highest — Critical infrastructures;

— Geotechnical structures whose integrity is of vital importance for
civil protectiona;
— Areas with significant landslide hazards.
CC3 Higher — Retaining walls and foundations supporting public buildings, with
high exposure;
— Man-made slopes and cuts, retaining structures with high
exposure;
— Major road/railway embankments, bridge foundations that can
cause server interruption of service in emergency situations;
— Geotechnical structures with a primary navigational
functionb27ccupanc;
— Underground constructions with large occupancy.
CC2 Normal All geotechnical structures not classified as CC1, CC3, or CC4

CC1 Lower — Retaining walls and foundations supporting buildings with low
occupancy;
— Man-made slopes and cuts, in areas where a failure will have low
impact on the society;
— Minor road/railway embankments not vital for the society;
— Underground structures with occasional occupancyc27ccupancy.
CC0 Lowest Not applicable for geotechnical structures
a Examples of Geotechnical structures whose integrity is of vital importance for civil protection is road/railway
embankments with fundamental role in the event of natural disasters, earth dams connected to aqueducts and energy
plants, levees, tailing dams and earth dams with extreme consequences upon failure, foundation of nuclear structures,
and major harbour structures.
B Examples of Geotechnical structures with primary navigational function is marking or protecting entrances of ports.
C Examples of underground structures with occasional occupancy is culverts not supporting main railway lines or
major roads.

27
 SC7_N1662 page 28

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

4.1.4 Robustness

(1) prEN 1990:2021, 4.4 shall apply.

NOTE 1 For most geotechnical structures, design in accordance with the Eurocodes provides an adequate level
of robustness without the need for any additional design measures to enhance robustness.

NOTE 2 Appropriate prognosis of climate change affecting the geotechnical structure during its design service
life is considered in 4.3.1.5.

(2) Measures to enhance robustness of a geotechnical structure should take into account:

— interaction between different structures or parts of structures;

— interaction between different failure modes affecting the geotechnical structure;

— potential progressive failures in the ground;

— ground conditions with specific issues that are not fully covered by normal design;

— impact on the geotechnical structure due to potential adverse events in the surroundings of the
structure;

— erosive influence of running water.

NOTE 1 Ground conditions with specific issues refer to local ground conditions known, by comparable
experience, to be difficult to handle and with huge consequences (e.g. quick clay, swelling ground, liquefiable soils).

NOTE 2 Additional design measures to enhance robustness of geotechnical structure can be given in the National
Annex.

(3) Strategies for designing geotechnical structures for robustness should include providing:

— enough ductility and deformation capacity;

— redistribution of load within the geotechnical structure to avoid sudden collapse;

— increased resistance of identified critical elements within the geotechnical structure;

— larger acceptable excavation tolerances;

— extra drainage capacity by appropriate design of drainage systems;

— measures to prevent scour leading to erosion of soil under and around a geotechnical structure;

— restriction on future loads on the ground surface or the structure.

4.1.5 Design service life

(1) The rules of design service life given in prEN 1990:2021, 4.5 shall apply to geotechnical structures.

4.1.6 Durability

(1) The rules for durability given in prEN 1990:2021, 4.5 shall apply to geotechnical structures.

28
 SC7_N1662 page 29

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(2) In addition to (1) durability provisions for construction materials in contact with the ground and
groundwater shall comply with relevant material and execution standards.

(3) To achieve adequate durability of the geotechnical structure, the design shall take into account the
relevant environmental influences given in 4.3.1.4.

(4) Measures should be taken to provide adequate durability over the entire design service life of the
geotechnical structure.

(5) If additional repair and strengthening measures to achieve adequate durability of the geotechnical
structure are needed, they should be specified in a Maintenance Plan.

(6) As an alternative to (3), measures may be taken to limit the environmental influences.

NOTE Examples of provisions to limit the environmental influences: isolation to avoid temperature variation,
drainage or barriers to avoid seepage, or reduction of contamination in the ground.

4.1.7 Sustainability

(1) The rules for sustainability given in prEN 1990:2021, 4.7 shall apply to geotechnical structures.

(2) In addition to (1), specification of measures to enhance sustainability of a geotechnical structure

and execution of geotechnical works, should take into account the:

— impact on non-renewable resources within the zone of influence;

— impact on structures, utilities, and ground within the zone of influence;

— impact on environment and economy during the life-cycle, from design stage to end of the structure's
design service life;

— potential re-use of structural elements or construction materials after the end of the structure's
design service life.

(3) Strategies for designing geotechnical structures for enhanced sustainability should include:

— optimize quantities of materials used;

— utilisation of renewable material;

— inclusion of geothermal elements in the geotechnical structure;

— re-use of structural elements;

— re-use of excavated material within the construction site;

— limitation of construction material with potential to cause pollution during execution and the
structures design service life.

4.1.8 Quality management

(1) The rules for quality management given in prEN 1990:2021, 4.8 shall apply to geotechnical
structures.

29
 SC7_N1662 page 30

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

(2) Quality controls should be implemented at all stages of ground investigation, design, preparation
of execution specification, execution, use, and maintenance.

(3) If used, Design Qualification and Experience Levels (DQL), Design Check Level (DCL), and Inspection
Levels (IL) should be related to Geotechnical Categories (GC).

NOTE 1 The definition of DQL, DCL and IL are given in prEN 1990:2021, Annex B, together with guidance on the
use.

NOTE 2 The relationship between Geotechnical Category (GC) and Design Qualification and Experience Levels
(DQL), Design Check Levels (DCL), and Inspection Level (IL), is given in Table 4.4(NDP) unless the National Annex
gives a different relationship.

Table 4.4(NDP) — Minimum Design Qualification and Experience, Design Check, and Inspection
Levels for different Geotechnical Categories
Geotechnical Category Minimum Design Minimum Minimum
Qualification and Design Check Inspection Level
Experience Level Level (DCL) (IL)
(DQL)
GC3 DQL3 DCL3 IL3
GC2 DQL2 DCL2 IL2
GC1 DQL1 DCL1 IL1

4.2 Principles of limit state design

4.2.1 General

(1) The principles of limit state design given in prEN 1990:2021, Clause 5 shall apply to geotechnical
structures.

(2) In addition to (1), limit states for geotechnical structures shall be verified by one or more of the
following methods:

— calculation using the partial factor method (4.4) or other reliability-based methods;

— prescriptive rules (4.5);

— testing (4.6);

— Observational Method (4.7).

(3) When the uncertainty in ground properties is too large to ensure the level of reliability required by
prEN 1990:2021, limit states for geotechnical structures should not be verified using the partial factor
method alone. SC7 NOTE [#7]: CR_ 0112
Added note to assist the
NOTE The validation of that the certainty of the ground properties provide the level of reliability required by engineer on how to
prEN 1990:2021 is achieved by meeting the requirements and following the recommendations in 4.2.4 Validation validate the uncertainty of
of information from the Ground Investigation Report and 4.2.3.2 Validation of the Geotechnical Design Model. the ground properties, to
fulfil the level of reliability
by prEN 1990.

30
 SC7_N1662 page 31

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(3)(4) The verification of limit states by any of the methods given in (1) shall provide a level of
reliability no less than that required by prEN 1990:2021.

(4)(5) The result of the verification shall be compared with previous experience.

4.2.2 Design situations

(1) prEN 1990:2021, Clause 5 shall apply to geotechnical design situation.

(2) In addition to prEN 1990:2021, 4.2.5 and prEN 1990:2021, 5.2(1), the physical conditions that define
geotechnical design situations shall include the following:

— geometrical properties of the site and the geotechnical structure;

— geometrical and material properties of the ground and groundwater; and

— environmental influences on the structure, the ground, and groundwater.

(3) Geotechnical design situations should also include:

— stages of execution, service life, repair, and maintenance;

— potential impact of execution methods on geometrical and ground properties;

— consideration of the practicability and buildability;

— anticipated transient or permanent changes that will alter the ground or groundwater conditions,
their geometrical properties or the behaviour of the ground-structure interaction; and

— anticipated placement and removal of ground or storage of building material in the zone of influence.

NOTE Examples of changes in the ground or groundwater conditions and their geometrical properties are:
adverse effects of excess groundwater pressures depending on the rate of construction, rapid drawdown of water
level, propagating cracks in the ground, effects of scour, erosion or dredging on the ground geometry, effects of
soluble, expansive or collapsible grounds on the geotechnical structure.

4.2.3 Geotechnical Design Model

4.2.3.1 General

(1) A Geotechnical Design Model (GDM) shall be developed for each geotechnical design situation, with
corresponding combinations of actions and associated relevant limit states.

(2) The GDM shall be based on the Ground Model.

NOTE Guidance on Ground Model is given in prEN 1997-2:2022, Clause 4.

(3) The GDM shall be developed after validating the information contained in the Ground Model,
according to 4.2.4, regarding variability and uncertainty of the ground conditions.

(4) The GDM shall include representative values of ground properties for all the geotechnical units
encountered in the zone of influence.

NOTE 1 Guidance on selection of representative values of ground properties is given in 4.3.2.

31
 SC7_N1662 page 32

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

NOTE 2 For verification of limit state using partial factor method, design values of ground properties are
determined from the representative values.

(5) The GDM shall identify any spatial trend in ground properties.

4.2.3.2 Validation of the Geotechnical Design Model

(1) The confidence of each GDM shall be validated to ensure that the level of reliability required by
prEN 1990:2021 is obtained.

NOTE The validation of GDM providing the level of reliability required by prEN 1990:2021 is achieved by
meeting the requirements and following the recommendations in subclauses (2) to (5). SC7 NOTE [#8]: CR 0112
Added note to assist the
(6)(2) The measures taken to validate the GDM should be selected according to the Geotechnical engineer on how to
validate the uncertainty of
Category.
the ground properties, to
fulfil the level of reliability
NOTE Measures to validate the GDM are given in Table 4.5(NDP) unless the National Annex gives different by prEN 1990.
measures.

Table 4.5(NDP) — Measures to validate the Geotechnical Design Model

Geotechnical Measures
Category

GC3 All items given for GC2 and, in addition:

— sensitivity analyses of key ground properties for the design to identify need of
additional information to cover all anticipated design situations;
— sensitivity analyses of key geometrical properties for the design to identify need of
additional measures;
— check that the information available is sufficient to determine the variability of the
ground properties and groundwater conditions.
GC2 All items given for GC1 and, in addition:
— comparison of derived values from different sources within each geotechnical unit to
determine representative values of ground properties with appropriate level of
confidence;
— check that GDM includes all ground properties and groundwater conditions affecting
the design situation;
— check that GDM is appropriate and compatible with the considered ultimate limit states
(failure modes) and serviceability limit states;
— check that the ground properties are determined for a time frame compatible with the
considered limit states and design situation.
GC1 All items given below:
— check the consistency of assumed geotechnical units and geotechnical properties with
available information from the desk study and comparable experience;
— confirmation of the Geotechnical Design Model with information from site inspection.

(7)(3) If the validation process in (1) and (2) indicates that confidence in the GDM is insufficient to
obtain the level of reliability required by prEN 1990:2021, additional ground investigation shall be
performed.

32
 SC7_N1662 page 33

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(8)(4) As an alternative to (3), other measures may be used to improve confidence in the GDM,
provided the measures are specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, agreed for a
specific project by relevant parties.

(9)(5) To account for any remaining uncertainty in the GDM, different design variants for the design
situation, corresponding combinations of actions and associated limit states should be considered.

4.2.4 Validation of information from the Ground Investigation Report

(1) The confidence of information from the Ground Investigation Report shall be validated to ensure
that the level of reliability required by prEN 1990:2021 is obtained.

NOTE The validation of information from the Ground Investigation Report providing the level of reliability
required by prEN 1990:2021 is achieved by meeting the requirements and following the recommendations in
subclauses (2) to (7). SC7 NOTE [#9]: CR 0112
Added note to assist the
(10)(2) The quality, quantity, and appropriateness of the information obtained from the Ground engineer on how to
validate the uncertainty of
Investigation Report (GIR) shall be validated for all relevant design situations, corresponding
the ground properties, to
combinations of actions and associated limit states. fulfil the level of reliability
by prEN 1990.
(11)(3) The measures taken to validate the information from the GIR should be selected according to
the Geotechnical Category.

NOTE Measures for validating the information in the GIR are given in Table 4.6(NDP) unless the National Annex
gives different measures.

(12)(4) Non-relevant information that is excluded from the GDM should be documented and justified.

(13)(5) In addition to (12), the level of detail and extent of the Ground Model shall be validated.

NOTE 1 Guidance on Ground Model is given in prEN 1997-2:2022, Clause 4.

33
 SC7_N1662 page 34

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

Table 4.6(NDP) — Measures to validate the information obtained from the GIR
Geotechnical Measures
Category

GC3 All items given below for GC2 and, in addition:

— determine relevant qualitya parameters based on the available data;

— check that areas with low confidence in the determined geological, hydrogeological and
geotechnical conditions, do not have a significant influence on the design and verification
of the limit state.
GC2 All items given below for GC1 and, in addition:
— comparison of the consistency of boundaries of the geotechnical units from different
sources of information, to confirm that used methods of interpolation has sufficiently
captured the variations;
— comparison of ground description, classification, and strength index test results to
identify inconsistencies;
— evaluation of the performed testing to ensure that the test results are appropriate for
design situation considered, with respect to e.g. loading rate, strain level, stress path and
boundary conditions;
— check that, for the design situation considered, the derived values have been
appropriately determined and correlation used within their respective limitations;
— check the confidence of the different sources of information with consideration of the in-
situ techniques and laboratory tests suitability for the considered design situation and
possible level of confidence (see prEN 1997-2:2022).
GC1 All items given below:
— if field investigation and laboratory testing is performed, check that appropriate testing
standards have been used;

— comparison of derived values from different sources to identify inconsistencies and

anomalies;

— check of anomalies identified in the GIR, and exclusion of non-relevant information.

A Quality parameters include for example sample disturbance, zero-drift for CPT, measurement accuracy.

(14)(6) If the validation process in (12) and (45) indicates that the quantity, quality, or appropriateness
of the information presented in the GIR is insufficient to achieve the level of reliability required by
prEN 1990:2021, additional ground investigation shall be performed.

NOTE Guidance on minimum amount of ground investigation is given in prEN 1997-2:2022, Clause 5.

(15)(7) As an alternative to (56), other measures may be used to obtain necessary information, provided
they are specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, agreed for a specific project by the
relevant parties.

4.2.5 Impacts within the zone of influence

(1) Design situations shall include the impact of the new structure on existing structures, utilities, and
the ground and groundwater within its zone of influence.

NOTE 1 Impacts include groundwater alteration, settlement, noise, vibrations and pollution.

NOTE 2 Additional guidance on design situation is given in 4.2.2.

34
 SC7_N1662 page 35

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(2) Design situations shall include the impact of existing structures, utilities, and the ground and
groundwater on the new structure within their zones of influence.

(3) Strategies to limit adverse impact within the zone of influence may include:

— limitation of load close to sensitive structures or utilities;

— appropriate selection of installation methods in relation to ground conditions;

— inclusion of physical or chemical barriers to limit zone of influence;

— limitation of construction material with potential to cause pollution during execution and the
structure design service life.

(4) In addition to prEN 1990:2021, 5.4, and prEN 1990:2021,9.1, serviceability criteria for the new
structure, existing structures, utilities, ground, and groundwater within the zone of influence should be
defined.

(5) If the construction works are likely to have adverse impacts on the behaviour of existing structures,
utilities, and the ground and groundwater within the zone of influence, the behaviour during execution
should be checked against provisions included in the Monitoring Plan.

NOTE Guidance on the use of monitoring to limit the impact from execution and the geotechnical structure
within the zone of influence and to ensure behaviour within the threshold values is given in 10.5.

(6) The anticipated behaviour during execution may be determined by prognosis (calculation with best-
estimate-values) or engineering judgement.

4.3 Basic variables

4.3.1 Actions and environmental influences

4.3.1.1 Classification and representative values of actions

(1) prEN 1990:2021, 6.1, shall apply to geotechnical structures.

4.3.1.2 Permanent and variable actions

(1) In addition to prEN 1990:2021, 6.1.2.2 and prEN 1990:2021, 6.1.2.3, the following potential actions
should be included in relevant geotechnical design situations:

— the weight of the ground and groundwater;

— in situ ground stresses and pressures;

— groundwater pressures;

— ground movements and pressures arising from loads imposed on the ground directly or through
other structural elements;

— ground movements and pressures caused by pre-existing stresses in the ground or changes thereof;

— ground movements and pressures caused by environmental influences;

— stress and stress changes due to construction and operation; and

35
 SC7_N1662 page 36

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

— anticipated future structures.

(2) The design of geotechnical structures shall consider the effects of interaction between the structure
and the ground.

(3) Variable actions arising from traffic loads shall comply with prEN 1991-2:2021, 6.9 and
prEN 1991-2:2021, 8.10. SC7 NOTE [#10]: CR0004
Reference added to prEN
4.3.1.3 Cyclic and dynamic actions 1991. The Annex F in
earlier drafts is replaced
by this reference.
(1) Variable actions that are applied repeatedly or vary systematically during the design service life of
the geotechnical structure shall be considered as:

— cyclic actions:

— when they induce significant ground strength or stiffness degradation, or densification, or

generation of excess groundwater pressures, or permanent settlements or vibration in the
surrounding ground;

— dynamic actions:

— when they induce inertial effects on the geotechnical structures;

or

— cyclic and dynamic actions:

— when the two previous conditions both hold.

NOTE 1 Examples of cyclic or dynamic actions include wind, waves, eccentrically rotating masses, traffic loads,
vibrations due to wind turbines and machineries, including those used in geotechnical works.

NOTE 2 Dynamic actions are defined in prEN 1990:2021.

NOTE 3 Seismic actions are defined in prEN 1998.

4.3.1.4 Environmental influences

(1) prEN 1990:2021, 6.1.4 shall apply.

