CEN/TC 250

Date: 2022-1-19

prEN 1997-3:2022
CEN/TC 250

Secretariat: BSI

Eurocode 7 — Geotechnical design — Part 3: Geotechnical structures

Eurocode 7 - Entwurf, Berechnung und Bemessung in der Geotechnik — Teil 3: Geotechnische Bauten

Eurocode 7 - Calcul géotechnique — Partie 3: Constructions géotechniques

ICS:

Descriptors:
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Contents Page

European foreword............................................................................................................................................. 6
0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 7
1 Scope ........................................................................................................................................................10
1.1 Scope of prEN 1997-3.........................................................................................................................10
1.2 Assumptions..........................................................................................................................................10
2 Normative references ........................................................................................................................10
3 Terms, definitions, and symbols ....................................................................................................11
3.1 Terms and definitions .......................................................................................................................11
3.2 Symbols and abbreviations .............................................................................................................24
4 Slopes, cuttings, and embankments .............................................................................................39
4.1 Scope and field of application .........................................................................................................39
4.2 Basis of design ......................................................................................................................................39
4.3 Materials.................................................................................................................................................42
4.4 Groundwater.........................................................................................................................................42
4.5 Geotechnical analysis ........................................................................................................................43
4.6 Ultimate limit states ...........................................................................................................................46
4.7 Serviceability limit states .................................................................................................................47
4.8 Implementation of design ................................................................................................................48
4.9 Testing.....................................................................................................................................................49
4.10 Reporting ...............................................................................................................................................49
5 Spread foundations ............................................................................................................................49
5.1 Scope and field of application .........................................................................................................49
5.2 Basis of design ......................................................................................................................................50
5.3 Materials.................................................................................................................................................54
5.4 Groundwater.........................................................................................................................................54
5.5 Geotechnical analysis ........................................................................................................................55
5.6 Ultimate limit states ...........................................................................................................................63
5.7 Serviceability limit states .................................................................................................................69
5.8 Implementation of design ................................................................................................................70
5.9 Testing.....................................................................................................................................................70
5.10 Reporting ...............................................................................................................................................71
6 Piled foundations ................................................................................................................................71
6.1 Scope and field of application .........................................................................................................71
6.2 Basis of design ......................................................................................................................................71
6.3 Materials.................................................................................................................................................75
6.4 Groundwater.........................................................................................................................................77
6.5 Geotechnical analysis ........................................................................................................................77
6.6 Ultimate limit states ...........................................................................................................................87
6.7 Serviceability limit states .................................................................................................................96
6.8 Implementation of design ................................................................................................................97
6.9 Testing.....................................................................................................................................................99
6.10 Reporting ............................................................................................................................................ 102
7 Retaining structures ....................................................................................................................... 102
7.1 Scope and field of application ...................................................................................................... 102

2
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

7.2 Basis of design .................................................................................................................................. 102

7.3 Materials ............................................................................................................................................. 105
7.4 Groundwater ..................................................................................................................................... 106
7.5 Geotechnical analysis ..................................................................................................................... 106
7.6 Ultimate limit states ....................................................................................................................... 111
7.7 Serviceability limit states ............................................................................................................. 116
7.8 Implementation of design............................................................................................................. 117
7.9 Testing ................................................................................................................................................. 118
7.10 Reporting ............................................................................................................................................ 119
8 Anchors ............................................................................................................................................... 119
8.1 Scope and field of application ..................................................................................................... 119
8.2 Basis of design .................................................................................................................................. 120
8.3 Materials ............................................................................................................................................. 122
8.4 Groundwater ..................................................................................................................................... 123
8.5 Geotechnical analysis ..................................................................................................................... 123
8.6 Ultimate limit states ....................................................................................................................... 123
8.7 Serviceability limit states ............................................................................................................. 126
8.8 Implementation of design............................................................................................................. 128
8.9 Testing ................................................................................................................................................. 129
8.10 Reporting ............................................................................................................................................ 131
9 Reinforced fill structures .............................................................................................................. 131
9.1 Scope and field of application ..................................................................................................... 131
9.2 Basis of design .................................................................................................................................. 132
9.3 Materials ............................................................................................................................................. 135
9.4 Groundwater ..................................................................................................................................... 141
9.5 Geotechnical analysis ..................................................................................................................... 141
9.6 Ultimate limit states ....................................................................................................................... 148
9.7 Serviceability limit states ............................................................................................................. 152
9.8 Implementation of design............................................................................................................. 152
9.9 Testing ................................................................................................................................................. 153
9.10 Reporting ............................................................................................................................................ 153
10 Ground reinforcing elements ...................................................................................................... 154
10.1 Scope and field of application ..................................................................................................... 154
10.2 Basis of design .................................................................................................................................. 154
10.3 Materials ............................................................................................................................................. 156
10.4 Groundwater ..................................................................................................................................... 158
10.5 Rock bolts and rock anchors ....................................................................................................... 158
10.6 Soil Nails .............................................................................................................................................. 162
10.7 Wire mesh .......................................................................................................................................... 167
10.8 Sprayed concrete ............................................................................................................................. 170
10.9 Facing element.................................................................................................................................. 171
10.10 Reporting ............................................................................................................................................ 173
11 Ground improvement..................................................................................................................... 173
11.1 Scope and field of application ..................................................................................................... 173
11.2 Basis of design .................................................................................................................................. 174
11.3 Materials ............................................................................................................................................. 179
11.4 Groundwater ..................................................................................................................................... 182
11.5 Geotechnical analysis ..................................................................................................................... 182
11.6 Ultimate limit states ....................................................................................................................... 186
11.7 Serviceability limit states ............................................................................................................. 188
11.8 Implementation of design............................................................................................................. 188

3
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

11.9 Testing.................................................................................................................................................. 189

11.10 Reporting ............................................................................................................................................ 190
12 Groundwater control ...................................................................................................................... 191
12.1 Scope and field of application ...................................................................................................... 191
12.2 Basis of design ................................................................................................................................... 192
12.3 Material................................................................................................................................................ 194
12.4 Groundwater...................................................................................................................................... 194
12.5 Reduction of hydraulic conductivity ......................................................................................... 194
12.6 Dewatering and infiltration.......................................................................................................... 196
12.7 Impermeable barriers .................................................................................................................... 198
12.8 Implementation of design ............................................................................................................. 199
12.9 Testing.................................................................................................................................................. 202
12.10 Reporting ............................................................................................................................................ 202
Annex A (informative) Slopes, cuttings, and embankments .......................................................... 203
A.1 Use of this Informative Annex ..................................................................................................... 203
A.2 Scope and field of application ...................................................................................................... 203
A.3 Calculation models for analysing the stability of soil and fill .......................................... 203
A.4 Calculation models for analysing the stability of rock mass ............................................ 205
Annex B (informative) Spread foundations ......................................................................................... 207
B.1 Use of this Informative Annex ..................................................................................................... 207
B.2 Scope and field of application ...................................................................................................... 207
B.3 Checklists ............................................................................................................................................ 207
B.4 Calculation model for bearing resistance using soil parameters ................................... 208
B.5 Calculation model for bearing resistance on ground underlain by a weaker layer 210
B.6 Calculation model for bearing resistance from pressuremeter test results .............. 211
B.7 Calculation model for settlement evaluation based on adjusted elasticity method 214
B.8 Calculation model for settlement evaluation based on stress-strain method ........... 215
B.9 Calculation model for settlements without drainage ......................................................... 215
B.10 Calculation model for settlements caused by consolidation ............................................ 215
B.11 Calculation model for time-settlement behaviour ............................................................... 215
B.12 Calculation model for settlement evaluation using pressuremeter test results....... 215
B.13 Calculation model for settlement evaluation using cone penetration test results .. 217
B.14 Relative stiffness of a spread foundation and subgrade modulus.................................. 218
B.15 Linear elastic spring stiffnesses of surface foundation ...................................................... 219
Annex C (informative) Piled foundations ............................................................................................. 221
C.1 Use of this Informative Annex ..................................................................................................... 221
C.2 Scope and field of application ...................................................................................................... 221
C.3 Examples of pile types .................................................................................................................... 221
C.4 Pile shaft resistance based on ground parameters. ............................................................ 223
C.5 Pile base resistance based on ground parameters .............................................................. 224
C.6 Axial pile resistance based on CPT profiles ............................................................................ 225
C.7 Axial pile resistance from PMT profiles ................................................................................... 229
C.8 Axial pile resistance based on empirical tables .................................................................... 232
C.9 Downdrag due to vertical ground movements ...................................................................... 234
C.10 Pile groups subject to axial tension ........................................................................................... 237
C.11 Calculation model for single pile settlement using load transfer functions ............... 238
C.12 Calculation model for single pile lateral displacement using load transfer functions
................................................................................................................................................................. 238
C.13 Buckling and second order effects ............................................................................................. 243
C.14 Cyclic effects ....................................................................................................................................... 248

4
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Annex D (informative) Retaining structures ...................................................................................... 250

D.1 Use of this Informative Annex ..................................................................................................... 250
D.2 Scope and field of application ..................................................................................................... 250
D.3 Calculation model to determine limit values of earth pressures on vertical walls . 250
D.4 Calculation model to determine at-rest values of earth pressure ................................. 254
D.5 Earth pressures due to compaction .......................................................................................... 255
D.6 Earth pressures caused by cyclic thermal movement for integral bridges ................ 257
D.7 Basal heave ........................................................................................................................................ 257
D.8 Limit equilibrium models ............................................................................................................. 260
D.9 Beam-on-spring models ................................................................................................................ 260
D.10 Calculation model to determine intermediate values of earth pressure .................... 261
D.11 Numerical continuum models ..................................................................................................... 262
D.12 Vertical wall stability ..................................................................................................................... 263
D.13 Determination of the anchor length to prevent interaction between anchors and
retaining structures ........................................................................................................................ 264
Annex E (informative) Anchors ............................................................................................................... 266
E.1 Use of this Informative Annex ..................................................................................................... 266
E.2 Scope and field of application ..................................................................................................... 266
E.3 Example for anchor design models ........................................................................................... 266
E.4 Layout of anchors ............................................................................................................................ 266
Annex F (informative) Reinforced fill structures .............................................................................. 270
F.1 Use of this Informative Annex ..................................................................................................... 270
F.2 Scope and field of application ..................................................................................................... 270
F.3 Calculation models for reinforced fill structures................................................................. 270
F.4 Calculation models for reinforced embankment bases ..................................................... 274
F.5 Calculation models for load transfer platform over rigid inclusions ........................... 276
F.6 Calculation models for embankments over voids ............................................................... 278
F.7 Veneer reinforcement .................................................................................................................... 280
F.8 Durability, reduction factor for tensile strength.................................................................. 281
F.9 Typical grades of steel used for soil reinforcement elements ........................................ 282
Annex G (informative) Ground improvement .................................................................................... 284
G.1 Use of this Informative Annex ..................................................................................................... 284
G.2 Scope and field of application ..................................................................................................... 284
G.3 Examples of ground improvement techniques ..................................................................... 284
G.4 Use of stress envelope to determine acceptable limit states ........................................... 288
Bibliography .................................................................................................................................................... 290

5
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

European foreword

This document (prEN 1997-3:2022) 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 is currently submitted to the CEN Enquiry.

This document will partially supersede EN 1997-1:2004.

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 recognise 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
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (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.

0.3 Introduction to prEN 1997-3

This document establishes principles and requirements for the design and verification of the following of
geotechnical structures, including temporary geotechnical structures: slopes, cuttings, embankments,
shallow foundation, piled foundation and retaining structures.

This document establishes principles and requirements for the design and verification of supporting
elements: anchors, reinforcing element in reinforced fill structures, soil nails, rock bolts and facing.

This document establishes principles and requirements for the design and verification of groundwater
control including reduction of hydraulic conductivity, dewatering and infiltration, and the use of
impermeable barriers

7
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

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 1997-3

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 1997-3:2022 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 1997-3:2022 through notes to the following:

Table 4.1 (NDP) Table 4.2 (NDP) Table 5.1 (NDP) Table 5.2 (NDP)

Table 5.3 (NDP) Table 6.1 (NDP) Table 6.2 (NDP) Table 6.3 (NDP)

Table 6.4 (NDP) Table 6.5 (NDP) Table 6.6 (NDP) Table 6.7 (NDP)

Formula (6.18) Table 7.1 (NDP) Table 8.1 (NDP) Table 8.2 (NDP)

Table 8.3 (NDP) Table 9.1 (NDP) Table 9.2 (NDP) Table 9.3 (NDP)

Table 10.1 (NDP) Table 10.2 (NDP) Table 10.3 (NDP) Table 10.4 (NDP)

Table 10.5 (NDP) Table 11.1 (NDP) Table 11.2 (NDP) Table 11.3 (NDP)

Table 11.4 (NDP) Table 11.5 (NDP) Table 12.1 (NDP) A.1(1) NOTE 1

G.1(1) NOTE 1

National choice is allowed in prEN 1997-3:2022 on the application of the following informative annexes.

Annex A Annex B Annex C Annex D

Annex E Annex F Annex G

8
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

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
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

1 Scope
1.1 Scope of prEN 1997-3

This document provides specific rules to be applied for design and verification of geotechnical
structures.

1.2 Assumptions

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.

This document is intended to be used in conjunction with prEN 1997-1:2022, which provides general
rules for design and verification of geotechnical structures.

This document is intended to be used in conjunction with prEN 1997-2:2022, which gives provisions
rules for determining ground properties from ground investigation.

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

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 (‘may’ clauses), possibilities (‘can’
clauses), and in notes.

EN 1537, Execution of special geotechnical works — Ground anchors

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

prEN 1992 (all parts), Eurocode 2 — Design of concrete structures

prEN 1993 (all parts), Eurocode 3 — Design of steel structures

prEN 1993-1-1:2022, Eurocode 3 — Design of steel structures — Part 1-1: General rules and rules for
buildings

EN 1993-5:2007, Eurocode 3 — Design of steel structures — Part 5: Piling

prEN 1994 (all parts), Eurocode 4 — Design of composite steel and concrete structures

prEN 1995 (all parts), Eurocode 5 — Design of timber structures

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

prEN 1997-1:2022, Eurocode 7 — Geotechnical design — Part 1: General rules

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

10
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

EN 10025 (all parts), Hot rolled products of structural steel

EN 10080, Steel for the reinforcement of concrete — Weldable reinforcing steel — General

EN 10244-2:2009, Steel wire and wire products — Non-ferrous metallic coatings on steel wire — Part 2:
Zinc or zinc alloy coatings

EN 10245-2, Steel wire and wire products — Organic coatings on steel wire — Part 2: PVC finished wire

EN 10245-3, Steel wire and wire products — Organic coatings on steel wire — Part 3: PE coated wire

EN 10245-4, Steel wire and wire products — Organic coatings on steel wire — Part 4: Polyester coated wire

EN 10245-5, Steel wire and wire products — Organic coatings on steel wire — Part 5: Polyamide coated
wire

EN 13738, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products — Determination of pullout resistance in soil

EN 14475:2006, Execution of special geotechnical works — Reinforced fill

EN 14488-4, Testing sprayed concrete — Part 4: Bond strength of cores by direct tension

EN 14488-5, Testing sprayed concrete — Part 5: Determination of energy absorption capacity of fibre
reinforced slab specimens

EN 14490, Execution of special geotechnical works — Soil nailing

EN ISO 1461, Hot dip galvanized coatings on fabricated iron and steel articles — Specifications and test
methods (ISO 1461)

EN ISO 12957-1, Geosynthetics — Determination of friction characteristics — Part 1: Direct shear test
(ISO 12957-1)

EN ISO 12957-2, Geosynthetics — Determination of friction characteristics — Part 2: Inclined plane test
(ISO 12957-2)

EN ISO 10319, Geosynthetics — Wide-width tensile test (ISO 10319)

EN ISO 22477-5, Geotechnical investigation and testing — Testing of geotechnical structures — Part 5:
Testing of grouted anchors (ISO 22477-5)

3 Terms, definitions, and symbols

3.1 Terms and definitions

For purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.

3.1.1 Common terms used in prEN 1997-3

[Link]
foundation
construction for transmitting forces to the supporting ground

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

11
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link]
deep foundation
foundation consisting of a pile or caisson that transfers loads below the surface stratum to a deeper
stratum or series of strata at a range of depths

[Link]
caisson
hollow construction with substantial impervious walls that comprises one or more cells and is sunk into
the ground or water to form the permanent shell of a deep foundation

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

[Link]
frost heave
swelling of soil due to formation of ice within it

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

[Link]
ground heave
upward movement of the ground caused by either failure in the ground or by deformations due to stress
relief, creep, or swelling

[Link]
secondary compression
slow deformation of soil and rock mass because of prolonged pressure and stress; synonym for ‘creep’ in
fine soils

[Link]
competent rock
rock with sufficient strength and stiffness to withstand applied actions without failure or any significant
permanent movement

3.1.2 Terms relating to slopes, cuttings, and embankments

[Link]
earth-structure
civil engineering structure, made of fill material or as a result of excavation

[Link]
cut
void that results from excavation of the ground

[Link]
cutting
earth-structure created by excavation of the ground

[Link]
cut slope
slope that results from excavation

[Link]
embankment
earth-structure formed by the placement of fill

12
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link]
embankment slope
slope that results from the placement of fill

[Link]
earthworks
civil engineering process that modifies the geometry of ground surface, by creating stable and durable
earth-structures

[Link]
excavation
result of removing material from the ground

[Link]
levee
embankment for preventing flooding

[Link]
load transfer platform
layer of coarse fill constructed with or without reinforcing element used to spread the load from an
overlying structure such as a spread foundation, raft or embankment to improved ground or piles

3.1.3 Terms relating to spread foundations

[Link]
spread foundation
foundation that transmits forces to the ground mainly by compression on its base

[Link]
footing
stepped construction that spreads the load at the foot of a wall or column

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

[Link]
pad foundation
spread foundation with usually rectangular or circular footprint

[Link]
strip foundation
long, narrow, usually horizontal foundation

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

[Link]
raft foundation
spread foundation in the form of a continuous structural concrete slab that extends over the whole base
of a structure

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

13
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link]
adjusted elasticity method
method to evaluate the settlement of a spread foundation assuming the ground beneath the foundation
is homogeneous and linear elastic

3.1.4 Terms relating to piled foundations

[Link]
pile
slender structural member, substantially underground, intended to transmit forces into load-bearing
strata below the surface of the ground

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

[Link]
bored cast-in-place pile
bored pile formed by continuous or discontinuous earthwork methods where the hole is subsequently
filled with concrete

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

[Link]
displacement pile
pile which is installed in the ground without excavation of material from the ground, except for limiting
heave, vibration, removal of obstructions, or to assist penetration

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

[Link]
driven pile
displacement pile forced into the ground by hammering, vibration or static pressure

[SOURCE: modified from ISO 6707-1:2020]

[Link]
end bearing pile
pile that transmits forces to the ground mainly by compression on its base

Note 1 to entry: The term ‘mainly’ implies at least 70 % to 80 % of the compression force applied to the pile is
transmitted to the ground via its base.

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

[Link]
friction pile
pile transmitting forces to the ground mainly by friction between the surface of the pile and the adjacent
ground

Note 1 to entry: The term ‘mainly’ implies at least 70 % to 80 % of the compression or tension force applied to
the pile is transmitted to the ground by friction between the pile shaft and the ground.

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

14
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link]
replacement pile
pile installed in the ground after excavation of material

[Link]
tension pile
vertical or inclined pile used to transfer axial tension force by friction between the surface of the pile and
the adjacent ground

[Link]
pile cap
construction at the head of one or more piles that transmits forces from a structure to one or several piles

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

[Link]
piled foundation
foundation that incorporates one or more piles

[SOURCE: ISO 6707-1:2020]

[Link]
pile group
foundation that incorporates piles arranged in a grid

[Link]
piled raft
combined foundation that incorporates a ground bearing raft foundation and a pile group

[Link]
ground model method
calculation method to determine the pile axial resistance based on a Geotechnical Design Model
comprising various strata with assigned ground parameters that can be ascribed to either the whole or
part of the project site area

[Link]
model pile method
calculation method to determine the pile axial resistance based on a single profile of field tests with
assigned ground parameters relevant just to the local profile and not to the whole project site area

[Link]
downdrag (negative shaft friction)
situation where the ground surrounding a pile settles more than the pile shaft sufficient to induce a
downward drag force that potentially results in drag settlement

[Link]
drag force
additional axial force acting on a pile due to downdrag

[Link]
drag settlement
additional settlement of a pile due to downdrag

15
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link]
neutral plane
depth at which there is no relative movement between the pile and the surrounding ground

[Link]
pile heave
upward movement of the ground surrounding a pile that can result in a heave force developing on the
pile shaft, tension within the pile shaft, and upward movement of part or all of the pile

[Link]
trial pile
pile that will not form part of the foundation, installed before the commencement of the piling works, and
used to investigate the appropriateness of the chosen type of pile and method of execution and to confirm
its design, dimensions, and resistance

[Link]
working pile
pile that will form part of the foundation of the structure

[Link]
test pile
trial pile or working pile to which loads are applied to determine the load-displacement behaviour of the
pile and the surrounding ground at the time of construction

[Link]
ultimate control test
load test carried out on a test pile to determine its resistance at the ultimate limit state

[Link]
serviceability control test
load test carried out on a test pile to determine its load-displacement behaviour and resistance at the
serviceability limit state

[Link]
inspection test
test used to verify acceptance of a working pile

Note 1 to entry: Pile inspection tests include non-destructive integrity tests (to confirm the as-built condition,
length, and cross-sectional area of the pile shaft) and concrete or grout tests (such as cube or cylinder strength tests
to confirm that the pile materials comply with acceptance criteria).

[Link]
integrity test
test carried out on an installed pile for the verification of soundness of materials and of the pile geometry

[Link]
pile load
axial compressive, tensile, or transverse load (or force) applied to the head of the pile

[Link]
pile test proof load
maximum proposed test load which includes imposed actions from the superstructure or the ground

16
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link]
temporary support load
load representing the temporary axial or transverse support from the ground to a pile under load test
resulting from particular conditions of the test such as variations in groundwater, pile head level or pile
head restraint that may reverse, reduce or change under service conditions

[Link]
static load test
load test in which a single pile is subject to a series of static loads in order to define its load-displacement
behaviour

[SOURCE: adapted from EN ISO 22477-1:2018]

[Link]
dynamic load
axial compressive impact load (or force) applied to the head of a pile by a driving hammer or drop mass

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-4:2018, 3.1.5]

[Link]
dynamic load test
test where a pile is subjected to chosen axial dynamic load at the pile head to allow the determination of
its compressive resistance

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-4:2018, 3.1.7]

[Link]
dynamic impact test
pile test with measurement of strain, acceleration and displacement versus time during the impact event

Note 1 to entry: Dynamic impact tests are often referred to as dynamic load tests

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-4:2018, 3.1.8]

[Link]
rapid load test
pile load test where a pile is subjected to chosen axial rapid load at the pile head for the analysis of its
capacity (compression resistance)

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-10:2016, 3.1.8]

[Link]
bi-directional load test
static load test using an embedded jack where a section of the pile is used as reaction to load another
section

Note 1 to entry: It is possible to install one or more levels of jacks in the pile shaft

[Link]
ultimate resistance of a pile
corresponding state in which the piled foundation displaces significantly with negligible increase of
resistance

17
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link]
driving formulae
formula that relates impact hammer energy and number of blows for a unit distance or permanent set
for a single blow to pile compressive resistance

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-4:2018, 3.1.9]

[Link]
wave equation analysis
analysis of a dynamically loaded pile by a mathematical model that can represent the dynamic behaviour
of the pile by the progression of stress waves in the pile and the resulting response of the ground

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-4:2018, 3.1.10]

[Link]
closed form solution
mathematical analysis of the dynamic load test data based on closed form wave analysis equations to
derive a mobilised load

[Link]
signal matching
numerical analysis to evaluate the shaft and base resistance of the test pile by modelling the pile and
ground with assumed parameters to closely match the measured signals of pile head strain, displacement
and acceleration obtained during a dynamic load test

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-4:2018, 3.1.11]

[Link]
re-driving
process of re-initiating movement of a driven pile carried out some time after pile installation, used to
check or determine any change in pile set or resistance

[Link]
pile set
permanent pile settlement after one hammer impact blow during driving

[Link]
pile set-up
time-dependent increase in pile resistance

3.1.5 Terms relating to retaining structures

[Link]
retaining structure
structure that provides lateral support to the ground or that resists pressure from a mass of other
material

[Link]
gravity wall
retaining structure of stone or plain or reinforced concrete having a base footing with or without a heel,
ledge or buttress

Note 1 to entry: The weight of the wall itself, sometimes including stabilizing masses of soil, rock or backfill,
plays a dominant role in the support of the retained material.

18
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link]
embedded wall
relatively thin retaining structure of steel, reinforced concrete, or timber that is supported by anchors,
struts or passive earth pressure

Note 1 to entry: The bending stiffness of such walls plays a significant role in the support of the retained material
while the role of the weight of the wall is insignificant.

Note 2 to entry: This definition includes structures that do not reach below the final excavation level, even if
they cannot formally be considered as embedded.

[Link]
composite retaining structure
retaining structure composed of elements of gravity and embedded walls

Note 1 to entry: A large variety of such structures exists and examples include double sheet pile wall cofferdams,
gabion walls, crib walls, earth structures reinforced by grouting.

Note 2 to entry: Earth structures reinforced by tendons, geotextiles, and structures with multiple rows of soil
nails are considered as soil reinforcement (see 3.1.7).

[Link]
combined wall
embedded wall composed of primary and secondary steel elements, placed in the ground before
excavation begins

3.1.6 Terms relating to anchors

[Link]
anchor
structural element capable of transmitting an applied tensile load from the anchor head through a free
anchor length to a resisting element and finally into the ground

[Link]
grouted anchor
anchor that uses a bonded length formed of cement grout, resin or similar material to transmit the tensile
force to the ground

Note 1 to entry: A ‘grouted anchor’ in prEN 1997-3:2022 is termed a ‘ground anchor’ in EN 1537.

[Link]
permanent anchor
anchor with a design service life which is in excess of two years

[Link]
temporary anchor
anchor with a design service life of two years or less

[Link]
tendon
part of an anchor that is capable of transmitting the tensile load from the anchor head to the resisting
element in the ground

19
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link]
fixed anchor length
designed length of an anchor over which the load is transmitted to the surrounding ground through a
resisting element

[Link]
free anchor length
distance between the proximal end of the fixed anchor length and the tendon anchorage point at the
anchor head

[Link]
tendon bond length
(for grouted anchors only) length of the tendon that is bonded directly to the grout and capable of
transmitting the applied tensile load

[Link]
tendon free length
length of the tendon between the anchorage point at the anchor head and the proximal end of the tendon
bond length

[Link]
apparent tendon free length
(for grouted anchors only) length of tendon which is estimated to be fully decoupled from the
surrounding grout and is determined from the load-elastic displacement data following testing

[Link]
investigation test
load test to establish the geotechnical ultimate load resistance of an anchor at the interface of the resisting
element and the ground and to determine the characteristics of the anchor in the working load range

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-5:2018, 3.1.6]

[Link]
suitability test
load test to confirm that a particular anchor design will be adequate in particular ground conditions

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-5:2018, 3.1.9]

[Link]
acceptance test
load test to confirm that an individual anchor conforms with its acceptance criteria

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-5:2018, 3.1.1]

[Link]
lock-off load
load with which pre-stressible anchors are fixed to realise an active force to limit deformation

[Link]
test method 1
test in which the anchor is loaded stepwise by one or more load cycles increasing from the datum load to
the proof load

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-5:2018, Test Method 1]

20
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link]
test method 2
test in which the anchor is loaded stepwise by load cycles increasing from a datum load to the proof load

Note 1 to entry: At each load step the load loss in the anchor is measured during a fixed time period.

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-5:2018, Test Method 2]

[Link]
test method 3
test in which the anchor is loaded in incremental steps from a datum load to a maximum load

Note 1 to entry: The displacement of the tendon end is measured under maintained load at each loading step.

[SOURCE: EN ISO 22477-5:2018, Test Method 3]

3.1.7 Terms relating to reinforced fill structures

[Link]
reinforced fill structures
engineered fill incorporating discrete layers of soil reinforcement, generally placed horizontally, which
are arranged between successive layers of fill during construction

[Link]
soil nailed structures
engineered cut-faced or existing structures incorporating layers of soil reinforcements which are
installed into the ground, usually at a sub-horizontal angle, and that mobilise resistance with the soil
along their entire length

Note 1 to entry: They are typically arranged in rows. For cut-faced applications the rows are usually placed
between successive passes of soil excavation in front of one face of the structure.

[Link]
basal reinforcement to embankments
fill structures incorporating at their base level at least one layer of soil reinforcements, commonly used
for fills founded on weak or soft soils and fills founded on inclusion networks, or for fills overbridging
voids

[Link]
soil veneer reinforcement
use of soil reinforcement to prevent the sliding of the cover soil layer over a landfill lining or cover system,
or any other low friction interface

[Link]
tie back wedge method
method of analysis of reinforced soil structures that follows basic design principles currently employed
for classical or anchored retaining walls

[Link]
coherent gravity method
method of analysis of reinforced soil structures based on the monitored behaviour of a large number of
structures using inextensible reinforcements, corroborated by theoretical analysis

21
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link]
isochronous creep curves
load/strain creep curves plotted at fixed times (0,1 h, 1 h, 10 h, etc.)

Note 1 to entry: The load at which there is a specified difference in strain for a specified time interval can then
be defined. The procedure how to generate the isochronous creep curves is given in ISO TR 20432.

[Link]
equivalent constant in-soil temperature
temperature that causes, during one year, the same rate of reinforcing element degradation as the actual
in-soil temperature variation at the location of the reinforcing element

3.1.8 Terms relating to ground reinforcing element

[Link]
rock bolt
rock reinforcing element for stabilizing rock excavations, transferring load from the unstable exterior to
the confined interior of the rock mass

[Link]
rock anchor
rock reinforcing element capable of imposing a pre-tensile load via the anchor from the unstable exterior
to the confined interior of the rock mass to enhance the shear capacity of potential slip surfaces inside
the rock mass

Note 1 to entry: A rock anchor differs from a “regular” anchor, that it is not transmitting external loads into the
ground from e.g. retaining walls, but to impose internal pretension load to stabilize the rock itself. Many of the
anchor characteristics may be the same or similar, such as an anchor head, grouting, anchor length.

[Link]
soil nails
soil reinforcing element to treat unstable natural soil slopes or as a construction technique that allows
the safe over-steepening of soil slopes

[Link]
sprayed concrete
concrete that is conveyed through a hose and pneumatically sprayed at high velocity onto a surface

[Link]
wire mesh
arrangement of bidirectional interlocking metal wires with spaced, small openings between

[Link]
facing element
modular precast panel embedding the connections for soil reinforcements

3.1.9 Terms relating to ground improvement

[Link]
ground improvement
modification of the ground or its hydraulic conductivity in order to bring the effects of actions within
ultimate and serviceability requirements

Note 1 to entry: Ground improvement can be achieved by reducing or increasing hydraulic conductivity, binding
or densifying the ground, filling voids, or creating inclusions in the ground.

22
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link]
ground improvement zone
volume of ground within which ground improvement is installed and results in modified ground
properties

[Link]
inclusion
elements installed in the ground with defined geometry and material properties sufficiently different
from the surrounding ground as to modify the distribution of load, stress and groundwater flow within
the ground improvement zone

[Link]
rigid inclusion
inclusions with higher stiffness and a measurable unconfined compressive strength

[Link]
discrete ground improvement
ground improvement zone comprising inclusions created in the ground with properties differing from
the surrounding ground

[Link]
diffused ground improvement
ground improvement where the ground improvement zone is be modelled with a single set of parameters

[Link]
structural connection
mechanical connection between the ground improvement and the structure, capable of transferring
compressive, tensile, shear, and bending actions directly

[Link]
contact
physical contact between the ground improvement and the structure, capable of transferring only
compressive and limited shear loads

Note 1 to entry: The transferable shear load typically depends on the size of the compressive load and the
activated friction.

[Link]
load distribution
subdivision of the total load into the share transferred by the inclusion and the share transferred by the
soil

Note 1 to entry: The load distribution is determined by calculation and is an integral part of the design of
discrete ground improvement.

23
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

3.2 Symbols and abbreviations

The symbols in prEN 1997-1:2022 and the following apply to this document.

