PAPER Pile design to Eurocode 7 and the UK National Annex. Part 1: Eurocode 7 Andrew J Bond, director, Geocentrix and Brian Simpson, director, Arup Geotechnics Summary This cwo-past paper presents @ summary of the provisions for ple design according o Burocode 7 and the UK National Annex. The design process for piling depends on both calculation and teting of piles, by either static loading or dynamie methods. Although Eurocode 7 ‘ecogniss the importance of combining thes, its provisions treat theme araely Furthermore pile design has usually linked at east implicit, O° sideration of ultimate and serviceability ik state; this remains the es Eurooode 7. In the event, specifying how calculation and testing should be used togsther proved to be a major challenge in drafting the UK. National ‘Aanex. Aa extensive consultation among pile designers vas undertaken 10 reach the consensus, which was published in November 2007. ‘The paper is published in two pars. Par 1 covers the provisions of| Jurocode 7 itself (ENs 1997-1 and -2), which apply throughout Burope ‘except where amended by a National Annex. Part? wil present the values ‘of the various factors required by the UK National Annex, together with a ‘escrption of the process by which they were derived. Part wilalo include ‘wo worked examples showing the application of the Enrocode rules. Ineracyction Background to Eurocode 7 Eurocode 7 Par 1 (EN 1997-1)! was released by the European Commitee for Standardisation (CEN) in Novernber 2004 for pabliation asa national standant in 30 counties thoughout the European Union ad the Europes Free Trade Association (EFTA). The British Standard Institution published this standard as BS EN 1997-1? in December 200, ‘The design of pile foundations i the subject of Section 7 of Eurocode 7 Part 1, covering topes such as: limit states; actions and design situations; design methods and design considerations; pile load tees; axially 1oaded piles; transversely losded pte structural design of ples, and supervision Of construction. Section 7 comprises 167 paragraphs, of which 98 are Pin ciples (general statements and definitions that must be followed) and the remainder Application Rules (generally recognised rules that comply with the Principles and satisfy their requitement). Principles are identied by thei use of the verb "shall"; Application Rules employ sich verbs as “may"and "should". Section 7 applies to end-bearing, ition, tension, and ‘ransversely loaded piles installed by diving, jacking, screwing, and boring thor wthost grouting), ‘Under CEN rules, each National Standards Body (NSB) may provide in National Annex (NA) decisions regarding certain national choices, where Such choices are allowed inthe Eurocode, These include values for Nation ally Determined Parameters (NDP), such as partial, coreation, and model factors; the procedure t0 be used where alternative procedures ae given: 2PAPER »> ments for ULS and SLS design at inked for most ground conditions in ‘whieh ples might be bearing, This must be borne in mind in considering the {ext which is dected primarily at ULS, as discussed below. ‘The findamental requirement of EC7 for ULS design is tha pile founda ‘ions must be verified against lure or excessive deformation of the ground in which the stength of the ground is significant in providing resistance Gimit state "GEO"; and against internal failure or excessive deformation of the structure in which the strength ofthe srecturessgnficant in providing resistance (Kit state "STR°). Both ofthese oltimate limit tates are gov termed bythe same requirement: @ Eas Re where Ea represents the design effet of actions, suchas theultimate design Toads on pile, and Ry represents the corresponding resistance, such asthe design ultimate bearing capacity or the sructral strength of the ple. The term “design” implies that these valves alneady incorporate patil Facors, t0:no further overall factor of safety is required in equation (4). ‘For a pile foundation subject to compression, this inequality may be © Fea= Bre.Gus + Brewis «Rea = Su * where Fst total esgn compressive ation Ge he erg asion-efstin Tooauon 3) Guy and Qyjare characters permanent snd voabe scons, ‘pecty Yop and Yes ae the conesponding pti factor or perma: owt and veil atin a combnton face or varie actos 36 {pected im EN 199 and 19915 Rete ple ral design compresive ‘Esstance the desig esstance in quntion Raa and Res ae the pes Saracterc shaft and bse snstance,reapetvey and Yoana Yar the ‘Sresponng paral factors fo shat a hase esiance he summations tow for mulle permanent and/or variable action being spied