(2) The adverse effects on actions of the following environmental influences shall be considered:

— existing and future climate conditions such as precipitation, temperature change, and wind;

— freezing and/or thawing of groundwater and surface water;

— mass displacement due to ground improvement, piling, or other installation in the ground;

— increase in groundwater pressure due to construction work or other activities; and

— biological activity.

(3) The adverse effects on the design situation of the following environmental influences shall be
considered:

36
 SC7_N1662 page 37

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

— natural and man-made cavities and underground spaces;

— freezing and/or thawing of groundwater and surface water; SC7 NOTE [#11]: CR0210

— pre-existing activities at regional scale (dewatering, oil or gas extraction, mining);

— climate change effects such as sea level rise; and

— natural dissolution features.

(4) The adverse effects on the durability of the structure, of the following environmental influences on
degradation, corrosion, leaching and erosion shall be considered:

— existing and future climate conditions due to precipitation, temperature and wind;

— freezing and/or thawing of groundwater and surface water; SC7 NOTE [#12]: CR0210

— electro-chemical composition of ground, groundwater, surface water and any fill;

— salinity of ground, groundwater and surface water;

— mineralogical composition of the ground;

— change of physical, chemical and/or mineralogical composition in the ground;

— evaporation;

— any electrical current flowing in the ground;

— biological activity; and

— existing or potential contaminated ground, groundwater, or surface water.

(5) The adverse effects on strength and stiffness properties of ground, groundwater and construction SC7 NOTE [#13]: CR0210
material of the following environmental influences shall be considered:

— existing and future climate conditions due to precipitation, temperature and wind;

— evaporation;

— biological activity; and

— freezing and/or thawing of groundwater and surface waterincluding iteration effects. SC7 NOTE [#14]: CR0210

(6) The adverse effects of environmental influences other than those given in (2) to (5) should be
considered where present.

(7) If the geotechnical structure is in an area with temperatures below zero, frost heave and thaw
weaking shall be considered in ULS and SLS verifications.

(6) NOTE Guidnce on the determination of ground frost-susceptibility is given in EN 1997-2. SC7 NOTE [#15]: CR0210

37
 SC7_N1662 page 38

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

4.3.2 Material and product properties

4.3.2.1 Representative values of ground properties

(1) Representative values of ground properties to be used in ultimate and serviceability limit state
verifications shall be determined from derived values collected in the GIR.

NOTE 1 The representative value refers to a particular ground property of a single geotechnical unit.

NOTE 2 Guidance on the selection of representative values of structural material properties or product
properties is given in other Eurocodes.

(2) The determination of representative values of ground properties shall take into account:

— pre-existing knowledge including geological information and data from previous projects;

— effect of subsequent excavation, placement of overburden or changes in groundwater pressure; SC7 NOTE [#16]: CR0155

— uncertainty due to the quantity and quality of site-specific data (4.2.4);

— uncertainty due to the spatial variability of the measured property; and

— the zone of influence of the structure at the limit state being considered.

(3) The representative value of a ground property shall be determined for each limit state, according to
its sensitivity to spatial variability of the ground property in the volume of ground involved.

(4) If the limit state is insensitive to spatial variability of the ground, the ground property shall be
determined as an average value.

(5) If the limit state is sensitive to spatial variability of the ground, the ground property shall be
determined as an inferior or superior value.

(6) The representative value of a ground property Xrep shall be determined from either Formula (4.14.1)
or Formula (4.24.2):

𝑋𝑋rep = 𝑋𝑋nom (4. 1)

𝑋𝑋rep = 𝑋𝑋k (4. 2)

where

Xnom is the nominal value of the ground property;

Xk is the characteristic value of the ground property.

(7) The representative value Xrep should be determined from (4.2) when there is sufficient data to allow
a reliable determination of the characteristic value Xk; otherwise, it should be determined from (4.1). SC7 NOTE [GF17]: R 1
(review group) Decided
(8)(7) When appropriate, a conversion factor accounting for effects, among others, of scale, that this change made to
November draft were not
moisture, temperature, ageing of materials, anisotropy, stress path or strain level may be used to obtain appropriate (not editorial)
the representative value of a ground material property by considering either Formula (4.34.3) or Formula and therefore shall be
(4.44.4): deleted.

𝑋𝑋rep = 𝜂𝜂𝑋𝑋nom (4. 3)

38
 SC7_N1662 page 39

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

𝑋𝑋rep = 𝜂𝜂𝑋𝑋k (4. 4)

Where, in addition to the symbols defined for Formula (4.14.1) and (4.24.2)

η is a conversion factor accounting for effects of scale, moisture, temperature, ageing of

materials, anisotropy, stress path or strain level.

NOTE The value of η is 1.0 for cases, where effects of scale, moisture, temperature, ageing of materials,
anisotropy, stress path and strain level already are included in selecting the nominal or characteristic value. SC7 NOTE [#18]: CR0206
Added include both (4.3)
4.3.2.2 Characteristic values of ground properties and (4.4) equation

(1) In addition to prEN 1990:2021, 6.2 (2), when the verification of a geotechnical limit state is
insensitive to the variability of a ground property, its characteristic value should be defined as 50 %
fractile (i.e. mean value)an estimate of the mean value.
SC7 NOTE [#19]: R 1
Review group concluded
(2) When the verification of a geotechnical limit state is sensitive to the variability of a ground property, that this addition were
its characteristic value should be defined as: needed to make the Nov-
draft confirming to earlier
— The An estimate of the 5 % fractile value, where a low (inferior) value of the ground property is drafts.
unfavourable; or SC7 NOTE [#20]: R 1
Review group concluded
that this addition were
— An estimate of the The 95 % fractile value, where a high (superior) value of the ground property is
needed to make the Nov-
unfavourable. draft confirming to earlier
drafts.
(3) The characteristic value of a ground property (Xk) should be determined from Formula (4.54.5):

𝑘𝑘n 𝜎𝜎x SC7 NOTE [#21]: R 1

𝑋𝑋k = 𝑋𝑋mean [1 ∓ 𝑘𝑘n 𝑉𝑉x ] = 𝑋𝑋mean �1 ∓ � (4. 5) Review group concluded
𝑋𝑋mean that this addition were
needed to make the Nov-
where draft confirming to earlier
drafts.
Xmean is the mean value of the ground property X from a number n of derived values;
VX is the coefficient of variation of X;
n is the number of derived values use to determine Xmean
kn is a coefficient that depends on n;
∓ denotes that knVX should be subtracted when a lower value of Xk is required and added when
an upper value is required;
σx is the standard deviation of X.

NOTE 1 Annex A gives a procedure to evaluate the different terms in Formula (4.54.5) and provides indicative
values of VX for common ground properties and test parameters.

NOTE 2 Formula (4.54.5) assumes that the values X follows a normal distribution. Different expressions are used
for other statistical distributions (see prEN 1990:2021, Annex C).

NOTE 3 Other procedures can be used to determine the characteristic values of a ground property increasing
with depth (e.g. for example using least squares with regression analysis) or the characteristic values of dependent
parameters (e.g. cohesion and friction angle).

(4) Other acceptable statistical procedures may be used.

39
 SC7_N1662 page 40

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

NOTE Acceptable statistical procedures can be based, for example, on Bayesian statistics.

4.3.2.3 Nominal value of ground properties

(1) The nominal value of a ground property Xnom shall be selected as a cautious estimate of the (average,
inferior, or superior) value affecting the occurrence of the limit state (based on the knowledge of the
construction site and comparable experience).

(2) Indicative values may be used as nominal values provided they are specified by the relevant
authority or, when not specified, agreed for a specific project by the relevant parties.

(3) Where an indicative value is used as a nominal value, it shall be selected as a very cautious estimate
of the value affecting the occurrence of the limit state.

4.3.2.4 Best estimate value of ground properties

(1) The best-estimate value of a ground property, used for prognosis of the behaviour of the
geotechnical structure, shall be determined as the:

— most probable value of a sample of derived values of the considered ground property;

— mean, median or mode of a sample of derived values, whichever is most appropriate;

— most probable values obtained by back-analysis carried out to reproduce the performance of a
geotechnical structure by monitoring.

4.3.3 Geometrical properties

(1) prEN 1990:2021, 6.3 and prEN 1990:2021, 8.3.7 shall apply to geotechnical design.

(2) Ground surface, surface water and groundwater levels, boundaries between geotechnical units, and
the dimensions of geotechnical structures shall all be regarded as geometrical properties.

NOTE Representative values of groundwater and surface water levels are defined in Clause 6.

(3) Geometrical properties of discontinuities in the ground shall include information on location,
orientation, length, and presence of voids or openings orientation, spacing, extent, aperture, and surface
roughness. SC7 NOTE [#22]: CR0095
Reworded
(4) Geometrical properties of discontinuities should normally be nominal values.

(5) The geometrical properties of discontinuities within a geotechnical unit may be considered either:

— as properties of discretely defined discontinuities within the unit; or

— as equivalent ground properties of the unit.

NOTE Discontinuities and their properties are defined in prEN 1997-2:2022, 6.2 and prEN 1997-2:2022, 8.1.5.

(6) In addition to prEN 1990:2021, 8.3.7, if the design is sensitive to the geometrical properties of the
discontinuities, the uncertainty in their presence and properties shall be assessed before defining anom
and Δa.

40
 SC7_N1662 page 41

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(7) The nominal value of geometrical properties for ground discontinuities may be determined by
sensitivity analysis using a probabilistic approach considering location, orientation, and length of the
discontinuities. SC7 NOTE [#23]: CR0095
Delete the obvious words
4.4 Verification by the partial factor method

4.4.1 Verification of ultimate limit states

4.4.1.1 General

(1) In addition to prEN 1990:2021, 8.3, ultimate limit states that involve the ground should be verified
using either the:

— material factor approach (MFA); or

— resistance factor approach (RFA).

NOTE 1 prEN 1997-3:2022 specifies which approach or approaches can be used for specific geotechnical SC7 NOTE [#24]: CR0111
structures. Multiple approaches can
be specified
NOTE 2 Where prEN 1997-3:2022 allows either MFA or RFA to be used, the National Annex can give a specific
choice.
SC7 NOTE [#25]: CR0111
This choice shall be in the
(2) When using MFA, partial factors γM should be applied to ground properties, using Formula (8.19) of specific clause in prEN
prEN 1990:2021, together with either: 1997-3 instead.

— γF applied to actions, using Formulae (8.4) of prEN 1990:2021, or

— γE to effects-of-actions, using Formula (8.5) of prEN 1990:2021.

NOTE prEN 1997-3 specifies which factors to apply for specific geotechnical structures.

(3) When using RFA, partial factors γR should be applied to ground resistance, using Formula (8.20) of
prEN 1990, together with either:

— γF applied to actions, using Formulae (8.4) of prEN 1990:2021, or

— γE applied to effects-of-actions, using Formula (8.5) of prEN 1990:2021.

NOTE prEN 1997-3 specifies which factors to apply for specific geotechnical structures.

(4) Provided that the resulting partial factor is not less than 1,0, the values of the factors γF, γM and γR may
be adjusted according to the consequences of failure, by multiplying the partial factor with the
consequence factor KF, KM and KR respectively.

NOTE 1 Values of KF are given in prEN 1990:2021.

NOTE 2 Values of KM and KR for different consequence classes are given in Table 4.7(NDP) unless the National
Annex gives different values.

Table 4.7(NDP) — Consequence factors KM and KR

Consequence class (CC) Description of consequences Consequence factor KM and KR
CC3 Higher 1,1

41
 SC7_N1662 page 42

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

CC2 Normal 1,0

CC1 Lower 0,9

(5) Only one of the consequence factors KM, KF and KR shall be applied in a single verification. SC7 NOTE [#26]: A dded
number since missing in
(6) The ultimate limit state may be verified implicitly by demonstrating that Ed ≤ Rd without computing CMCE version
specific values of Ed and Rd.

NOTE Implicit demonstration that Ed ≤ Rd ca be achieved by showing that:

— The system is stable for design actions and design material properties, or

— a ULS will only occur if:

— material strengths are reduced below their design value, or

— unfavourable material self-weights (according to the single source principle) are increased
above their design value. SC7 NOTE [#27]: CR0185
Added possibility Implicit
4.4.1.2 Design values of the effects of actions demonstration

(1) prEN 1990:2021, 8.3.2. shall apply in geotechnical design.

(2) When design values of the effects of actions are calculated using Formula (8.4) of prEN 1990:2021,
partial factors γF should be applied to actions.

(3) Values of the partial factor γF for ultimate limit states are given in prEN 1990:2021. When design
values of the effects of actions are calculated using Formula (8.5) of prEN 1990:2021, partial factors γE
should be applied directly to effects of actions.

NOTE Values of the partial factor γE for ultimate limit states are given in prEN 1990.

4.4.1.3 Design values of ground properties

(1) In addition to prEN 1990:2021, 8.3.5, when design values of geotechnical resistance are calculated
using Formula (8.19) of prEN 1990:2021, partial factors γM should be applied to ground properties.

NOTE 1 Values of the partial factor γM for persistent, transient and accidental design situations are given in Table
4.8(NDP) unless the National Annex gives different values.

NOTE 2 Values of the partial factors for resistance are given in prEN 1997-3:2022.

NOTE The value of γM for an accidental design situation is equal to the square root of the value of γM for the
corresponding persistent design situation, unless the National Annex gives a different value. SC7 NOTE [#28]: CR0136

42
 SC7_N1662 page 43

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Table 4.8(NDP) — Partial factors on ground properties for persistent and, transient, and
accidental design situations
Ground property Symbol M1a M2a
Persistent Persistent Accidental SC7 NOTE [#29]: CR0136
Transient Transient
Accidental
Soil and Fill parameters
Shear strength in effective γτf 1,0 1,25 KM 1,1
stress analysisb (τf)
Coefficient of peak friction γtanϕ,p 1,0 1,25 KM 1,1
(tan ϕ′p)d
Peak effective cohesion (c′p) γc,p 1,0 1,25 KM 1,1
Coefficient of friction at γtanϕ,cs 1,0 1,1 KM 1,0
critical state (tan ϕ′cs)d
Coefficient of residual γtanϕ,r 1,0 1,1 KM 1,0
friction (tan ϕ′r)d
Residual effective cohesion γc,r 1,0 1,1 KM 1,0
(c′r)
Shear strength in total γcu 1,0 1,4 KM 1,2
stress analysisb (cu)
Unconfined compressive γqu Same as γcu
strength (qu)
Rock material and rock mass parametersg
Shear strengthe b (τr) γτr 1,0 1,4 25 KM 1,2
Coefficient of friction along γtanϕdis 1,0 1,4 KM 1,2
discontinuities (tan ϕ′dis)d
Unconfined compressive γqu 1,0 1,4 KM 1,2
strengthc (qu)
Rock discontinuities
Shear strengthe (τr) γτdis 1,0 1,25 KM
Coefficient of residual γtanϕdis,r 1,0 1,1 KM
frictionf (tan ϕ′dis,r) SC7 NOTE [#30]: CR0097
Added partial faktors for
Interface parameters Rock discontinuities,
Coefficient of γtanδ 1,0 1,25 KM 1,1 revised notes and factors
for Rock material.
ground/structure interface
friction (tan δ)
a M1, and M2 are alternative sets of material factors. prEN 1997-3:2022 specifies which set to use for specific

geotechnical structures.
b Intended to be used for numerical models and non-Mohr-Coulomb strength criteria.

c Used for foundations purposes only.

d Partial factor is applied to tanϕ

e Used for linear and non-linear strength

f Used when the roughness component is neglected

43
 SC7_N1662 page 44

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

Ground property Symbol M1a M2a

Persistent Persistent Accidental SC7 NOTE [#29]: CR0136
Transient Transient
Accidental
d Values of partial factors shown for spil and fill parameters to be used for weak, highly fractured rock masses,
in cases when soil mechanics concepts are found to apply

(2) The design value of a ground property Xd should be calculated from Formula (4.6):

𝑋𝑋rep
𝑋𝑋d = (4. 6)
𝛾𝛾M

where

Xrep is the representative value of the ground property;

γM is a partial material factor.
NOTE Although the weight density of ground is not factored, actions arising from weight density can be
factored.

(3) When a superior value is needed, the design value of a ground property should be obtained by
multiplying the representative value by the partial material factor.

NOTE For example, a superior design value is needed to determine downdrag.

(4) Effective cohesion at the critical state shall be assumed to be zero.

(5) When design values of geotechnical resistance are calculated using Formula (8.19) of
prEN 1990:2021, the partial material factor γτf may be applied directly to the effective shear strength of
soil (τf) and γτr may be applied directly to the shear strength of rock material and rock mass (τrf), and γτdis
may be applied directly to the shear strength of discontinuities (τdis.). SC7 NOTE [#31]: CR0098
Added the distinction
between rock, rock mass
(6) Provided (7) is satisfied, the value of γM for transient design situations may be multiplied by a
and discontinuities
reduction factor Ktr ≤ 1,0, provided that the product KtrγM is not less than 1,0.

NOTE The value of the reduction factor Ktr is 1,0 unless the National Annex gives a different value.

(7) The reduction factor Ktr should only be applied if:

— the geotechnical structure behaviour is ductile;

— contingencies measures are available to deal with any arising problems that would affect the safety
of the works; and

— the consequences of failure for adjacent structures or for the general public are limited.

4.4.1.4 Design values of geometrical properties

(1) prEN 1990:2021, 8.3.7 shall apply in geotechnical design.

NOTE See also 4.3.3.

44
 SC7_N1662 page 45

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

4.4.1.5 Design values of resistance

(1) When design values of geotechnical resistance are calculated using Formula (8.20) of
prEN 1990:2021, partial factors γR should be applied directly to the resistance.

NOTE The value of γR for an accidental design situation is equal to the square root of the value of γR for the
corresponding persistent design situation, unless the National Annex gives a different value. SC7 NOTE [#32]: CR0136

(2) Provided 4.4.1.3 (7) is satisfied, the value of γR for transient design situations may be multiplied by a
reduction factor Ktr given in 4.4.1.3 (6). SC7 NOTE [#33]: CR0131
Permission for reduction
4.4.1.6 Combination of actions of partial factor in
transient situation.
(1) prEN 1990:2021, 8.3.4 shall apply in geotechnical design.