3.2.1 Latin upper-case letters

A plan area of the foundation base; and

A loss of metal (incl. zinc) per face over the first year (in reinforcement elements)
A' effective foundation area (= B' x L')

A0 initial cross-sectional area of steel reinforcement

A0,con initial cross-sectional area of steel reinforcement at a connection

Ab, As cross sectional area of the pile base and shaft, respectively

A’gs,d design value of the effective adhesion between the ground and geosynthetic
reinforcement (also covers apparent adhesion caused by interlocking mechanism)

Ar reduced cross-sectional area of steel reinforcement, taking account of the maximum

anticipated loss of steel during the design service life of the structure (Ar = A0 – ΔAr)

Ar,con reduced cross-sectional area of steel reinforcement at a connection, taking account of the
maximum anticipated loss of steel along the design service life of the structure (Ar,con =
A0,con – ΔAr,con)

Ared plan area of the foundation base not including any area where there is no positive contact
pressure between the foundation and the underlying ground

Aru reduced cross-sectional area of the reinforcing element at ultimate resistance, allowing
for the effects of potential corrosion

Ary reduced cross-sectional area of the reinforcing element at yield, allowing for the effects
of potential corrosion.

A’sn,d design value of the effective adhesion between the ground and a soil nail

A’st,d design value of the effective adhesion between the ground and steel reinforcement

B foundation width (shorter dimension on plan); and

B breadth of the reinforcing element

B' effective foundation width

Bb , Bs base and shaft width (for square piles), respectively

Bb,eq equivalent pile base size equal to Bb (for square piles), Db (for circular piles) or p/π (for
other shaped piles)

Bgi smaller plan dimension of a rectangle circumscribing the ground improvement zone,
limited to the depth of the zone of influence (in ground improvement)

24
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Bs,eq equivalent pile shaft size equal to Bs (for square piles) or Ds (for circular piles)

C Subgrade reaction modulus

Ca Cohesive resistance along the slip surface of an active wedge

Cp Cohesive resistance along the slip surface of a passive wedge

D bar diameter

D embedment depth

Dadd representative vertical or transverse temporary support force

Db base diameter (for circular piles) in pile foundations

Dds Diameter of depression at the surface

Drep representative drag force due to moving ground in pile foundations

Dd design drag force due to moving ground in pile foundations

Ds shaft diameter (for circular piles) in pile foundations

Dsupp representative vertical or transverse temporary support force

Dy diameter of the void

EdI Flexural stiffness of the pile, design value

Ei initial tangent modulus in at-rest conditions

Eur unloading-reloading modulus

Fad,SLS design value of the maximum anchor force, including the effect of lock off load, and
sufficient to prevent a serviceability limit state in the supported structure

Fak,SLS characteristic value of the maximum anchor force, including the effect of lock-off load,
sufficient to prevent a serviceability limit state in the supported structure

Fd,SLS design value of an action to prevent a SLS

Fd,ULS Design value of an action to prevent an ULS

Fax axial action applied to the pile

Fcd,SLS design axial compression applied to the pile at the serviceability limit state, including
potential down drag forces

Fd,group design action applied to the pile group or piled raft

Ftd design axial tension applied to the pile

Ftr,d design transverse force applied to the pile including an allowance for any potential

25
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

transverse force due to moving ground

H Maximum height of the embankment

Ηe height (depth) of the excavation

Hs height of material above the geosynthetic layer

Hv height above the void

I second moment of area (geometric moment of inertia)

K earth pressure coefficient averaging the pressure around the whole circumference, K =
(1 + K0)/2

K0 at-rest earth pressure coefficient

Ka active pressure coefficient

Ka𝛾𝛾, Kaq, normal active earth pressure coefficients

Kac

Kac,u normal active earth pressure coefficients for undrained conditions

KM consequence factor applied to material properties

Kp𝛾𝛾, Kpq, normal passive earth pressure coefficients

Kpc

Kpc,u normal passive earth pressure coefficients for undrained conditions

Ks relative stiffness between the foundation and the ground

Ku corrosion heterogeneity factor for ultimate (in reinforcement elements)

Ky corrosion heterogeneity factor for yield (in reinforcement elements)

L foundation length

L' effective foundation length

Lbd Buckling length, design value

Ldd depth of the neutral plane corresponding to the point where the pile settlement equals
the ground settlement

Lds total length of the reinforcing element along which direct shear stresses are mobilized

Lint mobilized interface length

Lj Length of the jth layer of reinforcement

Ln nail length

26
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Lpo total length of the reinforcing element beyond the failure surface (or line of maximum
tension) where pull-out stresses are mobilized (for reinforcement elements)

Lps total length of the length of the reinforcing element beyond the failure surface (or line of
maximum tension) where punching shear stresses are mobilized

M1, M2, independent sets of partial factors on material

N component of the total action acting normal to the foundation base

Na component of the total action acting normal to the slip surface of an active wedge

Nc non-dimensional bearing resistance factor

Ncu non-dimensional bearing resistance factor for undrained conditions

Nd design value of N

N’d design value of the effective action acting normal to the foundation base

Nrep representative value of N

Np component of the total action acting normal to the slip surface of a passive wedge

Nq non-dimensional bearing resistance factor for the influence of the overburden pressure

Ns shape factor depending on the length and the width of the excavation

Nγ non-dimensional bearing resistance factor for the influence of the ground’s weight
density

Nγu non-dimensional bearing resistance factor for the influence of the ground’s weight
density, for undrained conditions

P percentage of test results passing the required characteristic value (in ground
improvement); and

P length of the perimeter of the reinforcing element

Pc critical creep load determined in Test Method 3

Po lock-off load

PP proof load

Rad,SLS design value of an anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the serviceability limit state

Rad,ULS design value of an anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the ultimate limit state

Rak,SLS characteristic value of an anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the serviceability limit state

Rak,ULS characteristic value of an anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the ultimate limit state

Ram measured value of an anchor’s geotechnical resistance

27
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Ram,SLS measured value of an anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the serviceability limit state

Ram,ULS measured value of an anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the ultimate limit state

Ram,α,SLS measured value of an anchor’s geotechnical resistance complying with its serviceability
limit state criterion αSLS

Ram, α,ULS measured value of an anchor’s geotechnical resistance complying with its ultimate limit
state criterion αULS

(Ram,ULS)min minimum value of Ram,ULS in a number of tests

(Ram,SLS)min minimum value of Ram,SLS in a number of tests

Rb, Rs, Rst resistance of pile base, shaft, and shaft in tension, respectively

Rb,rep pile’s representative base resistance in axial compression

(Rcalc)mean mean calculated pile resistance for a set of profiles of field test results

(Rcalc)min minimum calculated pile resistance for a set of profiles of field test results

Rc, Rt, Rtr pile resistance to compression, tension, and transverse actions, respectively

Rc,rep pile’s representative total resistance in axial compression

Rd,group design resistance of the pile group or piled raft

Rd,gs,int design tensile strength of the interface with the geosynthetic reinforcing element

Rd,st,int design tensile strength of the interface with a steel reinforcing element

Rd,sn,int design tensile strength of the interface with a soil nail element

Rg resistance of the ground supporting the load transfer platform in the net area between
the columns mobilized at a settlement that is compatible with the settlement of the
ground improvement system

Rk,com characteristic resistance to direct shear of the reinforcing element

Rk,ds characteristic tensile resistance of the connection (of the reinforcing element)

Rm,sn,pul measured pull-out force

Rpd design value of the resisting force caused by earth pressure on the foundation side

RNd design bearing resistance normal to the base of a spread foundation

Rrep,po representative pull-out resistance of the reinforcing element

Rrep,raft representative ultimate vertical compressive resistance of the raft

Rri,i resistance of a rigid inclusion i, depending on its position within the group

28
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Rs,rep pile’s representative shaft resistance (in axial compression)

Rsys,rep representative value of the total resistance of the ground improvement system with rigid
inclusions

Rtd design value of pile’s design axial tensile resistance; and

Rtd design value of the tensile resistance of the structural elements of an anchor

(Rtest)mean mean calculated pile resistance measured in a set of load tests

(Rtest)min minimum calculated pile resistance measured in a set of load tests

Rtr,d pile’s design transverse resistance

Rt,rep pile’s representative axial tensile resistance

Rt,rep,el representative tensile resistance of the reinforcing element

Rx,d design resistance of a pile (where x = b, c, s, st, t, or tr, as above)

Rx,m measured resistance of a pile (where x = b, c, s, st, t, or tr, as above)

Rx,rep representative resistance of a pile (where x = b, c, s, st, t, or tr, as above)

St sensitivity of fine soil

Sv vertical spacing of the reinforcements

T component of the total action acting transverse (parallel) to the foundation base; and

T age of the structure (in reinforcement elements) in years

Td design value of T;

Tf,j is the tensile force per meter width due to any horizontal loads

Tgs,k characteristic tensile strength of geosynthetic reinforcement

Tk characteristic tensile strength of the reinforcing element

Tk,cr characteristic tensile strength of the reinforcing element allowing for creep and limiting
elongation

Tp,j tensile force per metre width due to the vertical loads of self-weight and surcharge

Trep representative value of T

Ts,j is the tensile force per metre width due to any strip loading

Tven tensile force to hold the veneer system on the slope without water

Vnorm coefficient of variation based on a normal distribution of strength values

29
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

W wedge load

Wa wedge load of an active wedge

Wp wedge load of a passive wedge

Ws surcharge load

WT vertical uniformly distributed (wedge) load on the reinforcement

Wv resultant vertical load excluding external strip loads on the layer of reinforcement

3.2.2 Latin lower-case letters

a adhesion between layers or of ground to a construction

ad design value of the geometrical property

anom nominal value of the geometrical property

b base width of the embankment; and

b width of the strip element (in reinforcement elements)

bc , b q , factors accounting for base inclination

bγ

bcu factor accounting for base inclination, undrained

bgs width of reinforcement per unit width (bgs = 1 for continuous sheets)

bst width of strip reinforcement per unit width (bst = 1 for grids)

cmin,dur minimum concrete cover required for environmental conditions

cu soil undrained shear strength

cu,d design undrained shear strength of the soft foundation soil (in reinforcing elements)

cu,rep representative undrained shear strength of the soft foundation soil (in reinforcing elements)

dc, dq, factors accounting for the depth of foundation embedment

dγ

dmin minimum depth of field investigation

ds rock discontinuity spacing between a pair of immediately adjacent discontinuities

dcu factor accounting for depth, undrained

e eccentricity of the applied or resultant action

30
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

e0d maximum transversal deformation of the initial curvature over the buckling length, design
value

eB eccentricity of the applied load in the direction of B

ed design eccentricity of the resultant action

ej eccentricity of the resultant vertical load at the level of the jth layer of reinforcement

eL eccentricity of the applied load in the direction of L

ez initial zinc thickness of coating (for steel reinforcement elements)

fds direct shear factor determined from direct shear tests or comparable experience (for
reinforcing elements)

fm,d design value of the unconfined compressive strength of the improved ground

fs reduction factor to allow for extrapolation uncertainty for given design service life

fuk characteristic ultimate tensile strength of steel reinforcement

fyk characteristic yield strength of steel reinforcement

gc, gq, factors accounting for ground inclination

gγ

h maximum depth or maximum height of a cutting, excavation or embankment

i load inclination factor; and

i numbering of strata with i from 1 to n

ic , i q , i γ factors accounting for load inclination

icu load inclination factor, undrained

j index number of layers or strata with j from 1 to n

k subgrade modulus; and

k horizontal subgrade reaction coefficient

ka𝛾𝛾, inclined active earth pressure coefficients

kaq, kac

kac,u inclined active earth pressure coefficients for undrained conditions

kp𝛾𝛾, inclined passive earth pressure coefficients

kpq, kpc

kpc,u inclined passive earth pressure coefficients for undrained conditions

kcu reduction factor on cu

31
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

kn{P} acceptance value for the sample distribution in terms of P

kpo pull-out factor determined in laboratory pull-out tests in representative conditions, from
comparable experience, or from field tests (for reinforcement elements)

ksn soil nail (reinforcement element) pull-out factor determined from field pull-out tests or from
comparable experience

ktanϕ reduction factor on tanϕ

k𝛿𝛿 constant depending on the roughness of the ground structure interface and local disturbance
during installation: kδ = a/c

m exponent in bearing resistance formulae for the load inclination factor i

my mean of the measured values of log(qu,field) (in ground improvement)

n number of rigid inclusions; and

n exponent (factor covering reduction in corrosion rate in time for reinforcement elements)

p pile perimeter

p0 total at-rest earth pressure

p’0 effective at-rest earth pressure

pa component of the total active earth pressure normal to the retaining wall face

p’a component of the effective active earth pressure normal to the retaining wall face

pa,min minimum value of pa to the retaining wall face

pfd design value of the ultimate transversal ground resistance pressure

pgroup smaller dimension of a rectangle circumscribing a group of piles

pmax,d presumed maximum design bearing pressure

pp component of the total passive earth pressure normal to the retaining wall face

p’p component of the effective passive earth pressure normal to the retaining wall face

pps resistance to punching through the ground or fill (of a reinforcing element)

pre perimeter of the reinforcing element

psn representative perimeter of the failure surface enclosing the soil nail per unit length , where
pull-out resistance is mobilized

q overburden or vertical surcharge pressure at given level

q' effective overburden pressure at the level of the foundation base

32
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

qo overburden pressure applied to the ground outside the foundation

qa vertical surcharge applied at the ground surface (on the active side of the retaining wall)

qb end bearing or base stress

qm,sn,pul measured interface unit strength

qp permanent vertical surcharge applied at formation level (on the passive side of the retaining
wall)

qs surface load

qs,i shaft friction in the various strata i

qsk characteristic skin friction along the soil nail (reinforcement element)

qu,field unconfined compressive strength measured in unconfined compressive tests on field

samples

quk,imp characteristic value of the unconfined compressive strength of the improved ground

qu,rep representative value of the unconfined compressive strength of the improved ground

s0 settlement caused by undrained shear

s1 settlement caused by consolidation

s2 settlement caused by creep

sc, sq, factors accounting for the shape of the foundation base
sγ

scu factor accounting for shape, undrained

sground ground strata settlement profile (at any particular time)

sp centre to centre spacing of the inclusions

spile pile settlement with depth

sy standard deviation of the measured values of log(qu,field) (in ground improvement)

t time in days (since t0)

t0 time / date of installation or construction

u groundwater pressure at a point in the ground

ua groundwater pressure acting at depth z on the active side of the retaining wall

ws surcharge of the geosynthetic layer

x distance along the length of the reinforcing element

33
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

y transversal deflection of the pile

yf relative deformation between the pile and the supporting soil where pf is obtained

z depth below ground surface

za depth of zone of influence; and

za depth at the active side of the retaining wall

zc depth of the foundation soil when the depth is limited and cu is constant throughout

ze,e equivalent embedment depth

zemb embedment depth of the foundation

zf foundation depth (thickness)

zp depth at the passive side of the retaining wall

zw groundwater level at a depth

zzoi depth of zone of influence

3.2.3 Greek upper-case letters

Δa deviation in a geometrical property

ΔAr maximum anticipated loss of steel area during the design service life of the structure

ΔB is a width deviation

Δcdev allowance in design for deviation of the concrete cover

Δe oss of thickness caused by corrosion in the ground

3.2.4 Greek lower-case letters

α angle of inclination of the foundation base to the horizontal; and

α angle of inclination of the surcharge

α1 limit value of the creep rate in Test Method 1

α3 limit value of the creep rate in Test Method 3

αds is a soil/reinforcement interaction coefficient for undrained conditions (for reinforcing

elements)

αSLS creep rate defining the geotechnical resistance of an anchor at the serviceability limit state
(determined from the displacement per log cycle of time at constant anchor load as defined
in EN ISO 22477-5)

34
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

αULS creep rate defining the geotechnical resistance of an anchor at the ultimate limit state
(determined from the displacement per log cycle of time at constant anchor load as defined
in EN ISO 22477-5)

β inclination of the ground surface

γ unit weight density of the ground

γa average weight density of the ground (on active side of the retaining wall) above depth za

𝛾𝛾a,SLS partial factor on an anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the serviceability limit state

𝛾𝛾a,SLS,test partial factor on the anchor resistance at the serviceability limit state in acceptance tests

𝛾𝛾a,ULS partial factor on an anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the ultimate limit state

γ’d design effective weight density of the ground below the foundation level

γE partial factor on effect-of-actions

γF partial factor on actions

γF,drag partial factor on a drag force due to moving ground in pile foundations

𝛾𝛾F,SLS partial factor on the anchor force at the serviceability limit state

γgs partial material factor for geosynthetic reinforcement

γgs,int partial resistance factor on interface strength of geosynthetic reinforcement

γgs,d design value of the effective angle of shearing resistance between the ground and
geosynthetic reinforcement

γM partial material factor, applied to ground properties

γM0, γM2 partial factors for steel (in reinforcing elements) whose values are specified in prEN 1993-
1-1

γM,gs partial factor for geosynthetic reinforcing elements

γM,pwm partial factor for polymer steel woven wire mesh reinforcing elements

γp average weight density of the ground (on passive side of the retaining wall) above depth zp

γR partial resistance factor, applied to ground resistance

γRb, γRs resistance factors in pile foundations

γRc resistance factor for an individual pile axial compressive resistance

γRst resistance factor

γRd partial factor associated with the uncertainty of the resistance model / model factor in pile

35
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

foundations; and

γRd model factor accounting for additional uncertainty owing to extrapolation of measured
strengths to the design service life (of reinforcing elements)

γRd,0, model factors that take account of the degree to which the strength of the steel reinforcing
γRd,2 element is mobilized in a reinforced ground structure

γRd,sys model factor on overall system resistance

γRe passive earth resistance factor (on retaining walls)

γRst resistance factor

γRd,group model factor for the pile group or piled raft

γR,group resistance factor for the pile group axial compressive resistance

γRh partial factor for sliding resistance

γRN partial factor for bearing resistance

γR,ds partial factor to direct shear of the reinforcing element

γR,po partial factor for pull-out resistance of the reinforcing element

γR,raft resistance factor for the raft

γRst partial factor of shaft resistance in pile foundations

γR,sys partial resistance factor for the rigid inclusion system

γRT partial factor for sliding resistance

γRtr partial factor of transversal resistance in pile foundations

𝛾𝛾SLS partial factor for pile shaft resistance in the serviceability limit state

γtanφ,cv partial factor on the coefficient of internal friction of the ground under constant-volume
conditions

γtanφ,res partial factor on the coefficient of friction of the ground along a residual slip surface

𝛿𝛿 ground/structure interface friction angle; and

δ angle of inclination of the earth pressure

𝛿𝛿d design value of 𝛿𝛿

δep angle of inclination of the earth pressure

𝛿𝛿rep representative value of 𝛿𝛿

36
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

εl limiting strain in the reinforcement

εr reinforcement strain

ηc conversion factor accounting for long term effects (in ground improvement)

ηch conversion factor accounting for the adverse effects of chemical and biological degradation
of the element at the design temperature

ηcon conversion factor accounting for the reduction of resistance (of a reinforcing element) due
to the connection

ηcov conversion factor allowing for the relationship between the log normal and normal
characteristic strength based on field test results

ηcr conversion factor accounting for the adverse effect of tensile creep due to sustained static
load over the design service life of the structure at the design temperature

ηdmg conversion factor accounting for the adverse effects of mechanical damage during execution

ηdyn conversion factor accounting for the adverse effects of intense and repeated loading over
the design service life of the structure

ηel,con conversion factor accounting for anticipated loss of strength with time and from other
influences at the connection (with reinforcing elements)

ηgs conversion factor for geosynthetic reinforcement accounting for potential loss of strength
with time and other influences

ηpwm conversion factor for reinforcement polymer steel woven wire mesh accounting for
potential loss of strength with time and other influences

ηt conversion factor accounting for the difference in time between testing (typically 28 days)
and when the improved ground is exposed to the designed stresses

ηw conversion factor accounting for the adverse effects of weathering

𝜃𝜃 angle on plan between the L axis and the direction of T

λ inclination of the retaining wall

μnorm mean normal strength of field samples

μpo coefficient of interface friction determined in laboratory pull-out tests in representative

conditions or from field tests (for reinforcement elements)

ξa,SLS,test correlation factor for serviceability limit state verification taking account of the number of
suitability tests

ξa,ULS,test correlation factor for ultimate limit state verification taking account of the number of
suitability tests

ξmean correlation factor for mean values / for the mean of the calculated values

37
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

ξmin correlation factor for minimum values/ for the minimum of the calculated values

ξn correlation factor based on the number of tests and selected value of measured force

ξsn correlation factor accounting for the number of field pull-out tests performed or comparable
experience (in reinforcement elements)

ξULS correlation factor for ultimate limit state verification

σ’n normal effective stress acting on the reinforcing element at the distance x

σ’v effective vertical stress acting on the reinforcing element on the anchorage length

τds resistance (in units of stress) against direct shear along the ground / grout / reinforcement
interface(for reinforcing elements)

τn action effect of down drag (negative shaft friction)

τn,rep representative action effect of down drag (negative shaft friction)

τpo representative shear resistance (in units of stress) against pull-out along the
ground/grout/reinforcement interface (for reinforcing elements)

φcv,k characteristic value of the angle of internal friction of the ground under constant-volume
conditions

φres,k characteristic value of the angle of friction of the ground along a residual slip surface

φsn,d design value of the effective angle of shearing resistance between the ground and a soil nail

φ’st,d design value of the effective angle of shearing resistance between the ground and steel
reinforcement

ωα intermediate variable on the angle of inclination of the surcharge

ωδ intermediate variable on the angle of inclination of the earth pressure

3.2.5 Abbreviations

AI, AII diffused ground improvement classes

BI, BII discrete ground improvement classes

CPT Cone Penetration Test

EFA Effects Factoring Approach

EI flexural stiffness product (bending stiffness)

GC Geotechnical Category

MFA Material Factor Approach

38
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NDP National Determined Parameter

OCR overconsolidation ratio of the soil

PMT Pressure meter Test

PWM Polymer Steel Woven Wire Mesh

RFA Resistance Factor Approach

SLS Serviceability Limit State

SPT Standard Penetration Test

ULS Ultimate Limit State

VC Verification Case

XA1 to Exposure classes for risk of chemical attack

XA3

4 Slopes, cuttings, and embankments

4.1 Scope and field of application

This clause shall apply to cuttings, embankments and slopes within the zone of influence of
construction works.

NOTE 1 Cuttings cover all type of transient and permanent excavations with an appointed design service life.

NOTE 2 EN 16907 (all parts) applies to the execution of earthworks projects (including cutting and
embankments) and their planning.

This clause shall apply to overall stability, local stability, and displacement of nearby structures and
infrastructure within the zone of influence.

This clause shall apply to dams and levees but excludes the verification of water retention of those
structures.

NOTE The provisions in this clause do not entirely cover design rules needed for dams and levees classified in
CC3 and CC4. For these structures additional provisions can be needed.

This clause shall apply to the overall stability of the following geotechnical structures:

– retaining structures;
– ground reinforcing elements and improved ground structures;
– structures, infrastructure and foundation on or near slopes and cuttings; and
– existing slope within the zone of influence of planned construction works.

4.2 Basis of design

4.2.1 Design situations

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2.2 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

39
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

4.2.2 Geometrical properties

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.3 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

4.2.3 Zone of influence

prEN 1997-1:2022 [Link] shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

4.2.4 Actions and environmental influences

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.1 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

[Link] Permanent and variable actions

Design situations involving long-term settlement and movement should include permanent and
variable actions determined using the quasi-permanent combination of actions specified in prEN
1990:2021, [Link].

Design situation for cuttings shall include redistribution of initial in-situ stress due to excavation.

Traffic load shall be included in the verifications of slopes, cuttings and embankments.

NOTE Guidance on traffic loads on geotechnical structures is given in prEN 1991-2:2022, 6.9 and prEN 1992-
1-1:2021, 8.10

[Link] Cyclic and dynamic actions

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

[Link] Environmental influences

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

4.2.5 Limit states

[Link] Ultimate Limit States

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1, the following ultimate limit states shall be verified for all
slopes, cuttings, and embankments:

– loss of overall and local stability of the ground and structures within the zone of influence;
– failure due to gradual degradation of ground strength;
– failure along discontinuities;
– failure due to the impact of rock fall;
– loss of bearing resistance of embankments;
– structural failure of the face or surface of the slope, cutting or embankment and parts of it;
– structural failure of stabilizing measures;
– adverse hydraulic effects as a result of failure of drains, filters or seals;
– rapid drawdown of surface water levels causing excess pore water pressure;
– failure in ground caused by surface or internal erosion, or scour;

40
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

– structural failure in structures, roads, railway lines, or utilities due to movements in the ground
in the zone of influence.

Potential ultimate limit states other than those given in (1) should be verified.

[Link] Serviceability Limit States

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9, the following serviceability limit states shall be verified for all
slopes, cuttings, and embankments:

– settlement of embankments;
– horizontal ground movements of slopes, cuttings ad embankments;
– creep in soil and fill during the freezing and thawing period;
– loss of serviceability in neighbouring structures, roads or services due to movements in the
ground or due to changes in groundwater conditions;
– deformation of the structure, which can cause serviceability limit states of existing nearby
structures;
– movements in the ground due to shear deformations, settlement, vibration or heave; and
– accumulated ground movement or settlement due to creep.

NOTE Excavation below groundwater level can cause severe reduction in ground strength, hydraulic heave,
groundwater flow, internal erosion, piping or surface erosion.

Potential serviceability limit states other than those given in (1) should be verified.

4.2.6 Robustness

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.4 shall apply for slope, cuttings, and embankments.

4.2.7 Ground investigation

[Link] General

prEN 1997-2:2022, 5 shall apply for slope, cuttings, and embankments.

NOTE Specific ground investigations for earthworks are given in EN 16907-1 and EN 16907- 5.

[Link] Minimum extent of field investigation

The depth and horizontal extent of the field investigation shall be sufficient to determine the ground
conditions within the zone of influence in accordance with prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link].

The minimum depth of field investigation (dmin) should be determined as follows:

– For cuttings: 1.4 h (where h is the maximum depth of excavation);

– For embankments: 1.2 H or 1.0 B, whichever is the larger (where H is the maximum height of the
embankment and B is its foundation width i.e. shorter dimension on plan);
– For embankments: at least, down to the bottom of the deepest fine soil layer (or layer of high
compressibility) that could undergo consolidation settlement, depending on the depth of
influence.

If a layer of high strength is encountered, dmin, may be reduced to the depth corresponding to the top
of that layer.

41
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Groundwater and piezometric levels shall be determined if they could influence the stability or
settlement of the geotechnical structure or any adjacent structures or services.

4.2.8 Geotechnical reliability

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.2 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

4.3 Materials
4.3.1 Ground properties

prEN 1997-2:2022, 7-12 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

NOTE For fill properties see prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.

Anisotropic properties should be determined if they have the potential to influence ground
behaviour.

NOTE For example, anisotropic ground strength is of special importance for cuttings in fine soils due to the
unloading and rotation of the principal stresses.

Potential reduction in ground strength properties caused by exposure to weather conditions during
or after execution should be considered.

NOTE Examples include desiccation and saturation of the ground and thawing of frozen ground.

Slopes, cuttings, and embankments may be verified using effective stress or total stress ground
properties.

The determination of properties of discontinuities shall comply with prEN 1997-2:2022, 6.2.

For unstable, slowly moving slopes, ground properties may be derived from back analyses using
prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.2 (12) and prEN 1997-2:2022, 5.3.6.

4.3.2 Properties of improved ground

The determination of the representative values of improved ground properties shall comply with
Clause 11.

4.4 Groundwater
4.4.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 6 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

Measures shall be taken to prevent the adverse effects of potential scour leading to erosion of soil
around an earth-structure or internal erosion of soil within or around an earth structure.

Groundwater pressure at interfaces and in discontinuities shall be determined.

groundwater flow through interfaces and discontinuities shall be determined.

42
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

4.4.2 Groundwater control systems

Groundwater control systems may be provided to ensure that design groundwater and piezometric
pressures are not exceeded due to unforeseen circumstances.

NOTE 1 Guidance on verification of groundwater control systems is given in Clause 12.

NOTE 2 Examples of drainage for cuttings and embankments are given in EN 16907-1.

If a groundwater control system is not provided, then the design shall be verified to withstand
potential increase of groundwater pressures.

It shall be verified that an Accidental Limit State is not exceeded if the groundwater control system
fails.

Where the safety and serviceability of the geotechnical structure depend on the successful
performance of a groundwater control system, one or more of the following measures should be
taken:

− inspection and maintenance of the system, which should be specified in the Maintenance Plan,
see prEN 1997-1:2022, 5;
− installing a drainage system that will perform according to specification without maintenance;
and
− installing a secondary (“backup”) system.

4.5 Geotechnical analysis

4.5.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 7 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.1, the design of slopes, cuttings, and embankments subject to
cyclic and dynamic loading should consider the following:

– degradation of ground strength and stiffness;

– accumulated ground movement or settlement;
– build-up of excess groundwater pressures;
– amplification of loads or displacements owing to resonance; and
– potential liquefaction of the ground.

NOTE For seismic design see EN 1998-5.

The resistance of pre-existing sliding surfaces should be determined using residual strength
properties.

If the reliability according to prEN 1990 is not obtained in the design verification, potential necessity
of stabilizing measures shall be considered.

When verifying overall stability, all potential failure mechanisms shall be verified.

43
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

4.5.2 Analysis of slopes and cuttings

[Link] Stability in soils and fills

The stability of slopes shall be determined using at least one of the following calculation models:

– limit-equilibrium methods;
– numerical models according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 7.1.4;
– limit analysis.

NOTE 1 Calculation models for overall stability of soil and fill slopes are given in A.3.

NOTE 2 Calculation models for stability of rock slopes are given in Annex A.4.

In layered soils with significant differences in shear strength or subjected to high external loads, the
stability of both circular and non-circular failure surfaces intersecting the layers with the lowest
shear strength shall be verified.

When it is not obvious which condition (drained or undrained) governs overall stability in any
particular geotechnical unit, a calculation using a combination of drained or undrained conditions
should be used in which the most unfavourable combination of drainage conditions is chosen.

The weight density of a geotechnical unit should be a superior (upper) value if it has an unfavourable
effect on the stability of the slope, or an inferior (lower) value if it has a favourable effect.

The stabilizing effect from capillary action in the unsaturated zone may be used in transient design
situations, provided its effect can be verified by comparable experience, groundwater pressure
measurements or monitoring.

NOTE The stabilizing effect is also referred to as apparent cohesion and can be significantly reduced with an
increase or decrease in moisture content. A common approach is to assume zero groundwater pressure above the
piezometric level.

Potential development of tension cracks in cohesive soils shall be considered in the verification of
limit state.

Potential instability along soil-rock interfaces shall be considered in verification of limit state.

[Link] Stability in rock mass

The verification of rock mass stability shall consider, but is not limited to:

– the rock excavation technique and sequence;

– damaging effects of excavation by blasting;
– influence of rock wedges within slopes and cuttings on the local stability;
– effect of possible local instability on the overall stability.

NOTE Calculation models for stability of rock slopes are given in A.4.

The verification of limit states shall be based on geotechnical mapping and documentation of the
rock conditions.

Scaling of rock surfaces shall be specified into the design.

44
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

4.5.3 Analysis of embankments

For the analysis of the stability of embankments, the rules given in [Link] shall apply.

Analysis of embankments should adopt strength and stiffness properties that have been determined
at compatible strains for the different materials in the embankment and ground.

Potential uplift due to buoyancy shall be considered as an Ultimate Limit State.

Additional calculation models for bearing resistance and settlement analysis given in Clause 5 may
be used to verify that embankments do not exceed limit states.

For embankments on low strength fine soils and organic soils, resistance to punching failure and
plastic extrusion failure of the underlying soil should be verified.

NOTE 1 A calculation model for extrusion resistance of reinforces embankments is give in F.4.

NOTE 2 Calculation models for embankments subject to punching shear are given in B.5.

4.5.4 Supporting elements

In cases where a combined failure of supporting elements and the ground could occur, ground-
structure interaction shall be considered allowing for the difference in strength and stiffness of the
ground and that of the supporting element.

NOTE Cases include failure surfaces intersecting supporting elements such as walls, piles, anchors, discrete
ground improvement, and reinforcement elements and walls.

If supporting elements are used to increase overall stability, their structural resistance shall be
verified for the combined effects of action from the ground and the structure for all relevant design
situations.

Supporting elements used to improve overall or local stability, bearing resistance, or settlement
performance shall be verified in accordance with clauses 6-10.

NOTE Actions in the supporting elements can include axial forces, shear forces or bending moments depending
on the types of interaction between the ground and the supporting elements.

It shall be verified that the design resistance of the supporting element equals or exceeds the design
effect of actions given by Formula (4.1):

𝐸𝐸 d = max �𝐹𝐹𝑑𝑑,𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 ; 𝛾𝛾𝐹𝐹 𝐹𝐹𝑑𝑑,𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 � (4.1)

where

Fd,ULS is the design value of the action that the supporting element shall provide to prevent an
ultimate limit state of the slope, cutting or embankment;
Fd,SLS is the design value of the action that the supporting element shall provide to prevent a
serviceability limit state of the slope, cutting or embankment;
γF is a factor to convert a SLS value into an ULS value (using DC4).

