Planned changes in Eurocode 7 for the second

generation of Eurocodes
Les changements prévus dans l'Eurocode 7 pour la deuxième
génération des Eurocodes
A.J. Bond*1, S. Burlon2 , A. van Seters3 and B. Simpson4
1
Geocentrix Ltd, Banstead, United Kingdom
2
IFSTTAR, Marne La Vallée, France
3
Fugro GeoServices B.V., Leidschendam, the Netherlands
4
Arup, London, United Kingdom

*
Corresponding Author

ABSTRACT Work is about to begin on development of the second generation of Structural Eurocodes, for publication in 2020. Plans have
been made to re-organize Eurocode 7 to make it more consistent with other Eurocodes, easier to understand, and more comprehensive
in its technical coverage.
The current Eurocode 7 was published in two parts, Part 1 (EN 1997-1:2004) covering General rules and Part 2 (EN 1997-2:2007) Ground
investigation and testing. To allow better coverage of existing topics and space for new ones, the next Eurocode 7 will be divided into
three parts: with Part 3 concentrating on Geotechnical Constructions, such as slopes, spread foundations, pile foundations, retaining
structures, anchors, ground improvement, and reinforced ground structures. Parts 1 and 2 will be made easier to use and the structure of
Part 1 revised to bring it more into line with the other Eurocodes.
One aspect that makes the present Eurocode 7 difficult to understand is the provision of three different Design Approaches, each with its
own set of partial factors and ‘special’ cases. Each country can adopt any Design Approach within its borders and many have additionally
chosen different partial factors from the recommended values given in EN 1997-1. To improve the harmonization of geotechnical design
practice across Europe, the next generation of Eurocode 7 will present a simpler, yet more comprehensive system of partial factors,
based on material factor and resistance factor approaches. The paper gives details of the current proposal and the reasons behind it.
RÉSUMÉ Les travaux pour l’élaboration de la deuxième génération de Eurocodes structuraux sont sur le point de commencer en vue
d’une publication en 2020. Un programme a été préparé pour réorganiser l'Eurocode 7 en le rendant plus compatible avec les autres Eu-
rocodes, plus facile à comprendre et plus complet en ce qui concerne les ouvrages géotechniques traités.

L’actuel Eurocode 7 a été publié en deux parties, la Partie 1 (EN 1997-1:2004) qui comprend les règles générales et la Partie 2 (EN 1997-
2:2007) qui traite de la reconnaissance des terrains et des essais. Pour permettre une meilleure couverture de sujets existants et libérer
un espace pour de nouveaux, le prochain Eurocode 7 sera divisé en trois parties : la partie 3 se concentrant sur les ouvrages géotech-
niques, comme les pentes, les fondations superficielles, les fondations profondes, les ouvrages de soutènement, les ancrages,
l’amélioration des sols et les sols renforcés. L’utilisation des Parties 1 et 2 sera plus facile et la structure de la Partie 1 sera révisée pour
être plus en conformité avec les autres Eurocodes.

Un aspect qui rend l'Eurocode 7 difficile à comprendre est l’existence de trois différentes approches de calcul, chacune possédant son
propre ensemble de facteurs partiels et ses cas «spéciaux». Chaque pays peut adopter une approche de calcul sur son territoire et beau-
coup ont en outre choisi des facteurs partiels différents de valeurs recommandées données dans l'EN 1997-1. Pour poursuivre l'harmoni-
sation des pratiques de conception géotechnique à travers l'Europe, la prochaine génération de l'Eurocode 7 présentera un système plus
simple mais mieux organisé de facteurs partiels, basé sur des facteurs de matériaux (pondération à la source) et des facteurs de résis-
tance. Cet article donne des précisions sur la proposition actuelle et les raisons qui la motivent.