4.4.2 Verification of serviceability limit states

(2) prEN 1990:2021, 8.4 shall apply in geotechnical design.

NOTE See also Clause 9.

4.5 Verification by prescriptive rules

(1) If prescriptive rules are used for verification of limit states involving geotechnical structures, they
shall only be applied for their specified application and within their known limitations.

NOTE Prescriptive rules for verification of limit state can be used for verification of limit states unless the
National Annex gives limitations for their applications.

(2) Prescriptive rules shall be suitably conservative and justified by comparable experience.

(3) Prescriptive rules shall specify the applications for which they can be used and their known
limitations.

(4) Prescriptive rules shall be specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, agreed for a
specific project by the relevant parties.

NOTE Prescriptive rules for geotechnical structures can be specified in the National Annex.

4.6 Verification by testing

(1) Prior to testing a geotechnical structure or structural element, the anticipated result of the test shall
be determined.

(2) The verification shall include a range of different testing variants, covering all relevant foreseeable
ground responses and ground-structure interactions.

NOTE Guidance on testing to verify limit state directly and evaluation of test results is given in Clause 11.

4.7 Verification by the Observational Method

(1) When using the Observational Method to verify limit states, a range of different design variants
(including corresponding Geotechnical Design Models) shall be established, covering all foreseeable
relevant ground responses and ground-structure interactions.

45
 SC7_N1662 page 46

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

(2) If monitoring of the relevant ground responses and ground structures interactions does not allow to
detect incipient failures, the Observational Method shall not be used. SC7 NOTE [#34]: CR0174
Added (2) but not the note,
(3) A contingency plan shall be prepared that defines contingency measures to be applied when actual since covered by note for
(7). In accordance with
behaviour violates acceptance criteria or threshold values. decision by TG A2.
However, (2) and (7) give
(4) Contingency measures shall include methods for preventing immediate failure, and instructions for similar REQ
selecting a prepared design variant that covers the actual ground response and ground-structure
interaction.

(5) Ultimate and serviceability limit states shall be verified for each design variant.

(6) It shall be verified that there is an acceptable probability to fulfil the serviceability criterion.

NOTE Guidance on determination of serviceability criterion is given in 4.2.5 and Clause 9. SC7 NOTE [#35]: CR0175
Deleted since argued that
(7)(6) Execution specifications shall be prepared for each design variant. already covered by (5)

(7) Contingency measures shall be sufficiently rapidIt shall be possible to apply contingency measures
rapidly enough to avoid to apply to prevent attaining exceeding the limit states.

NOTE Non-ductile behaviour of the ground can prevent contingency measures from being sufficiently rapid to
avoid exceeding the limit state and to make the Observational Method unsuitable. SC7 NOTE [#36]: CR0030
Revised paragraph and
(8) The number of design variants and the difference between them shall be sufficient to allow rapid added note.
replacement of a design variant by one matching the observed behaviour.

(9) An Inspection Plan and a Monitoring Plan shall be devised to check the assumptions against the
specified acceptance criteria and threshold values for each design variant.

NOTE Guidance on implementation of design during execution using Observational Methods is given in 10.6.

(10) The design shall be adapted to the evaluated results in (9) by application of the Contingency plan.

5 Materials

5.1 Ground

(1) Ground properties shall be determined according to prEN 1997-2:2022.

(2) The effects of ground and groundwater on concrete structure incorporated into the ground should
be determined using the exposure classes defined in EN 206.

5.2 Engineered fill

(1) The criteria for specifying material as suitable for use as engineered fill shall be based on achieving
the required strength, stiffness, durability, permeability, and classification, after placing.

(2) The criteria for specifying material as suitable for use as engineered fill shall take account of the
purpose of the engineered fill and the requirements of any structure that is placed on it.

(3) Engineered fill for earthworks should comply with EN 16907 (all parts).

46
 SC7_N1662 page 47

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(4) Measures shall be taken to ensure material placed as fill within the construction works does not
cause contamination of the environment, ground, or groundwater.

5.3 Geosynthetics

(1) Geosynthetics incorporated into geotechnical structures should comply with EN 13249, EN 13250,
EN 13251, EN 13252, EN 13253, EN 13254, EN 13255, EN 13256, EN 13257 and EN 13265.

(2) Geosynthetic reinforcement should comply with EN 14475.

(3) Vertical drainage in the ground should comply with EN 15237.

5.4 Grout

(1) Grout for anchors should comply with EN 1537.

(2) Grout for rock bolts should comply with EN 197-1.

(3) Grout placed in the ground should comply with EN 12715.

(4) Grout used for jet-grouting should comply with EN 12716.

(5) Grout and mortar should comply with the rules given for concrete in EN 445, EN 447, and EN 14199.

NOTE EN 445 describes the test methods for grout specified in EN 447.

(6) The choice of cement and water/cement ratio should take into account the aggressiveness of the
environment, as specified in EN 206 or be based on comparable experience.

(7) Unless preliminary tests prove that grout is sufficient to resist the maximum proof load, grout
strength should be determined by comparable experience or grout testing.

(8) For soil, unless another value is specified in the Geotechnical Design Report, the value of the
compressive strength should be equivalent to concrete class C25/30 according to EN 206.

NOTE Requirements for grout for a specific geotechnical structure are given in prEN 1997-3:2022.

(9) For rock mass, in order to avoid the occurrence of failure mechanisms into the grout, unless another SC7 NOTE [#37]: CR0098
value is specified in the Geotechnical Design Report, the value of the compressive strength should be Changed rock to rock mass
equivalent to concrete class C35/45 according to EN 206.

(10) The compressive and tensile strength of grout or mortar should be assessed from comparable
experience or testing.

5.5 Plain and reinforced concrete

(1) Plain and reinforced concrete for geotechnical structures shall comply with prEN 1992-1-1:2021
and EN 206.

(2) For the design of concrete incorporated in geotechnical structures, the minimum concrete cover
value should be based on Cmin,dur as defined in prEN 1992-1-1:2021.

NOTE For reinforced concrete foundations constructed in the ground, the exposure class is commonly XA1,
XA2 or XA3. EN 1992-1-1:2004 does not provide guidance for the cover allowance for durability for these exposure
classes.

47
 SC7_N1662 page 48

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

(3) In the absence of alternative guidance, a minimum cover for environmental conditions cmin,dur should
be applied for reinforced concrete in geotechnical structures.

NOTE 1 The value of cmin,dur is 25 mm, unless the National Annex gives a different value.

NOTE 2 Guidance is given in "Guide to Tremie Concrete for Deep Foundations, Second edition 2018, EFFC-DFI"

(4) The exposure classes for concrete shall comply with EN 206 SC7 NOTE [#38]: CR0157

(2)(5) Weldable reinforcing steel for reinforced concrete used for geotechnical structures should
comply with EN 10080.

(3)(6) Steel reinforcement for wire , wire ropes, and link chains should comply with relevant
standards for prestressing.

NOTE 1 The National Annex can specify relevant standards for prestressing steel.

NOTE 2 The harmonized product standard prEN 10138 for prestressing steel is currently under development.

(4)(7) Tolerances for concrete spread foundations should comply with EN 13670.

(5)(8) Sprayed concrete incorporated into geotechnical structures should comply with EN 14487 (all
parts).

(6)(9) For fibre reinforced sprayed concrete, the flexural strength and the energy absorption capacity
should be determined in accordance with EN 14488 (all parts).

NOTE Annex JA of prEN 1992-1-1:2021 gives information about the design of fibre reinforced sprayed
concrete.

(7)(10) For sprayed concrete without fibre reinforcement, the flexural strength should be determined
in accordance with ISO 1920-10.

(8)(11) The density of hardened concrete should be determined in accordance with EN 12390.

(10) The resistance to water penetration should be determined in accordance with EN 12390.

(11) The static modulus of elasticity in compression of hardened concrete should be determined in
accordance with ISO 1920-10 and prEN 1992-1-1:2021.

5.6 Steel

(1) Steel for geotechnical structures and the values of steel parameters shall comply with
prEN 1993-1-1:2020 and prEN 1993-5.

(2) The effects of potentially deleterious stray currents should be investigated in accordance with
EN 50162.

5.7 Timber

(1) Timber for geotechnical structures and the values of timber parameters shall comply with
EN 1995-1-1.

(2) The minimum grade of timber should be SS for softwoods or HS for hardwoods conforming to
EN 1912:2012, Tables 1 and 2.

48
 SC7_N1662 page 49

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

5.8 Masonry

(1) Masonry incorporated into geotechnical structures shall comply with prEN 1996 (all parts).

6 Groundwater

6.1 General

(1) The spatial and temporal variation of surface water and groundwater and the resulting piezometric
levels, groundwater pressures, hydraulic gradients and seepage forces in the ground shall be determined.

NOTE 1 Guidance about hydrogeological conditions is given in prEN 1997-2:2022.

NOTE 2 prEN 1997-3:2022, Clause 12 gives guidance about groundwater control techniques.

(2) The determination of piezometric levels, groundwater pressures, hydraulic gradients, and seepage
forces should consider:

— their variation over time;

— spatial heterogeneity of the ground;

— aquifer and aquitard layers;

— anisotropy of the ground and hydraulic conductivity;

— construction works including effects on groundwater flow and drainage;

— supply of water by rain, flood, burst water mains or other means;

— potential changes of groundwater pressures due to the growth or removal of vegetation; and

— expected climatic changes.

(3) Groundwater pressure (u), shall be determined from Formula (6.1):

𝑢𝑢 = 𝛾𝛾w �ℎw,z − 𝑧𝑧� (6. 1)

where

γw is the weight density of the pore water;

z is the elevation where u is measured (positive upwards); and

hwz is the piezometric level at elevation z.

(4) Groundwater pressures arising from a common source of groundwater or surface water should be
considered as a single action.

NOTE This rule is commonly known as the ‘single-source principle’ (prEN 1990:2021, 6.1.1).

(5) When a single source of groundwater action produces both favourable and unfavourable effects, the
critical load cases involving upper and lower piezometric levels and the resulting groundwater pressures
shall be identified and verified.

49
 SC7_N1662 page 50

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

(6) Groundwater pressures should be determined by considering potential interactions between

groundwater and the surface water.

(7) If the groundwater pressure is not hydrostatic, the variation of groundwater pressures in all
directions should be determined in all geotechnical units identified in the Geotechnical Design Model.

(8) Groundwater pressures may be classified as accidental actions when:

— the annual probability of exceedance is less than that specified in prEN 1990:2021, 6.1.3.2 (6);

— they are caused by extreme events with a probability of exceedance less than specified in 6.4(1);

— engineered systems fail owing to deficiency in sealing or dam;

— the drainage system fails.

(9) If a groundwater control system is not provided, then the design should be verified to withstand
potential increase of groundwater pressures. SC7 NOTE [#39]: CR0164

(9)(10) Ground Pore water suction shall only be considered for unsaturated ground conditions when
SC7 NOTE [#40]: CR0184
the anticipated degree of saturation will be maintained throughout the design situation.

6.2 Properties of groundwater

(1) The effects of groundwater chemistry on the ground and on construction materials in contact with
the ground shall be determined.

(2) The exposure classes for concrete or chemical environment for other materials (steel, timber, etc.)
in contact with groundwater should comply with EN 206, prEN 1992-1-1, prEN 1993-1-1:2020, or
prEN 1996-1-1.

(3) The presence, type, and amount of solutes in the groundwater should be determined.

(4) In the absence of significant quantities of solutes, the representative value of weight density of
groundwater may be assumed to be 10 kN/m3.

6.3 Measurements

(1) Surface water, groundwater, and piezometric levels (and associated groundwater pressures) shall
be measured in order to give the most critical design situation.

(2) Surface water, groundwater and piezometric levels, and groundwater pressures should be
determined by direct measurements, taking into account the available historical data.

(3) When direct measurements are not reliable enough for the design service life of the structure,
surface water, groundwater, and piezometric levels may be determined only from historical data alone.

(4) Representative values of piezometric levels should correspond to the annual probability of
exceedance of the groundwater pressures that arise from them. SC7 NOTE [#41]: R 1
Review group concluded
that this paragrahp and
NOTE The annual probability of exceedance of the representative values of the groundwater pressures is given
note that were deleted in
in 6.4 the Nov-draft should be re-
introduced to confirm to
earlier drafts.

50
 SC7_N1662 page 51

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

6.4 Representative values of groundwater pressures

(1) If there is sufficient data to derive its value on the basis of the annual probability of exceedance, SC7 NOTE [#42]: CR0153
tThe representative value of groundwater pressure Fw,rep should be selected as either: Reworded according to
TGA2
— a single permanent value, equal to the characteristic upper Gwk;sup or lower Gwk;inf value of groundwater
pressure (whichever is more adverse according to the considered limit state);

— the combination of:

— a permanent value Gwk, equal to the mean value of groundwater pressure, and

— a variable value, equal to the representative value Qw,rep of the variation in groundwater pressure.

NOTE 1 The values of Gwk,sup and Gwk,inf are based on an annual probability of exceedance of 2 % (which
corresponds to a return period of 50 years), unless the National Annex gives a different value.

NOTE 2 Figure 6.1 illustrates the different terms used to denote representative values of groundwater pressure,
as defined in prEN 1990:2021, 6.1.3.2.

51
 SC7_N1662 page 52

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

Key
X1 t
X2 probability density (annual maximal)
X3 log t return period
Y groundwater pressures, Piezometric levels
1 higher values
2 lower values

Figure 6.1 — Representative values of groundwater pressures — illustration of characteristic,

combination, frequent, and quasi-permanent values.

52
 SC7_N1662 page 53

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(2) If there is insufficient data to derive their values on the basis of the annual probability of
exceedance, Gwk,sup and Gwk,inf should be selected as cautious estimates of the most adverse values likely
to occur during the design situation.

(3) The representative value Qw,rep of the amplitude of the variation in groundwater pressure shall be
selected as one of the following, depending on the design situation:

— the characteristic value Qwk; or

— the combination value Qw,comb; or

— the frequent value Qw,freq; or

— the quasi-permanent value Qw,qper.

NOTE The values of Qwk, Qw;comb, Qw;freq, and Qw;qper are based on the probabilities of exceedance given in
prEN 1990:2021, 6.1.3.2.

(4) In persistent and transient design situations, Qw,rep shall be selected as:

— the characteristic value (Qwk), when groundwater pressure is the leading variable action; or

— the combination value (Qw,comb), when groundwater pressure is an accompanying variable action.

(5) For simplicity, the combination value (Qw,comb) may be replaced by the (more adverse) characteristic
value (Qwk ≥ Qw,comb).

(6) If there is insufficient data to determine their values on the basis of annual probability of
exceedance, the characteristic value Qwk and the combination value Qw,comb should be selected as a
cautious estimate of the most adverse value likely to occur during the design situation.

(7) In accidental design situations, Qw,rep shall be selected as:

— the accidental value (Aw,d) where groundwater pressure is the leading variable action; or

— the frequent value (Qw,freq) or the quasi-permanent value (Qw,qper ) where groundwater pressure is an
accompanying variable action.
NOTE The value of Aw,d is based on the annual probability of exceedance given in prEN 1990:2021, 6.1.3.2.

6.5 Design values of groundwater pressures

6.5.1 Design values of groundwater pressures for ultimate limit state design

(1) Design values of groundwater pressures in ultimate limit states shall be determined by one of the
following methods:

— direct assessment; or

— applying a deviation to the representative piezometric level or to the representative groundwater SC7 NOTE [#43]: R 1
pressure; or Review group concluded
that this paragrahp and
note that were deleted in
— applying a partial factor to the representative groundwater pressures or to their action effects. the Nov-draft should be re-
introduced to confirm to
NOTE 1 Methods that involve direct assessment or application of a deviation are usually suitable in cases where earlier drafts.
groundwater pressures are used to calculate shear strength from effective stresses (e.g. overall stability analyses or

53
 SC7_N1662 page 54

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

retaining wall design). Application of a partial factor is usually suitable in cases where groundwater pressures are
used to calculate forces and bending moments on structural elements.

NOTE 2 The value of the partial factor is given in prEN 1990:2021, Table A.1.8.

(2) When assessing design groundwater pressures directly or by applying a deviation to the
representative piezometric level or groundwater pressure, design values of groundwater pressures for
ultimate limit states shall have a probability of exceedance as specified in prEN 1990:2021.

(3) For accidental design situations, where the groundwater pressures are not the accidental action,
design groundwater pressures may be taken equal to a combination of the representative permanent
value Gwk and the frequent variable value Qw,freq.

NOTE For accidental design situations, the design value of the leading action is selected directly. The
accompanying design actions are set equal to frequent values.

6.5.2 Design values of groundwater pressures for serviceability limit state design

(1) Design values of groundwater pressures in serviceability limit states shall be equal to the
representative values defined in 6.4.

6.6 Groundwater in freezing conditions SC7 NOTE [#44]:

CR0210 Delete and
instead add items in
(1) The effect of groundwater in freezing conditions shall be considered if all of the following apply:
4.3.1.4

— there is groundwater or sufficient moisture available;

— the geotechnical structure is in an area with temperatures below zero; and

— the ground is frost-susceptible.

NOTE Guidance on the determination of ground frost-susceptibility is given in prEN 1997-2:2022.

(2) If freezing of moist soil is possible during the design service life, the following should be considered:

— frost heave;

— thaw weakening;

— deformations and ultimate limit state due to frost and subsequent thaw;

— change of material properties due to frost and its effect on frost heave;

— change of material properties due to thaw and its effect on thaw weakening;

— change of material properties with temperature in general; and

— iteration effects of freeze thaw occurrences.

7 Geotechnical analysis

7.1 Calculation models

7.1.1 General

(1) Calculation models shall provide a level of reliability no less than that specified in prEN 1990:2021.