45
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

4.5.5 Ground displacement and settlement of embankments

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.1 potential ground displacement due to the following causes
should be considered:

− change of stresses in the ground due self-weight or application and removal of external actions;
− change in groundwater conditions and corresponding groundwater pressures;
− ongoing creep;
− volume loss of soluble strata or due to internal erosion;
− shrinkage and swelling of ground due to change in water content;
− freeze and thaw effects; and
− presence of cavities in the ground.

The following components of settlement should be considered for soils and fill beneath and within
the embankment:

− immediate settlement;
− settlement caused by consolidation; and
− settlement caused by creep.

NOTE Consolidation and creep can occur simultaneously, particularly in thick soil layers of low hydraulic
conductivity.

Immediate settlement and settlement below an embankment during execution should be included
in the calculation of total settlement if it affects the final structure or utilities.

Settlement within and below the embankment after execution due to external actions, self-weight,
or delayed compaction effects should be included in the total settlement.

4.6 Ultimate limit states

4.6.1 Verification by the partial factor method

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4 shall apply for slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

4.6.2 Verification by prescriptive rules

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.5 shall apply for slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

4.6.3 Verification by testing

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.6 shall apply for slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

Staged construction or trial embankments excavations or cuttings may be used to verify limit states.

4.6.4 Verification by the Observational Method

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.7 shall apply for slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

4.6.5 Partial factors

Partial factors for the verification of slopes, cuttings, and embankments at the ultimate limit states
shall be determined according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1 using the Material Factor Approach.

46
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE 2 Values of the partial factors are given in Table 4.1 (NDP) for persistent and transient design situations
and in Table 4.2 (NDP) for accidental design situations, unless the National Annex gives different values.

Table 4.1 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of ground resistance of slopes, cuttings,
and embankments for fundamental (persistent and transient) design situations

Verification of Partial factor on Symbol Material factor approach (MFA)a ,b

Actions and effects-of-actions γF and γE VC3
Overall stability
Ground propertiesc γM M2b

Bearing resistance see Clause 5

a Values of the partial factors for Verification Case 3, (VC3) are given in prEN 1990 :2021 Annex A.
b Values of the partial factors for Sets M2 are given in prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link].
c Also includes ground properties of Class AI ground improvement (Clause 11)

Table 4.2 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of ground resistance of slopes, cuttings,
and embankments for accidental design situations

Verification of Partial factor on Symbol Material factor approach (MFA)a

Overall stability Actions and effects-of-actions γF and γE Not factored

Ground propertiesb γM M2
Bearing resistance see Clause 5
a Values of the partial factors for Set M2 are given in prEN 1997-1:2022 Annex A.
b Also includes ground properties of Class AI ground improvement (Clause 11).

4.7 Serviceability limit states

4.7.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 9 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

It shall be verified that deformation of the ground within the zone of influence of a slope, cutting, or
embankment does not cause a serviceability limit state in nearby structures or civil engineering
works.

Serviceability limit states for embankments shall be verified for deformations caused by freezing and
thawing.

4.7.2 Displacement of slopes and cuttings

In accordance with prEN 1990:2021, 5.1(2), if there are no explicit serviceability criteria, then the
verification of serviceability limit states of slopes may be omitted provided ultimate limit states are
verified.

47
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

4.7.3 Settlement of embankments

It shall be verified that differential settlement caused by the variability of ground stiffness and
thickness does not cause a serviceability limit state to be exceeded.

When verifying the settlement of an embankment, any decrease in effective stress in the ground
should be considered.

4.8 Implementation of design

4.8.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

NOTE For earthworks see EN 16907-3.

4.8.2 Inspection

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.3 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

Quality control of earthworks should comply with EN 16907-5.

4.8.3 Monitoring

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.4 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.4, a Monitoring Plan should be prepared for slopes, cuttings,
and embankments in GC 2 and GC3 for the following situations:

− when existing slopes show permanently or repeatedly ongoing displacement;

− where the stability is sensitive to the groundwater pressure distribution in and beneath the
embankment;
− when utilizing the stabilising effect from capillary action; and
− to measure effects on structures.

[Link] Monitoring of slopes and cuttings

The Monitoring Plan for slopes and cuttings should include, but is not limited to, measurement of the
following:

– horizontal and vertical ground displacements with time;

– groundwater levels or groundwater pressures with time as needed;
– location and geometrical properties of the sliding surface in a developed slide, to derive the
ground strength parameters from back analysis for the design of remedial works; and
– displacement and visible damage of structures and infrastructures within the zone of influence.

48
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link] Monitoring of embankments

The Monitoring Plan for an embankment should include, but is not limited to, measurement of
the following:

– groundwater pressure measurements during execution of embankments on fine soil and fill of
high compressibility;
– settlement measurements for the whole or parts of the embankment, different soil layers, and
nearby structures, roads, and services;
– measurements of horizontal displacements in the zone of influence;
– checks on strength and stiffness properties of fill during construction;
– chemical analyses before, during and after construction, if pollution control is required;
– if fine grained fill is used: groundwater pressure measurement within the body of the
embankment during construction; and
– checks on hydraulic conductivity or grain sized distribution of fill material and of foundation soil
during construction.

When an embankment on fine soil of low strength is raised in layers, to avoid potential limit states,
groundwater pressures within the zone of influence should be monitored to ensure that they have
dissipated to a sufficient degree to prevent a limit state being exceeded, before the next layer is placed.

4.8.4 Maintenance

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.5 shall apply to slopes, cuttings and embankments.

The Maintenance Plan should include, but is not limited to, the following:

− inspection and maintenance measures of erosion and scour protection, drainage systems and
filters;
− allowable dredging or excavation levels;
− procedures for canal or reservoir emptying;
− reconstruction or remedial measures of existing slopes after failure or extensive deformation;
− allowable loads and other restrictions during maintenance work.

4.9 Testing

prEN 1997-1:2022, 11 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

NOTE For earthworks see EN 16907-5.

4.10 Reporting

prEN 1997-1:2022, 12 shall apply to slopes, cuttings, and embankments.

5 Spread foundations
5.1 Scope and field of application

This clause shall apply to spread foundations, including pad, strip, raft foundations, unreinforced
working platforms and load transfer platforms.

This clause may be applied to deep foundations, including caissons, that behave as spread
foundations.

49
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

5.2 Basis of design

5.2.1 Design situations

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2., design situations for spread foundations should include the
effect of o:

− t soluble, expansive, and collapsible soils;

− the particular features of rock; and
− of scour.

5.2.2 Geometrical properties

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.3 shall apply to spread foundations.

The width of a spread foundation should be chosen considering setting out tolerances, working space
requirements, and the dimensions of the structural member supported by the foundation.

When choosing the embedment depth of a spread foundation, influences that could affect the
resistance of the bearing stratum and the deformation behaviour of the foundation shall be
considered.

NOTE Influences that can affect the resistance of the bearing stratum are given in B.3.

5.2.3 Zone of influence

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to spread foundations.

5.2.4 Actions and environmental influences

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.1 shall apply to spread foundations.

[Link] Permanent and variable actions

Actions for spread foundation shall include but are not limited:

− imposed actions from the structure;

− the self-weight of the foundation;
− the weight of any backfill placed on the foundation;
− favourable and unfavourable earth pressures acting on the foundation, where significant;
− loading due to lateral or vertical ground displacements;
− actions due to frost, including frost heave, thaw settlement, and thaw weakening of the ground;
− actions due to the swelling in soils with high expansion potential;
− actions due to the collapse of ground;
− actions due to heating of the ground causing a reduction in the groundwater content and ground
movements;
− actions due to the swelling of desiccated ground by the restoration of groundwater;
− actions due to seasonal drying and wetting cycles;
− changes in geometrical and geotechnical properties during the structure’s design service life due
to anticipated nearby excavations for the replacement of pipes, cables, and drainage;
− actions due to adjacent building; and
− accidental actions.

50
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The adverse effects of actions on a spread foundation due to planned construction of adjacent
structures and nearby excavations should be considered.

Hazards due to changes in the volume of the ground shall be identified.

NOTE Examples of risks are active soils, swelling, shrinking and heave.

In grounds with high expansion potential, measures shall be taken to avoid swelling during execution
of a spread foundation.

Spread foundations should be designed to accommodate any potential volumetric changes in the
ground caused by a change in water content.

NOTE For example, due to the presence or removal of nearby trees or other vegetation or the presence of
expansive clays.

For raft and slabs foundation of larger extent, an analysis of the interaction between the supported
structure and the ground should be performed to determine the distribution of actions on the spread
foundation.

Actions on the foundation may be determined by an analysis of ground structure interaction based
on an equivalent spring model of the ground.

NOTE Formula for linear elastic spring stiffnesses are given in B.15.

[Link] Cyclic and dynamic actions

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to spread foundations.

The design of foundations subjected to cyclic and dynamic loading should consider the following:

− occurrence of vibrations that can affect the structure, surrounding structures, people or sensitive
machinery;
− degradation of ground strength and potential liquefaction of foundation soil (leading to ultimate
limit states being exceeded at loads below those expected from verifications based on static
strength);
− changes in the ground hydraulic conductivity;
− large eccentricity leading to smaller effective foundation area and reduced bearing resistance;
− degradation of ground stiffness, leading to an accumulation of permanent foundation
displacement;
− damping of vibrations in the ground beneath the structure;
− amplification of loads or movements owing to resonance; and
− potential surface wave issues due to dynamic loading.

[Link] Environmental influences

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to spread foundations

Measures shall be taken to avoid frost impact on ground during execution.

Testing to determine the frost susceptibility of ground shall comply with prEN 1997-2:2022, 12.1.

Structural damage due to frost in frost susceptible ground may be prevented by adopting one or
more of the following measures:

51
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

− setting the foundation level beneath the depth of frost penetration; or

− providing insulation to prevent frost.

Insulation to prevent frost should comply with EN ISO 13793.

An alternative to EN ISO 13793 may be used, when specified by the relevant authority or, where not
specified, agreed for the specific project by the relevant parties.

The potential of low temperatures due to ground freezing causing deformations of the foundation
elements shall be considered in the presence of frost susceptible ground.

NOTE This particularly applies to thin raft foundations, including during execution.

The adverse effects of frost action caused by construction work or by ground freezing should be
considered.

Measures shall be taken to avoid structural damage due to drying and wetting cycles of the ground
caused by the change of climatic conditions during service life.

Measures shall be provided to prevent the adverse effects of potential scour leading to erosion of soil
under and around a spread foundation.

5.2.5 Limit states

[Link] Ultimate limit states

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1, the following ultimate limit states shall be verified for all
spread foundations:

− bearing failure;
− sliding failure;
− rotational failure;
− shear and tensile failure of possible ground-foundation reinforcement elements;
− structural failure due to excessive foundation movement; and
− excessive heave due to swelling, frost, or other causes.

Potential ultimate limit states other than those given in (1) should be verified.

[Link] Serviceability limit states

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9, the following serviceability limit states shall be verified for all
spread foundations:

− settlement;
− heave;
− rotation and tilting; and
− horizontal displacement.

Potential serviceability limit states other than those given in (1) should be verified.

5.2.6 Robustness

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.4 shall apply to spread foundations.

52
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

5.2.7 Ground investigation

[Link] General

prEN 1997-2:2022, 5 shall apply to spread foundations.

[Link] Minimum extent of field investigation

The depth and horizontal extent of the field investigation shall be sufficient to determine the ground
conditions within the zone of influence of the structure according to prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link].

For low-rise structures in Geotechnical Category 1, the minimum depth of investigation below the
planned base of an isolated spread foundation should be dmin = 2 m.

For low-rise structures in Geotechnical Category 2, the minimum depth of investigation below the
planned base of an isolated spread foundation dmin should comply with Formula (5.1):

𝑑𝑑min ≥ max(3𝑏𝑏F ; 3𝑚𝑚) (5. 1)

where

bF is the smaller side length of the foundation (on plan) shown in Figure 5.1a.
For high-rise structures, the minimum depth of investigation below the planned base of a spread
foundation dmin should comply with Formula (5.2):

𝑑𝑑min ≥ max(3𝑏𝑏B ; 6𝑚𝑚) (5. 2)

where

bB is the smaller side length of the foundation (on plan) shown in Figure 5.1b.
For raft foundations and structures with several foundation elements whose effects in deeper strata
are superimposed on each other, the minimum depth of investigation (dmin) below the planned base
of the foundation should be determined based on the expected zone of influence unless a ground
layer of high bearing resistance and sufficient thickness is identified at a shallower depth.

NOTE Minimum depth of investigation is defined in Figure 5.1.

The minimum depth of investigation may be reduced in medium strong rock masses and stiff rock
mass, moraine and strongly over consolidated clays provided there is comparable experience to
allow the properties of the ground to be predicted up to the depth given by Formula (5.1) and
Formula (5.2).

Greater investigation depths should be selected when:

− unfavourable geotechnical conditions, including potential weak or compressible layers below

layers with higher bearing resistance or discontinuities;
− unstable ground or groundwater conditions are anticipated; and
− the project involves raising or lowering the ground level.

53
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
A foundation
B structure

Figure 5.1 — Definition of dmin for spread foundations

5.2.8 Geotechnical reliability

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.2 shall apply to spread foundations.

5.3 Materials
5.3.1 Ground properties

prEN 1997-2:2022, clause 7 to 12 shall apply to spread foundations.

NOTE For engineered fills see prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.2.

Spread foundations may be verified using effective or total stress properties depending on the
permeability of the ground, potential failure mechanisms, and the rate and duration of loading.

5.3.2 Plain and reinforced concrete

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.5 shall apply to spread foundations.

5.4 Groundwater
5.4.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 6 shall apply to spread foundations.

Groundwater levels and pressures (including potential changes in them) that could affect the bearing
resistance, sliding resistance, stability against uplift and loss of equilibrium, and settlement shall be
considered in the verification of limit states.

54
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Increased groundwater levels and pressures owing to burst pipes and other failures of engineered
systems involving water around a foundation may be classified as accidental actions.

Surface water, groundwater and piezometric levels shall comply with prEN 1997-1:2022, 6.2, and
prEN 1997-2:2022, 11.

Where the groundwater level is close to the foundation level, the effects of capillary rise causing
deterioration of foundation materials should be considered.

NOTE Capillary rise can be avoided by including waterproofing membranes or a capillary break soil layer.

5.4.2 Groundwater control systems

Clause 12 shall apply to spread foundations.

If ponding of water above a spread foundation reduces its robustness against the occurrence of a
limit state below an acceptable level, drainage systems should be provided to remove the surface
water or structural measures implemented to prevent ponding.

Where the safety and serviceability of a spread foundation depend on the successful performance of
a groundwater control system, one or more of the following measures should be taken:

− a Maintenance Plan should be specified (see prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.5);

− a groundwater control system should be specified that perform according to the specifications
without maintenance; and
− a secondary (“backup”) system should be specified that prevent any potential leakage from
entering the ground beneath or next to the structure.

NOTE An example of a secondary system is a pipe or channel that encloses the primary system.

5.5 Geotechnical analysis

5.5.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 7 shall apply to spread foundations.

When verifying a spread foundation against ultimate or serviceability limit states, the effect of
adjacent foundations on the loading, resistance and movement of the foundation should be
considered.

In addition to (2), the effect of the spread foundation on nearby foundations, structures, and services
should be considered.

The calculation models given in [Link] and [Link] may be used to verify limit states for spread
foundations on soil or fill.

NOTE Guidance on calculation models is given in B.4 to B.12.

The calculation models given in [Link] may be used to verify limit states for spread foundations on
rock.

Calculation models used to verify the bearing resistance of a spread foundation should account for
the following:

55
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

− the failure mechanism (general shear, local shear, punching shear, or squeezing failure);
− the strength of the ground;
− the variability of the ground, especially layering;
− discontinuities and weakness zones in a rock mass or in hard soils;
− the shape, depth, and inclination of the foundation;
− groundwater pressures;
− the inclination of the ground surface;
− the eccentricity and inclination of the loads; and
− the presence of cyclic or dynamic loads.

5.5.2 Bearing resistance

[Link] Bearing resistance from soil and fill parameters

Provided that the undrained strength of the ground is assumed constant within the zone of influence,
the undrained bearing resistance (RNu) of a spread foundation on soil or fill to a force acting normal
to the base may be determined using total stress analysis from Formula (5.3):

𝑅𝑅Nu = 𝐴𝐴′ (𝑐𝑐u 𝑁𝑁cu 𝑏𝑏cu 𝑑𝑑cu 𝑔𝑔cu 𝑖𝑖cu 𝑠𝑠cu + 𝑞𝑞𝑜𝑜 ) (5. 3)

where
A′ is the effective plan area of the foundation, see (3) and (4);
cu is the soils undrained shear strength;
Ncu is a non-dimensional bearing resistance factor for undrained conditions, see B.4;
qo is the overburden pressure applied to the ground outside the foundation;
bcu, dcu,, gcu, are non-dimensional factors to account for the effects of base inclination, embedment
icu, and scu, depth and resistance above the base of the foundation, ground surface inclination, load
inclination, and foundation shape.
NOTE 1 Formula for Ncu, bcu, dcu, gcu, icu, scu, and Nγu are given in Annex B.4(1) and (3).

NOTE 2 When the ground surface slopes downwards away from the foundation, it is possible to add a third term
(0.5 γ B’ Nγu) in Formula (5.3), being γ the weight density of the ground below the base of the foundation; B’ the
effective foundation width shown in Figure 5.2; and Nγu a non-dimensional bearing resistance factor for the
influence of the ground’s weight density with negative value in this case.

The effective plan area of a rectangular foundation (A′) in Formula (5.3) should be determined from
Formula (5.4), assuming an uniform stress distribution:

𝐴𝐴′ = 𝐵𝐵′ × 𝐿𝐿′ = (𝐵𝐵 − 2𝑒𝑒B )(𝐿𝐿 − 2𝑒𝑒L ) (5. 4)

where
B’ is the effective foundation width;
L’ is the effective foundation length;
B is the actual foundation width;
L is the actual foundation length;
eB is the eccentricity of the applied load in the direction of B;

56
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

eL is the eccentricity of the applied load in the direction of L.

NOTE The notation used in Formula (5.4)is illustrated in Figure 5.2.

Key
1 Embankment depth
N Component of the total action acting normal to the foundation base
T Component of the total action acting transverse (parallel) to the foundation base
α Angle of foundation base
B Actual foundation width
B’ Effective foundation width
L Actual foundation length
L’ Effective foundation length
A’ Effective plan area of a rectangular foundation
eB Eccentricity of the applied load in the direction of B
eL Eccentricity of the applied load in the direction of L
β Sloping down angle of the ground [ω to be adjusted in the Figure]

Figure 5.2 — Notation for a rectangular spread foundation with an inclined base and eccentric
load
The effective plan area (A′) of a circular foundation for use in Formula (5.3) should be determined
from Formulae (5.5) and (5.6):

𝐷𝐷 2 2𝑒𝑒 2𝑒𝑒 2𝑒𝑒 2

𝐴𝐴′ = 𝐵𝐵′𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 × 𝐿𝐿′𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 = �cos−1 � � − �1 − � � � (5. 5)
2 𝐷𝐷 𝐷𝐷 𝐷𝐷

57
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

𝐵𝐵′𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 𝐷𝐷 − 2𝑒𝑒
=� (5. 6)
𝐿𝐿′𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 𝐷𝐷 + 2𝑒𝑒

where
B’eq is the effective width of the equivalent rectangular foundation area;
L’eq is the effective length of the equivalent rectangular foundation area;
D is the diameter of the circular foundation;
e is the eccentricity of the applied action.
NOTE The notation used in Formulae (5.5) and (5.6) is illustrated in Figure 5.3.

Key
Beq effective width of the equivalent rectangular foundation area
Leq effective length of the equivalent rectangular foundation area
e eccentricity of the applied action
α
R radius of the circular foundation
A, B, C, D

Figure 5.3 — Notation for a circular spread foundation with an inclined base and eccentric load
The drained bearing resistance (RN) of a spread foundation on soil or fill to a force acting normal to
the base may be determined using effective stress analysis from Formula (5.7):

𝑅𝑅N = 𝐴𝐴′ �𝑐𝑐 ′ 𝑁𝑁c 𝑏𝑏c 𝑑𝑑c 𝑔𝑔c 𝑖𝑖c 𝑠𝑠c + 𝑞𝑞 ′ 𝑁𝑁q 𝑏𝑏q 𝑑𝑑q 𝑔𝑔q 𝑖𝑖q 𝑠𝑠q + 0.5γ′ 𝐵𝐵′ 𝑁𝑁γ 𝑏𝑏γ 𝑑𝑑γ 𝑔𝑔γ 𝑖𝑖γ 𝑠𝑠γ � (5. 7)

where:
A′ is the effective plan area of the foundation;
B′ is the effective foundation width shown in Figure 5.2;
c′ is the soil effective cohesion;
q′ is the effective overburden pressure in ground outside the foundation base at the level of
the base;
γ′ is the buoyant weight density of the ground beneath the foundation;

58
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Nc, Nq, are non-dimensional bearing resistance factors;

Nγ
bc , bq , b γ are non-dimensional factors accounting for base inclination;
dc, dq, dγ are non-dimensional factors accounting for the depth of foundation embedment;
gc, gq, gγ are non-dimensional factors accounting for ground surface inclination;
ic , iq , i γ are non-dimensional factors accounting for load inclination;
sc, sq, sγ are non-dimensional factors accounting for foundation base shape.
NOTE 1 Formulae for Nc, Nq, etc. are provided in B.4(4) and B.4(6).

NOTE 2 Guidance is given in B.4(7) to account for the effect of groundwater level on groundwater pressure and
buoyant weight density.

Formula (5.7) should only be used in uniform soil or fill or in layered ground where the shear
strength properties do not differ by more than 5 % between the layers in the zone of influence for
bearing resistance failure.

When calculating the bearing resistance of a foundation on layered ground in which shear strength
properties differ by more than 5 % between layers, weighted average values of soil or fill parameters
within the zone of influence of the foundation may be used.

NOTE In layered grounds the rupture mechanism can differ from those implied by the adoption of Formula
(5.7).

The q term in Formula (5.3) and Formula (5.7) shall be reduced if overburden is potentially removed
during the design service life of the foundation.

A value of dcu > 1.0 in Formula (5.3) or dc > 1.0 in Formula (5.7) should only be used when the strength
of soil or fill above the foundation depth D is equal to or greater than the strength of the soil at
foundation level; otherwise dcu = 1 or dc = 1.

Where soil or fill beneath a spread foundation has a definite structural pattern of layering or other
discontinuities, the assumed rupture mechanism and the selected shear strength and deformation
parameters shall consider the characteristics of the layering and discontinuities.

Where a weaker geotechnical unit underlies a stronger unit, including a granular layer forming a
working platform foundation, the rupture mechanisms that should be considered depend on the
relative thickness of the stronger layer to the foundation width and should include:

− bearing resistance failure in the upper geotechnical unit;

− punching failure through the upper unit and bearing resistance failure in the lower unit; and
− squeezing or extrusion failure in the lower unit.

NOTE Calculation models for punching failure of a spread foundation on a stronger geotechnical unit over a
weaker unit are given in B.5.

Soil reinforcement may be placed on a weak geotechnical unit under a spread foundation supporting
an inclined force, or under a stronger unit supporting a working platform, to resist the horizontal
component of the force.

When soil reinforcement is used to improve the stability of a spread foundation close to sloping
ground, verification of overall stability shall comply with Clause 4.

59
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

When analytical models cannot accommodate or do not adequately represent the design situations
described in (11) and (12), numerical models should be used instead to determine the most
unfavourable failure mechanism (see prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.2).

[Link] Bearing resistance and settlement from empirical models

An empirical calculation model may be used to verify bearing resistance of spread foundations,
provided there is comparable experience of its successful use.

The bearing resistance and settlement of a spread foundation on soil may be determined from the
results of field investigations and calculation models.

NOTE Empirical calculation models for the bearing resistance and settlement of a spread foundation are given
in Annex B.

[Link] Bearing resistance of rocks

The bearing resistance of a spread foundations on a discontinuous rock mass shall comply with prEN
1997-2:2022, 8.1.

NOTE Mechanisms for bearing resistance of a spread foundation on discontinuous rock can include planer
sliding, wedge sliding and toppling.

[Link] Bearing pressures for structural analysis

The bearing pressure beneath a rigid foundation may be assumed to be distributed linearly when
determining bending moments and shear forces in the structural member.

The distribution of bearing pressure beneath a flexible foundation shall consider the stiffness of the
foundation and the supported structure.

The distribution of bearing pressure beneath a flexible foundation may be derived by modelling the
foundation as a beam or raft resting on a deforming continuum or series of springs, with appropriate
stiffness and strength, to determine the bending moments and shear forces.

NOTE 1 Formulae for the relative stiffness of a spread foundation on elastic ground and for subgrade modulus
are provided in B.14.

NOTE 2 A method for determining whether a foundation is rigid or flexible on the basis of the relative stiffness
value is given in B.14.

NOTE 3 For spread foundations, calculations based on uniform spring stiffness do not provide realistic
estimations of deformations due to edge effects.

5.5.3 Sliding resistance

The resistance of a spread foundation to sliding may be determined as the sum of the resistance to
sliding on its base plus any resistance to sliding caused by earth pressure on the face of the
foundation.

The resistance from earth pressure on the face of the foundation RT,face shall be determined
considering the deformation compatibility with the sliding resistances.

60
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Where a spread foundation is constructed on a lean concrete blinding layer or includes a waterproof
membrane, failure occurring along a plane weaker than that between the foundation base and the
underlying ground shall be considered.

The undrained sliding resistance along the base of a spread foundation (RTu,base) on soil or fill may be
determined using total stress analyses from Formula (5.8):

𝑅𝑅Tu,base = 𝐴𝐴red 𝑘𝑘cu 𝑐𝑐u (5. 8)

where

Ared is the plan area of the foundation base, not including any area where there is no positive contact
pressure between the foundation and the underlying ground as a result of load eccentricity,
ground shrinkage, or any other cause;
kcu is a reduction factor depending on the foundation material, execution method, and soil or fill
disturbance;
cu is the soil undrained shear strength.
For spread foundations made of concrete cast directly against soil or fill, the value of kcu should be
taken as 1.0 if the base is rough or ridged; or as 2/3 if the base is smooth.

For spread foundations made of pre-cast concrete, the value of kcu should be taken as 2/3.

The drained sliding resistance along the base of a spread foundation (RT,base) on soil or fill may be
determined using effective stress analysis from Formula (5.9):

𝑅𝑅T,base = (𝑁𝑁 − 𝑈𝑈) tan𝛿𝛿 (5. 9)

where

N′ is the normal component of the resulting force acting on the foundation base;
U is the uplift force due to groundwater pressures on the foundation base;
tan δ is the coefficient of friction between the foundation and the ground.
The value of the soil structure interface coefficient of friction (tan δ) shall comply with Formula
(5.10):

tan 𝛿𝛿 ≤ 𝑘𝑘tan𝛿𝛿 tan 𝜑𝜑 ′ (5. 10)

where

tan ϕ’ is the value of the soil coefficient of effective friction;

ktanδ is a reduction factor depending on the foundation material and execution method.
For spread foundations made of concrete cast directly against soil or fill, the value of ktanδ should be
taken as 1.0 if the base is rough or ridged; or as 2/3 if the base is smooth.

For spread foundations made of pre-cast concrete, the value of ktanδ should be taken as 2/3.

When verifying the sliding resistance of a spread foundation, the representative angle of friction of
soil or fill should consider potential disturbance of the soil or fill beneath the foundation.

61
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

When designing a spread foundation against sliding using the Mohr-Coulomb model, the value of
effective cohesion c′ at the base of the foundation should be taken as zero.

The value of the sliding resistance of a spread foundation on its front face (RT,face) should be
determined considering of the nature of the ground including any backfill within the horizontal zone
of influence.

5.5.4 Settlement

The following components shall be considered when calculating the settlement of spread
foundations:

− immediate settlement;
− settlement caused by consolidation;
− settlement caused by creep; and
− settlement caused by cyclic and dynamic actions.

NOTE 1 Calculation models for settlements of spread foundations are given in B7 to B13 for situations where
comparable experience exists.

NOTE 2 Consolidation and creep can occur simultaneously, particularly in thick layers of soil of low permeability.

NOTE 3 Settlement by consolidation typically occurs in fine soils with a high degree of saturation.

NOTE 4 Cyclic actions can generate settlements due to strain and excess ground water pressure accumulation.

The settlement of a foundation on rock may be determined on the basis of comparable experience
related to rock mass classification.

The settlement of a spread foundation may be determined using soil and fill parameters, provided
the calculation model used is appropriate for the type of ground and is based on comparable
experience.

NOTE Information regarding the use of calculation models for settlement is provided in B.7 to B11.

The depth of the compressible soil layer to be considered when calculating settlement should depend
on the load, the size and shape of the foundation, the variation in soil stiffness with depth and the
spacing of foundation elements.

The following factors potentially causing additional settlement to the ones due to loading should be
considered:

− the effect of a change in the effective stress due to reduction in the groundwater pressure;
− the effect of self-weight compaction of the soil;
− the effects of self-weight, flooding and vibration on fill and collapsible soils; and
− the effects of stress changes on crushable coarse soil.

The settlement of spread foundations should be determined assuming a distribution of bearing

pressures resulting from the ground-foundation interaction.

Allowance should be made for differential settlement caused by variability of the ground unless it is
prevented by the stiffness of the structure.

62
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The tilting of an eccentrically loaded foundation, which is of limited size and hence assumed to be
rigid, may be determined by assuming a linear bearing pressure distribution and then calculating the
settlement at the corner points of the foundation, using the vertical stress distribution in the ground
beneath each corner point and the settlement calculation models described above.

NOTE Differential settlement calculations that ignore the stiffness of the structure tend to be over-predictions.

5.5.5 Heave

Verification of serviceability limit state shall allow for heave caused by the following potential
mechanisms:

− reduction of effective stress;

− volume expansion of partly saturated soil;
− death or removal of vegetation;
− seasonal changes of the water content;
− increase in groundwater as a result of water leaking from damaged pipes;
− constant volume deformations in fully saturated soil, caused by settlement of an adjacent
structure; and
− chemical reactions in the ground.

NOTE An example of a chemical reaction in the ground causing heave is the transformation of anhydrite
(anhydrous calcium sulphate) to gypsum.

Calculations of heave shall include both immediate and delayed heave.

5.6 Ultimate limit states

5.6.1 General

The ultimate limit states of a spread foundation involving overall stability, bearing, and sliding failure
shall be verified using Formula (8.1) of prEN 1990:2021.

The design resistance of soil and fill beneath a spread foundation shall be verified for drained and
undrained conditions (or a combination of both), depending on the prevailing drainage conditions.

5.6.2 Verification by the partial factor method

[Link] Overall stability

It shall be verified, in accordance with Clause 4, that a spread foundation does not exceed an ultimate
limit state of overall stability.

NOTE This is particularly relevant when the spread foundation is within the zone of influence of sloping
ground; excavations or cuttings; rivers, canals, lakes, reservoirs, or the seashore; mine workings or buried
structures; other significant changes in the ground surface profile.

[Link] Bearing failure and overturning

The design bearing resistance normal to the base of a spread foundation RNd shall be verified using
Formula (5.11):

𝑁𝑁d ≤ 𝑅𝑅Nd (5. 11)

where

63
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Nd is the design value of the normal component of the resulting force on the foundation base;

The design bearing resistance of a spread foundation subject to a horizontal force should be verified
using two separate combinations of actions: one treating the vertical force as a favourable action and
the other as an unfavourable action.

Overturning subject to combined n vertical and horizontal forces (including gravity walls, reinforced
fill structures, and soil nailed structures) shall be verified for bearing failure according to (1).

The design eccentricity of the load acting on a spread foundation should be determined using design
actions.

NOTE 1 The design eccentricity is calculated using the partial factors given in 5.6.6.

NOTE 2 When calculated using partial factors on actions from Verification Case VC1, the design eccentricity of
loading ed is limited to the values given in Table 5.1, unless the National Annex gives different values.

Table 5.1 — (NDP) Limits to the design load eccentricity in the case of ULS design

Strip foundation Circular foundation Rectangular foundation

7 37 𝑒𝑒B,d 𝑒𝑒L,d 1
𝑒𝑒d ≤ � � 𝐵𝐵 𝑒𝑒d ≤ � � 𝐷𝐷 �1 − 2 � �1 − 2 � ≥
15 80 𝐵𝐵 𝐿𝐿 15

The following precautions shall be taken where the eccentricity of loading exceeds 1/3 of the width
of a rectangular foundation or 0.3 times the diameter of a circular foundation:

— careful review of the design values of the actions; and

— designing the location of the foundation edge by considering the magnitude of construction
tolerances.