the ie ® The values of characteristic actions are derived from ENs 1990 and 1991, but thee regements Beg the question how are characters ple rena ncer devel? The proces foqited i the responsibilty of EC? and ts National Annex. ECY sates tat the character vale shoul be aa Tous estimate of the valve afecting she oceans of th it ate” The {pproch adoped inthe UK National Anne explained in this paper Tine ies sha and base eiances canoe be termined separ, he revi negulty yb sip © Fea StasGus # Sto Ons «Poa =e % where Rex isthe pile’ total characteristic compresive resistance; and i the corresponding partial fctor for toca resistance For pile foundation subject to tension, requirement (5) may be writen as: R, Fa Droit Dray Pre = where Fa isthe total design tensile action; Req is the pile’ total design ten $e wesistaace, Reis the piles characteristic shaft esiance n tension; 04 ‘Yori the corresponding partial factor for tensile shaft resistance Design Approaches Furocode Part allows thelimit states GEO and STR tobe verified accord- {ng to one of three Design Approaches. In Design Approach I (DA), rl ability i ensued by applying partial factors into separate checks: fst to factions (in Combination |) and second to material properties or pile esis {ances (in Combination 2), Design Approach 2 (DA2) ensures reliability by ‘applying factors to actions (or their efets) and resistance, simultaneously ‘And Detign Approach 3 (DA3) applies factors to actions and material prop- erties, again simultaneousy “ust over half of the countries in CEN have chosen DA? for foundation 1) are accompanying characteristic variable actions, and Ras and Ray ae the ples characteristic shat and base resistances, respectively ‘In tis equation, we have placed boxes around the partial factors that are numerically» 1.3 and hence provide the most sgniicnat contetbution (orl ability, Valves ofthese factors for use in the UK wil be given in Part 2 Combination 2 applies significant partial factors (13) 0 resistances and 10 variable actions, Permanent actions and ground strengths (when used in deiv- Ing pile resistances) are left unfactored. These factors are taken fom Sets A2, ‘Mi, and R&, Thus, verification of Combination 2 may be expressed as: © YreGr, + oP. + Hye] Re 8 10,, Res this calculation indicates that the chosen ple length isnot suflcien wo provide suliient reliability ayainst ultimate mit state GEO. ‘The rato of Fs t0 Reg ~ termed the “degree of utilisation” (A) by Bond and Haris — 18a measure of how much of the available design resistance isting used bythe applied design loud. In this eas ts Fig _ 4300 = Fee 80 15% Rig 3749 indicating thatthe pile must be lengthened to meet the requirements of Burocode , The waional factor of safety fra plea this length is Rust, 4964+ 1299) (Fae Bae gy = (S988 1289) gaze (Feast an) A pile length jst under 31m (giving F = 2.5) is required to satisfy the UK Jmplementaton of Eurocode 7if no explicit LS check is performed, Verification of limit state GEO with static load tests on working ples If tests are scheduled for 1% of the constructed piles and the load taken to at least 15 times the representative load for which they are designed, 30 Coy shart ocean) ono ar ey 1 120 2800 905 352 2 120 3,000 905 377 3 100 2,000 754 251 4 120 3,000 905 377 Average 867 339 Minimum 754 251 ‘Table 8: Results of cone penetration tests used in Example 2 fe to atleast: 1.5x(6, +, )=1.8x(2000. 1.01000) = cooky then the partial factors for 2 bored pile in Combination 2 may be reduced toy.= 1 And = 17, increasing the ples total design compressive ress = Fan, Ros 4964 | 1283 | pang Poa Ye Y 14° 17 Which now exceeds the design effect of action Fea = 4,270KN. The degree ‘of utilisation i = Fea, 4300 994, Rig 4908 indicating tha the pile just) meets the requirements of the UK implemen: tation of Eurocode 7, provided static load test on working piles ate per Formed, As calculated above, the traditional factor of safety fora pile length fof 28m is F = 22. The pile is essentially shat controlled. Higher overall factors would be calculated for base-ontrolled ples, Verfeton of lit state GEO wih preimnary pe load ests Taplin nate pertomed ante oe abe een tha of he ntl tra may te ele oe ome eh Se mea ee — axdy, 0.5x158: Patan [Se }a-(53% x97 97 sre ands chances esac i Ras If, in addition, 1% ofthe piles are tested to atleast 1.5 times the repre- sentative load, the petal factors for Combination 2 arey,= Land y= 1.7 and the piles total design compressive ress ag Fin Fn 5701, 1800, te “The degree of utilisation is Fea 4900 Fas, 4800 _ 56. AR,” 5023" % indicating thatthe