54
 SC7_N1662 page 55

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

NOTE The verification of the calculation models providing the level of reliability required by prEN 1990:2021
is achieved by meeting the requirements and following the recommendations in subclauses (2) – (7). SC7 NOTE [#45]:
CR_0112
(1)(2) Calculation models shall be appropriate for the limit state being considered. Revised so that is will be
clear that if the validation
according to this clause is
(2)(1) Calculation models shall provide a level of reliability no less than that specified in prEN used, the reliability
1990:2021. required by EN 1990 will
be meet.
(3) The assumptions, including idealisations and limitations, of calculation models should be stated in
the Geotechnical Design Report.

(4) Calculation models used to verify limit states should consider the following aspects as model inputs:

— model geometry including discretization and boundary conditions (mechanical, hydraulic and
thermal);

— zones of non-homogeneities and discontinuities;

— initial in-situ stress states;

— piezometric levels or groundwater pressures;

— ground properties and structural elements properties;

— effects of permanent, variable, cyclic and dynamic actions; and

— construction stages and loading rates.

(5) Parametric analyses may be performed to assess the effects of model inputs on the results of the
calculation models and to precise their selection.

(6) Calculation models shall be validated to ensure that they are appropriate for the specific design
situation and are applied within their limitations.

(7) The minimum level of validation of calculation models used in geotechnical design shall be
determined according to the Geotechnical Category.

NOTE The minimum level of validation of calculation models used in geotechnical design is given in Table 7.1
(NDP) unless the National Annex gives a different minimum level.

55
 SC7_N1662 page 56

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

Table 7.1 (NDP) — Level of validation of calculation models

Geotechnical Category Measures

GC3 All the measures given below for GC2 and, in addition:
• Calibration of the calculation model for the specific site against another
suitable calculation model or site observations.
GC2 All the measures given below for GC1 and, in addition:
• Literature reference that the calculation model has been used for similar
conditions;
• documentation showing that the assumptions for the calculation model
used are relevant for the specific site and structure.
GC1 All the measures given below:
• Local experience shows that the calculation model is suitable for the
local conditions;
• When using calculation models contained in prEN 1997-3:2022,
confirmation that the design falls within the limits of application stated
in prEN 1997-3:2022.

NOTE Knowledge of the ground and workmanship control is to be considered as more significant in fulfilling
the fundamental requirements than the precision in the calculation models.

7.1.2 Empirical models

(1) Empirical models may be used for the verification of limit states.

NOTE Empirical models are often intended for certain ground and site conditions. Therefore, they often have
a narrow range of such conditions for which they are suitable.

7.1.3 Analytical models

(1) Analytical models may be used to verify limit states.

(2) Limit equilibrium analysis in ground with discontinuities (including rock mass and very stiff clay)
should take into account the shear strength along the discontinuities that control the limit states.

(3) For the verification of serviceability limit states, limit equilibrium and limit analysis models should
only be used in accordance with 9.1(5).

7.1.4 Numerical models

(1) Numerical models may be used for the verification of limit states including the assessment of
failure modes and ground movements.

(2) The complexity of a numerical model shall be appropriate for the quality and quantity of data
available for determining input parameters.
SC7 NOTE [#46]: CR0113
NOTE 1 The reliability accuracy of a numerical model does not only depend on its complexity but on the quality Replace reliability with an
of the input data. appropriate word. The
word accuracy were
NOTE 2 Simple models can provide more reliable results than complex models. selected. Note splited
according to the CR

56
 SC7_N1662 page 57

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(3) The choice between continuum or discrete model shall be based on the type of ground, especially
on the presence and the effects of discontinuities.

(4) The validation of the numerical model should be consistent with the complexity of the numerical
model.

7.1.5 Calculation models for cyclic and dynamic actions

(1) Appropriate calculation models should be selected to determine the effects of cyclic and dynamic
actions.

(2) Cyclic effects listed in 4.3.1.3 (1) shall be determined for both the ultimate and serviceability limit
states.

(3) When the expected effects of dynamic actions listed in 4.3.1.3 (1) are significant, a full dynamic
interaction analysis with the modelling of the structure, its foundation and the dynamic action should be
performed.

NOTE For machine foundations design analyses aim at predicting their response to ensure that both ultimate
limit states and serviceability limit states are verified. Serviceability limit states are typically specified in terms of
peak velocity or displacement or of acceleration amplitudes during normal operation of the machinery.

(4) When dynamic actions are represented by quasi-static actions, ground properties should be
selected appropriately for the frequency, the duration and the amplitude of the dynamic actions.

NOTE 1 Quasi-static actions are defined in prEN 1990:2021.

NOTE 2 prEN 1997-2:2022, Clause 10, gives ground properties for verification of ultimate and serviceability
limit states when cyclic or dynamic actions are involved.

7.2 Model factors

(1) Model factors should be used to adjust any significant bias and additional uncertainty in a
calculation model compared with a reference model.

NOTE 1 Suitable reference models include:

— comparable experience based on case histories;

— a full-scale instrumented and monitored prototype of the geotechnical structure (for example, pile test, trial
embankment);

— small-scale physical model that reproduces the limit states being considered (the validity of the model is
ensured if its scale is such that the expected behaviour at the prototype scale is reproduced);

— theoretical model for which closed form or numerical solutions for the limit states being considered are
available (for example, Prandtl’s solution for shallow foundations, steady state seepage under a sheet pile wall,
consolidation settlement in one dimension).

NOTE 2 Model factors for the reference model already include an allowance for some bias and uncertainty.

NOTE 3 The value of the model factor is 1.0 unless the National Annex gives a different value for a specific
calculation model.

NOTE 4 Guidance on suitable values for model factors for certain geotechnical structures is given in
prEN 1997-3:2022.

57
 SC7_N1662 page 58

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

(2) Model factors should be used to ensure that calculation models are sufficiently accurate for their
intended purpose and provide a level of reliability no less than that specified in prEN 1990:2021.

8 Ultimate limit states

8.1 Type of ultimate limit states

8.1.1 Failure by rupture

(1) In addition to the limit states given in prEN 1990:2021, 5.3(3), the following potential ultimate limit
states caused by rupture of the ground shall be verified, including:

— rupture of the ground passing outside the geotechnical structure;

— translational and rotational failure of ground mass or rock blocks;

— loss of bearing capacity and sliding of foundations;

— loss of geotechnical resistance of a structural element embedded in the ground.

NOTE Guidance on rupture of the ground for different geotechnical structures is given in prEN 1997-3:2022.

(2) In addition to (1), other potential ultimate limit states caused by rupture of the ground should be
verified.

8.1.2 Failure due to excessive deformation of the ground

(1) In addition to the limit states given in prEN 1990:2021, 5.3(3), the following potential ultimate limit
states of the structure or structural member caused by excessive deformation of the ground shall be
verified, including, as relevant: SC7 NOTE [#47]: CR0094

— failure of a structural element owing to excessive deformation of the ground mass;

— failure of a structural element owing to excessive movements of its own foundation (without rupture
of the ground);

— failure of an existing structural element owing to the execution of another construction.

NOTE Examples of excessive deformation of the ground mass is down drag, swelling, shrinkage.

(2) In addition to (1), other potential ultimate limit states caused by excessive deformation of the
ground should be verified.

8.1.3 Failure by loss of static equilibrium of the structure or ground

8.1.3.1 Loss of rotational equilibrium

(1) Loss of static equilibrium due to the rotation of the structure or part of it shall be prevented by SC7 NOTE [#48]: CR0096
verifying that destabilizing design moments are less than or equal to the stabilizing design moments Add text
about the assumed point of rotation, with partial factors applied to actions using Design Verification Case
2 of prEN 1990:2021. SC7 NOTE [#49]: CR0096
Confirm with EN1990
NOTE 1 See prEN 1990:2021, 8.3.3.1(5).

58
 SC7_N1662 page 59

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

NOTE 2 Verification by comparison of stabilizing and destabilizing moments is only applicable if the point of
rotation is known, which is the case only when the ground resistance is sufficiently high.

NOTE 3 Overturning is verified according to prEN 1997-3:2022, Clause 5 involving failure in the ground.

8.1.3.2 Loss of vertical equilibrium due to uplift

(1) Loss of static equilibrium due to uplift of an impermeable structure or a ground layer of low
permeability shall be prevented by verifying that any destabilizing design vertical forces are less than or
equal to the stabilizing design vertical forces (including any resistance to uplift).

NOTE 1 See prEN 1990:2021, 8.3.3.1(5).

NOTE 2 This verification can also be applied for other fluids than water.

NOTE 3 The effects of all actions are compared with the resistances. Therefore, the actions consist of
destabilizing (permanent and variable) actions of groundwater pressures and other forces and the stabilizing
actions due to the weight of the structure. Resistance can be provided by anchors, piles or shear strength of the
ground along the sides of the structure.

(2) If the structure or ground layer acts as a rigid body (Figure 8.1a), Formula (8.1) shall be verified:

𝑈𝑈d,dst + 𝐺𝐺d,dst + 𝑄𝑄d,dst − 𝐺𝐺d,stb ≤ 𝑅𝑅𝑑𝑑 (8. 1)

where

Ud,dst is the design value of destabilising (uplift) force due to groundwater pressures;

Gd,dst is the design value of any permanent destabilizing force (upwards) not caused by
groundwater pressures;

Qd,dst is the design value of any variable destabilizing force (upwards) not caused by groundwater
pressures;

Gd,stb is the design value of the stabilizing (downward) forces;

Rd is design value of any resistance to uplift.

NOTE 1 Partial factors for actions are given in prEN 1990:2021, Annex A; for ground properties in Table 4.8
(NDP); and for resistances in prEN 1997-3:2022.

NOTE 2 The contribution of piles, anchors, etc. to Rd is determined according to prEN 1997-3:2022.

(3) If the structure or ground layer does not act as a rigid body (Figure 8.1b), Formula (8.2) shall be
verified:

𝑢𝑢d;dst − 𝜎𝜎v;d ≤ 0 (8. 2)

where

ud,dst is the design value of destabilizing (uplift) groundwater pressures;

σv;d is the design value of the (stabilizing) vertical total stress at the base of the layer that is
subject to uplift.

59
 SC7_N1662 page 60

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

NOTE 1 Design values of groundwater pressures are determined according to 6.5.

NOTE 2 Figure 8.1 give examples of design situations where uplift might be critical

Key
RB rigid body NRB non-rigid body
1 groundwater table 1 groundwater table
2 water tight surface 2 water tight surface
5 sand 3 light-weight material
8 injected sand 4 former ground surface
9 anchor 5 sand
11 sand 6 groundwater table bottom excavation
7 clay
10 groundwater table in sand

Figure 8.1 — Examples of design situations where uplift might be critical

(4) When additional structural verifications are necessary, they shall comply with 8.1.1 and 8.1.2.

60
 SC7_N1662 page 61

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

8.1.4 Hydraulic failure

8.1.4.1 General

(1) In the presence of groundwater flow, the following ultimate limit states shall be verified for all
ground conditions:

— hydraulic heave;

— internal erosion;

— piping.

(2) The assessment of groundwater seepage and groundwater pressures should take into account
potential:

— anisotropy of hydraulic conductivity of ground layers;

— occurrence of confined aquifers.

8.1.4.2 Hydraulic heave

(1) In order to prevent a limit state of failure by hydraulic heave, vertical equilibrium shall be
maintained in the ground by considering the ground’s self-weight and shear resistance and the
groundwater pressures.

(2) Components of shear resistance that are affected by groundwater pressure should be treated with
special caution.

(3) In cases of upward-flowing groundwater, it shall be verified that sufficient effective stress exists in
the ground to support the self-weight of the ground and any supported structures, vehicles, and
personnel.

(4) To prevent an ultimate limit state of hydraulic heave (Figure 8.2Figure 8.2), the inequality given in
Formula (8.38.3) shall be verified:

Δ𝑢𝑢d ≤ 𝛾𝛾HYD �𝛾𝛾rep − 𝛾𝛾w,rep �𝑧𝑧 + 𝛾𝛾pv 𝑝𝑝′v,rep (8. 3)

where

∆ud is the design excess groundwater pressure = ud – u0;

ud is the design groundwater pressure in the presence of flow;

u0 is the groundwater pressure in the absence of flow (hydrostatic) = γw,rep(z + hw);

γw,rep is the representative weight density of the groundwater;

z is the vertical distance of the point in the ground below the ground surface (not including
any overlying fill);

hw is the vertical distance from the surface water level to the ground surface;

61
 SC7_N1662 page 62

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

γrep is the representative weight density of the ground;

p′v,rep is the representative value of any effective overburden pressure at the ground surface;

γHYD is a partial factor for hydraulic heave;

γpv is a partial factor on the effective overburden pressure.

NOTE 1 The purpose of the factor γHYD is to ensure that the effective stress in the ground remains positive and to
allow for local variations of stresses at a granular scale, relevant to hydraulic failures.

NOTE 2 The values of γHYD and γpv are both 0.67 unless the National Annex gives different values.

Key
1 water level
2 filter
3 ground
4 γrep hw
5 ud (in presence of flow)
6 u0 (in absence of flow)
7 σ'v,0 (in absence of flow)
8 σ'v,d (in presence of flow)
X1 water pressure u
Y1 depth
X2 effective vertical stress σ'v

62
 SC7_N1662 page 63

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Y2 depth

Figure 8.2 — One dimensional upward flow of water

(5) Formula (8.3) may be applied using an averaged value of ∆ud acting on the base of a soil block with a
width of half of the depth of the block.

NOTE Further guidance on this method is given in Terzaghi and Peck. SC7 NOTE [#50]: C R0012
Added the permission that
TG A2 Agreed

8.1.4.3 Internal erosion and piping

(1) The design values of hydraulic gradients and seepage velocities shall be determined according to
6.3.3.

(2) Where seepage of groundwater occurs through coarse soil, as defined in EN ISO 14688 (all parts),
ultimate limit state due to internal erosion or piping shall be verified.

(3) To prevent an ultimate limit state of internal erosion or piping, Formula (8.48.4) shall be verified:

𝑖𝑖𝑑𝑑 ≤ 𝑖𝑖𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 (8. 4)

where

id is the design value of the hydraulic gradient;

icd is the design value of critical hydraulic gradient.

(4) The critical hydraulic gradient for internal erosion and piping should be determined taking into
consideration:

— the direction of flow;

— the grain size distribution and shape of grains;

— layering of the ground.

NOTE 1 Values of icd depend on particle size and grading of the soil. Typical values are between 0.3 and 0.9.

NOTE 2 Methods to determine icd are given in The International Levee Handbook, CIRIA Report C731 (2013).

(5) Where seepage of groundwater occurs through thin layers of ground not subjected to internal
erosion or piping (fine soils, grouted ground, etc.), hydraulic gradients greater than 1.0 may be accepted
provided that the 8.1.4.2(4) is satisfied.

(6) Exceedance of an ultimate limit state due to internal erosion and piping should be prevented by
measures including:

— filter protection at the free surface of the ground or at the end of any potential seepage path;

— increase of the length of the seepage path;

— reducing the hydraulic gradient;

— sufficient safety against failure by heave in case of a horizontal ground surface;

63
 SC7_N1662 page 64

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

— sufficient stability of the surface layers in sloping ground (local slope stability).

(7) Filter protection should be provided by use of soil that fulfils adequate design criteria for filter
materials or by the use of geosynthetic filters that prevent transport of fines without clogging.
NOTE Design criteria for filter materials are given in The International Levee Handbook, CIRIA Report C731
(2013).

(8) When determining the outflow hydraulic conditions for the verification of failure by piping, account
should be taken of joints and interfaces between the structure and the ground which can become
preferred seepage paths.

(9) Where prevailing hydraulic and soil conditions can lead to the occurrence of piping and where
piping endangers the stability or serviceability of the hydraulic structure, measures should be taken to
prevent the onset of the piping process, either by the application of filters or by controlling or blocking
groundwater flow.

8.1.5 Failure caused by time-dependent effects

(1) It shall be verified that potential failure in the ground or structural elements due to time-dependent
effects cannot occur.
NOTE Examples of such time-dependent effects include degradation, weathering, and change of chemical
composition.

8.1.6 Failure caused by the effect of cyclic actions

(1) Degradation of the ground resistance and accumulation of ground displacements, especially
settlements, due to cyclic effects shall be considered.

(2) Liquefaction and generation of excess pore pressure should be considered for geotechnical
structures located on saturated soils subjected to cyclic actions.
NOTE Guidance to include cyclic effects for verifications of specific geotechnical structures is given in
prEN 1997-3:2022.

(3) When cyclic effects are significant, ultimate limit states shall be verified using the persistent
combination of actions combined with cyclic effects.

8.2 Procedure for numerical models

(1) For geotechnical structures, verification of ultimate limit states by numerical models (Table 8.1)
should be based on the less favourable outcomes given by the:
SC7 NOTE [#51a]:
— Material Factor Approach (MFA)Input factoring, using: CR0212

— factors on actions γF from Verification Case 3 and;

— factors on material properties γM from Set M2;
— Effect Factor Approach (EFA)Output factoring, using:
— factors on effects-of-actions γE from Verification Case 4 and;
— factors on material properties γM from Set M1.
NOTE 1 In input factoring no factors are applied to ground resistance or to effects of action.

NOTE 2 In output factoring no factors are applied to ground resistance or to permanent actions.

64
 SC7_N1662 page 65

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

NOTE 3 The resistance of structural members is verified according to the other structural Eurocodes and EN
1997-3.

NOTE 14 Values of γF and γE are given in prEN 1990:2021, Annex A.

NOTE 25 Values of γM are given in 4.4.1.3.

NOTE 3 The Material Factor Approach (MFA) often determines the limiting ground resistance, whereas the
Effects Factoring Approach (EFA) often determines the limiting structural resistance.

NOTE 4 In MFA, all possible geotechnical ultimate limit states are verified by demonstrating that equilibrium can
still be obtained with design values of input parameters, without excessive deformation or a failure mechanism
being activated either in the ground or in structural elements.

NOTE 6 The National Annex can specify cases where ultimate limit states can be verified by input or output
factoring alone. SC7 NOTE [#51]: CR0188
Add possibility for NA
(2) As an alternative to (1), verification of Ultimate Limit State by numerical methods may be based on
output factoring, using:

— factors on effects-of-actions γE from Verification Case 4 and;

— factors on resistance γR according to prEN 1997-3 for the geotechnical structure. SC7 NOTE [#52]: C R0212

(3) Verification of either of the approaches in (1) may be omitted when it is obvious that verification of
the other approach is less favourable.