Unless specific measures or different tolerances are specified to control the dimensions of a cast-in-
place concrete foundation where the eccentricity of the loading exceeds 1/3 of the foundation width
or 0.3 times the diameter of a circular foundation, the design width of the foundation Bd should be
determined from Formula (5.12):

𝐵𝐵d = 𝐵𝐵nom − Δ𝐵𝐵 (5. 12)

where

Bnom is the nominal width of the foundation;

∆B is a deviation.
NOTE The value of ∆B is 0.1 m, unless the National Annex gives a different value.

[Link] Sliding failure

Where the applied force is not normal to the foundation base, the foundation shall be verified against
sliding failure.

64
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The design sliding resistance along the base of a spread foundation shall comply with Formula (5.13):

𝑇𝑇d ≤ 𝑅𝑅Td,base + 𝑅𝑅Td,face (5. 13)

where:
Td is the design value of the applied force acting parallel to the foundation base, including any
thrust caused by earth pressure acting on the foundation;
RTd,,base is the design value of the resistance of the foundation base to sliding;
RTd,,face is the design value of the resistance force to sliding caused by earth pressure on the front face
of the foundation, i.e. the design face resistance.
Thrust caused by earth pressure acting on the foundation (included in Td in Formula (5.13)) and
RTd,face shall be determined according to clause 7.

The values Td, RTd,base, and RTd,face shall be related to the scale of movement anticipated under the limit
state design loading.

NOTE The displacements required to mobilize shear resistance at the base of the foundation are much lower
than the displacements required to mobilize earth pressures on the foundation front face.

The value of RTd,face should allow for potential loss of ground strength caused by large displacements.

For spread foundations on fine soils resting within the zone of seasonal changes of the water content,
the possibility that the soil could shrink away from the vertical faces of foundations resulting in face
resistance not being available shall be considered.

The possibility that face resistance cannot be available as a result of the soil in front of the foundation
being removed by erosion or human activity shall be considered.

When using the material factor approach, the design undrained sliding resistance RTud,base of a spread
foundation on soil or fill shall be determined using Formula (5.14):

𝑐𝑐u,rep
𝑅𝑅Tud = 𝐴𝐴red 𝑘𝑘cu 𝑐𝑐u,d = 𝐴𝐴red 𝑘𝑘cu (5. 14)
𝛾𝛾cu

where
Ared is the plan area of the foundation base, not including any area where there is no positive contact
pressure between the foundation and the underlying ground as a result of load eccentricity,
ground shrinkage, or any other cause;
kcu is a reduction factor depending on the foundation material, execution method, and soil or fill
disturbance;
cu,d is the design value of the soil or fill undrained shear strength;
cu,rep is the representative value of the soil or fill undrained shear strength;
γcu is a partial factor on undrained shear strength.
NOTE Values for the reduction factor kcu are specified in 5.5.3 (5) and (6).

When using the resistance factor approach, the design undrained sliding resistance RTud,base of a
spread foundation shall be determined using Formula (5.15):

65
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

𝐴𝐴𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝑘𝑘𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐u,rep

𝑅𝑅Tud,base = (5. 15)
𝛾𝛾RT

where, in addition to the parameters defined for Formula (5.14):

γRT is the partial factor on sliding resistance

In addition to (9) the design sliding resistance RTud,base shall comply with Formula (5.16) if:

− it is possible for water or air to reach the interface between the foundation and the surrounding
soil or fill; or
− the formation of a gap between the foundation and the surrounding soil or fill is not prevented
by suction in areas where there is no positive bearing pressure.

𝑅𝑅Tud ≤ 0.4 𝑁𝑁rep,fav (5. 16)

where
Nrep,fav is the design value of the force acting normal to the foundation base, considered as a favourable
action
When using the material factor approach, the design drained sliding resistance RTd in of a spread
foundation on ground shall be determined from Formula (5.17):

𝑅𝑅Td = (𝑁𝑁𝐺𝐺,𝑑𝑑,𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 − 𝑈𝑈𝑑𝑑 ) tan 𝛿𝛿d (5. 17)

where:
Nd is the design value of the permanent force acting normal to the foundation base, considered as
a favourable action;
Ud Is the design value of any uplift force from groundwater pressures acting normal to the
foundation base;
tanδd is the design value of interface friction between the foundation and the ground.
NOTE 1 Design values of groundwater pressures are specified in prEN 1997-1:2022, 6.

NOTE 2 Values of partial factors γtanδ are given in prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link].

When using the resistance factor approach, the design drained sliding resistance RTd,base of a spread
foundation on ground shall be determined using Formula (5.18) for VC1 or Formula (5.19) for VC4:

(𝑁𝑁𝐺𝐺,𝑑𝑑,𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 − 𝑈𝑈𝑑𝑑 ) 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝛿𝛿𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟

𝑅𝑅𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 = 5. 18
𝛾𝛾𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅

(𝑁𝑁𝐺𝐺,𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟,𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 − 𝑈𝑈𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 ) 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝛿𝛿𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟

𝑅𝑅𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 = 5. 19
𝛾𝛾𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅

where:
NG,d,fav is the design value of the favourable permanent force acting normal to the foundation base;
NG,rep,fav is the representative value of the favourable permanent force acting normal to the foundation
base;

66
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Ud is the design value of any uplift force from groundwater pressures normal to the foundation
base;
Urep is the representative value of the any uplift force from groundwater pressures normal to the
foundation base;
δrep is the representative value of interface friction between the foundation and the ground;

γRT is a partial factor on sliding resistance.

NOTE 1 Representative values of groundwater pressures are specified in prEN 1997-1:2022, 6.

NOTE 2 Values of partial factors γRT are given in 5.6.6.

The determination of NG,d,fav and NG,rep,fav, shall consider whether T and N are independent or
interdependent actions.

[Link] Toppling

The stability against toppling of a spread foundation shall be verified in accordance with prEN 1990.

NOTE Toppling is rotational failure that does not involve failure of the ground.

5.6.3 Verification by prescriptive rules

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.5 shall apply to spread foundations

NOTE Guidance on the use of the presumed bearing pressures can be given in the National Annexes

5.6.4 Verification by testing

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.6 shall apply to spread foundations

The results of large-scale tests may be used to verify limit states for a spread foundation directly.

The location of the test shall be chosen in accordance with the ground investigation results to be
representative of the most unfavourable ground conditions likely to be found under the structure.

When evaluating the results of large-scale foundation tests to verify limit states, any excess
groundwater pressures beneath the foundation shall be measured and considered.

When using a test to verify limit states for a spread foundation, any differences in scale and response
between the test foundation and the real foundation shall be considered, including the adverse
influence of weak layers within the zone of influence of the test or real foundation.

5.6.5 Verification by the Observational Method

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.7 shall apply to spread foundations

5.6.6 Partial factors

Partial factors for the verification of spread foundations at the ultimate limit state shall be
determined according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1, using either the Material Factor Approach or the
Resistance Factor Approach.

NOTE 1 The National Annex can specify which Factor Approach to use.

67
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE 2 Values of partial factors are given in Table 5.2 (NDP) for persistent and transient design situations, and
Table 5.3 (NDP), for accidental design situations, unless the National Annex gives different values.

NOTE 3 If the Material Factor Approach is used, the National Annex can specify whether to use both
combinations (a) and (b) or the single combination (c) in Table 5.2 (NDP) and Table 5.3 (NDP).

Table 5.2 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of ground resistance of spread foundations
for fundamental (persistent and transient) design situations

Verification of Partial factor on Symbol Material factor Resistance factor

approach (MFA), either approach (RFA),
both combinations (a) either combination
and (b) or the single (d) or ©c
combination (c)
(a) (©(c) (d) (e)
Overall stability See Clause 4

Actions and γF and VC1a VC3a VC1a VC1a VC4

effects-of-actions γE
Ground γM M1b M2b M2b Not factored
Bearing and sliding properties
resistance
Bearing γRN Not factored 1,4
resistance
Sliding resistance γRT Not factored 1,1
a Values of the partial factors for Verification Cases (VCs) 1, 3, and 4 are given in prEN 1990:2021 Annex A.
b Values of the partial factors for Sets M1 and M2 are given in prEN 1997-1:2022, Table 4.7.
c Use combination (d) except where specified otherwise in 5.6.6 (2) and (3)

Table 5.3 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of ground resistance of spread foundations
for accidental design situations

Verification of Partial factor Symbol Material factor approach (MFA), Resistance

on either both combinations (a) and factor
(b) or the single combination (c) approach
(RFA)
(a) (b) ©
Overall stability See Clause 4
Actions and γF and Not factored
effects-of- γE
actions

Bearing and Ground γM M1a M2a M2a Not factored

sliding properties
resistance Bearing γRN Not factored 1,20
resistance
Sliding γRT Not factored 1,05
resistance
a Values of the partial factors for Sets M1 and M2 are given in prEN 1997-1:2022, Table 4.7.

68
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

If the resistance factor approach is used to determine the bearing resistance of spread foundations
under inclined loading, Verification Case 4 may be used instead of Verification Case 1, provided the
condition in Formula (5.20) is satisfied:

𝑇𝑇rep ≤ 0,2𝑁𝑁rep (5. 20)

where
Trep is the representative value of the force acting tangential to the foundation base;
Nrep is the representative value of the force acting normal to the foundation base, considered as a
favourable action.

If the resistance factor approach is used to determine bearing resistance of gravity retaining
structures, Verification Case 4 may be used instead of Verification Case 1.

Provided the conditions specified in prEN 1997-1:2022 4.4.3(10) are satisfied, the value of γRN and
γRT for transient design situations may be multiplied by a factor KR,tr ≤ 1,0 provided that the products
KR,tr γRN and KR,tr γRT are not less than 1,0.

NOTE For spread foundations, the value of KR,tr is 1,0 unless the National Annex gives a different value.

5.7 Serviceability limit states

5.7.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 9 shall apply to spread foundations.

The adverse effects of foundation displacements shall be considered both in terms of displacement
of the entire foundation and differential displacements of parts of the foundation.

Displacements caused by actions on the foundation shall be considered, including the actions given
in prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link](1).

In determining the magnitude of foundation displacements, comparable experience shall be

considered, as given in prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link].

The effect of existing adjacent foundations, fills, and excavations shall be considered, including the
stress increase in the ground and its influence on ground compressibility and displacement.

5.7.2 Settlement

To ensure the avoidance of a serviceability limit state, determination of differential settlements and
relative rotations shall consider both the distribution of loads and the variability of the ground.

Upper and lower bound values of settlement should be determined using inferior and superior
representative values of stiffness and hydraulic conductivity.

5.7.3 Tilting

For spread foundations subject to eccentric loading, it shall be verified that differential settlement of
the foundation will not result in the occurrence of a serviceability limit state due to unacceptable
tilting of the supported structure.

69
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

5.7.4 Vibration

Foundations for structures subjected to vibrating loads shall be designed to ensure that vibrations
will not cause excessive settlements or a loss of serviceability of supported or adjacent structures.

Precautions should be taken to ensure that resonance will not occur between the frequency of the
dynamic load and a critical frequency in the foundation-ground system, and to ensure that
liquefaction will not occur in the ground.

5.8 Implementation of design

5.8.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10 shall apply to spread foundation.

The execution of concrete spread foundations should comply with EN 13670.

5.8.2 Inspection

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.3 shall apply to spread foundation

5.8.3 Monitoring

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.4 shall apply to spread foundation

5.8.4 Maintenance

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.5 shall apply to spread foundation

Groundwater control systems around spread foundations should be designed for ease of
maintenance and renewal during the design life of the structure.

5.9 Testing

prEN 1997-1:2022, 11 shall apply to spread foundation

The results of Plate Loading Tests should only be used for verification of limit state if:

− the size of the plate has been chosen considering the width of the planned spread foundation; and
− a homogeneous layer up to two times the width of the planned spread foundation exists.

NOTE The depth of the zone tested by the Plate Loading Test is limited to approximately twice the diameter of
the plate. Therefore, no inference concerning the soil quality below that depth can be made unless additional
investigation, e.g. sounding, is carried out.

Based on established experience, the results of a Plate Loading Test may be used with an adjusted
elasticity method to determine Young’s modulus and evaluate the settlement of a spread foundation
on soil and fill and on rock.

NOTE An adjusted elasticity method is given in B.7.

When a Plate Loading Test is used to determine the Young’s modulus and evaluate the settlement of
a spread foundation on soil and fill, the effects of any groundwater pressures generated on loading
should be considered.

70
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Dummy footing tests, skip tests, zone tests, and small-scale prototype tests may also be used to verify
the design of a spread foundation on soil or fill, provided the size of the loaded area and the depth of
a homogeneous layer beneath the planned foundation comply with (3).

5.10 Reporting

prEN 1997-1:2022, 12 shall apply to spread foundation.

6 Piled foundations
6.1 Scope and field of application

This Clause shall apply to single piles, pile groups and piled rafts.

In addition to Clause 11, part of this clause shall apply to rigid inclusions.

Piles should be classified according to their method of execution.

NOTE 1 The classification is given in Table 6.1 (NDP) unless the National Annex gives a different classification.

NOTE 2 The pile type is used to determine resistance factors, see 6.6.3.

NOTE 3 Examples of different pile types are given in Annex C.3.

Table 6.1 — (NDP) Classification of piles

Pile type Description Class

Displacement pile Pile installed in the ground without Full displacement

excavation of material
Partial displacement

Replacement pile Pile installed in the ground after the Replacement

excavation of material

Pile not listed above --- Unclassified

6.2 Basis of design

6.2.1 Design situations

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2.2 shall apply to piled foundations.

6.2.2 Geometrical properties

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.3 shall apply to piled foundations.

[Link] Single Pile

Pile dimensions shall be selected according to the pile type and method of execution, the stability of
the ground, and the potential adverse changes that can occur due to pile installation.

71
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE Nominal dimensions are given in the execution standards given in 6.8.1

The adverse effects of pile geometrical imperfections shall be considered in the verification of limit
states.

NOTE 1 The execution standards given in 6.8.1 give positional and verticality tolerances. Other geometrical
imperfections can include curvature of the pile shaft, bulging or necking of the pile, and oversized or undersized
bores.

NOTE 2 Annex C.13 provides calculation models to consider second order effects induced by some geometrical
imperfections.

[Link] Pile groups

The spacing of piles in groups should be selected according to the pile type, method of execution,
proposed sequence of execution, pile length, ground conditions, and anticipated pile group behaviour.

Pile spacing should be sufficient to avoid damage to previously constructed piles, considering
positional and verticality tolerances.

6.2.3 Zone of influence

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to piled foundations.

The adverse effects of nearby construction activity on the piled foundation shall be considered.

The adverse effects of pile execution resulting in ground movement and vibrations that could impact
on nearby structures should be considered.

6.2.4 Actions and environmental influences

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.1 shall apply to piled foundations.

[Link] Permanent and variables actions

Actions for piled foundations shall include, but are not limited to:

– applied axial, transverse, and shear forces in any combination;

– applied bending and torsional moments in any combination;
– static, cyclic, dynamic, or impact actions in any combination;
– loading due to lateral or vertical ground displacements;
– pile imperfections that result in additional bending moment or shear loads;
– loading due to thermal deformations of the pile or surrounding ground.

NOTE Seismic actions are defined in EN 1998 (all parts).

[Link] Cyclic and dynamic actions

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to piled foundations.

The adverse effects of cyclic and dynamic action on the long-term bearing and transverse resistance
of piled foundations, shall be considered.

72
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE 1 Cyclic and dynamic actions can result in reduced ground strength and stiffness leading to additional pile
displacements and loss of resistance.

NOTE 2 In coarse fills and soils, cyclic and dynamic actions can result in densification of the ground leading to
increased stiffness, particularly in the horizontal direction.

For axially loaded piles, the stability diagram may be used to assess whether the effects of cyclic loads
can significantly affect the response of the pile or can be neglected.

NOTE 1 The concept of a pile stability diagram is presented in Annex C.14.

NOTE 2 The effect of cyclic actions on the axial pile resistance depends on the pile properties, load characteristics
and ground properties.

[Link] Actions due to ground displacement

The adverse effects on the piled foundation of vertical and horizontal ground movements shall be
considered.

NOTE 1 See [Link] for a method of calculating downdrag action on piles.

NOTE 2 Ground mass displacement are assessed according to Clause 4.

[Link] Environmental influences

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to piled foundations.

6.2.5 Limit states

[Link] Ultimate Limit States

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1, the following ultimate limit states shall be verified for all piled
foundations:

− failure of the ground surrounding the piled foundation;

− failure of the ground between individual piles;
− buckling of the pile element;
− structural failure of the pile element (see EN 1992 (all parts), prEN 1993 (all parts) or EN 1995
(all parts) respectively based on pile material);
− combined failure of the ground and the structural pile element;
− failure of the supported structure caused by excessive pile movement.

Potential ultimate limit states other than those given in (1) should be verified.

[Link] Serviceability Limit States

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9, the following serviceability limit states shall be verified for all
piled foundations:

− pile settlement;
− differential settlements;
− settlement caused by downdrag;
− heave;
− transverse movement;
− unacceptable movements or distortions of the structure caused by pile movements.

73
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Potential serviceability limit states other than those given in (1) should be verified.

6.2.6 Robustness

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.4 shall apply to piled foundations.

6.2.7 Ground investigation

[Link] General

prEN 1997-2:2022, 5 shall apply to piled foundations.

The ground investigation should include one or more of the following:

− field tests to allow direct correlation with the pile shaft and base resistance;
− field tests to determine the shear strength and stiffness of ground;
− laboratory tests to determine ground shear strength and stiffness;
− description of the geological and geotechnical ground conditions.

In addition to (1) for piled foundations on or in very weak to weak rock mass or weakness zones at
the anticipated pile base level, the ground investigation should include one or more of the following:

− rotary core drill holes to provide undisturbed core samples;

− assessment of any core loss, fracturing and joint spacing;
− a full core description complying with EN ISO 14689, including estimates of rock strength;
− laboratory testing to determine the compressive strength of the rock.

In addition to (1) for piled foundations on or in medium to strong rock mass at the anticipated pile
base level, the ground investigation should include one or more of the following:

− measurement while drilling;

− borehole video logging;
− comprehensive comparable experience.

The aggressiveness of the ground and groundwater shall be determined during the ground
investigation.

In addition to (1) – (3), the ground investigation may include:

– visual inspection of rock surfaces;

– site trials and prototype pile installation;
– installation of piles for load testing;
– observation of spoil from drilled or bored replacement piles;
– measurement of drive blows for driven displacement piles;
– drive energy analysis;
– static load testing;
– dynamic impact load testing;
– rapid load testing.

[Link] Minimum extent of field investigation

The depth and horizontal extent of field investigation shall be sufficient to determine ground
conditions within the zone of influence of the structure according to prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link].

74
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The field investigation shall determine ground conditions over the full depth of the piled foundation
including any overlying fills or low strength soils, and should extend beyond the anticipated founding
stratum at or pile base.

The minimum depth of field investigation below the anticipated base of a piled foundation dmin in
soils and in very weak and weak rock masses should be determined from Formula 6.1:

𝑑𝑑𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚�5 m; 3𝐵𝐵b,eq ; 𝑝𝑝group � (6.1)

where

Bb,eq is the equivalent size of the pile base, equal to Bb (for square piles), Db (for circular piles), or
pb/π (for other piles);
Bb is the base width of the pile with the largest base (for square piles);
Db is the base diameter of the pile with the largest base (for circular piles);
pb is the base perimeter of the pile with the largest base (for other piles);
pgroup is the smaller dimension of a rectangle circumscribing the group of piles forming the
foundation, limited to the depth of the zone of influence.
The value of dmin in strong rock masses should be determined from Formula (6.2):

𝑑𝑑𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚�3 𝑚𝑚; 3𝐵𝐵𝑏𝑏,𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 � (6.2)

The value of dmin should be increased for rock masses that are susceptible to dissolution features or
cavities, or where closely spaced discontinuities may reduce the mass strength and stiffness.

The value of dmin in medium strong and strong rock mass or dense moraine may be reduced provided
there is comparable experience to allow the properties of the rock mass or moraine to be predicted.

6.2.8 Geotechnical reliability

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.2 shall apply to piled foundations.

Piled foundations shall be classified as GC 2 or GC 3.

6.3 Materials
6.3.1 Ground properties

prEN 1997-2:2022, Clauses 7 to 12 shall apply to piled foundations.

The following non-exhaustive list of field tests and ground parameters may be used to calculate axial
or transverse pile resistance:

– cone resistance from Cone Penetration Tests;

– corrected blow counts from Standard Penetration Tests;
– limit pressure from Pressuremeter Tests;
– effective shear strength parameters of fill, soil, or weak rock;
– constant volume effective stress parameter of fill or soil;
– undrained shear strength of fill or soil;
– unconfined compressive strength of rock;

75
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

– compressive strength of rock mass and mechanical properties of discontinuities.

The effect of subsequent excavation, placement of overburden, or changes in groundwater pressure

on the values of ground properties should be considered.

Verification of limit states should be based on ground parameters that represent the strength and
stiffness of the ground after pile execution, unless the selected design method implicitly allows for
execution effects.

6.3.2 Plain and reinforced concrete

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.5 shall apply to piled foundations.

Exposure classes for concrete should comply with EN 206.

Concrete cover requirements shall comply with prEN 1992-1-1.

NOTE For many reinforced concrete piles or piled foundations constructed in natural ground, the exposure
class will be XA1, XA2 or XA3. Currently prEN 1992-1-1 does not provide guidance for the cover allowance for
durability for these exposure classes.

In the absence of alternative guidance, the minimum cover for environmental conditions cmin,dur
should be 25 mm for reinforced concrete used for both precast and cast-in-place piles.

In the absence of alternative guidance, the allowance for deviation Δcdev should be 50 mm for
concrete cast against the ground and 10 mm for precast piles.

NOTE EN 12794 and EN 13369 give additional recommendations.

The value for Δcdev for precast piles may be reduced in accordance with prEN 1992-1-1:2021, [Link]
(3) when fabrication is subject to a quality assurance system with measurement of concrete cover.

6.3.3 Plain and reinforced grout and mortar

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.4 shall apply to piled foundations.

Exposure classes for grout and mortar should comply with:

– 6.3.2(2) for durability;

– EN 14199 for corrosion protection.

In the absence of guidance, exposure classes for grout and mortar, and rules for durability may be
determined from comparable experience or testing.

6.3.4 Steel

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.6 shall apply to piled foundations.

6.3.5 Steel reinforcement

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.5 shall apply to piled foundations.

76
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

6.3.6 Ductile cast iron

Cast iron for piles or piled foundation and the values of cast iron properties should comply with EN
1563.

6.3.7 Timber

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.7 shall apply for pile design.

Timber grading for pile foundations should comply with the general requirements of EN 14081-1.

Timber piles without preservative treatment may be used provided the piles are installed below the
groundwater table and remain fully submerged throughout their design service life.

6.4 Groundwater

prEN 1997-1:2022, 6 shall apply to piled foundations.

6.5 Geotechnical analysis

6.5.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 7 shall apply to piled foundations.

The interaction between the structure, pile foundation and ground shall be considered when
verifying limit states.

Combined axial and lateral loading may be analysed by separating each load component and applying
the principle of superposition, provided pile internal behaviour remains substantially elastic.

The non-linearity of the load-displacement curve of axially and transversally loaded piles should be
considered for the verification of both geotechnical and structural limit states.

6.5.2 Effect of ground displacement

[Link] General

Actions due to ground displacement shall be modelled either by treating the displacement as an
action or as an equivalent design force.

Evaluation of an equivalent design force should take account of the strength and stiffness of the
ground, together with the source, magnitude and direction of the ground displacement by assuming
the most unfavourable values of the strength and stiffness of the moving ground.

Downdrag

The adverse effects of the drag force caused by moving ground shall be included in the verification
of serviceability and ultimate limit states.

The effects of the downdrag should be modelled by carrying out a ground-pile interaction analysis,
to determine the depth of the neutral plane Ldd corresponding to the point where the pile settlement
spile equals the ground settlement..

NOTE 1 The neutral plane marks the boundary between downwards shaft friction (occurring above the neutral
plane), and upwards shaft friction (occurring below the neutral plane).

77
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE 2 The depth of the neutral plane Ldd is usually different for serviceability and ultimate limit state
conditions.

The ground-pile interaction analysis should provide force, displacement, and strain profiles for the
full depth of the pile to enable the representative drag force Drep acting on the pile shaft above the
neutral plane to be determined.

NOTE See C.9 for detailed models and combinations of actions for downdrag.

In addition to prEN 1990-1:2021, 6.1.1(4) and prEN 1990-1:2021, [Link](3)-(4), when carrying out
an interaction analysis, if the drag force and shaft resistance originate in a single geotechnical unit,
with no significant change in strength or stiffness across the neutral plane, then both the drag force
and the resistance may be considered as coming from a single-source.

The equivalent drag force Drep should be determined from Formula 6.3:

𝐿𝐿dd
𝐷𝐷rep = 𝑝𝑝 � 𝜏𝜏s ∙ dz 6.3)
0

where

p is the perimeter of the pile;

τs is the unit shaft friction causing downdrag at depth z;
Ldd is the depth to the neutral plane.
In order to provide a cautious estimate of the downdrag force, the shaft friction causing downdrag
should be determined from upper (superior) ground parameters.

[Link] Heave

Verification of the pile compression or tensile resistance shall take account of ground heave
(including swelling) which could take place during execution before piles are fully loaded by the
structure.

The adverse effects of heave caused by moving ground shall be included in the verification of
serviceability and ultimate limit states, especially to avoid tensile failure of the pile.

Verification of serviceability limit states should consider short- or long-term ground heave sufficient
to cause unacceptable uplift to the pile element or to result in a serviceability limit state in the overall
structure.

Long-term heave may be disregarded where the imposed permanent actions exceed the heave load.

[Link] Transverse loading

Verification of the pile transverse resistance and displacement shall take account of actions on piles
originating from the adverse effect of ground movements or asymmetric loads around a pile.

6.5.3 Axially loaded single piles

[Link] Calculation

The axial resistance of a single pile shall be determined based on comparable experience from the
results of field investigation and laboratory testing or load tests.

78
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The axial resistance of a single pile designed by calculation shall be determined by one of the
following methods:

− using ground properties determined from field and laboratory tests (the Ground Model Method);
or
− using individual pile resistance profiles determined from correlations with field test results or
ground properties from field or laboratory tests (the Model Pile Method).

NOTE The method (Ground Model or Model Pile) to be used can be given in the National Annex.

The validity of the method used to assess the base and shaft resistance of a pile shall be proved by
documented load testing of comparable piled foundations and case histories that confirm that the
method provides reliable pile resistance and performance.

NOTE Methods of calculating base and shaft resistance are included in C.4 and C.5 for ground parameters, C.6
for cone penetration test methods, and C.7 for pressuremeter methods.

The axial compressive resistance Rc of a single pile should be determined from Formula 6.4

Rc = Rb +Rs 6.4

where

Rb is the pile base resistance;

Rs is the pile shaft resistance.

NOTE 1 The use of Formula (6.4 assumes the compatibility of the displacements to mobilise both base resistance
and shaft resistance considering the pile geometry and the difference of stiffness between the ground and the pile.
In case of layered ground with layers of significant different stiffness, shaft resistance may not be fully mobilized in
layers of lower stiffness.

NOTE 2 For piled foundation on rock the proportion of base resistance and shaft resistance to be taken into
account depends on the ratio of Ec (concrete Young’s modulus) to Erm (rock mass Young’s modulus) and on the pile
slenderness. The shaft resistance of soil layers tends to reduce to 0, when a pile is socketed in competent rock.

The weight of the pile should be included as an action in the calculation model, in which case the
beneficial contribution of overburden should be included in the axial compressive resistance at the
pile base.

The weight of the pile and the additional resistance at the pile base due to overburden pressure may
both be disregarded provided that:

– the pile weight and the contribution to resistance due to overburden pressure are
approximately equal;
– downdrag is not significant;
– the soil or fill does not have a very low weight density;
– the pile does not extend above the surface of the ground.

The weight of the pile element may be included as a resistance for piles loaded by tension.

The pile base resistance in compression Rb should be determined from Formula( 6.5):

79
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

𝑅𝑅b = 𝐴𝐴b ∙ 𝑞𝑞b (6.5)

where

qb is the unit base resistance;

Ab is the area of the pile base.
The pile shaft resistance Rs in compression should be determined from Formula( 6.6):
𝑛𝑛

𝑅𝑅s = � 𝐴𝐴s,i 𝑞𝑞s,i (6.6)

𝑖𝑖=1

where

qs,i is the unit shaft resistance in the i-th geotechnical unit;

As,i is the area of the pile shaft in the i-th geotechnical unit;
i is an index that varies from 1 to n;
n is the number of geotechnical units providing resistance.
The pile shaft resistance in tension Rst should be determined from Formula( 6.7):

𝑅𝑅st = ∑𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖=1 𝐴𝐴s,i 𝑞𝑞st,i (6.7)

where
qst,i is the unit shaft resistance in tension in the i-th geotechnical unit.

[Link] Prescriptive rules

The axial compressive resistance of a single pile may be determined using prescriptive rules where
specified by a relevant authority.

[Link] Testing

The axial compressive resistance of a single pile at the ultimate limit state may be determined from
the results of static load, dynamic impact, or rapid load tests.

The axial tensile resistance of a single pile at the ultimate limit state may be determined from the
results of static load tests.

Determination of the axial resistance of a single pile from static load tests should account for potential
temporary support.

The compressive resistance of a single pile may be determined from the results of dynamic impact or
rapid load tests provided adjustments are made to account for temporary support.

The compressive resistance of a friction pile from a dynamic impact test should be determined from
the maximum applied test load determined by signal matching.

In the absence of site-specific correlations, the validity of dynamic impact or rapid load tests shall
have been established using static load test previously carried out in documented comparable

80
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

situation on the same pile type, with similar geometry, in comparable ground conditions, and tested
to similar load levels.

Results of dynamic impact or rapid load tests where more than 30 % of the pile resistance is provided
by shaft friction or end bearing in fine soils should only be used to determine Rc if there is site-specific
calibration against static load test.

The validity of the interpreted results from dynamic impact or rapid load tests should be
demonstrated by static load tests carried out in parallel to allow direct site-specific correlation.

Allowance for any potential pile set-up may be included provided this has been either verified by load
tests on piles of different ages or established by comparable experience.

The compressive resistance of a pile may be determined from the results of wave equation
analysis based on the registered energy transfer to the pile during driving, provided the analysis has
previously been calibrated against the results of static load tests on the same pile type, with similar
geometry and installation method and in comparable ground conditions.

The compressive resistance of an end-bearing pile in coarse soil or rock may be based on a pile
driving formula provided the formula has previously been calibrated against the results of static load
tests on the same pile type, with similar geometry, of similar installation method and in comparable
ground conditions.

Analysis of the results of dynamic impact tests may be carried out using wave equation analysis
for confirmation of design or for interpolation between test locations when it is necessary to modify
the design to consider different design situations.

Wave equation analysis may also be used to determine the effect of significant changes in
dimensions, length, impact energy, and final set of piles that are not load tested.

Wave equation analysis or driving formulae may be used to determine driving criteria for control
purposes.

6.5.4 Transversely loaded single piles

The transverse resistance of a single pile may be determined by calculation or by testing.

The transverse resistance of a single pile may be determined assuming rotation or translation of the
pile as a rigid body (for short piles with a ratio (length to diameter ratio L/D < 6) or bending failure
and local yielding of the pile for longer piles (L/D≥6).

NOTE Verification of piles for transverse loading is often controlled by the serviceability limit state rather than
ultimate limit state.

Temporary support from moving ground that will reduce or reverse during the design service life of
the piled foundation shall not be included in the computation of transverse resistance.

The transverse resistance of a single pile shall take account of the fixity of the pile head to the pile
cap or sub-structure and the fixity of the pile base.

The transverse resistance of a single pile should take account of potential variations of ground
stiffness with depth.

81
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

For piles in multi-layered soils, superior (upper) and inferior (lower) values of soil stiffness in
different layers should be combined in the most adverse manner.

NOTE For example, upper bound stiffness for stiff soil layers and lower bound for less stiff layers.

The transverse geotechnical and structural resistance of a socketed pile should include specific
analyses of the pile base, especially when shear forces are present owing to a large difference in
stiffness between the rock mass and any overlying soil.

If piles are additionally loaded transversally, they should be verified using second order theory.

NOTE For example, additionally load can be induced by settlement of the ground, displacement of sloping
ground or by structural actions.

6.5.5 Pile groups

Verification of limit states for pile groups may be carried out by numerical, analytical, or empirical
calculation methods, or determined from the observed performance of comparable pile groups.