1 THE EVOLUTION OF EUROCODE 7 the harmonization of technical specifications’. The

In 1975, the European Commission decided to create a
programme in the field of construction ‘with the ob-
jective of promoting free trade between the member
states by the elimination of technical obstacles and
outcome of this initiative was the suite of European
standards – collectively known as the ‘Structural Euro-
codes’ – that were published by the European stand-
ards organization (CEN) starting in 2002. By 2010 all
national standards that conflicted with the Eurocodes
had been withdrawn (at least, in theory).
In May 2010, the European Commission invited CEN
to ‘initiate the process of further evolution of the Eu-
rocode system, incorporating both new and revised
Eurocodes’. CEN has submitted a €10M technical pro-
gramme to the Commission which, by the time this
paper is published, will hopefully be funded and un-
derway. The outcome of this work will be a second
generation of Eurocodes, ready for publication in the
early 2020s.
In anticipation of this work, TC250/SC7 (the com-
mittee responsible for Eurocode 7) established a
number of ‘Evolution Groups’ (EGs) – comprising ex-
perts in their subject from around Europe – to make
proposals for the revision of Eurocode 7. This paper
summarizes the main elements of the work pro-
gramme for the next generation of Eurocode 7.
At the same time, SC7 wants to avoid unnecessary
change to Eurocode 7 by preserving existing material
from EN 1997-1:2004 and EN 1997-2:2007.
Although there is a desire to reduce the overall
number of pages across the current Eurocode suite, in
the case of Eurocode 7 there is a need to expand the
page count in order to provide space for new subjects.
Consequently, SC7 is currently planning to split the
next version of Eurocode 7 into the following three
parts:
1. General rules
2. Ground investigation
3. Geotechnical constructions
The revised Part 1 will comprise mainly Principles that
are applicable to all foundations types; while detailed
Application Rules will appear in the revised Part 2 and
new Part 3.