(4) Explicit verification of specific failure mechanisms may be omitted when using a numerical model
that implicitly determines the most critical failure mechanism. SC7 NOTE [#53]: CR0189
With revised wording
NOTE 1 Examples of specific failure mechanisms include sliding, overturning, bearing failure, global failure. agreed by TG A2

NOTE 2 MFA and some type of EFA calculations use partial factors that are not specific to any particular failure
mechanism. RFA, however, uses partial factor thar are specific to a given failure mechanism. SC7 NOTE [#4]: C R 0189
Added notes agreed by TG
(2)(5) The ground strength mobilized in numerical models should not exceed the design value. A2

NOTE The mobilized ground strength calculated by numerical models is influenced by the failure criterion as
well as other input parameters, such as dilatancy and excess water pressure. When using effective stress analysis
to predict undrained or partially drained ground strength, for example, it is possible for the mobilized ground
strength to exceed its design value.

(3)(6) Strength reduction should be used to verify that design values of ground strength parameters
are not exceeded.
NOTE 1 Different procedures are available to account for stress and strain changes caused by strength reduction
and it is important that a suitable procedure is adopted in order to predict the most critical failure mechanisms
accurately.

NOTE 2 Standard strength reduction procedures are not necessarily applicable to advanced constitutive models.

NOTE 3 Strength reduction will normally start from representative values. SC7 NOTE [#55]: CR0186
Revised note
(4)(7) As an alternative to (4), design values of ground strength may be used as input to numerical
calculation (Table 8.1 – DC3+M2-alternative), provided that the effect of using design values throughout
the calculation is considered when verifying the accuracy of simulations.

65
 SC7_N1662 page 66

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

NOTE The use of design values from the start of a numerical model calculation can be detrimental to the
intended degree of conservatism. The effect can be conservative or non-conservative and can increase with
successive stages of the analysis. SC7 NOTE [#56]: CR0181
Delete note
(5)(8) Ground strength reduction may be combined with structural strength or resistance reduction to
help identify potentially critical collapse mechanisms of combined ground and structure failures.
NOTE 1 Reducing structural material strength or resistance reduces the effective stiffness of structures.
Therefore, structural forces can be underestimated.

NOTE 2 Design values of forces into structural elements depend on the constitutive law used. When elastic
behaviour is considered, design values can become infinite and lead to inappropriate results. When elasto-plastic
behaviour is considered, design values are limited to the ultimate resistance of the structural elements. SC7 NOTE [#57]: CR0181

(6)(9) Design values of force output in structures obtained by EFA should be used to verify adequate
resistance in addition to the MFA verification.
NOTE 1 Examples of force output is are axial force, shear force and bending moment. The considered structures
are e.g. piles, ground anchors, diaphragm walls and soil nails.

NOTE 2 The resistance of structures such as piles, diaphragm walls, ground anchors and soil nails are highly
dependent on the properties of the interface and disturbed ground immediately around such structures.
Consequently, factoring the undisturbed ground strength alone cannot provide a sufficiently reliable means of
verifying the ultimate limit state of such structures.In a variant of EFA which enables utilization of load
redistribution capacities, action factors are initially applied to the resistance side of the equation, i.e., to the strength
parameters of the structure. SC7 NOTE [#58]: CR0181
Replaced note
NOTE 3 Adaptation of the stiffness parameters of the structure is an option to counteract possible stiffness
reduction due to factoring of the strength parameters. The scope for load redistribution can be limited by the
presence of brittle components in the system. SC7 NOTE [#59]: CR0181
Added note
(7)(10) Design values of outputs from geotechnical structure types other than those referred to in (7)
above may also be compared with geotechnical resistances to assess the reliability against particular
failure mechanisms occurring.
NOTE MFA allows the most critical geotechnical ultimate limit state to be verified but does not necessarily
provide the degree of safety against particular failure mechanisms occurring. If this is required, it can sometimes be
obtained in this way (e.g. comparing the design value of spread foundation lateral load with its corresponding value
of sliding resistance). The resistance value can be obtained from a separate calculation or by numerical models in
accordance with (9) below.

(8)(11) Geotechnical resistances may be calculated by numerical models by forcing geotechnical

structures to fail by particular mechanisms.
NOTE 1 When geotechnical resistances are obtained by numerical models by simulating particular failure forms,
usually a separate calculation is performed.

NOTE 2 For example, the vertical displacement of a rigid spread foundation can be increased until failure in order
to obtain the bearing resistance from the output of force at failure.

NOTE 3 The procedure for verification of ultimate limit states with numerical models is given in Table 8.1(NDP)
unless the National Annex gives different procedure.

66
 SC7_N1662 page 67

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Table 8.1(NDP) — Procedure for verification of ultimate limit states with numerical models
Factoring approach - See 8.2(1)
EFA MFA MFA
DC4 + M1 DC3 + M2 DC3 + M2
(Recommended) (Alternative)

See 8.2(2), (7) and See 8.2(2),(3) (4) and See 8.2(2), (5) and (6)
(8) (6)
Step 1c Step 1 c Step 1 c
Representative Step Representative Step ---
Piezometric level Representative values
or groundwater
pressure
Input Ground properties Representative Values
Structural element Representative Values Not applicable
properties Go directly to Step 2
External actions Representative Values
Movements a
Output
Structural forces a

Step 2 Step 2 Step 2

Construction Stage 1 (CS1)

ULS Verification ULS Verification Step ULS Verification Step

Step
Piezometric level Design levelb Design levelb Design levelb
or groundwater
pressure
Ground properties Design values by M1 Partial factors M2d Design values by M2
combination (to obtain Design values combination
Input by “Strength reduction”
procedure) SC7 NOTE [#60]: CR0186
Structural element Representative Representative values Representative values Delet and add note
properties values
External actions Design values by DC4 Design values by DC3 Design values by DC3
combination combination combination
Verification of See 8.2(7) and 8.2 (8) ULS verified ULS verified
ground failure if equilibrium is if equilibrium is attained
attained in the ground in the ground with no
with no failure of the failure of the structure
structure
Output
Verification of Design values (Ed) Design values (Ed) Design values (Ed)
structural failure obtained by applying obtained directly from obtained directly from
γE to calculation calculation results calculation results
results See 8.2(6)
See 8.2(7) and (8)

Continue in the same way through any subsequent stage (CS2, CS3, etc.)
CS2

67
 SC7_N1662 page 68

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

a These output values can be used for SLS verifications

b The "Design piezometric level" can be obtained by applying a deviation to the representative peixometric level
as stated in 6.4.1 (1), second bullet SC7 NOTE [#61]: R 1
c the start of Step 1 of any given Construction Stage continues from the end of Step 1 of the preceding Review group concluded
Construction Stage that this paragraph and
d If the analysis cannot perform strength reduction or apply different material factors to different soils, then
note that were deleted in
the Nov-draft should be re-
Step 2 also continues from Step 1 of the preceding Construction Stage using design material properties introduced to confirm to
determined with partial factors from Set M2. earlier drafts.

9 Serviceability limit states SC7 NOTE [#62] R0186

Suggested to delete this
note. But since R1 have
9.1 General judge that is should be
included, it was not deleted
(1) In addition to prEN 1990:2021, 5.4 and prEN 1990:2021,8.4, the following specific serviceability at this stage.
limit states shall be verified:
SC7 NOTE [#63]: CR0186
— ground movements and structural aspects, including differential displacements, rotation, angular Added notes
strain, relative deflection, deflection ratio, tilt, and angular distortion;

— hydraulic aspects including hydraulic conductivity, ingress or egress of water.

(2) In addition to prEN 1990:2021, 8.4, design values of ground properties for serviceability limit states
shall be determined using a partial factor γM = 1.0.

(3) In addition to prEN 1990:2021, 5.4 and prEN 1990:2021,8.4, verification of serviceability limit
states should be based on calculation, monitoring and testing.

NOTE Further guidance on monitoring and testing is given in Clauses 10 and 11.

(4) Verification of SLS may be based on a check of strength mobilization only if:

— a sufficiently low fraction of the ground strength is used as mobilization limit;

— time dependent effects are taken into account; and

— established comparable experience exists with similar ground, structures.

(5) Long-term settlements and movements should be calculated using the quasi-permanent
combination of actions given in prEN1990:2021, 8.4.3.4, taking into account ground hydraulic
conductivity and creep effects.

(6) In addition to 7.1.5(2), when cyclic effects are significant, they should be taken into account in the
verification of serviceability limit states.

9.2 Serviceability criteria

(1) In addition to prEN 1990:2021, 5.4 the relevant serviceability criteria shall be determined with
consideration of ground movement, structural aspects, and hydraulic aspects within the zone-of-
influence.

NOTE Further guidance on serviceability criteria within the zone-of-influence is given in 4.2.5.

(2) In addition to (1), the serviceability criteria shall be selected to avoid any ultimate limit state in the
new structure, existing structures, utilities, and ground within the zone of influence.

68
 SC7_N1662 page 69

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(3) The serviceability criteria may be defined in terms of limiting values and threshold values or in terms
of acceptance criteria.

NOTE 1 The serviceability criteria can be defined in terms of e.g. deformation (differential displacement,
rotation, settlement, tilt), stress, strain, groundwater level, groundwater pressure, groundwater flow, vibration,
noise, environmental restrictions, temperature.

NOTE 2 The limiting value is the value of the relevant serviceability criteria.

NOTE 3 Limiting values of structural deformation and ground movements are given in Annex B.

NOTE 4 Guidance on use of inspection and monitoring to limit the impact from execution and the geotechnical
structure within the zone of influence and to ensure behaviour within the serviceability criteria are given in 10.3
and 10.4.

(4) To limit the adverse impacts on existing structures, utilities, and the ground and groundwater,
serviceability criteria may be defined as a proportion of the limiting value of the deformation of the
affected existing structures.

(5) If the serviceability criteria are defined according to (3), the proportion of the limiting value shall be
specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, agreed for a specific project by the relevant
parties.

9.3 Calculation of ground movements

(1) The determination of ground movement should take into account the following:

— loading distribution;

— effects of cyclic actions or dynamic actions (vibrations);

— construction method (including the sequence of loading);

— excavations, quarrying, tunnelling, and backfilling within the zone of influence of the geotechnical
structure;

— consolidation and creep;

— changes in groundwater conditions and corresponding groundwater pressures;

— changes in groundwater chemistry;

— stiffness of the ground in relation to the expected rate of ground movements;

— degradation of the ground stiffness and the accumulation of permanent strains due to cyclic effects;

— stiffness of the structure during and after construction;

— volume loss due to soluble strata or oxidation of organic content;

— mining (active or historical), gas extraction, or similar works.

(2) In the absence of reliable calculation models for determining ground movements, serviceability
limit states may be verified by one or more of the following:

69
 SC7_N1662 page 70

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

— limiting the mobilised shear strength to values specified in the design;

— observing the movements and specifying measures to reduce or stop them, as described in 4.7.

(3) When the structure can redistribute actions, ground-structure interaction analysis should be used
to determine the amount of redistribution according to the relative stiffness of the ground and the
structure.

9.4 Structural aspects

(1) Limiting foundation movements shall take account of the following:

— the confidence with which the acceptable value of the movement can be specified;

— the occurrence (or recurrence) and rate of ground movements;

— the effect of horizontal as well as vertical ground movements;

— the type and age of structure;

— the requirements of any plant or machinery (during both construction and the design service life of
the structure) and the proposed use of the structure;

— the changing state of the structure during construction;

— the mode of deformation;

— relative movement between buildings or parts of buildings of different characteristics;

— allowable movements of services entering the structure.

(2) In the absence of specified limiting values of structural deformations of the supported structure, the
suggested values given in prEN 1990:2021, A1.7.4 shall be used.

NOTE Further guidance on the choice of the limiting values of structural deformation is given in Annex B.

9.5 Hydraulic aspects

(1) The limiting value of the serviceability criterion for hydraulic serviceability limit states shall be
defined in terms of, but not limited to:

— hydraulic conductivity of the ground or certain parts of the ground;

— groundwater pressure;

— ingress of water or leakage into an excavation or defined space;

— egress of water from the surrounding environment;

— groundwater level or changes to the groundwater level.

(2) In addition to (2), threshold values and related acceptance criteria should be defined.

70
 SC7_N1662 page 71

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

10 Implementation of design

10.1 General

(1) The design of a geotechnical structure shall include specifications for supervision, inspection,
monitoring, and maintenance to check implementation of the design during execution and design service
life.

NOTE The specifications are prepared at an appropriate stage during the design. SC7 NOTE [#64]: C R 0177
TGA2 agreed to delete the
(2) The type, level and amount of supervision, inspection, monitoring, and maintenance shall be related note instead of adjusting it.
to the Geotechnical Category of the geotechnical structure, or the relevant part of it.

NOTE Guidance on appropriate levels is given in 4.1.8 and prEN 1990:2021, Annex B.

(3) The results of supervision, inspection, and monitoring shall be reviewed and used as an integral part
to check that the execution complies with the design assumptions and execution specifications.

(4) If the results of supervision, inspection and monitoring give any incompatibility, contingency
measures shall be specified and implemented.

(5) The following plans shall be prepared to ensure that the execution of geotechnical structures
provides a level of reliability no less than that required by prEN 1990:2021:

— Supervision Plan;

— Inspection Plan;

— Monitoring Plan;

— Maintenance Plan.

(6) The format of the Plans should be specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, agreed
for a specific project by the relevant parties.

NOTE The Plans can be for example single volume, multivolume, digital, paper copy, partly consist of drawings,
part of a Building Information Model (BIM) or project specific databases.

(7) The objectives, type, extent, and level of supervision, inspection, monitoring, and maintenance shall
comply with the specific requirements of prEN 1997-3:2022 and relevant execution standards.

(8) The Supervision, Inspection, and Monitoring Plans should be based on a review of the most
unfavourable conditions that occur during execution, with regards to:

— ground conditions;

— groundwater conditions;

— actions on the structure;

— environmental impacts and potential changes including landslides and rockfalls;

— impact within the zone of influence (4.1.2.1).

71
 SC7_N1662 page 72

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

NOTE 1 Guidance on specification of acceptance criteria for inspection is given in 10.3.

NOTE 2 Guidance on specification of limiting values and threshold values for monitoring is given in 10.4.

(9) If acceptance criteria or threshold values are violated, the data should be checked for consistency
before modifying the design or implementing additional contingencies measures.

(10) If acceptance criteria or threshold values are violated, the design and execution specification
shall be reviewed and modified appropriately.

(11) The Inspection and Monitoring Plan should include measures to prevent failure that can be
employed if the acceptance criteria or threshold values are violated.

(12) The design of geotechnical structures shall be checked for its practicability and feasibility for
maintenance.

10.2 Supervision of execution

(1) The execution of geotechnical structures shall be supervised.

NOTE This clause gives general provisions for supervision. Guidance on detailed provisions for supervision for SC7 NOTE [#65]: CR0024
a specific geotechnical structure is given in the corresponding execution standard. Added a revised Note

(1)(2) <REQ>It shall be checked that the construction works complies with the execution specification
with regards to execution methods and construction stages.

(2)(3) Supervision shall be undertaken during the execution to ensure that all safety measures required
to ensure a safe working environment are implemented.

10.3 Inspection

(1) The Inspection Plan shall specify measures to check compliance with the design and the execution
specification including, but not limited to:

— material and products are used according to the execution specification;

— execution is performed according to the work description and applicable method statement;

— the quality of structural element fulfils the assumed capacity according to the design;

— design revisions are adopted;

— the probability of human errors during execution is reduced.

(2) In addition to (1), other measures should be included in the Inspection Plan to ensure compliance
with the design and execution specification.

(3) Inspection may be performed by observation, measurement, or testing.

(4) The Inspection Plan shall specify acceptance criteria for:

— properties of construction material with tolerances;

— products and their quality specification;

72
 SC7_N1662 page 73

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

— dimensions of products and structural elements with tolerances;

— execution as specified by execution standard or method statements.

NOTE Guidance on tests to confirm resistance is given in 11.4 and to confirm product quality in 11.5.

(5) In addition to (3), other acceptance criteria should be included in the Inspection Plan.

(6) In addition to (1), the Inspection Plan shall specify provisions to check that the Ground Model and
the Geotechnical Design Model are both in compliance with the encountered ground conditions at the
site.

NOTE Guidance on appropriate testing to assess ground properties is given in 11.3.

(7) Indirect evidence of ground properties may be used to check encountered ground conditions.

NOTE Indirect evidence includes drilling records, pile driving records, back-analyses, etc.

(8) The extent and details of the Inspection Plan should be linked to the Inspection Level (and hence the
Geotechnical Category) given in 4.1.8.

(9) Acceptance criteria may be established by sensitivity analyses or engineering judgement of

acceptable variations.

10.4 Monitoring

(1) Monitoring should be undertaken:

— during ground investigation, to obtain data of the ground behaviour;

— before execution, to establish reference conditions;

— during execution, to identify the need for remedial measures, revision of the design, for switching to
another design variant (if using the Observational Method), or alterations of the execution sequence
or method;

— after execution, to evaluate the long-term performance of the structure.

(2) If monitoring is specified, a Monitoring Plan shall be prepared that specifies which aspects of the
behaviour of the geotechnical structure shall be monitored to verify compliance with the serviceability
criteria.

(3) The Monitoring Plan should include, but is not limited to, provisions that:

— check the validity of the behaviour of all structures, ground, utilities within the zone of influence of
the construction works;

— check the validity of the design assumptions compiled in the Geotechnical Design Model;

— reduce the probability of adverse environmental impact and damage to surroundings during
execution;

— check that trends are coherent with the construction activities;

73
 SC7_N1662 page 74

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

— ensure that the structures continue to behave as required after execution.

(4) In addition to (2), other provisions should be included in the Monitoring Plan to monitor for
successful performance of the structure.