ple could be shortened and sill meet the requirements of Eurocode 7 Api length of just over 25m (giving F~ 1.8) is required to satisfy the UK. implementation of Eurocode if preliminary pile load tests are performed, ‘crown ENGINEERING IANUARY 2010RESISTANCE vs EFFECT OF ACTIONS (kN) 00060008000 No awit sts check = Win working od ats = Win prelrinary oad tests Usfactored ple resistance LENGTH OF PLE, L(t) Design ULS vertical action —> | Figure §: Design resistance of tho pile in Example 1, ‘scording to the UK National Annex to EN 1997-1 Figure 5 shows the variation in wtimate limi state design resistance with pile length fr the three cases discussed above. Example 2: Design by testing [Design a group of continuous flight auger (CFA) ples at a site where four ‘cone penetration tests (CP'TS) have been used to calculate limiting average ‘unit shaft and base resistances, using bes estimate calibrations as given sa “Table 8. Based on these values, the calculated shaft and base resistances for «a 4O0anm diameter by 6m long pile are also given. (This example s adapted fiom the book by Bord and Harris) Since four ground tests have been performed, the correlation factors applied inthe UK to the mean and minimum caleulated resistances are E> 18 and & = 1.29 respectively (see Table 7). Assuring thatthe ple cap will allow load tobe transfered from weaker stronger pls, thene factors may be divided by 1.1 to give 138 «4.95 and, «122 <1.47 1 i ‘The characteristic vesstance ofa single ples given by the lower of: ar Pa n-& Bs 7 Pas f= Coa “Poat ha. 7544251. ase ‘which means thatthe design is governed by the minimam calulated resis ance, ie Re = ASTIN. Ino explicit check is made of serviceability, then the UK’s partial fac: tors for a CFA pile for Design Approach 1 Combination ? are, = 1.6 and qe= 20, (Combination I is most unlikely to govern.) Hence, the pile’ total ‘design compressive resistance i p,, ~ Coathn, Poorbe Eexte Bax Yo ‘A design compressive action close to SOSKN could be obtained if, for example, each pile inthe group caried a permanent characteristic action Cx SSOKN together with a variable characteristic action Q, = 120KN ~ with the factors on ations for Design Approach 1 Combination 2 (ie. yo 1.0 and y= 1.3), these values give: 754 251 VA7*1.6 1.17%2.0 —_ Fog = YQ toy ~1.0%350 +1.8%120 ~ 5OGKN SOOKN = Fi, cncun ences ANAK 2010 For comparison, the tational overall factor of safety, taken as the ratio of smallest‘bes estimate’ resistance to characteristic actions would be: if calculated more cautiously on the basis of the minimum resistances (Pat data * Peetu _ 867 +899 Lie G, +Q, 350+ 120 7297 Pact an + Poot og. 754+251 Fea 0, 3504120 >" “The design of piles to Eurocode 7 involves checking that the ground sur ‘rounding the piles hes suficient resistance to withstand compression, ten- ‘ion, and traverse actions at the oltimate limit tae, Ples may be devizned by static load testing (validated by ealclation), by dyamie impact testing (validated by static load tess), or by cafeulation (validated by static load tess). “The UK National Annex has been writen so a to facilitate the acoepte. practice of designing on the basis of a combination of calculation and load esting, The partial factors and correlation factos proposed in the CEN version of EC? have been changed, generally increased, and model factors have been introduced, a allowed by the code into the process of calculating characteristic shat and base resisances from ground test esl ‘Acknowledgements ‘The following people reviewed various drafts ofthe authors’ proposals for pile design that formed the basis ofthe UK National Annex to BS EN 1997 4: David Beadman, Andrew Harris, Martin Peiey, John Powell, and Steve Wade. References 21. Bond A.J and Simpson B. (2009) Pile design to Evrocode 7 and the UK ‘National Annex. Part I: Eurocode 7, Ground Engincering December 2009, p27. 22. UK National Annex o BS EN 1997-1: 2008, London: British Standards Institution. 23, EN 1997-1: 2004, Eurocode 7 — Geotechnical design, Part I: General ‘ules, Brussels: European Committee fo Standardization. 24, London Distict Surveyors" Association (1999), Guidance note for the ‘esq of scight hated bored ples in London Clay 25, Bond A.J. aad Hatris A.J. 2008), Dending Erode 7, London Taylor and Francs, 398pp. Table I: Methods of designing pile foundations according to Burocode 7 Part 1 was incorrectly printed In the December edition. It should have appeared as follows: Use Cor — eataee were Seas ee Beem heh, ates eee eee caesein tite ceis yas meee Observation Observed performance ‘Must be supported by Peete ie SRR 31