Pile group design shall consider that the resistance and load-displacement behaviour of individual
piles in a group might show significant variation compared to the behaviour of single piles.

Calculation of pile group effects should consider the potential changes in stress and density of the
ground resulting from pile installation together with the effects of group behaviour due to the
structural loads.

Pile group design may be based on the results of load tests on individual piles provided the
interaction between individual piles and pile group effects are considered.

The ultimate vertical resistance of a pile group Rgroup should be determined from Formula 6.8:
𝑛𝑛

𝑅𝑅group = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 �� 𝑅𝑅i ; 𝑅𝑅block � 6.8

𝑖𝑖

where

Ri is the ultimate axial resistance of the i-th pile in the pile group, taking full account of the effects
of pile interaction;
i is an index that varies from 1 to n;
n is the number of piles within the piled foundation;
Rblock is the ultimate vertical resistance of the block of ground bounded by the perimeter of the pile
group.
In the case of tension loading, the reduction in effective vertical stresses in the ground should be
considered when deriving the shaft resistance of individual piles in the group.

NOTE For the evaluation of the block failure of pile groups subject to axial tension see C.10.

The effects of pile interaction, the shadow effect of closely spaced piles, and head fixity of piles should
be accounted for when deriving the transverse resistance of a pile group from the results of
calculations or load tests on individual test piles.

82
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Where interaction effects between piles are expected to be significant, the verification of limit states
should be based on numerical models that consider non-linear ground-pile response and can cater
for combined axial, lateral, and moment actions.

If the piles in a group are connected by a pile cap that is unable to redistribute loads, verification of
limit states shall be based on the pile in the most unfavourable condition.

The verification of geotechnical ultimate and serviceability limit states for individual piles may be
omitted provided is verified that the pile cap is able to redistribute loads without itself exceeding an
ultimate or serviceability limit state.

6.5.6 Piled rafts

The ultimate compressive resistance of a piled raft Rpiled-raft should be determined from Formula 6.9
considering the compatibility of the displacements of the piles and the rafts:
𝑛𝑛

𝑅𝑅piled−raft = �� 𝑅𝑅c,i + 𝑅𝑅raft � (6.9)

𝑖𝑖

where

Rraft is the ultimate compressive resistance of the raft alone;

Rc,i is the compressive resistance of the i-th pile;
i is an index that varies from 1 to n;
n is the number of piles supporting the piled-raft.
The design of piled rafts should consider the interaction effects shown in Figure 6.1:

− pile-soil interaction;
− pile-pile interaction;
− raft-soil interaction;
− pile-raft interaction.

83
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
1 interaction between piled raft and ground
2 Piled-Ground-Interaction
3 Raft-Ground-Interaction
4 Piled-Raft-Interaction
5 Pile-Pile-Interaction
e distance between piles
B pile diameter

Figure 6.1 — Interaction effects of a piled raft

84
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Analysis of a piled raft may be based on numerical modelling including nonlinear stress–strain
models for the ground, the structural flexural stiffness of the raft and the interactions between
ground, raft and piles.

Verification of the ultimate limit state of individual piles within a piled raft may be omitted provided
an ultimate limit state of the combined structure is not exceeded.

The ultimate compressive resistance of a piled raft may be determined in a simplified manner by
neglecting pile resistances and considering the ultimate compressive resistance of the raft alone Rraft
according to [Link] and 5.6.3.

Provided that an ultimate limit state in the combined structure is not exceeded, the shaft and base
resistances of individual piles used for settlement reduction of a raft foundation may be allowed to
reach their limiting value.

NOTE 1 This is particularly beneficial when piles are used for the purpose of settlement or raft bending moment
reduction.

NOTE 2 The limiting value here is not necessarily the same as that of a single pile, since it includes pile-raft
interaction effects, especially the surcharge effect and the restrain provided by the raft in contact with the ground.

6.5.7 Displacement of piled foundations

[Link] General

The settlement and transverse displacement of a piled foundation shall be determined from the
results of load tests; analytical, numerical or empirical calculations, or prescriptive rules based on the
observed performance of comparable single piles or pile groups.

NOTE Load testing of pile groups is seldom feasible, and so the performance of pile groups is normally verified
by other methods.

The validity of analytical, numerical and empirical calculation methods should be demonstrated using
documented load tests on and case histories of comparable pile foundations to confirm that the
methods provide reliable parameter values and predictions of pile settlement and transverse
displacement.

Potential downdrag shall be considered for both serviceability and ultimate conditions and shall take
account of the relevant pile foundation loading and the strain mechanisms between the piles and the
surrounding fill or soil in accordance with 6.5.2.

[Link] Single piles

The settlement and transverse displacement of a single pile may be determined from load tests or
calculated using empirical or analytical methods or numerical modelling.

NOTE Owing to rapid degradation of mobilized ground stiffness with pile head movement, calculation models
based on nonlinear stiffness are particularly appropriate for calculating the transverse response of a pile
foundation.

Elastic shortening of the pile shaft under axial compression should be included in the calculation of
pile head settlement taking into account the effects of creep.

85
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link] Pile groups and piled rafts

The settlement and transverse displacement of pile groups and piled rafts may be determined using
empirical or analytical methods or numerical modelling.

Calculation methods for pile group design should take account of:

− the load-displacement behaviour of individual piles as well as behaviour of pile group;

− the movement and loading effects caused by pile to pile interaction through the ground;
− the interaction with the supported structure.

NOTE Examples of appropriate methods include finite element/difference, boundary element, and interaction
factor approaches.

Load transfer functions should not be used to determine groups effects unless the they account for
interaction between the piles.

Interactions between piles should consider the non-linear behaviour of the ground.

NOTE Methods based on purely linear behaviour tend to overestimate pile displacement at working load.

6.5.8 Confirmation of pile design by site-specific load testing or comparable experience

Pile design should be validated using site-specific static load testing to confirm design parameter
values, verify compressive or tensile resistance, and establish behaviour under serviceability limit
state conditions.

NOTE Unlike static load tests, rapid load and dynamic impact tests do not provide direct information about the
pile behaviour under serviceability limit state conditions.

Pile resistance to axial compression may be confirmed using dynamic impact or rapid load tests
provided that these tests have been validated by static pile load tests.

Site-specific ultimate control test may be omitted where there is comparable experience or evidence
of previous successful use for the same pile type, with similar geometry, installed in similar ground
conditions.

The number and type of site-specific pile loads tests ntest needed to confirm pile design by calculation
may be selected based on the type and purpose of the load test.

NOTE Values of ntest are given in Table 6.2 (NDP) unless the National Annex gives different values.

86
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 6.2 — (NDP) Minimum quantity of load testing for confirmation of pile design by
calculation

Type of load test Confirmation of design Confirmation of design

by Ultimate Control Tests by Serviceability Control
Tests

Static load test max (1, 0.5 % N) max (2, 1 % N)

Rapid load test max (3, 1.0 % N) max (6, 5 % N)

Dynamic impact load test max (3, 1.0 % N) max (6, 5 % N)

NOTE N = total number of piles in similar ground conditions

When selecting the value of ntest, piles with different geometries may be considered as a single set of
tests, provided they are anticipated to exhibit a similar response to loading.

The value of ntest may be adjusted proportionately when carrying out both Ultimate and Serviceability
Control Tests or when carrying out a mix of static, rapid, or dynamic impact load tests.

All pile load test should be carried out in accordance with 6.9.

The design of piles shall consider any adverse effect of Control Tests on the load-settlement behaviour
of the test pile during its design service life.

6.6 Ultimate limit states

6.6.1 Single piles

[Link] Verification of axial compressive resistance

The axial compressive resistance of a single pile shall be verified using Formula 6.10):

𝐹𝐹cd ≤ 𝑅𝑅cd 6.10

where
Fcd is the design axial compression applied to the pile including an allowance for any potential drag
force (see [Link]);
Rcd is the pile’s design axial compressive resistance.

NOTE Rcd includes cyclic degradation effects where applicable.

The design axial compressive resistance Rcd shall be determined from Formula (6.11 ):

𝑅𝑅c,rep 𝑅𝑅b,rep 𝑅𝑅s,rep

𝑅𝑅cd = 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 � + � 6.11
𝛾𝛾Rc . 𝛾𝛾Rd 𝛾𝛾Rb . 𝛾𝛾Rd 𝛾𝛾Rs . 𝛾𝛾Rd

where

Rc,rep is the pile’s representative total resistance in axial compression;

87
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Rb,rep is the pile’s representative base resistance in axial compression;

Rs,rep is the pile’s representative shaft resistance in axial compression;
γRd is a model factor;
γRc, γRb, γRs are resistance factors given in 6.6.3.
NOTE 1 Values of γRd are given in Table 6.3 (NDP) for verification by calculation for compressive and tensile
actions unless the National Annex gives different values.

NOTE 2 Value of γRd are given in Table 6.4 (NDP) for verification by testing for compressive and tensile action,
unless the National Annex gives different values.

Table 6.3 — (NDP) Model factor γRd for verification of axial pile resistance by calculation

Verification by Model factor γRd

Ground Ultimate Control Tests 1.2
Model
Method Extensive comparablea,b experience
1.3
without site-specific Control Tests
Serviceability Control Tests 1.4
No pile load tests and limited
1.6
comparable experiencea,c
Pile on competent rock using
properties determined from field and 1.1
laboratory tests

Compressive
Tensile resistance
resistance

Model Pile Pressuremeter testd 1.15 1.4

Method
Cone penetration testd 1.1 1.1
Profiles of ground properties based on
1.2 1.2
field or laboratory testsd,e
a Comparable experience assumes documented records (or database) of static pile load test results conducted
on similar piles, in similar ground conditions, under similar loading conditions from a certain number of sites n,
b Extensive comparable experience assumes n ≥ 10
c Limited comparable experience assumes n < 10
d Value can be multiplied by 0.9 when accompanied by Ultimate Control Tests
e Ground strength properties determined at maximum vertical spacings of 1.5 m

88
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 6.4 — (NDP) Model factor γRd for verification of axial pile resistance by testing

Verification by Model factor γRd

Fine soils Coarse soils Rock Competent
rock
Static load tests 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Rapid load tests (multiple load cycles)a 1.4 1.1 1.2 1.1
Rapid load tests (single load cycle)a 1.4 1.1 1.2 1.1
Dynamic impact tests Shaft bearing 1.5 1.1 1.2 1.1
(signal matching)b
End bearing 1.4 1.25 1.25 1.15
Dynamic impact tests Shaft bearing 1.5 1.1 1.2 1.1
(multiple blow)b
End bearing 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.1
Dynamic impact tests Shaft bearing Not permitted Not permitted Not permitted 1.3
(closed form solutions)b
End bearing Not permitted 1.3 1.3 1.3
Wave equation analysis Not permitted 1.6 1.5 1.4
Pile driving formulae Not permitted 1.8 1.7 1.5
a When dynamic impact tests are not calibrated by site-specific static load testing, but by comparable
experience only (see Table 6.3 (NDP)), the values for γRd are increased by::
+0.1 when calibration is based on extensive comparable experience;
+0.25 when calibration is based on limited comparable experience.
b When dynamic impact tests are carried out on cast-in-place piles, the values for γRd are increased by 0.2
[Link] Verification of axial tensile resistance

The axial tensile resistance of a single pile shall be verified using Formula (6.12):

𝐹𝐹td ≤ 𝑅𝑅td 6.12

where

Ftd is the design axial tension applied to the pile;

Rtd is the pile’s design axial tensile resistance.
The design axial tensile resistance Rtd shall be determined from Formula (6.13):

𝑅𝑅t,rep
𝑅𝑅td = 6.13
𝛾𝛾Rst . 𝛾𝛾Rd

where

Rt,rep is the pile’s representative axial tensile resistance;

γRd is a model factor;
γRst is a resistance factor, specified in 6.6.3.
NOTE 1 Values of γRd are given in [Link]

NOTE 2 Rtd include potential cyclic degradation effects.

89
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link] Verification of transverse resistance

The transverse resistance of a single pile shall be verified using Formula (6.14):

𝐹𝐹tr,d ≤ 𝑅𝑅tr,d (6. 14)

where:

Ftr,d is the design transverse force applied to the pile including an allowance for any potential
transverse force due to moving ground (see [Link]);
Rtr,d is the pile’s design transverse resistance.
If using the material factor approach, the design transverse resistance Rtr,d shall be determined
according to prEN 1990:2021, Formula (8.12), by applying material factors γM to the representative
values of the material properties Xrep.

NOTE The values of γM is given in prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1

If using the resistance factor approach, the design transverse resistance Rtr,d shall be determined
according to prEN 1990:2021, Formula (8.13), by applying resistance factors γR,tr to the
representative transverse resistance of the single pile Rtr,rep.

NOTE The value of γR,tr is given in 6.6.3

[Link] Downdrag

Downdrag should be classified as a permanent action arising from the relative axial movement when
ground settlement exceeds pile settlement.

The design drag force due to settling ground shall be determined from Formula (6.15):

𝐷𝐷d = 𝛾𝛾F,drag 𝐷𝐷rep (6. 15)

where:

Dd is the design drag force due to moving ground;

Drep is the representative drag force due to moving ground;
γF,drag is a partial action factor given in 6.6.3.
[Link] Transverse ground loading

Transverse forces on the pile due to moving ground should be classified as permanent actions arising
from relative transverse movement between the ground and the pile.

[Link] Representative values of resistance

For design by calculation using the Ground Model Method, the representative value of resistance of
a single pile Rrep shall be determined from Formula (6.16):

𝑅𝑅rep = 𝑅𝑅calc (6. 16)

90
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

where:

Rrep is Rc,rep for compression, Rt,rep for tension, or Rtr,rep for transverse resistance, as appropriate;
Rcalc is the calculated pile resistance based on ground parameters.
For design by calculation using the Model Pile Method, the representative value of resistance of a
single pile Rrep shall be determined from Formula (6.17):

(𝑅𝑅calc )mean (𝑅𝑅calc )min

𝑅𝑅rep = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 � ; � (6. 17)
𝜉𝜉mean 𝜉𝜉min

where:

(Rcalc)mean is the mean calculated pile resistance for a set of profiles of field test results;
(Rcalc)min is the minimum calculated pile resistance for a set of profiles of field test results;
ξmean is a correlation factor for the mean of the (calculated) values;
ξmin is a correlation factor for the minimum of the (calculated) values.
NOTE Values of ξmean and ξmin are given in Table 6.5 (NDP) unless the National Annex gives different values.

Table 6.5 — (NDP) Correlation factors

Correlation Coefficient Number of tests or profiles
Factora,b of variation
1 2 3 4 5 7 10 20 ≥ 50
(CoV)
ξmin n/a 1.4 1.27 1.23 Use ξmean alone
ξmean ≤ 12 % Use ξmin alone 1.30 1.28 1.28 1.27 1.26 1.25 1.25
15 % 1.40 1.39 1.38 1.37 1.36 1.36 1.35
20 % 1.67 1.64 1.63 1.61 1.60 1.59 1.58
25 % 1.98 1.95 1.93 1.90 1.89 1.87 1.85
≥ 25 % Sub-divide the Geotechnical Design Model to reduce the CoV
a If all piles in a group are tested, use ξmean = 1.0 provided load can be transferred through the pile cap. For
individually tested piles, use ξmean = ξmin = 1.0.
b The correlation factors given here assume field test profiles arranged on a grid with reference spacing dref of 30 m
Profiles of field test results shall only be considered as a single data set if they are obtained in an area
of the site with similar ground conditions and over similar depths as the installed piles.

For each single data set defined in (3), the coefficient of variation (CoV) of the computed pile
resistance for each profile should be determined.

The values of the correlation factors ξmean and ξmin for the Model Pile Method shall be determined
based on the number of profiles in the single data set and the coefficient of variation determined in
(4).

For design by testing, the representative value of resistance of a single pile Rrep shall be determined
from Formula (6.18):

(𝑅𝑅test )mean (𝑅𝑅test )min

𝑅𝑅rep = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 � ; � (6. 18)
𝜉𝜉mean 𝜉𝜉min

91
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

where:

(Rtest)mean is the mean pile resistance measured in a set of load tests;

(Rtest)min is the minimum pile resistance measured in a set of load tests;
ξmean is a correlation factor for the mean of the (measured) values;
ξmin is a correlation factor for the minimum of the (measured) values.

Results of pile load tests shall only be considered as a single data set if they relate to similar pile
types, pile geometry, loading conditions, and ground conditions.

The values of ξmean and ξmin may be reduced by 10 % for pile groups or piled rafts that are able to
redistribute load from a single pile to other piles in the group without any significant additional
settlement of the foundation provided the value of the final correlation factor is not less than 1.0.

If ξmean and ξmin are reduced according to (8), then the verification of limit states in the pile cap shall
consider the load redistribution.

The values of ξmean and ξmin may be calculated by considering corresponding to the number of test
profiles N in the area S:

d 𝑑𝑑𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝜉𝜉mean (𝑆𝑆) = 1 + (𝜉𝜉mean − 1) or 𝜉𝜉min (𝑆𝑆) = 1 + (𝜉𝜉 − 1) (6. 19)
𝑑𝑑𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝑑𝑑𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 min

where:

𝜉𝜉mean (𝑆𝑆) is the value of ξmean by considering the area S corresponding to the number of test profiles N;
𝜉𝜉min (𝑆𝑆) is the value of ξmin by considering the area S corresponding to the number of test profiles N;
dave is the average distance between the N test profiles located in the area S;
dref is the reference spacing of 30 m for the Model Pile Method.
NOTE Formula (6.19) is applied unless the National Annex provides different formula.

6.6.2 Pile groups and piled rafts

The design resistance of a pile group or piled raft Rd,group shall be verified using Formula (6.20):

𝐹𝐹d,group ≤ 𝑅𝑅d,group (6. 20)

where:

Fd,group is the design action applied to the pile group or piled raft;
Rd,group is the design resistance of the pile group or piled raft.

If using the material factor approach, the design resistance Rd,group shall be determined according to
prEN 1990:2021, Formula (8.12), by applying material factors γM to the representative values of the
material properties Xrep.

NOTE The valued of γM is given in prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1

92
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

If using the resistance factor approach the design resistance Rd,group for vertical resistance may be
determined from Formula (6.21):

𝑅𝑅rep,group ∑𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖 𝑅𝑅c,rep,i 𝑅𝑅rep,raft

𝑅𝑅d,group = 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑅𝑅𝑑𝑑,𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝−𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 = � + � (6. 21)
𝛾𝛾R,group 𝛾𝛾Rd,group 𝛾𝛾Rd 𝛾𝛾Rc 𝛾𝛾R,raft

where:

γR,group is a resistance factor for the pile group axial compressive resistance;
γRc is a resistance factor for individual pile axial compressive resistance;
γR,raft is a resistance factor for the raft, given in 6.6.3;
γRd,group is a model factor for the pile group or piled raft.
γR,d Is a model factor for a single pile, given in [Link]
NOTE The value of γRd,group is 1.0, unless the National Annex gives different values.

6.6.3 Partial factors

[Link] Single piles

Partial factors for the verification of the axial resistance of single piles at the ultimate limit state shall
be determined according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1, using either the Resistance Factor Approach
in combination with either the Ground Model Method or the Model Pile Method.

NOTE 1 Values of the partial factors for single piles are given in Table 6.6 (NDP) for persistent and transient
design situations and for accidental design situations unless the National Annex gives different values.

NOTE 2 Either the Model Pile Method or the Ground Model Method can be used, unless the National Annex
specifies otherwise.

93
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 6.6 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of ultimate resistance of single piles for
fundamental (persistent and transient) design situations and accidental situations
Verification Partial factor on Symb Material Resistance factor approach
of ol factor (RFA)
approach
(MFA) – both
combinations
(a) (b) Pile class model pile ground model
Axial Actions and effects- γF and All VC1
compressive of-actions1 γE
resistance Drag force due to γF,drag 1.35 (1.0)d
settling ground
Ground properties2 γM Not factored
Base and shaft γRb | Base Shaft Base Shaft
resistance in γRs Full displacement 1.2 1.2 1.05
compression (1.1)d (1.1)d (1.0)d

Partial 1.2 1.0 1.3 1.05

displacement (1.1)d (1.0)d (1.15) (1.0)d
d
Replacement 1.2 1.4 1.15
(1.1)d (1.2)d (1.05)
Not Used d

Unclassified 1.35 1.25 1.5 1.25

(1.15) (1.1)d (1.25) (1.1)d
d d
Total resistance in γRc Full displacement 1.1 (1.05) d
compression
Partial 1.2 (1.1) d
displacement
Replacement 1.3 (1.15) d

Unclassified 1.3 (1.15) d 1.4 (1.2) d

Axial tensile Actions and effects- γF and All DC1
resistance of-actionsa γE
Ground propertiesb γM Not factored
Shaft resistance in γRst Full displacement 1.2 (1.1) d
Not Used
tension Partial 1.2 (1.1) d
1.15 (1.05) d
displacement
Replacement 1.3(1.15) d
Unclassified 1.4 (1.2) d 1.5 (1.25) d
Transverse Actions and effects- γF, vC4 Not used
vC3
resistance of-actionsa,c and γE (EFAe
Ground propertiesb γM M1 M2 Not factored

94
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Verification Partial factor on Symb Material Resistance factor approach

of ol factor (RFA)
approach
(MFA) – both
combinations
(a) (b) Pile class model pile ground model
Transverse γRtr Not used
Not factored
resistance
a Values of the partial factors for Verification Cases (VCs) 1, 3, and 4 are given in prEN 1990:2021 Annex A. For transverse
resistance, DC1 may be used as alternative to VC4.
B Values of the partial factors for Sets M1 and M2 are given in prEN 1997-1:2022, Table 4.7
c Including drag force due to moving ground.
D Values in brackets are given for accidental design situations.
E See prEN 1997-1 :2022, 8.2

[Link] Pile groups and piled rafts

Partial factors for the verification of pile groups and piled rafts at the ultimate limit state shall be
determined according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1 using either the Material Factor Approach or the
Resistance Factor Approach.

NOTE 1 Values of the partial factors for pile groups and piled rafts are given in Table 6.7 (NDP) for persistent,
transient, and accidental design situations unless the National Annex gives different values.

NOTE 2 The National Annex can specify which Factor Approach to use.

Table 6.7 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of ultimate resistance of pile groups and
piled rafts for fundamental (persistent and transient) design situations and accidental situations
Verification of Partial factor on Symbol Material factor
approach Resistance factor
(MFA) – both approach
combinations (RFA)
(a) (b)
Vertical Actions and effects- γF and γE VC4 VC3 VC1
resistance of-actionsa
Ground propertiesb γM M1 M2 Not factored

Vertical resistance γR,group Not factored 1.4 (1.1)c

γRc See Table 6.6 (NDP)

γR,raft 1.4 (1.1)c

Combined axial Actions and effects- γF DC4 DC3 Not used
and transverse of-actionsa and γE (EFA)d
resistance (see Ground propertiesb γM M1 M2
prEN 1997-
1:2022, 8.2) Compressive and γR,group Not factored
transverse
resistance
A Values of the partial factors for Verification Cases (VCs) 3 and 4 are given in prEN 1990;2021 Annex A.
b Values of the partial factors for Sets M1 and M2 are given in prEN 1997-1:2022, Table 4.7.

95
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Verification of Partial factor on Symbol Material factor

approach Resistance factor
(MFA) – both approach
combinations (RFA)
(a) (b)
c Values in brackets are given for accidental situations.
D See prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.2

6.6.4 Structural design and verification

The structural resistance of single piles should be verified in accordance with:

− prEN 1992-1-1 for reinforced and plain concrete, grout or mortar piles;
− prEN 1993-1-1 and EN 1993-5 for steel piles;
− EN 1994-1-1 for composite steel and concrete piles;
− EN 1995-1-1 for timber piles.

Ground stiffness should be determined considering the magnitude of any axial or transverse
displacement of the pile.

The representative value of stiffness should be selected as either an upper or lower value, depending
on which is more critical.

NOTE Upper values are sometimes critical when transversal loads are present (e.g. from settling soil).

Bending stresses due to initial curvature, eccentricities and induced deflection should be considered
together with stresses due to transverse load.

Buckling and torsional stability should be verified considering second order effects, particularly for
long slender piles.

NOTE Annex C.13 provides calculation models to take into account buckling and second order effects.

For piles and rigid inclusions subjected to compression, the structural resistance and buckling should
be verified by theory of second order when the following conditions are met:

− Pile diameter B<Bref;

− Pile length embedded in soil layers with a thickness of h>href and with a shear strength in total
stress analyses cu<cu,ref.

NOTE 1 Bref = 0.3 m, href = 1.0 m and cu,ref = 15 kPa unless the National Annex gives other values.

NOTE 2 Example of second order theory is given in Annex C.13

6.7 Serviceability limit states

prEN 1997-1:2022, 9 shall apply to piled foundations.

Serviceability behaviour of piled foundations shall be determined in accordance with 6.5.7.

Explicit verification of the serviceability of a piled foundation may be omitted provided serviceability
performance of the piled foundation can be demonstrated by comparable experience.

96
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Explicit verification of settlement may be omitted for single piles loaded in compression when
founded in medium to dense coarse soils, medium to high strength fine soils, or rock, provided the
inequality given in Formula (6.22) is verified:

𝐹𝐹cd,SLS ≤ 𝜅𝜅b,SLS 𝑅𝑅b,rep + 𝜅𝜅s,SLS 𝑅𝑅s,rep (6. 22)

where:

Fcd,SLS is the design axial compression applied to the pile with the quasi-permanent and characteristic
serviceability limit state combinations, including potential downdrag forces;
Rb,rep is the representative value of base resistance;
Rs,rep is the representative value of shaft resistance;
κb,SLS is a mobilization factor for base resistance in the serviceability limit state;
κs,SLS is a mobilization factor for shaft resistance in the serviceability limit state.
NOTE The values of κb,SLS and κs,SLS are respectively 0.1 and 0.85 unless the National Annex gives different
values.

Verification of the serviceability limit state for pile groups and piled rafts should be based on
modelling that accounts for non-linear stiffness of the ground, flexural stiffness of the structure, and
interaction between the ground, structures, and piles.

6.8 Implementation of design

6.8.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10 shall apply to piled foundations.

The execution of piled foundations should comply with the following execution standards:

– EN 1536 for bored piles;

– EN 12699 for displacement piles;
– EN 14199 for micropiles;
– EN 12063 for sheet piles used for bearing resistance;
– EN 1538 for diaphragm walls for bearing resistance;
– EN 12716 for jet grouting;
– EN 14679 for deep mixing.

6.8.2 Inspection

[Link] General

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.3, the Inspection Plan should include:

− the location and general layout of the piled foundations;

− the sequence of works;
− the working level and working platform;
− rig monitoring and instrumentation;
− non-destructive integrity tests.

97
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link] Rig monitoring and instrumentation

For continuous flight auger and continuous helical displacement piles, the piling rig should be fitted
with a suitable automated instrumentation and monitoring system capable of measuring the
execution metrics throughout the boring and concreting of the pile.

Piling rigs used to install driven displacement piles should be fitted with a suitable automated
instrumentation and monitoring system capable of measuring the execution metrics throughout the
pile driving process.

Installation and monitoring records should be inspected after pile execution to verify conformance
of the pile to its design criteria.

[Link] Non-destructive integrity tests

Cast-in-place or precast concrete piles may be subject to non-destructive integrity testing to verify
the pile does not include any defects within the shaft and has not been damaged during installation.

The method for integrity testing may be chosen from the following:

− low strain Pile Integrity Test;

− thermal integrity profiling;
− cross-hole sonic logging method;
− distributed fibre optic sensing method.

Results of dynamic impact load testing may also be used to verify pile shaft integrity.

For driven precast concrete piles, the need of integrity tests may be based on evaluation of the
driving based on observations and discontinuities in the drive blow record.

6.8.3 Monitoring

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.4, the Monitoring Plan for piled foundations should comply with
the execution standards.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.4, the Monitoring Plan should include, but is not limited to, the
following:

− settlement, lateral and distortion measurements of the supported structure;

− vibration measurements;
− settlement, lateral and distortion measurements of nearby sensitive structures.

Monitoring of pile execution should be carried out for all piles over the full depth of each pile and
should include, but is not limited to:

− piling rig monitoring and instrumentation records;

− drive blow and hammer energy records for driven piles;
− visual inspection of spoil and observations of ground conditions for auger bored and drilled piles.

NOTE Piling rig monitoring and instrumentation records can include pull-down force, duration per depth,
penetration per revolution, torque.

Installation and monitoring records should be inspected after pile execution to verify conformance
of the pile to its design criteria.

98
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

6.8.4 Maintenance

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.5, the Maintenance Plan of piled foundations should comply
with the execution standards.

6.9 Testing
6.9.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 11 shall apply for piles.

Pile load tests should conform to the following standards:

− EN ISO 22477-1 for static compression load testing;

− prEN ISO 22477-2 for static tension load testing;
− prEN ISO 22477-3 for transverse load testing;
− EN ISO 22477-4 for dynamic load testing;
− EN ISO 22477-10 for rapid load testing.

Ultimate Control Tests shall be carried out when verification of limit states is to be based on the
results of pile load testing.

Ultimate Control Tests should be performed when using a pile type or installation method for which
there is no comparable experience or when piles have not previously been tested under comparable
ground or loading conditions.

Serviceability Control Tests should be carried out on working piles during the main piling works for
the purpose of verifying acceptable pile movement.

Control Tests should also be carried out when observations during pile execution indicates
conditions that deviate from the anticipated Ground Model.

Inspection Tests should be carried out to verify the integrity of all piles susceptible to installation
damage or other piles when execution procedures cannot be monitored in a reliable way.

6.9.2 Trial piles

Trial piles should be installed and tested before commencement of the piling works to confirm the
chosen pile type, its design, dimensions, resistance, and performance.

If only one trial pile is installed, it should be located in the most adverse ground conditions identified
on the project site.

Execution of the trial pile shall be performed in an identical manner to that proposed for the working
piles and shall comply with the execution standards.

In cases where it is impractical to install or construct full-size large diameter trial piles, a smaller
diameter trial pile may be installed provided that:

– the ratio of the trial pile to working pile diameter is not less than 0.5;
– the trial pile is constructed or installed in an identical manner to the proposed working piles;
– the trial pile is instrumented to allow separation of the base and shaft resistance during any test.

99
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

6.9.3 Test proof load

The test proof load shall be determined allowing for potential drag force, transverse ground force,
and temporary support load.

The proof load PP for Ultimate Control Tests shall be determined from Formula (6.23):

𝑃𝑃P ≥ 𝑅𝑅rep + 𝐷𝐷sup (6. 23)

where:
Rrep is the representative value of the pile’s ultimate resistance, estimated from previous load testing,
calculation, or comparable experience;
Dsup is the vertical temporary support force provided by the ground.

The value of Dsup should be estimated using superior (upper) ground strength and stiffness
properties.

In presence of a significant vertical temporary support force provided by the ground, the pile should
be instrumented.

When the pile ultimate resistance is unknown at the time of test, the proof load Pp may be determined
from Formula (6.24):

𝑃𝑃P ≥ 𝛾𝛾Rd ∙ 𝜉𝜉 ∙ 𝛾𝛾R ∙ 𝐹𝐹d,ULS + 𝐷𝐷add + 𝐷𝐷sup (6. 24)

where:

γRd is the model factor used in the verification of ultimate resistance;

ξ is the correlation factor (if any) used in the verification of ultimate resistance;

γR is the resistance factor to be used in the verification of ultimate resistance;

Fd,ULS is the design action at the ultimate limit state excluding any drag force or transverse force as
appropriate to the type of load test.
The test proof load PP for Serviceability Control Tests shall be determined from Formula (6.25):

𝑃𝑃P = 𝛾𝛾test ∙ 𝐹𝐹d,SLS + 𝐷𝐷add + 𝐷𝐷sup (6. 25)

where:
γtest is a partial factor;

Fd,SLS is the design action at the serviceability limit state of the quasi-permanent combination
excluding any drag force or transverse force as appropriate to the type of load test.

NOTE The value of γtest is 1.35, unless the National Annex gives a different value.

Determination of the proof load for transverse load testing should take account of the level at which
the applied load or transverse force from moving ground is to be applied and any differences in
geometry and head fixity of the test pile compared to the pile under service conditions.

100
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

6.9.4 Static load tests

Static load tests in compression should comply with EN ISO 22477-1.

The interpretation of load testing should take account of the systematic and random variations that
exist in the ground and the variability of the test pile installation and its influence when deriving the
pile’s resistance.

Separation of the base and shaft resistance components from a static compression load test may be
performed using instrumented test piles or specialist testing procedures.

In an Ultimate Control Test, the ultimate compressive resistance shall be determined as the load
corresponding to a downward plunging failure of the pile, with adjustments for temporary support
resistance.