(5) The Monitoring Plan shall specify threshold and limiting values for the:

— behaviour of geotechnical structure at relevant construction stages;

— behaviour of structures, ground and utilities within the zone of influence (4.1.2.1);

— variation in groundwater conditions within the zone of influence;

— environmental impact, including noise, vibration, and pollution within the zone of influence.

(6) In addition to (5), other threshold and limiting values should be included in the Monitoring Plan.

(7) The Monitoring Plan should include duration, type and frequency of monitoring, and locations of
monitoring points.

(8) It shall be verified that the behaviour of the geotechnical structure, other structures, utilities, and
ground in the zone of influence complies with the serviceability criteria as defined in 4.2.5.

(9) Monitoring may be performed using observations or measurements (including geotechnical and
geodetical monitoring).

NOTE Monitoring includes visual observation.

(10) Effects of noise, vibration, and temperature on selected monitoring and monitoring equipment
shall be accounted for.

(11) Geotechnical monitoring should comply with EN 18674 (all parts).

(12) If the verification of a limit state is sensitive to a specific ground property, the Monitoring Plan
should include measures to verify the design assumptions made for these ground properties.

(13) The response time of instruments shall be rapid enough to capture potential changes in ground-
structure behaviour.

(14) In addition to (10), the management and communication procedures for analysing results shall
be sufficiently fast to allow adverse outcomes to be prevented.

10.5 Maintenance

(1) A Maintenance Plan shall be prepared that records the activities needed to ensure the safety,
serviceability, and durability of the geotechnical structure during its design service life.

NOTE Guidance on use of maintenance to ensure adequate durability is given in (1).

(2) The Maintenance Plan shall specify the objectives, types, and frequency of activities required to
ensure that the structure, and any part of it, can be used for its intended purpose without major repair
during its design service life.

74
 SC7_N1662 page 75

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

NOTE Maintenance activities for geotechnical structures include, e.g. cleaning of drainage systems, adjustment
of erosion protection, replacement of specific part of the structural element, adjustment of the surface level of
embankment.

(3) The Maintenance Plan shall include the supervision, inspection, and monitoring activities specified
in 10.1 to 10.4.

(4) The Maintenance Plan should specify:

— critical parts of the geotechnical structure that need post-execution inspection;

— the objective, type and frequency of post-execution inspection;

— acceptance criteria related to the intended inspection;

— threshold and limiting values related to the intended monitoring;

— maintenance activities if acceptance criteria and/or threshold values are violated.

NOTE 1 Post-execution monitoring can include measurement of groundwater variations, displacements,

rotations, pressure, anchors and visual inspections.

NOTE 2 Post-execution inspection can include checking of clogging of dewatering systems, effects of erosion and
signs of degradation of construction material.

(5) In addition to (4), other information should be included in the Maintenance Plan to check that the
structure functions as intended during its design service life.

10.6 Application of Observational Method

(1) In addition to 10.1 to 10.4, when using the Observational Method to verify limit states, the
Contingency Plan shall address foreseeable ground responses and ground-structure interactions and give
contingency measures appropriate for each design variants.

(2) The Contingency Plan shall be activated if threshold values or acceptance criteria for the current
design variant are exceeded.

11 Testing

11.1 General

11.1.1 Use of testing

(1) Testing may be used to determine ground properties, determine parameters for use in design, verify
capacity of structural element, check quality of construction material or product, and to understand the
behaviour of the geotechnical structure or part of it.

(2) Testing may be used as part of ground investigation or as part of verification by calculation, testing,
prescriptive rules or the Observational method.

(3) Tests may be carried out either on a sample of the actual geotechnical structure, on a supporting
element, or on full scale or reduced scale models.

75
 SC7_N1662 page 76

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

11.1.2 Test planning

(1) Test requirements, including test method and the number of tests, should be related to the
Geotechnical Category of the relevant part of the geotechnical structure.

(2) Prior to carrying out tests, a Test Plan should be compiled that includes, but is not limited to:

— test objectives and scope;

— specifications of sample preparation, as required;

— loading specifications;

— testing arrangements;

— period of time from execution to test, where relevant;

— test equipment (characteristics, maintenance and calibration requirements);

— measurement plan and frequency;

— prediction of test results;

— method for test evaluation and reporting;

— acceptance criteria;

— requirements from comparable experience, if any.

(3) In addition to (2), other items should be included in the Test Plan to result in successful execution of
the test.

11.1.3 Test evaluation

(1) Test evaluation shall include a check of the validity of the test results by comparison with prognosis
of test results or comparable experience.

(2) When significant deviations from prognosis or comparable experience occur, the reasons should be
established and documented.

(3) In case of unexpected deviations, the test should be repeated, or an alternative test method should
be used.

(4) The following aspects should be considered in the evaluation of the test:

— differences in ground properties between the test and the actual site of the geotechnical structure;

— effects of time, scale, stress levels and particle size.

(5) In addition to (4), other aspects should be included in the test evaluation as necessary to ensure an
appropriate result.

76
 SC7_N1662 page 77

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

11.2 Testing to determine ground properties

(1) Testing may be used to obtain ground properties using specified testing procedures during the
ground investigation.

NOTE Guidance on relevant field investigation and laboratory testing for specific ground properties are given
in prEN 1997-2:2022.

11.3 Testing to determine parameters for use in design

(1) Testing may be used to determine values of parameters others than ground properties for use in the
design.

NOTE Parameters for use in the design and verification of limit states can refer to ground-structure interface
properties or bearing capacity of the ground.

(2) Investigation tests on supporting elements that are not incorporated in the final structure may be
used to determine the ultimate resistance of the elements at the ground/structure interface and to
determine their characteristics in the working load range.

NOTE Guidance on the applicability of investigation tests for piles, anchors, soil nails, and rock bolts is given in
prEN 1997-3:2022.

(3) Investigation tests on laboratory specimens of improved ground may be used to determine shear
strength and deformation characteristics in the working load range.

NOTE Guidance on applicability of investigation tests for ground improvement is given in prEN 1997-3:2022.

(4) Suitability tests may be used to confirm that a specific design and construction methodology is
suitable for the present ground conditions.

NOTE Guidance on the applicability of suitability tests for piles, anchors, soil nails, rock bolts, and ground
improvement is given in prEN 1997-3:2022.

11.4 Testing to verify resistance

(1) Testing may be used to verify that a geotechnical structure fulfils its specified design requirements
without exceeding a limit state.

(2) Acceptance tests may be used to verify that the specified acceptance criteria are fulfilled in order to
verify the limit states.

11.5 Testing to control quality

(1) Control tests should be used to check the identity or quality of delivered products or the consistency
of production characteristic.

NOTE Example of control tests are tests to check the identity or quality of delivered products (for instance
geosynthetics) or the consistency of production characteristics (for instance lime-cement columns).

(2) Control tests should be used to check the compaction of engineered fill, using compaction control.

11.6 Testing to determine geotechnical behaviour

(1) Testing may be used to determine the behaviour of the geotechnical structure (or part of it).

77
 SC7_N1662 page 78

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

NOTE Guidance on acceptable limits of behaviour for geotechnical structures is given in 4.2.5 and 9.2.

12 Reporting

12.1 General

(1) The geotechnical aspects of the design of geotechnical structures and other works shall be reported.

(2) The extent and details of the reporting shall be adequate for an independent technical review.

(3) Reporting shall include information specified for the Ground Investigation Report (12.2),
Geotechnical Design Report (12.3), Geotechnical Construction Record (12.4), and any geotechnical test
reports (12.5).

NOTE The format of the reports is not specified in this document. The reports can be e.g. single volume,
multivolume, digital, paper copy, partly consist of drawings, or part of a Building Information Model (BIM).

(4) The content of the reporting shall include the information specified in Annex C.

(5) The extent and details of the reporting should be appropriate for the type of geotechnical structure
and the Geotechnical Category.

NOTE 1 Guidance on specific reporting for different geotechnical structures is given in prEN 1997-3:2022.

NOTE 2 The minimum extent and level of detail of reporting is given in Table 12.1(NDP) unless the National
Annex gives different a minimum extent and level of detail.

Table 12.1(NDP) —Extent and level of detail of reporting appropriate for GC

Geotechnical Extent and level of detail

Category
GC3 All the items given below for GC2 and, in addition:
— more extensive documentation should be included, covering all aspects of
the design as defined in Annex C;
— the extent of the documentation and the degree of detail should make it
possible for a third party to obtain similar results from check analyses of
the design.
GC2 All the items given below for GC1 and, in addition:
— the documentation should cover all critical aspects of the design;
— the extent of the documentation for items that are not critical may be
reduced or excluded provided justification is given.
GC1 — the documentation should cover the main design assumptions with
justification;
— the extent of the documentation for each heading, as defined in Annex C,
may be reduced to a record with bullet-points of what has been done.
NOTE An example of a reduced GDR for GC1 is presented in C.4.4

(6) The responsibility for reporting and keeping the records should be specified by the relevant
authority or, where not specified, agreed for a specific project, by the relevant parties.

78
 SC7_N1662 page 79

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

12.2 Ground Investigation Report

(1) The results of ground investigation shall be compiled in a Ground Investigation Report (GIR).

(2) The GIR shall, for each stage of the ground investigation, consist of a factual account of site
information and all results from the in-situ and laboratory testing as detailed in prEN 1997-2:2022,
Clause 13.

(3) The GIR shall document the Ground Model.

(4) The GIR shall include derived values, where available.

(5) The GIR shall state limitations of the results from field investigation and laboratory testing.

(6) Unless the National Annex gives a different requirement, the GIR shall include the depth to
conventional bedrock H800 for all projects located within seismic regions in accordance with
prEN 1998-1-1.

12.3 Geotechnical Design Report

12.3.1 General

(1) Documentation of the verification and design process of all construction phases and the final design
shall be compiled in a Geotechnical Design Report (GDR).

(2) The contents of the GDR shall comply with Annex C, C.4.

(3) The GDR shall give a description of the site and the planned geotechnical structure, including the
zone-of-influence.

(4) The GDR shall record the Consequence Class, Geotechnical Complexity Class, and Geotechnical
Category.

(5) Compliance with the assumptions in 1.2 shall be recorded in the GDR.

(6) The extent and details of the reporting for design situations and design assumptions which do not
govern the design may be reduced.

12.3.2 Ground properties and Geotechnical Design Model

(1) The GDR shall document the Geotechnical Design Model (GDM).

(2) The GDM should include representative values of the ground properties of the geotechnical units,
geometric specification, and groundwater conditions.

(3) The data sources used to determine the representative value of a ground property shall be stated in
the GDM.

NOTE Further guidance on content of the Geotechnical Design Model is given in Annex C.

(4) The GDR shall record the results of validating information in the GIR according to 4.2.4.

(5) The GDR shall record changes to the Ground Model that occur on receipt of additional information
about the ground conditions.

79
 SC7_N1662 page 80

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

(6) The GDR shall record the results of validating the GDM according to 4.2.3.

12.3.3 Properties

(1) The GDR shall record the evaluation of nominal value of geometrical properties.

(2) The GDR should record the evaluation of representative values of actions and resistances.

(3) The GDR shall record the evaluation of the representative and design values of material properties.

12.3.4 Verification of limit states

(1) The GDR shall describe the design situations considered (4.2.2).

(2) The GDR shall record the verification of limit states (4.2.1).

12.3.5 Implementation of design

(1) The GDR shall include the Inspection (10.3), Monitoring (10.4), and Maintenance (10.5) Plans.

(2) The GDR shall include specification of supervision.

(3) The GDR shall identify any important modifications of the design implemented to account for results
from supervision, inspection, monitoring, or maintenance.

(4) The GDR shall identify contingency measures, with corresponding acceptance criteria or threshold
values, to be implemented based on results from supervision, inspection, monitoring, or maintenance.

(5) If the Observational Method is applied (10.6), a Contingency Plan shall address foreseeable ground
responses and ground-structure interactions and give required contingency measures for each design
variants.

12.4 Geotechnical Construction Record

(1) A Geotechnical Construction Record (GCR) shall be prepared that documents construction,
supervision, monitoring, and inspection of the final structure and each phase of execution.

(2) The contents of the GCR shall comply with Annex C, C.5.

NOTE The aim of the GCR is to assist with future maintenance, design of additional works and decommissioning
of the works.

(3) In addition to (1), for verification of limit states using the Observational Method, the GCR shall include
a record of encountered scenarios at site and the contingency actions implemented, with justification of
any implemented contingency measure.

12.5 Geotechnical test reports

(1) The results of testing, of the performance of a geotechnical structure or the ground, or part thereof,
for design, supervision, inspection, or monitoring shall be compiled in a geotechnical test report.

NOTE Guidance on use of testing is given in Clause 11.

(2) If standard test methods are used, the documentation shall be presented and reported according to
the requirements defined in applicable test standards.

80
 SC7_N1662 page 81

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(3) Geotechnical test reports shall state any limitations of the results.

NOTE Geotechnical test reports can be part of the GIR, GDR, or GCR.

81
 SC7_N1662 page 82

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

Annex A
(informative)

Characteristic value determination procedure

A.1 Use of this annex

(1) This Informative Annex provides complementary guidance to 4.3.2 on characteristic values of ground
properties.

NOTE National choice on the application of this Informative Annex is given in the National Annex. If the
National Annex contains no information on the application of this informative annex, it can be used.

A.2 Scope and field of application

(2) This Informative annex covers procedures to determine the characteristic value of ground
properties.

A.3 Background
(1) Different sources of uncertainty should be related to the observed variability value through Formula
(A.):

2 2 2
V𝑥𝑥 = �V𝑥𝑥,𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖ℎ + V𝑥𝑥,𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 + V𝑥𝑥,𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 (A. 1)

where

Vx is the coefficient of variation of the observed property value;

Vx,inh is the coefficient of variation of the property due to inherent ground variability;

Vx,quality is the coefficient of variation of the measurement error;

Vx,trans is the coefficient of variation of the transformation error.

NOTE 1 There are several sources of uncertainty that affect the evaluation of ground properties.

NOTE 2 These sources include inherent variability, measurement error, statistical uncertainty, and
transformation uncertainty, as well as sampling quality.

NOTE 3 Statistical uncertainty describes the errors associated with estimating parameters (e.g. mean) of a
population based on a limited number of samples. Larger number of samples leads to smaller statistical
uncertainties.

NOTE 4 Transformation uncertainty is only relevant if the property is not measured directly but inferred from a
separate measurement.

NOTE 5 Examples of transformation uncertainty is undrained shear strength from Standard Penetration Test
blow count.

NOTE 6 Only inherent variability is a site property, the rest are design-dependent.

82
 SC7_N1662 page 83

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

A.4 Description of the determination procedure SC7 NOTE [#66]: CR0208

All changes in this Annex
(1) The determination procedure described in this Annex should be used to calculate the characteristic
A.4 except (3) Note 1 is
value of a ground property by statistical methods. from CR 0208.
This were judge to be
(2) The derived values of the ground property presented in the Ground Investigation Report, should be editorial, since it is mainly
used for the determination of the characteristic value of the ground property. rewording and moving the
tables into an appropriate
order.
(3) The procedure described in this Annex may be applicable for the determination of the characteristic The content of the tables
value of a ground property, considered as an estimate of either: were kept. Even if the CR
could be interpretated that
— the mean value [Case Type A]; or some of the tables should
be reduced (rows deleted).
However, deletion of rows
— the inferior (5 % fractile) or superior (95 % fractile) value [Case Type B]. were judge to be a
technical issue, not
NOTE 1 The relation of the scale of fluctuation to the extent of the failure surface can be used in the determination editorial change
of the characteristic values

NOTE 2 Alternative assessment procedures can be given in the National Annex. SC7 NOTE [#67]: CR0207
Clarification scale of
(4) The procedure in this Annex shall be used to evaluate the different terms in Formula (A. 2) [repeated fluctuation
from Formula 4.3]:

𝑋𝑋𝑘𝑘 = 𝑋𝑋𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 [1 ∓ 𝑘𝑘𝑛𝑛 𝑉𝑉𝑥𝑥 ] (A. 2)

where
Xk is the characteristic value of the ground property X;

Xmean is the mean of the ground property X from a number (n) of sample derived values;

kn is a coefficient that depends on the number of sample derived values (n) used to calculate
Xmean;
VX is the coefficient of variation of the ground property X [VX = (standard deviation)/(mean value)];

∓ denotes that knVX should be subtracted when a lower value of Xk is critical and added when
an upper value is critical.

NOTE Formula (A. 2)(A. 2)is based on the following assumptions: the ground property values follow either a
Normal or a Log-Normal distribution; there is no prior knowledge about the mean value.

(5) The determination procedure may be applied for three different cases: Case 1 “VX known”, Case 2 “VX
assumed” and Case 3 “VX unknown.

(6) Case 1 “VX known” should be used when the coefficient of variation of the ground property being
determined is known from prior knowledge.

(7) Case 2 “VX assumedunknown” should be used applied when the designer decides to use the indicative
values in Table A.2, for ground parameters, or Table A.3, for test parameters.

(8) Case 3 “VX unknownassumed” should be used applied when decided to use indicative values for
ground parameters of for test parameters.the coefficient of variation of the ground property being
determined is unknown ab initio.

83
 SC7_N1662 page 84

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

NOTE 1 Indicative values for ground properties are given in Table A.1 (NDP) and for test parameters in Table
A.2 (NDP) unless the National Annex gives different values.

NOTE 12 Prior knowledge might come from the evaluation of previous tests in comparable situations. Engineering
judgement can be used to determine what can be considered as “comparable”.

NOTE 23 In practice, it is often preferable to use Case 2 "VX assumed" together with a conservative upper estimate
of VX, rather than to apply the rules given for Case 3 "VX unknown".