2 REORGANIZATION OF EUROCODE 7 INTO THREE 3 PROPOSED CHANGES TO EUROCODE 7 PART 1 –

PARTS GENERAL RULES
The current Eurocode 7, dealing with geotechnical de- The main headings of Part 1 will be changed from ti-
sign, was published in two parts: Part 1 (EN 1997- tles based mainly on foundation type to titles based
1:2004) giving general rules and Part 2 (EN 1997- on ‘phenomena’ that apply to all foundations types.
2:2007) covering ground investigation and testing.
Thus the current structure:
A major element of SC7’s plans for the evolution of
Eurocode 7 is the intention to re-structure these doc- 1. General
uments in order to: 2. Basis of geotechnical design
3. Geotechnical data
 Improve ease-of-use of Eurocode 7 4. Supervision of construction, monitoring and
 Harmonize the structure of Eurocode 7, both maintenance
with the other Eurocodes and with national an- 5. Fill, dewatering, ground improvement and rein-
nexes, standards, and other supporting docu- forcement
ments 6. Spread foundations
 Provide specific sections for new or important 7. Pile foundations
subjects, including: numerical methods, rein- 8. Anchors
forced soil, water pressures, and ground im- 9. Retaining structures
provement 10. Hydraulic failure
 Allow room in existing sections for ‘generic’ sub- 11. Overall stability
jects, such as: seismic design, dynamic design, 12. Embankments
and rock mechanics
 Remove repetition and duplication …will be transformed into:
 Eliminate unnecessary variation in the docu- 1. General
ments’ structure, by using the same section 2. Basis of geotechnical design1
headings as the other Eurocodes and consistent 3. Materials
section headings within Eurocode 7 itself 4. Durability
 Ensure a balanced and manageable size for each 5. Geotechnical analysis2
part
1
‘Basis of structural design’ in the other Eurocodes
2
‘Structural analysis’ in the other Eurocodes
 6. Ultimate limit states 1. General
7. Serviceability limit states 2. Principles of ground investigation4
8. Execution 3. Planning of ground investigations
9. Reporting* 4. Sampling and groundwater measurements*
5. Field tests*
These headings are nearly identical to those used in 6. Laboratory tests*
the ‘material’ or ‘resistance’ Eurocodes, i.e. EN 1992 7. Reporting
for concrete, EN 1993 for steel, EN 1994 for composite
steel and concrete, EN 1995 for timber, EN 1996 for The Evolution Group (EG) that is providing the rec-
masonry, and EN 1999 for aluminium structures. Only ommendations for the contents of the revised Part 2 is
Clause 9 Reporting is additional to what appears in EG2 Ease of use.
those standards and is a heading we hope will appear
in their revised versions.
5 PROPOSED EUROCODE 7 PART 3 – GEOTECHNICAL
By making Part 1 of Eurocode 7 look similar to the
CONSTRUCTIONS
other Part 1s in the Eurocode suite, our intention is to
make the document more accessible to geotechnical
The purpose of the proposed new Part 3 of Eurocode
and structural engineers who have to work with sev-
7 is to provide adequate space for detailed exposition
eral Eurocodes on the same project.
of the design rules for common foundation types and
The last section of ENs 1992-6 and 1999 – typically techniques, namely:
entitled ‘Rules for particular structures or structural
1. General
elements’ – covers material similar to what is planned
2. Slopes, cuttings, and embankments
for Part 3 of Eurocode 7, Geotechnical constructions.
3. Spread foundations
The decision to create a third part to Eurocode 7 was
4. Pile foundations
partly to provide space in Part 1 for more thorough
5. Retaining structures
coverage of generic subjects, such as numerical analy-
6. Anchors
sis, serviceability limit states, derivation of characteris-
7. Ground improvement
tic values, and selection of ground water pressures for
8. Reinforced soil structures
design. The contents of the ‘old’ Sections 5 to 12 of
EN 1997-1:2004 will be moved into the ‘new’ Part 3 to
To ensure that this new standard is easy to navigate,
accommodate this.
each section will have the same set of sub-headings,
The Evolution Groups (EGs) that are providing rec- as follows:
ommendations for the contents of the revised Part 1
1. General
include EG4 Numerical methods, EG6 Seismic design,
2. Limit states
EG8 Harmonization, EG9 Water pressures, EG11 Char-
3. Actions and design situations
acterization, and EG13 Rock mechanics.
4. Design methods and design considerations
5. Ultimate limit state design
4 PROPOSED CHANGES TO EUROCODE 7 PART 2 – 6. Serviceability limit state design
GROUND INVESTIGATION 7. Structural design
8. Execution
Current plans for Eurocode 7 Part 2 include considera-
ble pruning of text, particularly where it provides The Evolution Groups (EGs) that are providing recom-
largely ‘textbook material’ – i.e. purely informative mendations for the contents of the new Part 3 include
text that can readily be obtained from standard text- EG1 Anchors, EG3 Model solutions, EG5 Reinforced
books in many languages. At the same time, better soil, EG7 Pile design, EG10 Calculation models, and
coverage of tests relevant to rock mechanics will be EG14 Ground improvement.
provided.
The main headings of Part 2 will become:3
4
This clause will be new to Part 2, with its contents de-
3
Headings marked * will drop the phrase ‘… of soil and rived mainly from the current Clause 3 of EN 1997-
rock’, as used in EN 1997-1:2004 1:2004, Geotechnical data
6 SIMPLIFYING EUROCODE 7’S DESIGN APPROACHES
The Design Approaches in Eurocode 7 are often found
confusing by users at first reading. They are particular-
ly difficult for non-geotechnical engineers using the
code and a significant obstacle to future harmoniza-
tion of geotechnical practice across Europe. In broad
terms, the Design Approaches work as follows:
Design Approach 1: Partial factors are applied to ac-
tions OR to ground strength parameters in two sepa-
rate ‘combinations’ – except in the design of axially
loaded piles and anchors, when factors are applied to
actions OR to resistance
Design Approach 2: Partial factors are applied to ac-
tions (or to the effects of actions) and to ground re-
sistances – but for slope and overall stability analyses
to effect of the actions (only) and resistance
Design Approach 3: Partial factors are applied to ac-
tions (or to the effects of actions) from the structure
and to ground strength parameters – but for slope and
overall stability analyses, actions on the soil (e.g.
structural actions, traffic load, etc.) are treated as ge-
otechnical actions and factored by less
A major aim of the revision of Eurocode 7 is to replace
the Design Approaches with a simpler system that still
provides National Standards Bodies (NSBs) with the
flexibility they require to ensure the reliability of ge-
otechnical designs in their countries.
In a review of the way Eurocode 7 has been imple-
mented across Europe, Bond (2013) showed that the
Design Approach adopted by the NSBs varies accord-
ing to the geotechnical construction:
 For slopes and embankments, the vast majority
of countries have adopted Design Approaches 1
or 3, meaning that partial factors are universally
applied to ground strength parameters
 For pile foundations, the vast majority of coun-
tries have adopted Design Approaches 1 or 2,
meaning that partial factors are universally ap-
plied to actions and ground resistance
 For shallow foundations, about half of the coun-
tries have adopted Design Approach 2, meaning
that partial factors are applied to actions and
ground resistance; while the other half have
adopted Design Approaches 1 or 3, meaning that
partial factors are applied to actions and ground
strength parameters
Evolution Group 8 has proposed that the three Design
Approaches are replaced by a series of ‘Design Combi-
nations’, each of which would have its own set of par-
tial factors (see Table 1). The Design Combinations
(DCs) would be numbered 1, 2, 3, etc. and guidance
would be given as to which combination should be
checked in which circumstance.
Careful study of Table 1 will reveal that each Design
Combination applies partial factors in one of three
ways (see the row ‘Factor approach’):
 Material factor approach (MFA) – factors are ap-
plied primarily to material strength
 Resistance factor approach (RFA) – factors ap-
plied to actions and resistance
 Effects factor approach (EFA) – factors are ap-
plied solely to effects of actions (such as bending
moments, bearing pressure, etc.)
Precise details of the partial factors for each Design
Combination are still under discussion. However, the
idea is that each NSB would specify in its National An-
nex to EN1997-1 which Design Combinations should
be used for different geotechnical constructions.
For example, a country that currently adopts DA1 or
DA3 for shallow foundations might specify:
 For slopes, DC1
 For retaining structures, DCs 2a and 2b
 For shallow foundations, DCs 4a and 4b
 For pile foundations, DC 6 or DC7
 For numerical methods, DCs 8a and 8b
Whereas, a country that currently adopts DA2 for shal-
low foundations might specify:
 For slopes, DC1
 For retaining structures, DC 3
 For shallow foundations, DC 5
 For pile foundations, DC 6 or DC 7
 For numerical methods, DCs 8a and 8b
7 ALLOWING FOR CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE
The current version of Eurocode 7 recommends a sin-
gle set of partial factors for use in geotechnical design,
regardless of the consequences of failure. However,
several countries – including Austria, Denmark, Fin-
land, the Netherlands, and Sweden – have chosen, in
their National Annexes to EN 1997-1:2004, to adopt
different partial factors that do take consequences of
failure into account.
Table 1. Outline of Design Combinations proposed for the next version of Eurocode 7 (values are tentative)
Foundation Slopes Retaining structures Shallow foundations Pile foundations Numerical methods
Combination 1 2a 2b 3 4a 4b 5 6 7 8a 8b
Factor approach MFA MFA EFA RFA MFA EFA RFA RFA RFA MFA EFA
Factors on ac- G 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.35 1.35 1.0 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.0 1.0
tions
Q 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.5 1.1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.3
G,fav 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Factors on φ 1.25 1.25 1.0 1.0 1.25 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.25 1.0
ground
c 1.25 1.25 1.0 1.0 1.25 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.25 1.0
strength
cu 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.0
Factors on re- Rv 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.0 1.0
sistance
Rh 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0
Re 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.0 1.0
s 1.1 n 1.1 Rd 1.0 1.0
s,t 1.15 n 1.15 Rd 1.0 1.0
b 1.1 n 1.1 Rd 1.0 1.0
t 1.15 n 1.15 Rd 1.0 1.0
Factors on ef- E 1.0 1.0 1.35 1.0 1.0 1.35 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.35
fects
n is a correlation factor based on a number of tests; Rd is a model factor