The ultimate compressive resistance should be mathematically defined as the resistance

corresponding to infinite settlement.

Provided the Ultimate Control Test has been taken to a sufficiently high load level to mobilise a large
proportion of the base resistance, an extrapolated asymptotic value of pile compressive resistance
at infinite movement may be adopted.

As an alternative to (5) and (6), the ultimate compressive resistance may be determined as:

− the maximum applied test load; or

− the test load at a pile head settlement equal to 10 % of the pile’s base diameter.

For a tension load test, the ultimate tension resistance Rt shall be determined as the load
corresponding to pull-out failure of the pile corresponding to infinite vertical displacement.

NOTE The limiting criteria to be used is as specified by the relevant authority or where not specified, as agreed
for a specific project by the relevant parties.

Interpretation of horizontal load test results shall take account of the different deformation
mechanism between a load test carried out on a free-headed pile and the in-service behaviour where
the pile caps and sub-structure can result in significant head fixity to the pile.

NOTE 1 It is unlikely that a horizontal load test can achieve sufficient displacement to fully mobilize the
resistance of the ground to any appreciable depth.

NOTE 2 Under test conditions, the behaviour of the pile will be dominated by the strength, stiffness and
variability of the ground over the top few metres of the pile. The pile diameter due to oversized or undersized ores
and the concrete rate stiffness dependency will also affect the results.

6.9.5 Rapid load tests

Rapid load tests should comply with EN ISO 22477-10.

The compressive pile resistance Rc determined from the results of a rapid load test should be set
equal to the maximum frictional resistance, with allowance for temporary support resistance.

For rapid load tests carried out on piles installed in fine fills and soils, an additional allowance for
potential consolidation and creep should be applied.

101
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

6.9.6 Dynamic impact tests

Dynamic impact load tests should comply with EN ISO 22477-4.

The compressive pile resistance Rc determined from the results of a rapid load test should be set
equal to the maximum frictional resistance, with allowance for any drag force or temporary support
resistance.

Where Ultimate Control Tests using dynamic load test are used to confirm design by calculation or
testing, the pile’s total resistance and an estimate of its shaft and base resistances may be determined
from an analysis of test measurements using signal matching.

6.10 Reporting

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 12, pile test reports shall include full details of the pile execution
including type of pile, method of installation, size, length, material properties, and other observations
made during installation.

Pile load test reports shall comply with 6.9.4-6.9.6 and the test standards given in 6.9.1.

In addition to (2), pile load test reports shall include applied load and displacement measurements
at all stages of the test, together with results of any instrumentation or external measurements.

7 Retaining structures
7.1 Scope and field of application

This Clause shall apply to structures that retain ground, groundwater, engineered fill, and surface
water.

7.2 Basis of design

7.2.1 Design situations

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2.2 shall apply to retaining structures.

7.2.2 Geometrical properties

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.3 shall apply to retaining structures.

[Link] Ground surfaces

Values for the geometry of the retained material shall take account of any variation in actual field
values and anticipated excavation or possible scour or erosion in front of the retaining structure.

NOTE Anticipated excavation includes post-construction excavation in front of the structure, e.g. due to buried
services maintenance.

The design level of the resisting ground should be lowered below the nominal level by an amount ∆a
given by:

– for a cantilever wall, ∆a = min(0.1 H; 0.5 m), where H is wall height above excavation level;

102
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

– for a supported wall, ∆a = min(0.1 hs; 0.5 m), where hs is the distance between the lowest support
and excavation level at each construction stage.

Values of ∆a smaller than those given in (2), including ∆a = 0, may be used when the surface level is
specified to be controlled reliably throughout the relevant execution period.

Values of ∆a larger than those given in (2) should be used when the surface level is particularly
uncertain.

NOTE This can be relevant for marine structures during dredging operations or for erosion conditions.

7.2.3 Zone of influence

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to retaining structures.

7.2.4 Actions and environmental influences

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.1 shall apply to retaining structures.

[Link] Permanent and variables actions

Actions for retaining structures shall include, but are not limited to:

− stages of excavation, construction, operation, and maintenance;

− anticipated future structures or any anticipated future loading or unloading within the zone of
influence of the geotechnical structure;
− effects on waterfront structures, ice, and wave force;
− potential adverse effects of repeated surcharge loading;
− potential actions arising from temperature changes in struts or integral bridges.

NOTE Seismic actions are defined in EN 1998 (all parts)

Loads that act within the zone of influence may be considered as concentrated or uniform depending
on their nature and proximity to the retaining structure.

[Link] Cyclic and dynamic actions

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to retaining structures.

[Link] Environmental influences

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to retaining structures.

The adverse effects of temperature changes shall be considered, especially when determining the
loads in struts and props due to wall movements.

NOTE Direct sunlight effects can often be reduced by specific measures, such as coating or painting.

Measures should be taken to prevent frost heave and potential ice lenses forming in the ground
behind a retaining structure.

NOTE 1 Frost heave can occur in frost susceptible soil, especially in silt.

103
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE 2 Formation of ice lenses can occur in silt with access to free water leading to a significant volume
expansion of the soil.

NOTE 3 Possible measures include selection of suitable backfill material, drainage, or insulation.

7.2.5 Limit states

[Link] Ultimate Limit States

In addition to the limit states specified in prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1, the following ultimate limit states
shall be verified for all retaining structures:

− failure of a structural element, including the wall, anchor, rock bolt, corbel, or strut;
− failure of the connection or interface between structural elements;
− combined failure in the ground and in the structural element;
− excessive movement of the retaining structure, which may cause collapse of the structure or
nearby structures or services that rely on it (see prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1.2 (1)).

Potential ultimate limit states other than those given in (1) should be verified.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1, the following ultimate limit states shall be considered for
gravity walls and for composite retaining structures:

— bearing resistance failure of the ground below the base, taking into account eccentricity and
inclination of loads;
— failure by sliding along the base;
— failure by overturning or by toppling (see 5).

In addition to this Clause 7, ultimate limit states for gravity walls shall be verified according to Clause
5.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1, the following ultimate limit states shall be considered for
embedded retaining walls:

− failure by rotation or translation of the wall or parts thereof;

− failure by lack of vertical equilibrium.

Ultimate limit states for embedded retaining walls shall be verified according to this Clause 7.

[Link] Serviceability Limit States

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9, the following serviceability limit states shall be verified for all
retaining structures:

− movements of the retaining structure that cause damage or affect the appearance or the use of
the structure or nearby structures or services;
− unacceptable leakage through or beneath the structure;
− unacceptable change in the groundwater conditions induced by retaining structure itself.

Potential serviceability limit states other than those given in (1) should be verified.

7.2.6 Robustness

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.4 shall apply to retaining structures.

104
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

7.2.7 Ground investigation

[Link] General

prEN 1997-2:2022, 5 shall apply to retaining structures.

Investigations should include the installation of sufficient piezometers to measure groundwater

variations within each relevant geotechnical unit considering seasonal, tide and fluvial changes.

[Link] Minimum extent of field investigation

The depth and horizontal extent of the investigation shall be sufficient to determine the ground
conditions within the zone of influence of the structure according to prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link].

The depth of field investigation shall comply with prEN 1997-3:2022, [Link] for gravity retaining
structures and with prEN 1997-3:2022, [Link] for embedded retaining structures with particular
attention paid to hydraulic conditions at the bottom of the wall.

The field investigation shall determine ground conditions over the full height of the retaining wall
including any overlying fills or low strength soils.

7.2.8 Geotechnical reliability

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.2 shall apply to retaining structures.

7.3 Materials
7.3.1 Ground properties

prEN 1997-2:2022, Clause 7 to Clause 12 shall apply to retaining structures.

7.3.2 Plain and reinforced concrete

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.5 shall apply to retaining structures.

7.3.3 Steel

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.6 shall apply to retaining structures.

7.3.4 Sprayed concrete

Clause10 shall apply to retaining structures.

7.3.5 Timber

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.7 shall apply to retaining structures.

7.3.6 Masonry

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.8 shall apply to retaining structures.

7.3.7 Other structural materials

Materials other than concrete, steel, timber or masonry may be used provided they comply with a
material standard specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific
project by appropriate parties.

105
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

7.3.8 Improved ground properties

In case ground improvement techniques are used, either to form the retaining structure itself, or to
improve the adjacent ground, material properties shall comply with Clause 11.

7.4 Groundwater
7.4.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 6 shall apply to retaining structures.

Potential obstruction of natural groundwater flow caused by l embedded retaining walls shall be
considered.

Retaining walls should be designed for an accidental design situation corresponding to a water table
at the surface of the retained material unless the three following conditions are met:

− a persistent groundwater control system is installed (see Clause 12); or

− infiltration is prevented; or
− efficient piezometric control is ensured.

Unfavourable potential effects of hydraulic gradients due to dewatering shall be considered when
calculating groundwater pressures and resulting effective stresses (see 7.6.5).

7.4.2 Groundwater control systems

Clause 12 shall apply to retaining structures.

When the safety and the serviceability of the structure depends on the successful performance of a
drainage system, a Maintenance Plan shall be specified.

7.5 Geotechnical analysis

7.5.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 7 shall apply to retaining structures.

The limit states specified in 7.6 and 7.7 should be verified using one or more of the following
calculation models:

− an analytical model (including limit equilibrium model and limit analysis);

− a semi-empirical model (including earth pressure envelopes);
− a numerical model (including beam-on-spring models or continuum model).

NOTE Further details of these models are given in Annex D.

Prestressing forces exerted on the retaining structure by anchors or struts should be included in the
calculation model.

106
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

7.5.2 Determination of earth pressures

Determination of earth pressures shall take account of the expected failure mechanisms and
deformations at the limit state under consideration.

NOTE 1 The magnitudes of earth pressures and directions of resultant forces are strongly influenced by
horizontal and vertical movements of the retaining structure in relation to the ground block, which may vary with
time, successive design situations, and limit states being considered.

NOTE 2 The term “earth pressure” includes ground pressure from rock.

Total stress analysis may only be adopted if comparable experience exists.

Calculations of earth pressure and the forces resulting from them shall consider, but are not limited
to, the following:

− shear strength and weight density of the ground;

− amount and direction of the movement of the wall relative to the ground;
− surcharge on the ground surface;
− inclination of the ground surface;
− inclination of the wall to the vertical;
− wall roughness;
− rigidity of the structure and its supporting system relative to the stiffness of the ground;
− water levels and the seepage forces in the ground;
− strain and stiffness time-dependence for low-permeability fine soils;
− effect of compaction;
− horizontal and vertical equilibrium for the entire retaining structure;
− effect of initial stresses and stiffness of the ground;
− inclination of the ground strata and potential discontinuities;
− the swelling potential of the ground;
− anisotropy of the ground for mechanical and hydraulic properties;
− potential for strain ratcheting due to imposed cyclic actions.

The shear stress mobilized at the interface between the ground and the structure shall be
determined by the ground-structure interface coefficient (tan δ), where δ is the inclination of stresses
applied to the interface.

The value of the ground-structure interface coefficient (tan δ) shall comply with Formula (7.1):

δ ≤ 𝑘𝑘δ 𝜑𝜑 (7. 1)

where:

ϕ is the value of the ground’s angle of friction;

kδ is a constant depending on the roughness of the ground structure interface and local disturbance
during execution.
NOTE 1 The value of the interface coefficient depends on the relative displacement of the retaining structure in
relation to the ground block that might, in specific circumstances, reduce the inclination of earth pressure.

NOTE 2 This reduction in inclination is automatically considered when using continuum numerical models.
Explicitly introducing a value lower than the maximum is only relevant for analytical models that do not
automatically take the relative displacement into account.

107
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE 3 The assessment of reduced values of the interface coefficient in the presence of structural forces is
considered in [Link] and more guidance is given in Annex D.

In fine soils, it may be assumed that kδ = ɑ/c, where ɑ is the adhesion to the wall and c the soil’s
cohesion.

The value of kδ shall not exceed 1.0.

A value of kδ = 1,0 may be assumed for concrete cast directly against soil and for stone infill or backfill
used for crib walls and gabions.

The value of kδ should not exceed 2/3 for retaining structures formed with smooth surfaces.

NOTE This limit can also be applied conservatively to retaining structures with rough surfaces.

A value of kδ = 0 should be used for steel sheet piles walls immediately after installation into clay or
peat.

In the case of structures retaining rock masses, calculations of the earth pressures shall take account
of the effects of discontinuities in the rock mass, with particular attention to their orientation,
spacing, aperture, roughness and the mechanical characteristics of any joint filling material.

NOTE The mechanical resistance of the matrix itself can be a limiting parameter in specific materials, such as
schist.

7.5.3 Limiting values of earth pressure

Limiting values of earth pressures shall be determined considering the relative movement of the
ground and the wall at failure and the corresponding shape of the failure surface.

When using tabulated values of earth pressure coefficients or computer software based on limit
equilibrium analysis, the consistency between limiting values of earth pressure assuming straight
failure surfaces and interface parameters δ should be considered in order to avoid unsafe results
(see 7.5.5).

In cases where struts, anchors, or similar structural elements impose restraints on movement of the
retaining structure, the possibility of more adverse earth pressures than limiting active and passive
values should be considered.

7.5.4 Values of active earth pressure

For ground in an active state, the component of the total earth pressure normal to the wall face (pa)
at a depth (za) below ground surface may be determined from Formula (7.2):

𝑝𝑝a = 𝑝𝑝′a + 𝑢𝑢a ≥ 𝑝𝑝a,min (7. 2)

where:

p′a is the component at depth z of the effective active earth pressure normal to the wall face,
defined in (7.3);
ua is the groundwater pressure acting at depth z on the active side of the wall;
pa,min is the minimum value of pa.

108
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

A minimum value of pa,min > 0 should be used when very large cohesion values result in no effective
pressure being applied over a significant height of the wall.

The component of the effective active earth pressure normal to the wall face (p′a) at a depth (za)
below ground surface may be determined from Formula (7.3):

𝑝𝑝′a = 𝐾𝐾aγ � � 𝛾𝛾𝑎𝑎,𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑧𝑧a − 𝑢𝑢a � − 𝐾𝐾ac 𝑐𝑐 ′ + 𝐾𝐾aq 𝑞𝑞a (7. 3)

where, in addition to the symbols defined for Formula (7.2):

γa,av is the average weight density of the ground above depth za;
c′ is the soil’s effective cohesion;
qa is the vertical surcharge applied at the ground surface; and
Kaγ, Kac, and Kaq are active earth pressure coefficients.
NOTE Values of Kaγ, Kac, and Kaq are given in Annex D.

When using a total stress calculation of undrained behaviour (see 7.5.2), Formula (7.4) may be used
instead of (7.2) and (7.3):

𝑝𝑝a = (𝛾𝛾�a 𝑧𝑧a ) − 𝐾𝐾ac,u 𝑐𝑐u + 𝑞𝑞a ≥ 𝑝𝑝a,min (7. 4)

where, in addition to the symbols defined for Formula (7.2):

cu is the soil’s undrained shear strength;

Kac,u is an active earth pressure coefficient for undrained conditions.
NOTE Values of Kac,u are given in Annex D.

The value of pa,min shall be ≥ 0.

NOTE The value of pa,min is 10 % of the total vertical stress unless the National Annex gives different values.

A value of pa,min > ua should be used when very large cohesion values result in no pressure being
applied over a significant height of the wall.

7.5.5 Values of passive earth pressure

For ground in a passive state, the component of the total earth pressure normal to the wall face (pp)
at a depth (z) below formation level may be determined from Formula (7.5):

𝑝𝑝p = 𝑝𝑝′p + 𝑢𝑢p (7. 5)

where, in addition to the symbols defined for Formula (7.2):

p′p is the component at depth z of the effective passive earth pressure normal to the wall face, defined
in (7.6);
up is the groundwater pressure acting at depth z on the passive side of the wall.

109
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The component of the effective passive earth pressure normal to the wall face (p′p) at a depth (zp)
below formation level may be determined from Formula (7.6):

𝑝𝑝′p = 𝐾𝐾pγ �𝛾𝛾𝑝𝑝,𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑧𝑧p − 𝑢𝑢p � + 𝐾𝐾pc 𝑐𝑐 ′ + 𝐾𝐾pq 𝑞𝑞p (7. 6)

where, in addition to the symbols defined for Formula (7.5):

γp,av is the average weight density of the ground above depth zp;
qp is any permanent vertical load applied at formation level; and
Kpγ, Kpc, and Kpq are passive earth pressure coefficients.
NOTE Values of Kpγ, Kpc, and Kpq are given in Annex D.

Coefficients of passive earth pressure should be cautiously assessed for high values of the friction
angle (> 40°).

When using a total stress analysis for calculation of undrained behaviour, Formula (7.7) may be used
instead of Formula (7.5):

𝑝𝑝p = �𝛾𝛾
������𝑧𝑧
𝑝𝑝,𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 p � + 𝐾𝐾pc,u 𝑐𝑐u + 𝑞𝑞p (7. 7)

where, in addition to the symbols defined for Formula (7.5):

Kpc,u is a passive earth pressure coefficient for undrained conditions.

NOTE Values of Kpc,u are given in Annex D.

If limiting values of passive earth pressure are determined by assuming planar failure surfaces, the
ground-structure interface coefficient in Formula (7.1) should be reduced to tan δ = 0.

Only permanent loads shall be considered on the passive side of the retaining structure.

7.5.6 At-rest values of earth pressure

The earth pressure coefficient at rest K0 should be determined according prEN 1997-2:2022, 7.1.7
taking into account in addition the type of retaining structures and the conditions of installation.

NOTE Some examples of conditions that affect the earth pressure coefficient at rest include the ratio of
overconsolidation in clay, a cylindrical wall layout on plan, and the wall’s installation method.

For ground in an at-rest state, the total earth pressure (p0) at a depth (z0) below ground surface may
be determined from Formula (7.8):

𝑝𝑝0 = 𝑝𝑝′0 + 𝑢𝑢 = 𝐾𝐾0 �𝛾𝛾𝑜𝑜,𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑧𝑧𝑜𝑜 − 𝑢𝑢 + 𝑞𝑞� + 𝑢𝑢 (7. 8)

where:

p′0 is the effective at-rest earth pressure at depth z;

u is the groundwater pressure;
K0 is the at-rest earth pressure coefficient.

110
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

γο,av is the average weight density of the ground above depth z0; and
q is the vertical load applied at the surface of the ground.
NOTE Calculation models to determine K0 are given in Annex D.

7.5.7 Intermediate values of earth pressure

Intermediate values of earth pressure, between active and passive limits, shall be determined
considering the amount of wall movement and its direction relative to the ground.

The intermediate values of earth pressures acting on the wall may be determined using empirical
rules, beam on springs models, or continuum numerical models.

NOTE Guidance on suitable calculation models and determination of ground stiffness, which plays an
important part in soil structure interaction, is given in Annex D.

7.5.8 Compaction pressures

The determination of earth pressures acting behind the wall shall consider any additional pressures
generated by compacting backfill, in relation with the procedures adopted for its compaction.

NOTE Guidance for determining these additional pressures is given in Annex D.

For integral bridges, enhanced values of earth pressure shall be determined considering the total
movement of the abutment from its maximum expansion position to its maximum contraction
position, and the direction of movement being considered in conjunction with the position of the
abutment.

NOTE For a given position of the abutment, there will be a maximum and minimum potential pressure
depending on whether the abutment is moving in or out of the backfill.

7.5.9 Groundwater pressures

prEN 1997-1:2022, 6 shall apply to retaining structures.

7.6 Ultimate limit states

7.6.1 General

Effects of actions derived from ultimate limit state verifications shall be considered when checking
the structural resistance of the retaining structure and associated supports, as well as the pull-out
resistance of anchors.

[Link] Verification by the Observational Method

For all retaining structures, when verification of limit states by the Observational Method is
performed, prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.7 shall apply.

7.6.2 Overall stability

The overall stability of a retaining structure shall be verified in accordance with Clause 4.

NOTE Figure 7.1 gives examples of limit modes for overall stability of retaining structures.

111
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Figure 7.1 — Examples of limit modes for overall stability of retaining structures
If measures are necessary to ensure the overall stability of the site and the retaining structure plays
a part in those measures, then the stability of failure surfaces that intersect the retaining structure
shall be verified.

If a continuum numerical model is used for overall stability calculations, it should also be used to
verify the ultimate limit states given in [Link] (rotational resistance), 7.6.5 (stability of excavations),
and 7.6.7 (structural failure).

NOTE This does not exclude that other calculation models are additionally used when checking local failure
mechanisms.

When a numerical model is used for overall stability calculations with elastic properties for
structural elements, forces into these structural elements shall be checked according to prEN 1992
(all parts), prEN 1993 (all parts), prEN 1995 (all parts) or prEN 1996 (all parts) depending on the
nature of structural elements (concrete, steel, timber, masonry).

When a numerical model is used for overall stability calculations with elasto-plastic properties for
structural elements shall be verified according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.2 with the ultimate resistance
of structural elements defined according to prEN 1992 (all parts), prEN 1993(all parts), prEN
1995(all parts) or prEN 1996 (all parts) depending on the nature of structural elements (concrete,
steel, timber, masonry).

If the rotational resistance of a retaining structure is verified using the resistance factor approach,
with partial factors only applied to passive earth pressure (see 7.6.8), one of the following
approaches should be used for overall stability calculations:

− the effects of actions into the retaining wall are checked using a continuum numerical model;
− failure surfaces intercepting the retaining structure are checked using a limit equilibrium
method;
− the overall stability is checked by considering an additional model factor γRd.

NOTE Unless the National Annex gives different values, the value of γRd is 1.2 for persistent design situations
and sensitive structures, 1.05 for transient design situations, and 1.0 for deep failure mechanisms that have no
possibility of interfering with the retaining structure.

7.6.3 Gravity walls

Overall stability of a gravity retaining structure shall be verified according to Clause 4 and 7.6.2.

The resistance of a gravity retaining structure to bearing, sliding, overturning resistance and
toppling shall be verified according to Clause 5.

112
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

7.6.4 Embedded walls

[Link] Rotational resistance

Resistance to loss of rotational equilibrium may be verified using analytical calculation models or
continuum numerical models.

NOTE 1 Figure 7.2 gives examples of mechanisms involving failure of embedded walls.

NOTE 2 Further information about calculation models is given in Annex D.

Figure 7.2 — Examples of failure mechanisms for embedded walls

[Link] Bearing resistance

The bearing resistance of an embedded wall that is subject to significant imposed vertical forces,
shall be verified according to either Clause 5 or Clause 6, depending on its embedded length.

NOTE Significant vertical forces can be imposed on an embedded wall by inclined anchors.

It shall be verified that the shaft friction mobilized to ensure the vertical equilibrium is compatible
with the horizontal equilibrium in terms of stress inclination.

NOTE 1 Shaft friction acting downwards on the active side of the wall or upwards on the passive side
considerably change the coefficients of earth pressure in an adverse way.

NOTE 2 Guidance is provided in 7.5.1(6) and Annex D.

7.6.5 Stability of excavations

Resistance to failure by heave of the bottom of excavations due to unloading of the ground shall be
verified.

NOTE Guidance about suitable models is provided in Annex D.

113
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Resistance to basal heave during excavation in fine soils should be verified assuming undrained
ground conditions.

Resistance to basal heave should be verified assuming drained conditions when undrained
conditions are likely to be less critical, particularly in layered soils.

Resistance to basal heave in coarse soils should be verified considering hydraulic gradients in the
soil.

In the presence of hydraulic gradients, it shall be verified that limit states due uplift (see prEN 1997-
1:2022, [Link]), hydraulic heave (see prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link]), and internal erosion or piping (see
prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link]) or bottom failure mechanisms, i.e. basal heave, are not exceeded.

NOTE See Annex D for basal heave.

Measures should be taken to avoid the adverse effects of upward hydraulic gradients.

NOTE Examples of preventive measures include: deep relief wells to protect the passive zone close to
embedded walls; increased embedment; embedment down to impervious layers and grouting,.

If upward hydraulic gradients cannot be avoided in the passive zone close to the retaining structure,
passive earth resistance shall be reduced accordingly and potential failure due to soil erodibility shall
be checked.

7.6.6 Supporting elements

It shall be verified that the supporting element can resist a design force effect given by Formula (7.9
):

𝐸𝐸𝑑𝑑 = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑥𝑥(𝛾𝛾𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝐹𝐹𝑑𝑑,𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 ; 𝛾𝛾𝐹𝐹; 𝐹𝐹𝑑𝑑,𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 ) (7. 9)

where:

Fd,ULS is the design value of the action that the supporting element shall provide to prevent an ultimate
limit state;
Fd,SLS is the design value of the action that the supporting element shall provide to prevent a
serviceability limit state;
γSd is a model factor to address the concentration of lad in the supporting element and depending
on the stiffness of the retained wall and the arching effects;
γF is used to convert a SLS value to an ULS value (using DC4).
NOTE 1 The value of the model factor, γSd, is 1.0 unless the National Annex gives another value.

NOTE 2 The value of the partial factor, γF is 1.35 according to VC4 unless the National Annex gives another value.

7.6.7 Structural failure

The structural resistance of retaining structures and their component members shall be verified in
accordance with:

− prEN 1992 (all parts) for reinforced or plain concrete retaining walls;
− FprEN 1993 (all parts) for steel retaining walls;
− EN 1994 (all parts) for composite steel and concrete retaining walls;

114
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

− EN 1995 (all parts) for timber members in retaining walls;

− prEN 1996 (all parts) for masonry retaining walls.

Structural resistance shall be verified considering all geotechnical failure mechanisms that interfere
with the retaining structure.

7.6.8 Partial factors

Partial factors for the verification of retaining structures at the ultimate limit state shall be
determined according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1, using either the Material Factor Approach or the
Resistance Factor Approach

NOTE 1 The National Annex can specify which Factor Approach to use

NOTE 2 Values of the partial factors are given in Table 7.1 (NDP) for persistent and transient design situations
unless the National Annex gives different values.

NOTE 3 Additional guidelines for use of partial factors for numerical models, is given in prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.2.

If the resistance factor approach is used, the partial factor γRe should be applied to the resultant
passive earth resistance.

NOTE When using the resistance factor approach, the partial factors γR and γE can be combined into a single
factor applied to passive soil resistance.

When using the resistance factor approach, explicit verification of rotational resistance may be
omitted if the upper part of the retaining structure is supported by anchors, struts, or slabs and the
ratio between the passive earth resistance and the mobilized earth pressure in front of the wall is
greater or equal to γRe γE.

115
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 7.1 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of ground resistance against retaining
structures for fundamental (persistent and transient) design situations and accidental design
situations

Verification of Partial factor Symbol Material factor approach Resistance factor

on (MFA) – both combinations approach (RFA)
(a) and (b)
(a) (b)

Overall stability See Clause 4

Bearing resistance See Clause 5

of gravity walls

Bearing resistance See Clause 6

of embedded walls

Rotational Actions and γF and γE VC4a VC3a VC4a

resistance effects-of-
actions (EFA)d

Ground γM M1b M2b Not factored

properties

Passive earth γRe γE Not factored 1.4 γE (1.12 γE)c

resistance

Basal heave See Annex D and Clause 5

a
B
c Values in brackets are for accidental situations.
D See prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.2.

7.7 Serviceability limit states

7.7.1 General

Where relevant, the assessment of design values of earth pressures should consider initial stresses
in and the stiffness and strength of the ground and the stiffness of the structural elements.

7.7.2 Displacements

Limiting values of ground movement around retaining structures shall comply with prEN 1997-
1:2022, 4.2.5 and 9.3, considering the tolerance to displacements of supported structures and
utilities within the zone of influence.

Ground movement around retaining structures, and their effects on supported structures and
services, shall always be checked against comparable experience.

116
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Determination of ground movement around retaining structures shall consider the sequence of
work.

Vibrations caused by traffic loads or construction machinery close to the retaining wall should be
considered when estimating ground movements around retaining structures.

NOTE Guidance on traffic loads is given in prEN 1991-2.

When linear ground behaviour is assumed, the stiffness adopted for the ground and structural
materials should be defined according to the potential range of deformation and the potential stress
paths.

NOTE When linear behaviour is assumed differential movements in the zone of influence of the retaining
structure are usually under-estimated, as well as the effects of ground movements of adjacent structures.

7.8 Implementation of design

7.8.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10 shall apply to retaining structures.

The execution, and control of concrete gravity walls should comply with EN 13670.

The execution, and control of steel sheet pile walls should comply with EN 12063.

The execution, and control of diaphragm walls should comply with EN 1538.

The execution, and control of pile walls should comply with EN 1536, EN 14199, or EN 12699
depending on type of piles.

The execution, and control of steel combined walls and high modulus walls should comply with EN
12063.

The execution, and control of deep mixing and jet grouting walls should comply with EN 14679 and
EN 12716 respectively.

7.8.2 Inspection

[Link] General

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.3, the Inspection Plan should include, but is not limited to:

− verification of ground and groundwater conditions, and of the location and general layout of the
retaining structure and any adjacent settlement sensitive structure (above and below ground);
− verification of the sequence of works, and control of ground excavation levels, as well as
temporarily applied loads behind the retaining structure;
− for gravity retaining structures, verification of the quality of foundation ground, including as
necessary placement of a concrete screed or a drainage layer properly compacted.

[Link] Water flow and groundwater pressures

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.3, the Inspection Plan should include, but is not limited to,
measures to check:

117
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

− adequacy of systems to ensure control of groundwater pressures in all aquifers where excess
pressure could affect stability of slopes or base of excavation, including artesian pressures in an
aquifer beneath the excavation;
− disposal of water from dewatering systems;
− depression of groundwater table throughout entire excavation to prevent boiling or quick
conditions, piping and disturbance of formation by construction equipment;
− diversion and removal or rainfall or other surface water;
− efficient and effective operation of dewatering systems throughout the entire construction
period, considering encrusting of well screens, silting of wells or sumps;
− wear in pumps;
− clogging of pumps
− control of dewatering to avoid disturbance of adjoining structures or areas;
− observations of piezometric levels;
− effectiveness, operation and maintenance of water recharge systems, if installed; and
− effectiveness of sub-horizontal borehole drains.

In addition to (1), the Inspection Plan should include, but is not limited to, measures to check:

− groundwater flow and pressure regime;

− effects of dewatering operations on groundwater table;
− effectiveness of measures taken to control seepage inflow;
− internal erosion processes and piping;
− chemical composition of groundwater; and
− corrosion potential.

7.8.3 Monitoring

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.4, the Monitoring Plan should include, but is not limited to:

− settlements at established time intervals of adjoining structures or areas, more especially in the
case of compressible or weak quality soil layers;
− evolution of existing cracks in adjacent structures;
− piezometric or groundwater levels under buildings or behind the structure, or in adjoining areas,
especially if permanent dewatering systems are installed;
− deflection or displacement of retaining structures;
− behaviour of temporary or permanent support systems, such as anchors or struts; and
− the required degree of water tightness.

7.8.4 Maintenance

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.5 shall apply to retaining structures.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.5, for permanent retaining structures, the Maintenance Plan
should include specifications relative to maintenance of sensitive devices, including anchors, drains
and pumping wells.

7.9 Testing

prEN 1997:2022, 11 shall apply to retaining structures.

The efficiency of any dewatering system should be tested before the beginning of excavation, in
accordance with EN ISO 22282-4.

118
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

7.10 Reporting

prEN 1997-1:2022, 12 shall apply to retaining structures.

8 Anchors
8.1 Scope and field of application

This Clause shall apply to temporary and permanent anchors that transmit a tensile force from the
anchor head through a free anchor length over a resisting element to a load resisting formation of
soil or rock.

NOTE 1 This includes anchors within the scope of EN 1537 and mechanical anchors with a free anchor length
(such as screw, harpoon, and expander anchors).

NOTE 2 Figure 8.1 shows an anchor within the scope of this clause.

Key
1 free anchor length
2 fixed anchored length(e.g. the grout body)
3 tendon
4 anchor head
5 load transfer block
6 anchored structure
7 soil/rock

Figure 8.1 — Grouted anchor within the scope of Clause 8

Tension elements without a free length shall be designed according to Clause 6 or Clause 10.

NOTE 1 For tension elements without a free length such as piles and micropiles see Clause 6

NOTE 2 For tension elements without a free length such as soil nails and rock bolts see Clause 10.

Anchor walls providing fixity for dead-man anchors shall be designed according to Clause 7.

119
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

8.2 Basis of design

8.2.1 Design situations

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2.2 shall apply to anchors.

8.2.2 Geometrical properties

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.3 shall apply to anchors.

The required free anchor length shall be determined in the design of the anchored structure.

The anchor head shall be designed to tolerate angular deviations complying with EN 1537.

The anchor head shall be designed to allow the tendon to be stressed, proof-loaded, and locked-off
and (if required) released, de-stressed, and re-stressed.