Table A.21 (NDP) — Indicative values of coefficient of variation for different ground properties
Coefficient of variation
Soil / Rock Type Ground property Symbol
Vx (%)

All soils and rocks Weight density γ 5-10

Shear strength in total stress cu 30-50

Fine-grained soils
analysis

Peak or residual effective c'p c'r 30-50

All soils and rocks
cohesion

All soils and rocks Angle of friction ϕ 5-15

All soils and rocks Shear strength at failure τf 15-25

Unconfined compressive qu 20-80

All soils and rocks
strength

All soils Modulus of deformabilitya E or G 20-70

Vertical or horizontal cv or ch 30-70

Fine-grained soils
consolidation coefficient

All soils Hydraulic conductivityb k 70-250

a It refers to the different modulus of deformation whose symbols appear in 3.2.1. &
3.2.7/prEN 1997-2:2022.
b Given the high value of the coefficient of variation for the hydraulic conductivity, this procedure

should not be used.

Table A.32 (NDP) — Indicative values of coefficient of variation for different test parameters
Coefficient of variation
Soil / Rock Type Test parameter Symbol
Vx (%)

Coarse All soils SPT blowdount NSPT 15-45

All soils Pressuremeter limit pressure pl 5-15

All soils Cone resistance qc 5-15

All soils Sleeve friction fs 5-15

84
 SC7_N1662 page 85

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(8)(9) The value of Xmean should be calculated by Formula (A. 3)(A. 3).

∑𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖=1 𝑋𝑋𝑖𝑖
𝑋𝑋𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = (A. 3)
𝑛𝑛

where

Xi is the value of the i-sample derived value;

n is the number of sample derived values used for the evaluation of Xmean.

(9)(10) The value of kn should be obtained from Table A.13 which collates Formulas (A.4) to (A.7) for the
Cases combinations of types of estimate and Vx cases defined above.

Table A.1 3 —Values of kn for different Vx cases and type of estimations

Types of estimation
Case 1: “VX known & Case 3
Case 2: “VX assumed”Case A: Estimate “VX unknown”
Vx CASES
of the Case B: Estimate of the
mean value inferior or superior value
(5 or 95 % fractile)
𝑘𝑘𝑛𝑛
1
Case A: Estimate of the
𝑘𝑘𝑛𝑛 = 𝑁𝑁95 �
𝑛𝑛 1
mean valueCase 1: “VX = 𝑁𝑁95 �1 +
(A.4) 𝑛𝑛 (A.56)
known" &
Case 3 “VX unknown” 1
𝑘𝑘𝑛𝑛 = 𝑡𝑡95,𝑛𝑛−1 �
𝑛𝑛
𝑘𝑘𝑛𝑛 𝑘𝑘𝑛𝑛
Case 2: “VX assumed” 1 1
Case B: Estimate of the = 𝑡𝑡95,𝑛𝑛−1 � = 𝑡𝑡95,𝑛𝑛−1 �1 +
𝑛𝑛 𝑛𝑛
inferior or superior (A.65) (A.7)
𝑘𝑘𝑛𝑛
value
(5 or 95 % fractile) 1
= 𝑁𝑁95 �1 +
𝑛𝑛
where

N95 represents the normal distribution, evaluated for a 95% confidence level and infinite
degrees of freedom;

t95,n-1 represents the Student’s t distribution, evaluated for a 95% confidence level and n–1
degrees of freedom, being n as defined above.

(10)(1) For Case 2 “Vx assumed”, indicative values of Vx may be taken from Table A.2, for ground
parameters, or Table A.3, for test parameters, unless the National Annex gives different values.

85
 SC7_N1662 page 86

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

Table A.2 (NDP) — Indicative values of coefficient of variation for different ground properties
Coefficient of variation
Soil / Rock Type Ground property Symbol
Vx (%)

All soils and rocks Weight density γ 5-10

Shear strength in total stress cu 30-50

Fine-grained soils
analysis

Peak or residual effective c'p c'r 30-50

All soils and rocks
cohesion

All soils and rocks Angle of friction ϕ 5-15

All soils and rocks Shear strength at failure τf 15-25

Unconfined compressive qu 20-80

All soils and rocks
strength

All soils Modulus of deformabilitya E or G 20-70

Vertical or horizontal cv or ch 30-70

Fine-grained soils
consolidation coefficient

All soils Hydraulic conductivityb k 70-250

a It refers to the different modulus of deformation whose symbols appear in 3.2.1. &
3.2.7/prEN 1997-2:2022.
b Given the high value of the coefficient of variation for the hydraulic conductivity, this procedure

should not be used.

Table A.3 (NDP) — Indicative values of coefficient of variation for different test parameters
Coefficient of variation
Soil / Rock Type Test parameter Symbol
Vx (%)

Coarse soils SPT NSPT 15-45

All soils Pressuremeter limit pressure pl 5-15

All soils Cone resistance qc 5-15

All soils Sleeve friction fs 5-15

(11) For Case C2se 3 “Vx unknown”, the value of VX should be calculated by Formula (A. 8)(A. 8):

𝑠𝑠𝑥𝑥 ∑𝑛𝑛 (𝑋𝑋𝑖𝑖 − 𝑋𝑋𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 )2

𝑉𝑉𝑋𝑋 = ; 𝑠𝑠𝑥𝑥 = � 𝑖𝑖=1 (A. 8)
𝑋𝑋𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑛𝑛 − 1

where

86
 SC7_N1662 page 87

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

sx is the standard deviation of the sample derived values.

NOTE Tables A.4 to A.7 collates the values of Normal and Student’s t factor (N95 or t95,n-1) and resulting kn for
the different Cases combinations of Vx cases and type of estimateand type of estimation, according to Formulae (A.4)
to (A.7).

(12) For Case 23 “Vx assumed”, indicative values of Vx may be taken from Table A.21, for ground
parameters, or Table A.32, for test parameters, unless the National Annex gives different values.

Table A.4 — Selected values of N95 and kn to estimate the characteristic value as the mean value
[Case Combination A1 & A2], according to Formula (A.4)
n 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12
N95 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64
kn 1.16 0.95 0.82 0.74 0.67 0.62 0.58 0.55 0.52 0.47

n 14 16 18 20 25 30 35 40 50 100
N95 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64
kn 0.44 0.41 0.39 0.37 0.33 0.30 0.28 0.26 0.23 0.16

Table A.5 — Selected values of t95,n-1 and kn to estimate the characteristic value as the mean value
[Case Combination A3], according to Formula (A.5)
n 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12
t95,n-1 6.31 2.92 2.35 2.13 2.02 1.94 1.89 1.86 1.83 1.80
kn 4.46 1.69 1.18 0.95 0.82 0.73 0.67 0.62 0.58 0.52

n 14 16 18 20 25 30 35 40 50 100
t95,n-1 1.77 1.75 1.74 1.73 1.71 1.70 1.69 1.68 1.68 1.66
kn 0.47 0.44 0.41 0.39 0.34 0.31 0.29 0.27 0.24 0.17

Table A.6 — Selected values of N95 and kn to estimate the characteristic value as the inferior or
superior value (5 or 95% fractile) [Case Combination B1 & B2], according to Formula (A6)

n 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12
N95 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64
kn 2.01 1.90 1.84 1.80 1.78 1.76 1.74 1.73 1.73 1.71

n 14 16 18 20 25 30 35 40 50 100
N95 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64
kn 1.70 1.70 1.69 1.69 1.68 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.66 1.65

Table A.7 — Selected values of t95,n-1 and kn to estimate the characteristic value as the inferior or
superior value (5 or 95% fractile) [Case Combination B3], according to Formula (A.7)
n 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12
t95,n-1 6.31 2.92 2.35 2.13 2.02 1.94 1.89 1.86 1.83 1.80
kn 7.73 3.37 2.63 2.34 2.18 2.08 2.01 1.96 1.92 1.87

n 14 16 18 20 25 30 35 40 50 100
t95,n-1 1.77 1.75 1.74 1.73 1.71 1.70 1.69 1.68 1.68 1.68

87
 SC7_N1662 page 88

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E) F.E with agreed CRs (v.2022.05)

kn 1.83 1.81 1.79 1.77 1.74 1.73 1.71 1.71 1.69 1.67

NOTE 1 When the ground property is considered to follow a log-normal distribution, Formulae (A. 2)(A. 2),
(A. 3)(A. 3) and (A. 8)(A. 8) become:

𝑋𝑋𝑘𝑘 = 𝑒𝑒 𝑌𝑌𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 (1+/−𝑘𝑘𝑛𝑛 𝑉𝑉𝑌𝑌) (A. 2 − 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙)

where
Xk is the characteristic value of the ground property X;

Ymean is the mean from a number (n) of sample derived log values, as defined in Formula A.3-log;

kn is a coefficient that depends on the number of sample derived values (n) used to calculate Ymean (Table
A.1);

VY is the coefficient of variation of the log values of the ground property X [VY = sY / Ymean], being sx the
standard deviation of the sample derived log values (Formula A.8-log);

-/+ denotes that kn VY should be subtracted when a lower value of Xk is critical and added when an upper
value is critical.

∑𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖=1 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑋𝑋𝑖𝑖
𝑌𝑌𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = (A. 3 − 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙)
𝑛𝑛

where
Xi is the value of the i-sample derived value;

n is the number of sample derived values used for the evaluation of Ymean.

∑𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖=1(𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑖 − 𝑌𝑌𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 )2
𝑠𝑠𝑌𝑌 = � (A. 4 − 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙)
𝑛𝑛 − 1

NOTE 2 Adopting a log-normal distribution has the advantage that no negative values can occur as, for example,
for geometrical and resistance variables.

NOTE 3 There are determination procedures, different from the one described in this Annex, to determine the
characteristic relation (line, for example least squares with regression analysis) of the values of a ground property
with depth (z) or the characteristic values of dependent parameters (e.g. cohesion and friction angle).

88
 SC7_N1662 page 89

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Annex B
(informative)

Limiting values of structural deformation and ground movement SC7 NOTE [#68]: CR0001
Annex B Agreed to be
deleted 2021-07-01

B.1 Use of this Annex

(1) This Informative Annex provides complementary guidance to that given in Clause 9 regarding
limiting design values of structural deformation and ground movement.

(2) National choice on the application of this Informative Annex is given in the National Annex. If the
National Annex contains no information on the application of this informative annex, it can be used.

B.2 Scope and field of application.

(1) This Informative Annex provides guidance on limiting design values for serviceability criterion
related to ground movement and structural aspects.

(2) The limiting design values of deformations in this Annex do not apply to buildings or structures
which are out of the ordinary or for which the loading intensity is markedly non-uniform.

B.3 General
(1) The components of geotechnical structure movement to be considered should include settlement,
relative (or differential) settlement, rotation, tilt, relative deflection, angular distortion, deflection ratio,
horizontal displacement and vibration amplitude.

(2) The damage criteria shown in Table B.1 should be used as a guide to set limiting design value of the
serviceability criteria for walls based on ease of repair.

NOTE 1 The boundary between Damage Classes 2 and 3 typically forms a serviceability limit state while Damage
Class 5 is typically considered an ultimate limit state.

NOTE 2 For further information on limiting design value of serviceability criterion, see prEN 1990:2021, 8.4.1.

(3) Based on the damage criteria in Table B.1 and Figures B.1 to B.3 may be used to derive allowable
deflection ratio for visual damage to walls in bending with different levels of horizontal strain.

NOTE 1 The derivation of the values in Table B.1, Figure B.1 to B.3 is described in Burland (1997) and Burland
et al (1977).

NOTE 2 The damage criteria shown in Table B.1 is a guide to setting serviceability limit state damage criteria to
walls for masonry buildings based on ease of repair.

(4) In the absence of specified limiting values of structural deformations of the supported structure, the
values of structural deformation given below may be used:

— Suggested limit on tilt of tall structures (height H) for visual appearance:

— ω=1/250 (H<24 m);

— ω=1/330 (24 m<H<60 m);

89
 SC7_N1662 page 90

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

— ω=1/500 (60 m<H<100 m);

— ω=1/1 000 (H>100 m).

— Other suggested serviceability limits:

— Leakage of steel fluid storage tanks β=1/300 to 1/500;

— Flexible utility connections s=150 mm;

— Crane operation on rails β=1/300;

— Drainage of floors β=1/50 to 1/100;

— Stacking of goods ω=1/100;

— Operation of machinery β=1/300 to 1/5 000 depending on machinery type, 1/750 typical;

Lift and escalator operation ω=1/1 200 to 1/2 000

90
 SC7_N1662 page 91

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Key
X /L 1 flexible structures
Y sensitivity to wall damage 2 load-bearing reinforced blockwork /
masonry walls
A negligible 3 L/ H ca. 6
B very slight 4 hogging
C slight 5 L/H ca. 1
D moderate 6 load-bearing unreinforced
blockwork / masonry walls
E severe 7 structural frames
F very severe [ULS] a low
G visual damage b medium
c high
d very high

Figure B.1 — Example determination of deflection ratio limits for walls in bending (zero
horizontal strain)

91
 SC7_N1662 page 92

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Key
X /L 1 flexible structures
Y sensitivity to wall damage 2 load-bearing reinforced
blockwork / masonry walls
A very slight 3 L/ H ca. 6
B slight 4 hogging
C moderate 5 L/H ca. 1
D severe 6 load-bearing unreinforced
blockwork / masonry walls
E very severe [ULS] 7 structural frames
F visual damage
a low
b medium
c high
d very high

Figure B.2 — Example determination of deflection ratio limits for walls in bending (0.05%
horizontal strain)

92
 SC7_N1662 page 93

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Key
X /L 1 flexible structures
Y sensitivity to wall damage 2 load-bearing reinforced blockwork
/ masonry walls
A slight 3 L/ H ca. 6
B moderate 4 hogging
C severe 5 L/H ca. 1
D very severe [ULS] 6 load-bearing unreinforced
blockwork / masonry walls
E visual damage 7 structural frames
a low
b medium
c high
d very high

Figure B.3 — Example determination of deflection ratio limits for walls in bending (0.1%
horizontal strain)

93
 SC7_N1662 page 94

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Table B.1 — Damage criteria for walls

Damage Normal Limiting Description Typical crack Ease of repair
class degree of tensile widths (mm)
sensitivity strain (%)
0 Negligible 0-0.05 Hairline cracks < 0.1

1 Very slight 0.05-0.075 Damage generally restricted to ≤1 Fine cracks that are easily treated
internal wall finishes. Close during normal redecoration
inspection may reveal some cracks in
external brickwork or masonry
2 Slight 0.075-0.15 Cracks may be visible externally; 2-3 Cracks easily filled. Re-decoration
doors and windows may stick probably required. Recurrent cracks
slightly can be masked by suitable linings. Some
repointing may be required to ensure
water-tightness
3 Moderate 0.15-0.3 Doors and windows sticking; service Up to 5 locally Cracks require some opening up and
pipes may fracture; weather- can be patched by a mason. Repointing
tightness often impaired of external brickwork and possibly a
small amount of brickwork may be
replaced
4 Severe > 0.3 Windows and door frames distorted; 5-15 Extensive repair work involving
floor sloping noticeably; walls breaking-out and replacing sections of
leaning or bulging noticeably; some walls, especially over doors and
loss of bearing in beams; service windows
pipes disrupted
5 Very severe Beams lose bearing; walls lean badly Several closely Requires a major repair job involving
and require shoring; windows spaced > 3 partial or complete rebuilding
broken with distortion; danger of
instability

94
 SC7_N1662 page 95

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Annex C
(normativeinformative) SC7 NOTE [#69]: CR0002
Change of status to
informative
Additional requirements and recommendations for reporting

C.1 Use of this Normative Annex

(1) This Normative informative Annex provides additional requirements and recommendations to those
given in Clause 12, concerning the content and extent of reporting.

NOTE National choice on the application of this Informative Annex is given in the National Annex. If the
National Annex contains no information on the application of this informative annex, it can be used. SC7 NOTE [#70]:CR0002
Added since the status now
C.2 Scope and field of application is informative and the
National Annex should
decide on the status.
(1) This infNormative Annex covers documentation of the design process from initial desk study and
ground investigation to implementation of the design in execution.

(2) This Normative informative Annex is intended to be used in conjunction with other European
standards that give complementary requirements on documentation for specific phases in the design
process, as illustrated in Figure C.1.

NOTE The process of geotechnical design and execution generally comprises a number of successive phases.
The guidelines for documentation are defined in different standards for these phases, as presented in Figure C.1.

95
 SC7_N1662 page 96

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Phase Standards Documentation

Documentation in field/lab

EN ISO 14688
EN ISO 14689
EN ISO 17892
Laboratory
EN 18674 Field report
report
EN 22475
EN 22476
EN 22282
Investigation

prEN 1997-2 Compiled documentation for field

investigation or laboratory testing
for specific site

Test Report Test Report

Field Laboratory

prEN 1997-2 Compiled documentation site

output data conditions (factual report)
prEN 1997-1
Input data Ground Investigation Report (GIR)

prEN 1997-1 Compiled documentation ground

Design and model and design (evaluating report)
verification

Geotechnical Design Report (GDR)

Compiled prEN
documentation
1997-3
test (factual with
report) reference to
CEN TC 341
Geotechnical Test CEN TC 288
Report
Execution

prEN 1997-1 Compiled documentation of construction process and

Implementation monitoring (evaluating report)
of design

Geotechnical Construction Record (GCR)

Figure C.1 — Illustration of interaction between documentation in EN 1997 and complementary

European standards.

96
 SC7_N1662 page 97

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

C.3 Ground Investigation Report

(1) prEN 1997-2:2022, Annex A shall apply.