The management of structural reliability of con- For example, the recommended value of the par-
struction works is discussed in Clause 2.2 and Annex tial factor on permanent actions on buildings is G =
B (informative) of EN 1990:2002. Clause 2.2 states 1.35 (=F,basic). So, when the consequences for loss of
that appropriate levels of reliability can be achieved human life are high (CC3), the value of G is in-
by suitable combinations of the following (inter- creased to 1.1 x 1.35 = 1.485.
changeable) measures: preventative and protective
measures; measures relating to design calculations,
Table 2. Definition of consequence class from EN
including choice of partial factors; quality manage-
1990:2002, together with suggested values of KFI
ment; measures aimed to reduce errors; and other
Conse- Consequences Value
measures. quence of KFI
For loss of human life Economic, social, or
Annex B expands on the use of partial factors by class environmental
introducing an ‘importance’ factor on actions KFI to CC1 Low and … Negligible 0.9
account for reliability differentiation based on ‘reli- CC2 Medium Considerable 1.0
ability class’. In that Annex, three reliability classes CC3 High or … Very great 1.1
(RC1 to RC3) are associated with three ‘conse- Examples of structures in CC1 include agricultural buildings and green-
houses; in CC2, residential and office buildings; and, in CC3, grandstands
quence classes’ (CC1 to CC3) that classify the conse- and public buildings.
quences of failure or malfunction of a structure. Ta-
ble 2 summarizes the definitions of the consequence
classes and the associated values of KFI that may be EN 1990:2002 states ‘Reliability differentiation
used for design. may also be applied through the partial factors on
According to EN 1990:2002, the partial factor on resistance M. However, this is not normally used’
actions (F) is the product of the KFI and the value of (emphasis added). But in geotechnical design, it is
often more appropriate to apply the importance
F that is normally used for design (herein termed
factor to material strength or resistance than to ac-
the ‘basic’ factor, F,basic), i.e.:
tions, especially when a large proportion of the ac-
tion comes from the ground (and is therefore is de-
𝛾𝐹 = 𝐾𝐹𝐼 × 𝛾𝐹,𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑖𝑐 termined by ground strength). For example,
modifying F has little or no impact on the verifica-
tion of slope stability in that case.
 To overcome the limited applicability of ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
EN 1990’s approach, some countries have selected
values for the partial factors on ground strength The authors would like to thank their fellow mem-
that vary with consequence class (see Table 3). bers of CEN TC 250/SC7’s Evolution Group 8 ‘Har-
monization’ for many fruitful discussions about the
planned revision of EN 1997:2004.
Table 3. Partial factors for persistent design situa-
tions based on consequences of failure
Country/Standard Partial factor φ for Consequence Class… REFERENCES
CC1 CC2 CC3
EN 1997-1:2004 1.25 1.25 1.25 Bond, A.J. 2013. Implementation and evolution of Eurocode 7. Modern
Austria 1.1 1.15 1.3 geotechnical design codes of practice (Eds: Arnold, P., Fenton, G.A.,
Hicks, M.A., Schweckendiek, T., and Simpson, B.), 3-14. IOS Press, Am-
Denmark n/a 1.2 1.32 sterdam.
Netherlands 1.2 1.25 1.3