The anchor head shall be designed to accommodate deformations and load variation that can occur
during the design service life of the structure.

Measures shall be taken to avoid adverse interactions between anchors that are located close to each
other.

NOTE Details are given in Annex E.

The resisting ground should be sufficiently distant from the anchored structure to avoid any adverse
interaction between the two.

The orientation of the anchor should be chosen to enable self-stressing under deformation.

If self-stressing under deformation is not possible, the adverse effects of potential failure
mechanisms shall be considered.

The orientation of the anchor should be chosen to optimize the transfer of load into the resisting
ground.

[Link] Zone of influence

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to anchors.

8.2.3 Actions and environmental influences

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.1 shall apply to anchors.

[Link] Permanent and variable actions

Design values of the anchor force and lock off load shall be obtained from the verification of limit
states for the anchored structure.

Anchor forces required to support slopes, cuttings, and embankments shall comply with Clause 4.

120
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Anchor forces required to support retaining structures shall comply with Clause 7.

For uplift design values of the anchor forces shall exceed the resistance required by prEN 1997-
1:2022, [Link].

The lock-off load shall not give rise to a limit state in the ground, in the anchored or in the supported
structures.

It shall be verified that the lock-off load is sufficient to ensure that the anchor resistance can be
restrictions without exceeding the serviceability limit state of both the anchored and adjacent
structures.

[Link] Cyclic and Dynamic actions

prEN 1997-1:2022 [Link] shall apply to anchors.

[Link] Environmental influences

prEN 1997-1:2022 [Link] shall apply to anchors.

The potential adverse effect of chemical components of ground or groundwater according to EN

1537 shall be taken into account for design for durability.

8.2.4 Limit states

[Link] Ultimate Limit States

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1, the following ultimate limit states shall be verified for all
anchors:

− structural failure of the tendon or anchor head;

− rupture at the interface between the tendon and the grout body;
− rupture at the interface between the grout body or the resisting element and the resisting ground;
− loss of anchor force by displacement of the resisting element due to creep, deformations or fall-
out of ground behind;
− limit states in anchored or adjacent structures, including those consequence of testing and pre-
stressing;
− excessive deformation of the anchored structure.

Potential ultimate limit states other than those given in (1) should be verified.

For a group of anchors, verification shall be based on the most critical failure surface.

NOTE Depending on spacing and the profile of ground strength, this can involve displacement of part of or the
whole anchored ground body, often combined with pull-out of the distant ends of the anchors.

[Link] Serviceability Limit States

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9, the following serviceability limit states shall be verified for all
anchors:

− deformation of the anchored structure;

− increase of anchor load during the design service life;

121
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

− loss of anchor force by displacement of the resisting element due to creep, deformations or fall-
out of ground behind.

Potential serviceability limit states other than those given in (1) should be verified.

8.2.5 Robustness

prEN 1997-1:2022 Clause 4.1.4 shall apply to anchors.

8.2.6 Ground investigation

[Link] General

prEN 1997-2:2022, 5 shall apply to anchors.

The zone of ground into which tensile forces are transferred should be included in ground
investigations.

The ground investigation should determine the potential influence of difficulties caused by, but not
limited to:

− potential obstructions to drilling;

− the process of borehole drilling (drillability);
− abrasivity;
− anchor borehole instability;
− flow of groundwater in or out of the borehole;
− geometrical properties of discontinuities and weakness zones in ground;
− borehole axis deviations; and
− loss of grout from the borehole.

[Link] Minimum extent of field investigation

The depth and horizontal extent of the field investigation shall be sufficient to determine the ground
conditions within the zone of influence of the structure according to prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link].

The depth and horizontal extent of the field investigation should be sufficient to ensure that:

− the Ground Model within the zone of influence of the anchors is confirmed;
− no underlying stratum will affect the anchor design;
− groundwater conditions are well defined; and
− the geometry of discontinuities and of the weak zones in the zone of influence of the anchors are
well defined.

8.2.7 Geotechnical reliability

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.2 shall apply to anchors.

Anchors shall be classified in GC2 or GC3.

8.3 Materials
8.3.1 Ground Properties

prEN 1997-2:2022, Clause 7 to 12 shall apply to anchors.

122
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

8.3.2 Steel

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.6 shall apply to anchors.

8.3.3 Grout

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.4 shall apply to anchors.

8.3.4 Other materials

If a material other than steel is used for the anchor tendon, it shall be checked independently as
specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific project by the
relevant parties.

8.4 Groundwater

prEN 1997-1:2022, 6 shall apply to anchors.

8.5 Geotechnical analysis

prEN 1997-1:2022, 7 shall apply to anchors.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 7, the geotechnical analysis shall address all limit state
verifications listed in 8.2.4.

8.6 Ultimate limit states

8.6.1 General

The design value of the ultimate limit state resistance of an anchor shall satisfy Formula (8.1).

𝐸𝐸d,ULS ≤ 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚�𝑅𝑅ad,ULS ; 𝑅𝑅td � (8. 1)

where
Ed,ULS is the design value of the effects of actions at the ultimate limit state;
Rad,ULS is the design value of an anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the ultimate limit state;
Rtd is the design value of the tensile resistance of the structural element.
Ed,ULS shall be evaluated according to 4.5.4 and 7.6.6 and prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1.3.

Ed,ULS shall include the effect of anchor lock-off load.

8.6.2 Geotechnical resistance

Anchors shall only be used if their geotechnical design and construction have been verified by:

− investigation or suitability tests; or

− comparable experience.

NOTE 1 Anchors are verified by investigation and suitability tests unless the National Annex states otherwise.

NOTE 2 Comparable experience is defined in prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link]

Acceptance tests shall be carried out on all anchors.

123
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Investigation, suitability and acceptance tests on grouted anchors should comply with EN ISO 22477-
5.

In addition to (2), the measured value of the geotechnical resistance of a grouted anchor at the
ultimate limit state shall be determined for each distinct geotechnical unit from a minimum of:

− three investigation or suitability tests, when using Test Method 1 specified in EN ISO 22477-5;
− two investigation tests and three suitability tests, when using Test Method 3 specified in EN ISO
22477-5.

For non-grouted anchor types, the minimum number of tests shall comply with (4) unless otherwise
specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific project by the
relevant parties.

The measured value of the geotechnical resistance of a grouted anchor at the ultimate limit state
(Ram,ULS) shall be obtained from the results of an anchor test using Formula (8.2):

𝑅𝑅am,ULS = min(𝑅𝑅am (𝛼𝛼ULS ); 𝑃𝑃P ) (8. 2)

where:

Ram(αULS) is the measured value of the anchor’s geotechnical resistance complying with the ultimate
limit state criterion, αULS;
PP is the proof load.
For grouted anchors, the ultimate limit state criterion αULS in Formula (8.2) shall be the creep rate:

− α1 for Test Method 1;

− α3 for Test Method 3.

NOTE 1 The values of α1 and α3 are given in Table 8.3 (NDP), unless the National Annex gives different values.

NOTE 2 The load relating to the physical pull-out resistance can be higher than the value of the load
corresponding to the creep rates given above.

The measured value of the geotechnical resistance of a non-grouted anchor at the ultimate limit state
(Ram,ULS) shall be obtained from the results of anchor test using Formula (8.3):

𝑅𝑅am,ULS = min�𝑅𝑅𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 �𝐶𝐶 ad,ULS �; 𝑃𝑃P � (8. 3)

where:

Ram(Cad,ULS) is the measured value of the anchor’s geotechnical resistance complying with the ultimate
limit state criterion, Cad,ULS;
PP is the proof load.
For non-grouted anchors, Cad,ULS should be specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified,
be agreed for a specific project by the relevant parties.

NOTE For non-grouted anchors, Cad,ULS can be given in the National Annex.

If the ultimate limit state criterion is not reached during a test, Pp shall be taken as Ram,ULS.

124
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The characteristic value of an anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the ultimate limit state Rak,ULS shall
be determined from Formula (8.4):

�𝑅𝑅am,ULS �min
𝑅𝑅ak,ULS = (8. 4)
𝜉𝜉ULS

where:

(Ram,ULS)min is the minimum value of Ram,ULS measured in a number of tests;

ξULS is a correlation factor taking into account the number of tests.
NOTE The value of ξULS is 1.0 unless the National Annex gives a different value.

The design value of an anchor’s geotechnical ultimate limit state resistance Rad,ULS shall be
determined from Formula (8.5):

𝑅𝑅ak,ULS
𝑅𝑅ad,ULS = (8. 5)
𝛾𝛾Ra,ULS

where:

Rak,ULS is the characteristic value of the anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the ultimate limit state;
γRa,ULS is a partial factor on the anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the ultimate limit state, given in
8.6.4.
8.6.3 Structural resistance

The design value of the ultimate limit state resistance of the structural elements of an anchor shall
comply with EN 1993-5 and with Formula (8.6):

𝐸𝐸d,ULS ≤ 𝑅𝑅td (8. 6)

where:

Ed,ULS is the design value of the effects of actions at ultimate limit state (see formula 8.2);
Rtd is the design value of the tensile resistance of the structural element.
The structural design of steel tendons under a proof load should comply with EN ISO 22477-5.

8.6.4 Partial factors

Partial factors for the verification of anchors at the ultimate limit state shall be determined according
to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1, using the Resistance Factor Approach in combination with either Text
Method 1 or Test Method 2.

NOTE 1 The National Annex can specify which Test Method to use.

NOTE 2 Values of γRa,ULS are given in Table 8.1 (NDP) for persistent, transient, and accidental design situation
unless the National Annex gives different values.

125
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 8.1 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of geotechnical resistance of anchors for
fundamental (persistent and transient) and addicental design situations at the ultimate limit
state
Verification of Partial factor on Symbol Resistance factor
approach (RFA)

Test Test
Method 1 Method 3

Geotechnical resistance Geotechnical resistance at the γa,ULS 1,1a,b 1,1 a

of an anchor ultimate limit state
(1,05)c (1,05)c

a See Formula (8.5)

b See Formulae (8.13) and (8.15)
c Values in brackets are for accidental design situations

8.7 Serviceability limit states

8.7.1 General

If Test Method 3 is used to determine the ultimate limit state resistance of a grouted anchor, then its
geotechnical resistance at the serviceability limit state should be verified in Suitability and
Acceptance Tests against the critical creep load Pc determined in a previous Investigation Test.

NOTE In Test Method 1, the serviceability limit state of a grouted anchor is implicitly verified by verification of
the ultimate limit state.

If Test Method 3 is used, the anchor’s design resistance (Rad,SLS) shall comply with Formula (8.7):

𝐸𝐸𝑑𝑑,SLS ≤ 𝑅𝑅ad,SLS (8. 7)

where:

Ed,SLS is the design value of the maximum anchor force, including the lock-off load, and sufficient to
prevent the serviceability limit state in the anchored structure;
Rad,SLS is the design value of the anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the serviceability limit state.
8.7.2 Geotechnical resistance

If Test Method 3 is used, the measured serviceability limit state resistance Ram,SLS of an anchor shall
be determined from a minimum of two investigation tests in each geotechnical unit.

The measured geotechnical resistance of a grouted anchor at the serviceability limit state (Ram,SLS)
shall be determined from Formula (8.8):

𝑅𝑅am,SLS = min(𝑅𝑅𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 (𝛼𝛼SLS ); 𝑃𝑃C ; 𝑃𝑃P ) (8. 8)

where:

Ram(αSLS) is the measured value of the anchor’s geotechnical resistance complying with αSLS;

126
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

αSLS Is the serviceability limit state criterion for grouted anchors, given in 8.9.2;
PC is the critical creep load Pc evaluated in Test Method 3 of EN ISO 22477-5;
PP is the proof load.
The measured geotechnical resistance of a non-grouted anchor at the serviceability limit state
(Ram,SLS) shall be determined from Formula (8.9):

𝑅𝑅am,SLS = min�𝑅𝑅𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 (𝐶𝐶 ad,SLS ); 𝑃𝑃C ; 𝑃𝑃P � (8. 9)

where:

Ram(Cad,SLS) is the measured value of the anchor’s geotechnical resistance at complying with Cad,SLS;
Cad,SLS is the serviceability limit state criterion for non-grouted anchors;
PC is the critical creep load Pc evaluated in Test Method 3 of EN ISO 22477-5;
PP is the proof load.
For non-grouted anchors, Cad,SLS should be specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified,
as agreed for a specific project by the relevant parties.

NOTE Cad,SLS can be given in the National Annex.

The characteristic value of the geotechnical resistance of an anchor at the serviceability limit state
(Rak,SLS) shall be determined from Formula (8.10):

𝑅𝑅ak,SLS = �𝑅𝑅am,SLS �min (8. 10)

where:

(Ram,SLS)min is the minimum value of Ram,SLS measured in a number of tests.

The design value of the geotechnical resistance of an anchor at the serviceability limit state (Rad,SLS)
shall be determined from Formula (8.11):

𝑅𝑅ak,SLS
𝑅𝑅ad,SLS = (8. 11)
𝛾𝛾Ra,SLS

where:

Rak,SLS is the characteristic value of the anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the serviceability limit
state;
γRa,SLS is a partial factor on the anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the serviceability limit state, given
in 8.9.
8.7.3 Partial factors

Partial factors for the verification of anchors at the serviceability limit state shall be determined
according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1, using the Resistance Factor Approach in combination with
either Text Method 1 or Test Method 3

NOTE Value of partial factors is given in Table 8.2 (NDP) unless the National Annex give different values.

127
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 8.2 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of geotechnical resistance of anchors at the
serviceability limit state
Verification Partial factor on Symbol Resistance factor approach (RFA)
of
Test Method 1 Test Method 3

Geotechnical Resistance of a permanent anchor at γRa,SLS Not used 1.2a

resistance of the serviceability limit state
an anchor
Resistance of a temporary anchor at 1.1a
the serviceability limit state

Suitability Resistance of a permanent anchor at γRa,SLS,test 1.25b

and the serviceability limit state
Acceptance
Tests Resistance of a temporary anchor at 1.15b
the serviceability limit state

a See Formula (8.11)

b See Formulae (8.13) and (8.15)

8.8 Implementation of design

8.8.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10 shall apply to anchors.

Execution of grouted anchors should comply with EN 1537.

Execution of non-grouted anchors should be as specified by the relevant authority or, where not
specified, as agreed for a specific project by the relevant parties.

In addition to (2) the specifications shall be given in the Geotechnical Design Report and in the
execution specification.

Prior to their usage, it should be demonstrated that the anchor components have the required
performance and durability as specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, as agreed
for a specific project by the relevant parties.

8.8.2 Supervision

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.2 shall apply to anchors.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.2, supervision of the installation and testing of anchors should
comply with EN 1537.

8.8.3 Inspection

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.3 shall apply to anchors.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.3, inspection of the installation and testing of anchors should
comply with EN 1537.

128
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

8.8.4 Monitoring

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.4 shall apply to anchors.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.4, monitoring of grouted anchors should comply with EN 1537.

8.8.5 Maintenance

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.5 shall apply to anchors.

8.9 Testing
8.9.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 11 shall apply to anchors.

Testing of grouted anchors should comply with one of the test methods given in EN ISO 22477-5.

NOTE 1 Test Method to be used can be specified in the National Annex.

NOTE 2 Limiting values for creep in investigation, suitability and acceptance tests are given in Table 8.3 (NDP)
unless the National Annex gives different values.

Table 8.3 — (NDP) Limiting criteria for investigation, suitability and acceptance tests at the
ultimate and serviceability states
Test Parametera Anchor Investigation Suitability test Acceptance test
method type test αULS αSLS αULS αSLS
αULS (8.12) (8.13) (8.14) (8.15)
1 α1 All 2 mm 2 mm Not used 2 mm Not used
Temporary 1,2 mm 2,5 mm
3 α3 5 mm Not used Not used
Permanent 1,0 mm 1,5 mm
a Creep rate per log cycle of time

Testing of non-grouted anchors should be carried out in accordance with EN ISO 22477-5, unless
specified otherwise by the relevant authority or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific project
by the relevant parties.

8.9.2 Grout

The compressive strength of grout used for load transfer shall be verified by testing prior to the use
of grout for anchor installation.

The testing of compressive strength of grout used for load transfer shall be conducted by two series
of tests for every 20 m3 of mixed grout.

Each series of tests shall comprise 3 samples.

8.9.3 Investigation tests

The proof load in investigation tests should be estimated from the expected geotechnical resistance
of the anchor at the ultimate limit state.

NOTE Limit values for creep at the proof load in investigation tests are given in 8.9.1

129
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Grouted anchors with tendon bond lengths spaced less than 1,5 m centre to centre should be tested
in groups of three anchors unless comparable experience has shown that the interaction has no
quantifiable adverse effects.

Anchors for investigation tests should comply with EN ISO 22477-5.

8.9.4 Suitability tests

Suitability tests shall be used to verify that specified criteria are not exceeded at a proof load, PP,
determined from Formula (8.12) for Test Method 1 or (8.13) for Test Method 3:

𝑃𝑃P ≥ 𝜉𝜉a,ULS,test ∙ 𝛾𝛾Ra,ULS ∙ 𝐸𝐸d,ULS (8. 12)

𝑃𝑃P ≥ 𝜉𝜉a,SLS,test ∙ 𝛾𝛾Ra,SLS,test ∙ 𝐸𝐸d,SLS (8. 13)

where:

Ed,ULS is the design value of the effects of actions at the ultimate limit state (see formula 8.2);
Ed,SLS is the design value of the maximum anchor force, including the lock-off load, and
sufficient to prevent the serviceability limit state in the anchored structure;
γRa,ULS is a partial factor on the anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the ultimate limit state, given
in 8.6.4;
γRa,SLS,test is a partial factor on the anchor’s geotechnical resistance in suitability and acceptance
tests at the serviceability limit state, given in 8.7.3;
ξa,ULS,test, are correlation factors, taking account of the number of suitability tests.
ξa,SLS,test
NOTE 1 The values of ξa,ULS,test and ξa,SLS,test are 1,0 unless the National Annex gives different values.

NOTE 2 Limit values for creep in suitability tests are given in 8.9.1

Unless comparable experience has shown that the interaction has no quantifiable adverse effects,
grouted anchors with tendon bond lengths spaced at less than 1,5 m centre to centre, should be
tested in groups of three anchors.

Grouted anchors for suitability tests should comply with EN ISO 22477-5.

The apparent tendon free length of a grouted anchor should comply with EN 1537.

8.9.5 Acceptance tests

Acceptance tests shall be carried out on all anchors prior to their lock off and before they become
operational.

Acceptance tests shall be used to verify that specified limiting criteria are not exceeded at the proof
load, PP, given by Formulae (8.14) for Test Method 1 or (8.15) for Test Method 3:

𝑃𝑃P = 𝛾𝛾Ra,ULS ∙ 𝐸𝐸d,ULS (8. 14)

𝑃𝑃P = 𝛾𝛾Ra,SLS,test ∙ 𝐸𝐸d,SLS (8. 15)

130
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

γRa,ULS is a partial factor on the anchor’s geotechnical resistance at the ultimate limit state, given in
8.6.4;
γRa,SLS,test is a partial factor on the anchor’s geotechnical resistance in suitability and acceptance tests
at the serviceability limit state, given in 8.7.3.
NOTE Limit values for creep in acceptance tests are given in 8.9.1

The apparent tendon free length of a grouted anchor shall comply with EN 1537.

For grouted anchors, where tendon bond lengths of a group of anchors cross at spacings less than
1,5 m (centre to centre), the pre-stress should be checked on selected anchors after completion of
the lock-off process.

8.10 Reporting

prEN 1997-1:2022, 12, shall apply to anchors.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 12, reporting for grouted anchors should comply with EN 1537
and EN ISO 22477-5.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 12, reporting for non-grouted anchors should be as specified by
the relevant authority or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific project by the relevant parties.

9 Reinforced fill structures

9.1 Scope and field of application

This Clause shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

NOTE 1 Reinforced fill structures include those in Figure 9.1.

NOTE 2 Earthwork structures without reinforcement are covered by Clause 4 embankments.

NOTE 3 Design of asphalt reinforcement of pavements, is not covered by this standard.

NOTE 4 Geotextile encased columns are covered in Clause 11.

131
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
A Reinforced wall and abutments
B Reinforced slope
C Basal reinforcement for embankments (including load transfer platforms over inclusions and voids
overbridging)
D Venner reinforcement

Figure 9.1 — Reinforced fill structures within the scope of Clause 9

9.2 Basis of design

9.2.1 Design situations

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2.2 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

9.2.2 Geometrical properties

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.3 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

[Link] Reinforcing elements

If the design of a reinforced fill structure is sensitive to deviations in the location of the reinforcing
elements or other geometrical properties, the verification of limit states shall include determination
of allowable construction tolerances.

NOTE The sensitivity depend on type of reinforcement, type of reinforcing element and applied design method.

132
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

9.2.3 Zone of influence

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

9.2.4 Actions and environmental influences

[Link] General

EN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.1 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

[Link] Permanent and variable actions

Design value of the force in the reinforcement elements shall be obtained from verification of limit
states for the reinforced structure.

The design resistance of reinforcement elements shall be sufficient to prevent the following limit
states being exceeded by the reinforced fill structure:

− failure by overall stability, determined in accordance with Clause 4.

− failure by loss of bearing capacity determined in accordance with Clause 5.
− failure by sliding determined in accordance with Clause 5.
− failure by loss of static equilibrium determined in accordance with Clause 7.

Traffic load should be included in verifications of reinforced fill structures.

NOTE Guidance on traffic load is given in prEN 1991-2:2022, Clause 6.9 and 8.10.

Seepage forces due to different groundwater levels behind and in front of a reinforced structure shall
be considered as actions, in accordance with 9.4, as appropriate.

[Link] Cyclic and dynamic actions

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

[Link] Environmental influences

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

The effects of temperature on the durability due to chemical degradation of geosynthetic reinforcing
elements shall be determined using the equivalent constant in-soil temperature, Teq.

The effects of temperature on the creep of geosynthetic reinforcing elements shall be determined
using the equivalent constant in-soil temperature, Teq.

The value of Teq may be specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, agreed for a
specific project by the relevant parties.

In the absence of a specified temperature or site-specific in-soil temperature data, the value of Teq
should be taken as either:

− a temperature midway between the average yearly air temperature and the average daily air
temperature for the hottest month at the site; or
− a temperature derived from a validated temperature-dependent kinetic degradation model
applied to site-specific in-soil temperature range and variations.

133
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Measures should be taken to avoid adverse swelling or expansion of frost susceptible soils in the
ground near the surface of reinforced structures.

NOTE Possible measures include selection of suitable backfill material, drainage, or insulation.

Chemical components of ground or groundwater that can adversely affect the durability of the
reinforcement element or the resistance at the ground/reinforcement interface shall be considered.

Temporary degradation of geosynthetic reinforcement by UV exposure shall be considered.

9.2.5 Limit states

[Link] Ultimate Limit State

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8, the following ultimate limit states shall be verified for all
reinforced fill structures:

− rupture of the reinforcing element;

− rupture of any connection between a reinforcing element and the facing of the structure or
between the reinforcing elements themselves;
− failure along slip surfaces that pass wholly or partially through the reinforced block;
− failure at the interface between the ground and the reinforcing element beyond the assumed slip
surface (pullout);
− failure by sliding between the ground and reinforcing element;
− failure by sliding between the reinforced block and its foundation;
− structural failure of any facing element;
− potential brittle failure in the reinforcing elements;
− failure of the connection between any facing elements;
− bearing failure of the foundation;
− squeezing of any weak foundation soils;
− excessive deformation in the reinforcement elements over the design life of the structure.

Potential ultimate limit states other than those given in (1) should be verified.

[Link] Serviceability Limit State

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9, the following serviceability limit states shall be verified for all
reinforced structures:

− deformations of the reinforced fill structure itself;

− differential settlement along the facing due to subsoil deformation;
− differential movement between facing and reinforcing element;
− deformation of the reinforced fill structure, which can cause serviceability limit states of nearby
structures or services that rely on it;
− bulging and deformation of the face;
− cracking or spalling of precast facing panels due to differential settlement or movement.

Potential serviceability limit states other than those given in (1) should be verified.

9.2.6 Robustness

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.4 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

134
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

9.2.7 Ground investigation

[Link] General

prEN 1997-2:2022, 5 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

Chemical properties of ground and groundwater should be determined for durability assessment of
any reinforcing elements, connections and facing elements.

[Link] Minimum extent of field investigation

The depth and horizontal extent of the field investigations shall be sufficient to determine the ground
conditions within the zone of influence in accordance with prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link]

The depth of the in-situ testing for application of reinforced fill as wall and abutments shall comply
with [Link].

The depth of the in-situ testing for application of reinforced fill as reinforced slope, basal
reinforcement and reinforced embankments shall comply with [Link].

9.2.8 Geotechnical reliability

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.2 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

9.3 Materials
9.3.1 Ground properties

prEN 1997-2:2022, Clause 7 to12 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

NOTE For classification of fill see EN 16907-2.

9.3.2 General related to durability

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.6 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

Determination of the loss of strength of reinforcing elements for fills shall, for the structures intended
design service life, take account of the long-term effects of sustained load in reinforcement (creep)
and long-term changes in fill properties.

In addition to (1) the potential damage of the reinforcement during transport, storage and
installation shall be considered.

9.3.3 Geosynthetics

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.3, geosynthetic reinforcing elements should comply with EN
13251.

The characteristic tensile strength of geosynthetic reinforcement, Tk should be determined in

accordance with EN ISO 10319.

When the strength of geosynthetic material is required for specific elongation, either total or relative
between given times, the characteristic tensile strength including the creep reduction Tk,cr shall be
determined from isochronous creep curves.

135
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE Relative elongation between given times can be related to post construction elongation or specified
design service life in voids overbridging application.

In addition to 9.3.2 (1), a reduction factor ηgs shall be applied to the tensile strength of geosynthetic
reinforcing elements to account for loss of strength.

The representative tensile resistance Rt,rep,el of a geosynthetic reinforcing element shall be

determined from Formula (9.1):

𝑅𝑅t,rep,el = ηgs 𝑇𝑇k (9. 1)

where:

Tk is the characteristic tensile strength of the reinforcing element see (2);

ηgs is a reduction factor accounting for anticipated loss of strength with time and other influences.

The reduction factor ηgs should account for the adverse effect of:

− tensile creep due to sustained static load over the design service life of the structure at the design
temperature;
− the adverse effects of mechanical damage during transportation, installation and execution;
− weathering;
− chemical and biological degradation of the reinforcing element over the design service life of the
structure at the design temperature;
− intense and repeated loading over the design service life of the structure (fatigue); and
− joints and seams for geosynthetic reinforcing elements and polymeric coated steel woven wire
mesh.

NOTE Guidance on determination of the reduction factor is given in F.8.1

9.3.4 Steel

Reinforcement in the form of strips, bars or rods, welded wire ladders and meshes shall comply with
EN 10025 (all parts), or EN 10080, as appropriate for the type of steel used.

The nominal yield strength fy for unprotected steel used in reinforced fill structures shall be not
more than 500 Mpa.

The nominal yield strength fy for protected (galvanized) steel used in reinforced fill structures shall
be not more than 600 Mpa.

NOTE Strengths of steels are limited for durability reasons and the risk of embrittlement. The susceptibility of
steel to hydrogen embrittlement and stress corrosion cracking is influenced by the microstructure of the steel as
well as the strength of the steel.

The provisions on ductility of prEN 1993-1-1:2022, 5.2.2, shall apply to all elements.

Alternative to (4), reinforcing steel manufactured to EN 10080 that complies with Class B of prEN
1992-1-1:2021 Table 5.5 may be used.

NOTE Typical steels used that meet the requirements of this document are given in Annex F9.

136
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

If a steel reinforcing element is galvanised, the hot dip galvanized coating shall comply with EN ISO
1461.

Reinforcing elements made from stainless steel or aluminium alloys shall only be used if they comply
with a standard specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, agreed for a specific
project by appropriate parties.

The design tensile resistance of steel reinforcing elements in reinforced fill structures Rtd,el shall be
determined from Formula (9.2):

𝑅𝑅𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡,𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 = 𝐴𝐴𝑟𝑟 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 (9. 2)

where:

fyd is the design yield strength of the steel:

for structural steel complying with EN 10025 (all parts), fyd = fy /γM0, where
fy is the characteristic yield strength of the steel and γM0 is a partial factor;
and
for reinforcing steel complying with EN 10080, fyd = f0.2k / γS where f0.2k is the
characteristic proof strength at 0.2 % strain of the steel and γS is a partial
factor;
Ar is the reduced gross cross-sectional area of the reinforcing element at the
weakest section, allowing for the effects of potential corrosion.
NOTE Values of γM0 and γS are given in Table 9.3 [NDP], unless different values are given in the National Annex.

The design tensile resistance of steel reinforcing elements at terminations and connections Rtd,con in
reinforced fill structures shall be determined from Formula (9.3):

𝑅𝑅t,rep,el = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚�𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡 𝐴𝐴𝑠𝑠,𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑓𝑓ud ; 𝐴𝐴r 𝑓𝑓yd � (9. 3)

where:

fud is the design tensile strength of the steel;

for structural steel complying with EN 10025 (all parts), fud = fu / γM2 where fu is
the characteristic tensile strength of the steel and γM2 is a partial factor; and
for reinforcing steel complying with EN 10080, fud = ftk / γt where ftk is the
characteristic tensile strength of the steel and γt is a partial factor
As,con is the net reduced cross-sectional area of the reinforcing element, allowing for
the effects of potential corrosion, at the termination or connection;
kt (≤ 1) is a calibration factor accounting for the influence of the termination on the
measured breaking strength of the element.
The ultimate resistance of terminations and connections shall comply with prEN 1993-1-8.

The value of kt should be determined by testing certified by a Technical Assessment Body.

In the absence of a value determined by testing, the value of kt in Formula (9.4) may be taken as:

− for sections with smooth holes (i.e. holes without notches), including holes fabricated by drilling
or water jet cutting, kt = 1,0;

137
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

− for sections with rough holes (i.e. holes with notches), including holes fabricated by punching or
flame cutting, kt = 0,9; or
− for sections with threads, kt = 0,9.

The cross-sectional area of steel reinforcing elements shall be reduced by an amount based on the
potential average loss of thickness ∆e around the exposed surface caused by corrosion in the ground,
as shown in Figure 9.2.

Figure 9.2 — Reinforced fill structures within the scope of Clause 9

For soils and fills that comply with the electro-chemical properties of Table B.1 of EN 14475:2006,
the value of ∆e shall be determined from Formula (9.4):

Δ𝑒𝑒 = 𝑘𝑘𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚(𝐴𝐴𝑇𝑇 𝑛𝑛 − 𝑒𝑒𝑧𝑧 ; 0) (9. 4)

A is the loss of metal (including zinc) per face over the first year;
T is the design service life of the structure in years;
n is an exponent accounting for reduction in corrosion rate in time;
ez is the initial local zinc coating thickness (minimum 70µm); and.
Kcc is a corrosion concentration factor, accounting for concentrated areas of corrosion and
depending on the steel manufacturing process.

NOTE 1
in Table 9.1 (NDP) unless the National Annex give a different value.

NOTE 2 Values of kcc are given in Table 9.2 (NDP), unless the National Annex give different values

138
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 9.1 — (NDP) Corrosion parameters for fill steel reinforcement

Steel A (µm) n

Land-based Fresh water Land-baseda Fresh waterb

Galvanizedc 25 40 0.65 0.60

Non-galvanized 0.80 0.75

a Land-based = without influence of groundwater or surface water
b Fresh water = installed fresh water or regularly submerged [EN 14490]
c Hot-dip galvanisation per EN ISO 1461, with a minimum local coating thickness of 70µm

Table 9.2 — (NDP) Corrosion concentration factor, kcc

Steel Strip thicknessa Bar diameter Corrosion concentration factor kccb,c

(mm) (mm)

Steel reinforcing Steel reinforcing

element with element with
uniform strength non-uniform (or
distribution unknown)
across its section strength
distribution
across its section

Galvanized 4-6 6-18 2.0 1,5

> 12 > 40 1.0 1.0
Non-galvanized 4-6 6-18 2.5 2,0
> 12 > 40 1.0 1.0
a For strips 6-12 mm thick and bars 18-40 mm in diameter, interpolate between the values given
b Some manufacturing methods result in steel properties varying across the section with higher strengths towards the outer
surface. This can affect tensile resistance disproportionally.
C Annex F.9 for examples of steels with uniform and non-uniform strength distributions.

The value of kcc may be determined by testing, provided the test data is certified by a Technical
Assessment Body and the value of kcc is not less than that given for steel with a uniform strength
distribution.

For soils and fills that do not comply with the electro-chemical properties of Table B.1 of EN
14475:2006, the value of ∆e shall be determined by tests in the specific ground conditions.