C.4 Geotechnical Design Report

C.4.1 General content

(1) The Geotechnical Design Report should include, but is not limited to, the following information:

1. Project information
a. Project name;
b. Proposed structure and its use and location (coordinates and reference system);
c. Normative references;
d. Reference to the GIR, Ground Model, and other sources of information.
2. Evaluation of available information
a. Desk study;
b. Site inspection;
c. In-situ and laboratory testing;
d. Other relevant investigations and studies;
e. Validation of information obtained from GIR (4.2.4).
3. List/sketch geotechnical structures for evaluation
a. Geotechnical structures for consideration;
b. Evaluation of the alternatives;
c. Choice of main alternatives, and motive for abandoning the other.
c.d. Suitability of the site with respect to the proposed geotechnical structures. SC7 NOTE [#71]: CR0002
4. Bases of design Added text according to CR
a. Design situations (4.2.2);
b. Limit states considered (8, 9);
c. Actions and combinations of actions (4.3.1);
d. Geotechnical reliability, Consequence Class (GCC, GC) (4.1.2.2, 4.1.2.3);
e. Geotechnical Design Model, including evaluation of representative values (4.3.2) and
validation of GDM (4.2.3);
f. Impact within the zone of influence (4.2.5);
g. Aspects in relation with robustness (4.1.4), design service life (4.1.5), durability ((1)) and
sustainability (4.1.7);
h. Any restrictions (loading, vibration, deformation, etc.);
i. Any assumptions or simplifications;
j. Verification method with corresponding selections and justification:
i. For verification by calculation
− Applicable design case and partial factors;
− Validation of chosen calculation model (7.1).
ii. For verification by testing
− Reference to performed and planed testing.
iii. For verification by prescriptive rules
− Reference to selected prescriptive rules.
iv. For verification by Observational Method
− Selection of design variants for analyses.
5. Geotechnical Analyses
a. Estimate of the expected range of results;
b. Documentation of analyses;
c. Sensitivity analyses;
d. Evaluation of results;

97
 SC7_N1662 page 98

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

e. Analyses of execution phases.

6. Execution specification for the geotechnical structure
a. Specification of materials (dimensions, tolerances, quality);
b. If needed, drawings;
c. Requirements on the execution process and description of each execution phase.
7. Implementation of design
a. Specification of supervision (10.2);
b. Inspection Plan (10.3);
c. Monitoring Plan (10.4);
d. Maintenance Plan (10.5).

(2) Additional information than given in (1) should be included to give proper documentation.

C.4.2 Specification of the Geotechnical Design Model

(1) A Geotechnical Design Model shall include specification of design situations (physical conditions and
timeframe), corresponding combinations of actions and associated relevant limit states. SC7 NOTE [#72]: CR0002
Deleted since already
(1) The description of the ground conditions compiled in the Geotechnical Design Model should included in 4.2.3 (1)
include, but is not limited to:

— the results of the field investigation and laboratory tests evaluated according to prEN 1997-2:2022;

— statement about data that is excluded from evaluation with justification;

— statement about any limitations of the investigation results;

— choice of Geotechnical Category, with justification;

— a review of the results of the site inspection, desk study, field investigation and laboratory tests;

— a review of topographical data;

— a review of the derived values of ground properties.

(2) The description of geotechnical units should include, but is not limited to:

— description and classification of ground included within each geotechnical unit;

— designation of the material parameters relevant for design;

— identification of the data that was used in the selection of representative values of ground properties.

NOTE Guidance on the specification of geotechnical units is given in prEN 1997-2:2022.

(3) The geometrical specification should include, but is not limited to:

— location of boundaries between different geotechnical units;

— location of discontinuities within a geotechnical unit;

— spatial trends in the variation of ground properties, particularly with depth.

NOTE Guidance on the geometric specification is given in prEN 1997-2:2022.

98
 SC7_N1662 page 99

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(4) The specification of groundwater and surface water conditions at a site should include, but is not
limited to:

— identification of any low permeability materials;

— specification of water tables, groundwater pressures, and flows relevant to the design;

— identification of saturation conditions for all materials in the model;

— chemical properties of groundwater;

— a statement about the likely drainage response of each permeable saturated material present in the
model.

NOTE Guidance on the specification of groundwater conditions is given in prEN 1997-2:2022.

(5) The documentation should include, but is not limited to:

a) tabulation and graphical presentation of the results of field investigation and laboratory testing;

b) cross-sections of the ground showing relevant geotechnical units and their boundaries including the
groundwater table;

c) the process of compiling the Geotechnical Design Model considering the groundwater table, ground
type, ground investigation techniques, transport, handling, specimen preparation, local experience,
and other sources of information.

C.4.3 Verification of limit states

(1) Documentation of verification by prescriptive rules (4.5) should include, but is not limited to:

— reference to the prescriptive rules specified by the relevant authority or agreed for the specific
project by relevant parties;

— evaluation of the applicability of the prescriptive rules for the considered design situation, limit state
and Geotechnical Design Model.

(2) Documentation of verification by testing (4.6) should include, but is not limited to:

— reference to the appropriate geotechnical test report;

— evaluation of the test results and their limitations.

(3) Documentation of verification by the calculation, including verification by partial factor method (4.4)
should include, but is not limited to:

— validation of the calculation model for the used Geotechnical Category;

— design values of ground parameters, including justification;

— design cases applied;

— geotechnical design calculations and drawings.

99
 SC7_N1662 page 100

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

(4) In addition to (3) documentation of verification by the Observational Method (4.7) should include,
but is not limited to:

— justification of the applicability of the Observational Method for the design situation, and
Geotechnical Category;

— design variant used at the outset of execution;

— design variants including threshold and limit values and acceptance criteria with associated
contingency measures.

(5) In addition to (3) or (4), documentation of design by calculation using numerical methods should
include, but is not limited to:

— justification of the applicability of the numerical model used for specific design situations;

— statement about the boundary conditions of the model.

C.4.4 Simplification for Geotechnical Category 1

(1) For Geotechnical Category 1, the lists above may be reduced to the following information, as
applicable:

1. Project information
a. Project name;
b. Proposed structure and its use;
c. Reference to the GIR and other sources of information.
2. Evaluation and validation of available information, summarised in a simplified Geotechnical
Design Model that is validated.
3. Bases of design
a. Geotechnical Reliability (GCC, GC) and Consequence class (CC);
b. Restrictions (loading, vibration, deformation, etc.);
c. Limit states;
d. Any assumptions and simplifications.
4. Geotechnical Analyses, one or more of the following:
a. Prescriptive rules with justification;
b. Documentation of calculation model used (with justification of it's validation Table 7.1)
5. Specification of the geotechnical structure
a. Specification of materials and dimensions;
b. Requirements on the execution process and description of each execution phase.
6. Implementation of design during execution and service life
a. Specification of supervision (10.2);
b. Inspection Plan (10.3).

100
 SC7_N1662 page 101

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

C.5 Geotechnical Construction Record

C.5.1 General content

(1) The Geotechnical Construction Record should include, but is not limited to, the following:

1. Project information
a. Project name;
b. Completed structure, its intended use and location (coordinates and reference system);
c. Any relevant normative references;
d. Reference to the GIR and GDR and to construction drawings and specifications.
2. Construction record
a. Sequence of construction operations assumed in the design including any deviations from
it during construction;
b. Encountered deviations from the design base including Geotechnical Design Model;
c. Measures applied;
d. Deviations from construction specification and structure specification made during
construction including justifications;
e. Temporary work;
f. Requirements for on-going monitoring;
g. As-built drawings.
3. Inspection record
a. Evaluation of inspection reports, including testing of structure and complementary
ground investigation;
b. Revision of the Ground Model and Geotechnical Design Model;
c. Measures applied;
d. Deviations from the plan.
4. Supervision record
a. Evaluation of results from supervision;
b. Measures applied;
c. Deviations from the plan.
5. Monitoring record
a. Evaluation of monitoring results;
b. Measures applied;
c. Deviations from the plan.
6. Consideration for future maintenance
a. Summary of observation made during the construction;
b. Record of items with special consideration for future maintenance.

(2) Test reports, inspection records, and drawings may be added to the GCR.

(3) A Building Information Model may be used to compile part of the GCR.

C.5.2 Record of construction

(1) The record of construction should include, but is not limited to:

— a general description of the works, including ground and groundwater conditions encountered;

— instability problems, unusual ground conditions, and groundwater problems, including measures to
overcome them;

— contaminated and hazardous material encountered on site and the location of disposal, both on and
off site;

101
 SC7_N1662 page 102

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

— temporary works and foundation treatment, including drainage measures and treatment of soft areas
and their effectiveness;

— types of imported and site-won materials and their use;

— any aspect of the specification or standards used that should be reviewed in view of problems
encountered on site;

— any unexpected ground conditions that required changes to design;

— problems not envisaged in the Geotechnical Design Report and the solutions to them.

(2) For geotechnical structures in Geotechnical Category 1, a formal construction schedule may be
omitted from the Geotechnical Construction record

C.5.3 Record of supervision, monitoring and inspection

(1) The record of supervision, monitoring, and inspection should include, but is not limited to:

— evaluation of results from measurements, observations and tests on the geotechnical structure or
parts of it;

— the impact of the results on the execution and built structure;

— evaluation of results from complementary geotechnical investigations;

— the impact of such investigation on the execution and built structure;

— alteration of the Geotechnical Design Model;

— deviations from the Supervision, Monitoring, and Inspection Plans;

— elaborate aspects which in execution phase differ from assumptions in design and assess its impact;

— summary of observations made during supervision, monitoring, and inspection.

C.6 Geotechnical test report

(1) The factual account in a geotechnical test report should include, but is not limited to:

1. Project information
a. Project name;
b. Purpose of testing;
c. List of tests performed and their locations (coordinates);
d. Any relevant normative reference;
e. Date and time of tests;
f. Environmental conditions on site during testing;
g. Name of field personnel;
h. Equipment used;
i. Documentation of calibration and certification documents;
j. Test methodology.
2. Details of tested structural parts
a. Type of ground, structure and/or structural parts;
b. Locations (drawing and/or coordinates);

102
 SC7_N1662 page 103

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

c. Dates of installation.
3. Test results
a. Measured values;
b. Derived values (with any correlations used, including justification);
c. Remarks on specific test results.
4. Review of testing and results
a. Problems encountered during the test that could affect the results;
b. Known limitations of the results.

103
 SC7_N1662 page 104

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Annex D
(informative)

Guideline on selection of Geotechnical Complexity Class

D.1 Use of this Informative Annex

(1) This Informative Annex provides complementary guidance to Clause 4 for selection of appropriate
Geotechnical Complexity Class

NOTE National choice on the application of this Informative Annex is given in the National Annex. If the
National Annex contains no information on the application of this informative annex, it can be used.

D.2 Scope and field of application

(1) This Informative Annex covers guidelines on selection of appropriate Geotechnical Complexity Class.

D.3 Specific features to consider

(1) The Geotechnical Complexity Class should be selected based on an evaluation of the degree of
severity for the design situation of these general features;

— uncertainty of the ground conditions;

— variability and difficulty of the ground;

— sensitivity of the geotechnical structure to groundwater and surface water conditions;

— complexity of the ground-structure interaction.

(2) The evaluation of the severity should be based on engineering judgement, with a scale from
significant, considerable, high at one end to negligible, uniform, low at the other end of the scale.

(3) If the evaluation in (1) results in a high severity for any of the general features, the GCC should be
selected as GCC 3.

NOTE Specific features to include in the evaluation of the severity of the general features is given in Table E.1
(NDP) unless the National Annex gives different specific features.

(4) If the evaluation in (1) results in a low severity for all the general features, the GCC should be selected
as GCC 1.

NOTE Guideline on specific features to be fulfilled for GCC1 is given in Table E.2 (NDP) unless the National
Annex gives different specific features.

104
 SC7_N1662 page 105

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Table D.1 (NDP) — Examples of specific features to account for in selection of the Geotechnical
Complexity Class

General features Specific feature

Uncertainty in Ground — Evaluation of uncertainty from the available results from Ground
condition investigations;
— evaluation of completeness of available results and relevance of
ground investigation method with respect to judged best possible
knowledge of the ground conditions;
— ground conditions are with high certainty expected to be as
interpreted from the ground investigations.
Variability or difficulty — Ground with weak layers or zones;
of ground condition — unfavourable discontinuity patterns;
— potential pre-existing failure surfaces;
— occurrence of soil that has potential to cause additional needs for
the geotechnical structure or execution. E.g. fine soil sensitive to
disturbance, aggressive soil, highly compressible soil, organic
soil, creep soil, swelling soil.
Sensitivity to — Existence of hydraulic gradient and seepage forces;
groundwater and — exposure to erosion, scour or piping;
surface water — potential of water flow;
conditions — high groundwater level;
— excavation below groundwater level;
— variability in water level.
Complexity of the — Ongoing ground movements (settlement and/or slope
ground-structure movement);
interaction — potential nonstable ground;
— progressive failure of natural or improved ground;
— potential sensitive adjacent structure or complex interaction
with adjacent structures;
— structure subjected to dynamic, cyclic or seismic actions;
— highly concentrated loading on part of the geotechnical structure;
— complexity of the structure itself including geometry, variation in
plane and depth;
— lack of documented comparable experience for the considered
geotechnical structure and execution of it in similar conditions.

105
 SC7_N1662 page 106

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Table D.2 (NDP) — Examples of specific features to select Geotechnical Complexity Class 1

General features Specific feature

Uncertainty in Ground — Documented comparable experience of the ground conditions,
condition — no known information that indicate uncertainty in the ground
conditions.
Variability or difficulty — Available results from Ground investigations validate simple and
of ground condition uniform ground conditions;
— no known weak layers or unfavourable discontinuities;
— ground considered as suitable for the specific application without
further improvement.
Sensitivity to — Restrictions on excavation below the ground water level;
groundwater and — no exposure to erosion, scour or piping;
surface water — minimal potential of water flow through the structure;
conditions — low influence from groundwater and/or surface water.

Complexity of the — No known ground movements (settlement and our slope movement);
ground-structure — restrictions on ground surface inclination;
interaction — restrictions on maximum excavation depth;
o e.g. 2 m in fine soil and 3 m in coarse soil
— absence of sensitive structures within the zone of influence;
— restriction on loading
o No dynamic, cyclic or seismic actions.
o No concentrated loading.
o permanent loading is restricted to a limited fraction of anticipated
bearing capacity of the ground

106
 SC7_N1662 page 107

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

Bibliography

References given in recommendations (i.e. "should" clauses)

The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content constitutes highly
recommended choices or course of action of this document. Subject to national regulation and/or any relevant
contractual provisions, alternative documents could be used/adopted where technically justified. For dated
references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document
(including any amendments) applies.
EN 197-1, Cement - Part 1: Composition, specifications and conformity criteria for common cements

EN 445, Grout for prestressing tendons - Test methods

EN 447, Grout for prestressing tendons - Basic requirements

EN 1563, Founding - Spheroidal graphite cast irons

EN 1537, Execution of special geotechnical works - Ground anchors

EN 1912:2012, Structural Timber - Strength classes - Assignment of visual grades and species

prEN 1998-1-1 Eurocode 8 - Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 1-1: General rules and
seismic action

EN 10080, Steel for the reinforcement of concrete - Weldable reinforcing steel - General

prEN 101381, Prestressing steels

EN 12390, Testing hardened concrete - Part 5: Flexural strength of test specimens

EN 12715, Execution of special geotechnical work - Grouting

EN 12716, Execution of special geotechnical work - Jet grouting

EN 13249, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products - Characteristics required for use in the construction
of roads and other trafficked areas (excluding railways and asphalt inclusion)

EN 13250, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products - Characteristics required for use in the construction
of railways

EN 13251, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products - Characteristics required for use in earthworks,
foundations and retaining structures

EN 13252, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products - Characteristics required for use in drainage systems

1 Under development.

107
 SC7_N1662 page 108

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

EN 13253, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products - Characteristics required for use in erosion control
works (coastal protection, bank revetments)

EN 13254, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products - Characteristics required for the use in the
construction of reservoirs and dams

EN 13255, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products - Characteristics required for use in the construction
of canals

EN 13256, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products - Characteristics required for use in the construction
of tunnels and underground structures

EN 13257, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products - Characteristics required for use in solid waste
disposals

EN 13265, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products - Characteristics required for use in liquid waste
containment projects

EN 14199, Execution of special geotechnical works - Micropiles

EN 14475, Execution of special geotechnical works - Reinforced fill

EN 14487 (all parts), Sprayed concrete

EN 14488 (all parts), Testing sprayed concrete

EN 15237, Execution of special geotechnical works - Vertical drainage

EN 16907 (all parts), Earthworks

EN 50162, Protection against corrosion by stray current from direct current systems

EN ISO 14688 (all parts), Geotechnical investigation and testing - Identification and classification of soil

EN ISO 14689, Geotechnical investigation and testing - Identification, description and classification of rock
(ISO 14689)

EN ISO 17892 (all parts), Geotechnical investigation and testing - Laboratory testing of soil

EN ISO 18674 (all parts), Geotechnical investigation and testing - Geotechnical monitoring by field
instrumentation

EN ISO 22475 (all parts), Geotechnical investigation and testing - Sampling and groundwater
measurements

EN ISO 22476 (all parts), Geotechnical investigation and testing - Field testing

EN ISO 22282 (all parts), Geotechnical investigation and testing - Geohydraulic testing

ISO 1920-10, Testing of concrete - Part 10: Determination of static modulus of elasticity in compression

ISO 6707-1, Buildings and civil engineering works - Vocabulary - Part 1: General terms

108
 SC7_N1662 page 109

prEN 1997-1:2022 (E)

References given in possibilities (i.e. "can" clauses) and notes

The following documents are cited informatively in the document, for example in "can" clauses and in
notes.

Buggy et al. (2018), Registration of Ground Engineering Professionals – a European Perspective, 13th IAEG
Congress, San Francisco, Ca US 15-23 September 2018

CIRIA R185. Observational method in ground engineering: principles and applications. CIRIA, London,
1999

CIRIA C731. The International Levee Handbook. CIRIA, Ministère de l'Ecologie, du Développement
Durable et de l'Energie, and the US Army Corps of Engineers. CIRIA, London, 2013

Burland J.B., Wroth C.P. (1974). Settlement of buildings and associated damage. SOA Review. Conf.
Settlement of Structures, Cambridge, Pentech Press, London, pp 611-654

10.32075/17ECSMGE-2019-0818 Geotechnical Engineering foundation of the future ISBN 978-9935-

9436-1-3, Proceedings of the XVII ECSMGE-2019 -Registration of Ground Engineering Professionals – A
European Perspective (ISSMGE online library)

Terzaghi and Peck (xxxx), ….. SC7 NOTE [#73]: CR0012

Correct reference to be
EFFC-DFI. Guide to Tremie Concrete for Deep Foundation. Second Edition. added

109