Evolution Group 8 proposes allowing countries to

generalize the approach set out in Annex B3 of
EN 1990:2002, so that it caters for the peculiarities
of geotechnical design. The next version of EN 1997-
1 therefore will introduce importance factors KMI
and KRI to be applied to the ‘basic’ values of the cor-
responding material and resistance factors (M and
R, respectively):

𝛾𝑀 = 𝐾𝑀𝐼 × 𝛾𝑀,𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑖𝑐
𝛾𝑅 = 𝐾𝑅𝐼 × 𝛾𝑅,𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑖𝑐

Only one importance factor (either KFI or KMI or KRI)

will be used in any one verification.

CONCLUSION

The next edition of Eurocode 7 will be a radical de-

parture from its original version:
 Eurocode 7 will be divided into three Parts,
dealing with general rules, ground investiga-
tion, and geotechnical constructions
 Eurocode 7 Part 1 will adopt main headings
that mimic the Part 1s of the other material Eu-
rocodes
 Eurocode 7 Part 2 will be simpler and easier to
use, owing to removal of ‘textbook material’
 A new Eurocode 7 Part 3 will give detailed rules
for common geotechnical constructions
 The three Design Approaches from EN 1997-
1:2004 will be replaced by ‘Design Combina-
tions’
 Provision will be made for adjusting partial fac-
tors for the consequences of failure