The reduced cross-sectional area of a steel reinforcing element Ar shall not be less than 50 % of its
initial cross-sectional area

139
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

9.3.5 Polymeric coated steel woven wire meshes

Reinforcement in the form of polymer coated woven wire mesh should comply with EN 10218-2, in
case of steel wire only and EN 10223-3 for the whole reinforcement product.

Polymeric coated steel woven wire meshes shall be treated with a zinc-aluminium alloy coating
(Zn95Al5 or Zn90Al10) conforming to EN 10244-2, the minimum coating unit weight shall comply
with Table 2 of EN 10244-2:2009 and further protected by:

− PVC coating conforming to EN 10245-2; or

− PE coating conforming to EN 10245-3; or
− PET coating conforming to EN 10245-4; or
− PA coating conforming to EN 10245-5.

The characteristic tensile strength of polymeric coated steel woven wire mesh reinforcement shall
be determined in accordance with EN ISO 10319.

The representative tensile resistance Rt,rep,el of a polymeric coated woven wire mesh reinforcing
element shall be determined from Formula (9.5):

𝑅𝑅t,rep,el = ηpwm 𝑇𝑇k (9. 5)

where:

Tk is the characteristic tensile strength of the reinforcing element;

ηpwm is a reduction factor accounting for anticipated loss of strength with time and other influences.

In addition to 9.3.2 (1), a reduction factor ηpwm shall be applied to the tensile strength of polymeric
coated steel woven wire meshes to account for the loss of strength.

NOTE Guidance on determination of the reduction factor is given in F.8.2

The evaluation of ηdmg shall account for the decrease of tensile strength at short term due to damage
during transportation, installation and execution.

The evaluation of ηcor shall account for the loss of protection to the metallic wires caused by
mechanical damage during execution to the polymeric and zinc-aluminium alloy coatings as well as
to the metallic wires.

NOTE The polymeric and a zinc-aluminium alloy coating have no structural function, since theirs only purpose
is to protect the metallic wires.

If the polymeric coated steel woven wire mesh is cut, the coating should be treated as damaged.

9.3.6 Other materials

Materials other than those specified in 9.3.3, 9.3.4, and 9.3.5 should only be used for reinforcement
if they comply with a standard specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, agreed for
a specific project by appropriate parties.

140
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

9.4 Groundwater
9.4.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 6, shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

9.4.2 Groundwater control system

Clause 12 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

If a groundwater control system in not provided, then the reinforced fill structure shall be designed
to withstand potential water pressures.

9.5 Geotechnical analysis

9.5.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 7 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

The external and compound stability of a reinforced fill structure, should be analysed according to
Clauses 4, 5, or 7, with the beneficial effect of reinforcing elements.

The internal stability of a reinforced fill structure shall be analysed according to the type of
reinforced fill structure.

NOTE The residual effects of compaction can be significant, when determining the design load and elongation
of the uppermost layers of reinforcement.

Horizontal and vertical deformations of a reinforced fill structure shall be analysed according to
Clauses 4, 5, or 7, as appropriate.

The compound stability of reinforced slopes, walls, and bridge abutments may be verified using a
method not given in [Link](1) provided it has been validated against comparable experience.

Verification of the compound stability of a reinforced fill structure shall include the potential
beneficial effect of any reinforcing elements.

9.5.2 Mode of failure for reinforced fill structures

[Link] Reinforced slopes, walls, and bridge abutments

The internal stability of reinforced slopes, walls, and bridge abutments should be verified using one
or more of the following methods:

− coherent gravity method;

− tie-back wedge method;
− multiple wedge method;
− slope stability methods;
− numerical methods.

NOTE Details of some of these methods are given in Annex F.3.

Other methods than those given in (1) may be used.

141
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link] Basal reinforcement for embankments

When analysing potential excessive deformation on embankment edges, resistance to extrusion shall
be verified.

Potential excessive deformation due to consolidation should be verified.

Resistance to horizontal sliding over the basal reinforcement shall be verified.

NOTE Details of these checks are given in Annex F.4.

Temporary roads and/or working platforms with basal reinforcement over low strength fine soil
shall be analysed as low height embankments.

If the height of the embankment prevents uniform distribution of concentrated loads above the
reinforcing element, local bearing resistance shall be verified according to Clause 5.

[Link] Load transfer platforms over piles and rigid inclusions

Load transfer platforms may be used over piles and discrete inclusions to allow bigger spacing and
limit differential deformation on embankment surface.

Rigid inclusions shall be designed according to Clause 11 and piles according to Clause 6.

When analysing embankment edges outside the inclusion zone, analyses according to [Link] shall
be performed.

The load distribution from an embankment through the load transfer platform should be analysed
using one or more of the following methods:

− Hewlett and Randolph method ;

− EBGEO method ;
− Concentric Arches method;
− numerical methods.

NOTE Details of these methods are given in Annex F.5.

Load transfer through a load transfer platform may be analysed using a method not given in (4)
provided it has been validated against comparable experience.

[Link] Overbridging systems in areas prone to subsidence

Overbridging systems that include reinforcing elements may be used over areas prone to subsidence
to limit differential deformation on surface.

The structure shall be designed to identify the location of any new void readily and quickly and to
ensure the void can be remediated within the specified short-term design period.

In persistent design situations, it shall be verified that the reinforcement satisfies the long-term
strain criteria required to ensure that the surface deformations remain within limiting design value
of the deformation and that the supporting ground around the void will remain stable for the design
life of the structure.

142
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Loads in reinforcing elements should be determined assuming that all of the following failure
mechanisms, depending on the ratio of the structure’s height above the void (H) to the diameter of
the void (D):

− failure of the bridging zone without lateral support, which generally applies to H/D ≤ 1;
− failure of the bridging zone with lateral support, which generally applies to H/D > 1;
− failure below developed arch in stabilised soil, which generally applies to permanent design
situations.

NOTE Details of these methods are given in Annex F.6.

Loads in reinforcing elements may be determined using a method not given in (5) provided it has
been calibrated and validated against comparable experience.

[Link] Veneer stability

It shall be verified that the resistance of reinforcing elements along the underlying slope is greater
than the load effect generated by the cover soil sliding over the weakest linear slip surface.

NOTE The reinforcement is in direct contact to the cover soil and the active soil mass.

The loads shall be determined using the plane of least frictional resistance in the veneer cover
package.

The stability of the veneer layer subject to traffic load shall be verified for a transient design situation.

The stability of the anchorage at the top of the veneer, and any intermediate anchorages down the
slope, shall be verified.

The stability of the veneer shall be verified considering the formation of a water table inside the
veneer soil.

NOTE Further details are given in Annex F.7.

9.5.3 Resistance of reinforcing elements

[Link] General

The representative tensile resistance (Rt,rep) of a reinforcing element shall be determined from
Formula (9.3):

𝑅𝑅t,rep = min�𝑅𝑅t,rep,el ; 𝑅𝑅rep,po ; 𝑅𝑅𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟,𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 ; 𝑅𝑅rep,con � (9. 6)

where:

Rt,rep,el is the representative tensile resistance strength of the reinforcing element;

Rrep,po is the representative value of the pull-out resistance mobilised along the interface between the
fill and the reinforcing element;
Rrep,ds is the representative value of the direct shear resistance;

143
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Rrep,con is the representative value of the resistance at the connection both at the point between the
facing and the reinforcing element (i.e., connection device), and the reinforcement at the
connection point.
Where the reinforcing element is assumed to carry shear loads, the shear structural resistance shall
be determined according to the relevant Eurocode for combined axial, shear, and bending actions.

Any shear resistance that is assumed in the calculation shall be limited to punching shear capacity of
the surrounding ground.

9.5.4 Pull-out resistance

[Link] General

The resistance of a reinforcing element to pull-out from the fill shall be verified both from the point
of maximum tension, or the intersection point between the reinforcement and the verified failure
line, towards non-connected ends.

The representative pull-out resistance (Rrep,po) of a reinforcing element shall be determined from
Formula (9.7):

𝐿𝐿po
𝑅𝑅rep,po = � 𝑃𝑃(𝑥𝑥) ∙ 𝜏𝜏po (𝑥𝑥) ∙ 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 (9. 7)
0

where:

P(x) is the length of the perimeter of the reinforcing element at point X;

τpo is the representative shear resistance against pull-out along the soil-reinforcement interface;
x is distance along the length of the reinforcing element;
Lpo is the total length of the reinforcing element beyond the failure surface (or line of maximum
tension) where pull-out stresses are mobilized.
NOTE Pull-out resistance can be influenced by dynamic action.

The perimeter for the reinforcing element at point x should be determined with consideration of type
of reinforcing element and the interaction between multiple layers.

If the reinforcing element is situated between two different soils the properties of the weaker should
be used for determination for the representative pull-out resistance.

NOTE Figure 9.3 gives an example of pull-out analysis of the reinforcing element embedded in the resistant
zone.

144
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
1 failure surface
Rpo pull-out resistance
τpo shear resistance against pull-out
Lpo length of the reinforcing element beyond the failure surface

Figure 9.3 — Example of pull-out analysis at the embedded end of reinforcing elements

The pull-out resistance shall be based on documented tests in comparable situations or from project-
specific tests.

The pull-out resistance from the face of the structure should be increased by any mechanical
connection resistance between facing and reinforcing element as determined according to 9.5.6.

[Link] Sheet reinforcement for fill

For sheet reinforcement (geogrids and geotextiles), the value of τpo in Formula (9.7) shall be
determined from Formula (9.8):

𝜏𝜏po (𝑥𝑥) = 𝑘𝑘po tan 𝜑𝜑rep 𝜎𝜎 ′ n (𝑥𝑥) (9. 8)

where:

ϕrep is the representative coefficient of friction of the surrounding soil;

σ′n is the normal effective stress acting on the reinforcing element at point x;
x is a variable which represents space along the length of the reinforcing element.;
kpo is a pull-out factor determined in laboratory pull-out tests in representative conditions, from
comparable experience, or from field tests.
If validated by comparable experience, cohesion may be added to Formula (9.8).

145
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link] Discrete fill reinforcement

For discrete fill reinforcement (strips and ladders), the value of τpo in Formula (9.7) shall be
determined from Formula (9.9):

𝜏𝜏po (𝑥𝑥) = 𝜇𝜇po 𝜎𝜎 ′ n (𝑥𝑥) (9. 9)

where, in addition to the symbols given for Formula (9.8):

µpo is the coefficient of interaction determined in laboratory tests in representative conditions or

from field tests.

If validated by comparable experience, cohesion or passive resistance may be added to Formula (9.9).

9.5.5 Resistance in direct shear

The representative resistance to direct shear (Rk,ds) shall be determined from Formula (9.10):

𝐿𝐿ds 𝐿𝐿ds
𝑅𝑅rep,ds = 𝐵𝐵 � 𝜏𝜏ds (𝑥𝑥) ∙ 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 = 𝐵𝐵 � 𝑓𝑓ds 𝜎𝜎 ′ n (𝑥𝑥) ∙ 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 (9. 10)
0 0

where:

B is the breadth of the reinforcing element;

τds is the resistance against direct shear along the soil-reinforcement interface;
x is distance along the length of the reinforcing element;
Lds is the total length of the reinforcing element along which direct shear stresses are mobilized;
fds is a direct shear factor determined from direct shear tests or comparable experience;
σ′n is the normal effective stress acting on the reinforcing element at the distance x.
NOTE 1 The vertical effective stress is a good approximation for the normal effective stress provided the
inclination of the reinforcing element is less than 10° from horizontal.

If validated by comparable experience, cohesion may be added to Formula (9.8).

NOTE Figure 9.4 gives an example of horizontal sliding analysis of a reinforced fill structure. The symbols are
defined in Formula (9.10).

146
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
1 failure surface

Figure 9.4 — Example of horizontal sliding analysis of a reinforced fill structure

The value of fds for geosynthetic and polymeric coated steel woven wire meshes reinforcements shall
comply with EN ISO 12957-1 for direct shear or EN ISO 12957-2 for shear along an inclined plane.

Mobilized resistance between the base of the reinforced fill structure and the subsoil, shall be
determined according to Clause 5.

9.5.6 Resistance of connections

The resistance of the connection between the facing and reinforcing element shall be determined by
testing the specific connection or by calculation.

If it is determined by calculation, the representative tensile resistance of a mechanical connection for

geosynthetics or polymer steel woven wire meshes (Rk,con) shall be determined from Formula (9.11):

𝑅𝑅rep,con = 𝜂𝜂el,con 𝑇𝑇rep (9. 11)

where:

Trep is the representative tensile strength of the reinforcing element;

ηel,con is a reduction factor accounting for anticipated loss of strength with time and from other
influences at the connection.
The reduction factor ηel,con shall be calculated from Formula (9.12) for geosynthetics or Formula
(9.13) for polymer steel woven wire meshes:

𝜂𝜂el,con = 𝜂𝜂gs 𝜂𝜂con,c (9. 12)

𝜂𝜂el,con = 𝜂𝜂pwm 𝜂𝜂con,c (9. 13)

where:

147
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

ηcon,c is a reduction factor accounting for the reduction of resistance due to the connection;
ηgs, ηpwm are reduction factors accounting for the durability of the material (see F.8.).
For steel reinforcing elements, if the determination is by calculation, Rrep,con shall comply with prEN
1993-1-8.

For connector components, Rrep,connector shall be determined according to the material constituting the
component and the relevant Eurocode.

For the strength of the facing at connection, Rrep,con,fac shall be determined according to the material
constituting the component and the relevant Eurocode.

When reinforcement is maintained by pull-out capacity between facing bloc, Rrep,con,po shall be
determined by testing.

Where the reinforcing element is assumed to carry shear loads, the shear resistance of connection
between facing and reinforcing element shall be determined according to the relevant Eurocode for
combined axial, shear, and bending actions.

9.6 Ultimate limit states

9.6.1 General

The design value of the ultimate limit state resistance of a reinforcement element shall comply with
formula (9.14)

𝐸𝐸d ≤ min(𝑅𝑅t,d,el , 𝑅𝑅d,po , 𝑅𝑅d,ds , 𝑅𝑅d,con ) (9. 14)

where:

Ed is the maximum value of the design value of the effects of actions in ultimate limit state (see
[Link]);
𝑅𝑅t,d,el is the design value of the resulting resistance of the reinforcement element;

Rd,po is the design value of interface resistance between fill and reinforcement elements at the
ultimate limit state (pullout);
𝑅𝑅d,ds is the design value of direct shear mobilised along the interface between the fill or ground and
the reinforcing element;
𝑅𝑅d,con is the design tensile resistance of a connection for geosynthetics or polymer woven wire mesh.

9.6.2 Verification by the partial factor method

[Link] Rupture of the reinforcing elements (tensile)

[Link].1 Geosynthetics

The design tensile resistance (Rt,d,el) of a geosynthetic reinforcing element shall be determined from
Formula (9.15):

𝑅𝑅t,rep,el
𝑅𝑅t,d,el = (9. 15)
𝛾𝛾Rd,re 𝛾𝛾M,re

148
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

where:

Rt,rep,el is the representative tensile resistance of the reinforcing element;

γM,re is a partial factor, given in [Link];

γRd,reis a model factor accounting for additional uncertainty owing to extrapolation of measured
strengths to the design service life.
NOTE 1 A method to determine the value of γRd,re is given in ISO TR 20432, where it has the symbol fs.

NOTE 2 The value of γRd is 1.0 unless the National Annex gives another value.

[Link].2 Polymeric coated steel woven wire mesh

The design tensile resistance (Rtd,el) of polymeric-coated woven wire mesh reinforcing element shall
be determined from Formula (9.16):

𝑅𝑅t,rep,el
𝑅𝑅td,el = (9. 16)
𝛾𝛾Rd 𝛾𝛾M,pwm

where:

Rt,rep,el is the representative tensile resistance of the reinforcing element;

γM,pwm is a partial factor, given in [Link];

γRd is a model factor accounting for additional uncertainty owing to extrapolation of measured
strengths to the design service life.
NOTE 1 A method to determine the value of γRd is given in ISO TR 20432, where it has the symbol fs.

NOTE 2 The value of γRd is 1.0 unless the national annex gives another value.

[Link] Failure at the interface between the fill and the reinforcing elements (pull-out)

The design pull-out resistance (Rd,po) of a reinforcing element shall be determined from Formula
(9.17):

𝑅𝑅rep,po
𝑅𝑅d,po = (9. 17)
𝛾𝛾R,po

where:

Rrep,po is the representative pull-out resistance of the reinforcing element;

γR,po is a partial factor, given in [Link].
[Link] Failure due to sliding in direct shear along interface

The design resistance to direct shear along the interface between the fill or ground and the reinforcing
element (Rd,ds) shall be determined from Formula (9.18):

149
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

𝑅𝑅rep,ds
𝑅𝑅d,ds = (9. 18)
𝛾𝛾R,ds

where:

Rrep,ds is the representative resistance to direct shear;

γR,ds is a partial factor, given in [Link].

[Link] Rupture of the connections

The design tensile resistance of a connection for geosynthetics or polymer woven wire meshes (Rd,con)
shall be determined from Formula (9.19):

𝑅𝑅rep,con
𝑅𝑅d,con = (9. 19)
𝛾𝛾R,con

where:

Rrep,con is the representative tensile resistance at the connection;

γR,con is a partial factor for the connection, given in [Link];
[Link] Failure of facing elements

prEN 1997-3:2022, Clause 10 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

[Link] Partial factors

Partial factors for the verification of reinforced fill structures at the ultimate limit state shall be
determined according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1, using the Resistance Factor Approach.

NOTE Values of the partial factors are given in Table 9.3 (NDP) for persistent and transient design situations
unless the National Annex gives different values.

150
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 9.3 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of resistance of reinforced fill structures
for fundamental (persistent and transient) design situations

Verification of Partial factor on Symbol Resistance factor

approach (RFA)

Overall and compound See Clause 4

stability
Bearing resistance and See Clause 5
sliding
Overturning See Clause 7
Pull-out failure of Pull-out sheet fill γR,po,gs 1.25
reinforcing elements resistance of reinforcement
discrete fill γR,po,dis 1.25
reinforcement
polymeric coated γR,po,pwm 1.25
steel wire mesh
reinforcement
Direct shear failure Resistance to direct shear γR,ds 1.25
along interface along interface for sheet fill
reinforcement
Rupture of Tensile strength geosynthetic γ M,re 1.1
reinforcing element of reinforcement
structural steel per γM0, specified in
EN 10025-2 or
EN 10025-4 prEN 1993-1-1

steel reinforcement γM2 specified in

prEN 1993-1-1
reinforcing steel γS specified in
per EN 10080 prEN 1992-1-1
polymeric coated γ M,pwm
1.25
steel wire mesh
reinforcement
Tensile strength of γR,con 1.25
polymeric coated steel wire mesh
reinforcement
Rupture of
connections between Tensile strength of
reinforcing elements polymeric coated steel woven wire 1.35
mesh connection

Geosynthetic 1.35
Rupture of Tensile strength γR,con 1.35
connections to facing

151
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

9.7 Serviceability limit states

9.7.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 9 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

9.7.2 Serviceability limit states of whole structure and it subsoil

Verification of serviceability limit state due to loading of the reinforced fill structure including
subsoil should comply with Clauses 4, 5, and 7.

It shall be verified that the deformation of the reinforced fill structure is within the limiting values
for the used facing elements.

NOTE The type of facing, if any, determines the amount of settlement that can be withstood. Guidance for
typical values for different facing types is given in EN 14475.

9.7.3 Serviceability limit states of reinforced fill structure itself

Total and differential deformation of the reinforced fill structure both vertically and horizontally
shall be in compliance with the specified limiting values.

Internal deformation of the reinforced fill structure shall comply with the specified limiting values.

9.7.4 Serviceability limit states of reinforcing element

Elongation of the reinforcing elements both in the short and long term shall be in compliance with
specified limiting values.

NOTE The serviceability limits for on post construction internal strains due to creep are usually taken as < 0.5
% for bridge abutments and < 1 % for retaining walls.

9.7.5 Serviceability limit states of facing element

prEN 1997-3:2022, Clause 10 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

9.8 Implementation of design

9.8.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

The execution and control of reinforced fill structures shall comply with EN 14475.

The execution specification shall include level of the excavation with construction tolerances.

Groundwater control measures shall be specified in accordance with Clause 12.

The execution specification shall state requirements on properties of the fill needed to fulfil the
verification of the limit states.

152
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

9.8.2 Inspection

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.3, the Inspection Plan should include, but is not limited to:

− verification of the quality of foundation ground, including as necessary placement of a concrete

screed or a drainage layer properly compacted;
− verification of excavation levels within the specified tolerances;
− verification of properly compacted fill, if used;
− verification of the type, number, and arrangement of reinforcing elements;
− verification of the quality of the assembly of parts of the reinforcing elements;
− verification of facing system alignment/reinforcement connections;
− verification of adequate performance of any drainage system installed.

9.8.3 Monitoring

[Link] General

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.4, the Monitoring Plan should include, but is not limited to:

− behaviour of temporary support systems;

− monitoring of the behaviour of reinforcement element;
− lateral and vertical displacements and distortions.

9.8.4 Maintenance

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.5 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

9.9 Testing

prEN 1997-1:2022, 11 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

9.9.1 Interface strength

The determination of interface shear strength between fill and geosynthetic or polymeric coated
steel woven wire mesh reinforcement in the laboratory should comply with EN ISO 12957 (all parts)
with respect to the position of the reinforcing element in the reinforced structure.

The determination of pull-out resistance of geosynthetic or polymeric coated steel woven wire mesh
reinforcement from soil in the laboratory shall comply with EN 13738.

9.9.2 Connection strength

The determination of the tensile strength at connections between reinforcing elements and facing
elements shall be tested with appropriate standards, considering the type of connection

9.10 Reporting

prEN 1997-1:2022, 12 shall apply to reinforced fill structures.

153
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

10 Ground reinforcing elements

10.1 Scope and field of application

This clause shall apply to ground reinforcing elements that provide resistance to prevent a limit state
of the geotechnical structure being exceeded.

NOTE 1 Ground reinforcing element include rock bolts; rock anchors; soil nails; sprayed concrete; wire mesh,
and facing elements.

NOTE 2 See Clause 8 for anchors that retain a structure fixed into soil or rock..

NOTE 3 Other stand-alone nets and safety nets than wire meshes, snow fences or avalanche protections are not
covered by this clause.

NOTE 4 Reinforcing elements in underground openings are not covered by this clause.

This Clause shall apply to the verification of ultimate limit states, serviceability limit states, durability
and robustness of the ground reinforcing elements themselves.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, Clauses 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9 of this document apply, as appropriate for
the geotechnical structure being designed.

10.2 Basis of design

10.2.1 Design situations

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2.2 design situations for ground reinforcing elements shall
include but are not limited to:

− temporary or permanent nature of the reinforcing element or structure;

− method and sequence of excavation and drilling;
− location of discontinuities, weathered zones and other interfaces relevant for the design of the
reinforcing element;
− chemical components of ground or groundwater that can adversely affect the durability of the
reinforcing element and the resistance at the grout/ground interface;
− potential brittle failure of the reinforced structure;
− effect of corrosion.

10.2.2 Geometrical properties

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.3 shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

Accessibility of drilling and installation equipment shall be taken into account in determining the
geometrical properties of the reinforcing element.

10.2.3 Zone of Influence

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

10.2.4 Actions and environmental influences

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.1 shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

154
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link] Permanent and variable actions

The design resistance of reinforcing elements shall be sufficient to prevent the following limit states
being exceeded by the reinforced structure:

− failure by overall or local stability determined in accordance with Clause 4;

− failure by loss of bearing resistance determined in accordance with Clause5;
− failure by sliding determined in accordance with Clause 5;
− failure by loss of equilibrium determined in accordance with Clause7.

[Link] Cyclic and dynamic actions

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

[Link] Environmental influences

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

Chemical components of ground or groundwater that can adversely affect the durability of the
reinforcing element or the resistance at the ground/grout interface shall be accounted for in the
verification of durability.

10.2.5 Limit states

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8, the following ultimate limit states shall be verified:

− rupture of the reinforcing element;

− failure at the interface between the ground and the reinforcing element (pull-out);
− rupture of the connection between reinforcing elements or to facing;
− failure by loss of bearing-resistance in the ground below reinforcing element (punching)
− loss of force or resistance by displacement of the resisting element due to creep;
− loss of force or resistance by deformations or fall-out of ground behind.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9, the following serviceability limit states shall be verified:

− Ground movement aspect;

− elongation of the reinforcing element;
− bulging and deformation of any facing element;
− deformation adversely affecting the function, comfort or appearance;
− Structural aspects;
− deformation causing damage to structure;
− cracking or spalling of any precast facing panels, blocks or sprayed concrete;
− Hydraulic aspect;
− Environmental effects.

Potential limit states other than those given in (1) and (2) should be verified.

If the ground reinforcing structure consist of multiple types of elements, the resistance of each
element type and the combined reinforcing resistance shall be verified.

In addition to (2) and (3), the verification of the limit states shall prevent a potential brittle failure of
the reinforced structure.

155
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

10.2.6 Robustness

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2.2, the appropriate sub-clauses on robustness in Clauses 4, 5, 6,

7 and 9 shall apply to the geotechnical structures being designed.

Specification of measures to enhance robustness of a reinforced structure with rock should include;

− installation of rock bolts and rock anchors prior to blasting, to avoid creation of adversely
orientated fractures, opening or enlarging existing discontinuities;
− installation of rock bolts and rock anchors before excavation, if anticipated adversely orientated
discontinuities cannot be foreseen by any means before excavation.

A progressive failure of the structure due to the collapse of a single reinforcement element shall be
prevented.

10.2.7 Ground investigation

prEN 1997-2:2022, 5 shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

The ground investigation should determine potential obstacles for the execution and performance
of the ground reinforcement element during the design service life, including, but not limited to:

− obstruction to drilling;
− the drillability of the ground;
− abrasivity;
− borehole stability;
− potential flow of groundwater in or out of a borehole;
− geometrical properties of discontinuities and weakness zones;
− resistance capacity or lack of it of the resisting ground;
− adhesion at interface surfaces;
− borehole axis deviations; and
− potential loss of grout from the borehole.

10.2.8 Geotechnical reliability

prEN 1997-1:2022,[Link] shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

10.3 Materials
10.3.1 Ground

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.1 and EN 1997-2 shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

10.3.2 Steel

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.6 shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

10.3.3 Grout

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.4 shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

10.3.4 Cast and sprayed concrete

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.5 shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

156
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

10.3.5 Steel fibres

Steel fibres in sprayed concrete should comply with EN 14487-1.

Fibres of other materials in sprayed concrete may be used.

If other material than steel fibres are used, 10.3.8 shall apply.

10.3.6 Coatings

For steel reinforcing elements, the hot dip galvanized coating to steel should comply with EN ISO
1461.

For a zinc-aluminium alloy coated steel welded wire meshes the coating should comply with EN
10244-2.

Epoxy coating should comply with EN 13438.

Polymeric coated steel should comply with EN 10245 (all parts).

10.3.7 Concrete panels and other facing elements

The properties of concrete facing panels should comply with prEN 1992-1-1.

The properties of precast products should comply with EN 15258.

The properties of concrete facing blocks should comply with EN 771-3.

Facing elements made of the same material as the reinforcing elements for fill applications shall
comply with the corresponding standard, defined in 9.3.

Facing elements of steel, masonry, or timber shall comply with prEN 1993-1-1, prEN 1996-1-1, and
EN 1995-1-1, respectively.

10.3.8 Other materials

Materials other than steel, grout, concrete, steel fibres, coatings, shall only be used for reinforcing
elements if they comply with a standard specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified,
as agreed for a specific project by appropriate parties.

10.3.9 Durability

prEN 1997-1:202, 4.1.6 shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

NOTE 1 For steel element see EN 1993-5:2007, 6.

NOTE 2 For steel soil nails see EN 14490, instead of EN 1993-5:2007, 6.

The design service life for steel reinforcing shall be achieved by using one or more of the following
measures:

− use of additional steel thickness as corrosion allowance (see EN 1993-5:2007, 6.4);

− grout, mortar or concrete protection;
− grouted duct;
− protective surface coating;

157
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

− appropriate steel material (see EN 1993-5:2007, 6.1);

− greased nail head constructions.

Galvanic steel corrosion of different connecting elements shall be prevented.

Where the corrosion protection is provided by sacrificial thickness allowance, ground-specific loss
of steel thickness (∆e) should be determined.

NOTE Values of ∆e/2 for black steel elements without any corrosion protection measures for different service
lives are given in EN 1993-5:2007, Tables 6.1 and 6.2.

For soil nails corrosion protection provided by grout cover (with or without duct), surface coating,
or use of stainless steel should comply with EN 14490.

For other steel elements corrosion protection provided by grout or cement cover, surface doating or
use for stainless steel may comply with EN 14490.

The selection of an appropriate system of measures for durability should consider:

− the feasibility for inspection and maintenance;

− variation of corrosion along the nail/bolt due to variation in ground conditions;
− local corrosion at connections.

10.4 Groundwater

prEN 1997-1:2022, 6 shall apply to ground reinforcing elements.

NOTE For groundwater control measures, see Clause 12.

10.5 Rock bolts and rock anchors

10.5.1 Geotechnical analyses

[Link] General

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 7, the geotechnical analyses shall address all relevant limit state
verifications listed in 10.2.4.

Rock bolts and rock anchors to reinforce rock mass shall be verified.

Rock anchors reinforcing rock mass may be designed and verified according to Clause 8 or 10.

NOTE A rock anchor, anchors rock into deeper rock to reinforce the rock mass by enhancing shear resistance
of possible slip surfaces, such as discontinuities, weakness and weathered zones, by increasing the normal loads as
a result of pre-stressing.

[Link] Resistance

The design should include, but is not limited to:

− type of element;
− connection to an external structure (or absence of it);
− grouting (or absence of it);
− use of an additional bearing plate (or absence of it);
− effects of corrosion and corrosion protection needs; and

158
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

− type of loading.

The installation direction shall be determined in relation to the geometrical properties of the
discontinuities and weathered zones and to the direction of the action forcing upon it.

The length, spacing, type and diameter shall be determined by the structure’s geometrical properties,
rock quality and the depth of discontinuities, weakness or weathered zones causing possible failure.

Rock anchors shall be prestressed.

For rock bolts tension may be applied.

NOTE Tensioning avoids superficial loosening and is usually between 25 and 50 kN.

In case of tensioning or pre-stressing, its influence both on the tendon elements and on the ground
shall be addressed.

[Link] Resistance at the interface of the rock bolt (pullout)

The minimum total length of a rock bolt shall include a sufficient length in the rock beyond potential
failure surfaces.

The length shall be sufficient to avoid pull-out of the interface between the bolt and the surrounding
grout or rock and/or failure at the interface between the grout and the rock.

The representative pull-out resistance (Rrep,po) should be determined from Formula (10.1)

𝑅𝑅rep,po = 𝑃𝑃 ∙ 𝜏𝜏po ∙ 𝐿𝐿𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 (10. 1)

where:

P is the representative perimeter of the interface area, either drilled hole or the rock bolt/anchor;

τpo is the representative interface shear resistance against pull-out along the bolt-grout, bolt-rock or
grout-rock interface;
Lpo is the representative length of the element beyond potential failure surfaces, where pull-out
stresses are mobilised.
10.5.2 Ultimate limit states

[Link] Verification by partial factor method

Partial factors for the verification of rock bolts and rock anchors at the ultimate limit state shall be
determined according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1, using the Resistance Factor Approach.

The design tensile resistance (Rtd,el) of steel shall comply with prEN 1993-1-1:2022, 8.

The design shear resistance (Rsd,el) of steel shall comply with prEN 1993-1-1:2022, 8.

For rock bolts loaded in tension and shear the angle between loading action direction and the angle
of rock bolt installation shall be considered.

The design pull-out resistance (Rd,po) shall be determined from Formula (10.2).

159
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

𝑅𝑅rep,po
𝑅𝑅d,po = (10. 2)
𝛾𝛾R,po

where:

Rrep,po is the representative pull-out resistance;

γR,po is a partial factor, given in Table 10.1.

NOTE Values of the partial factors are given in 10.1 (NDP) for persistent and transient design situations, unless
the National Annex gives different values.

Table 10.1 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of resistance of rock bolts for persistent
and transient design situations
Verification of Partial factor on Symbol Resistance
Factor Approach
(RFA)

Structural resistance of reinforcing element Steel See prEN 1993-1

and any connections.

Geotechnical resistance, mobilised at the Pullout γR,po 1,5

interface between rock bolt, grout and/or rock.

[Link] Verification by prescriptive rules

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.5 shall apply to rock bolts and rock anchors.

Prescriptive rules may be used to verify rock bolts for transient design situations and for structures
belonging to GC1 and GC2, provided there is comparable experience with the rock bolt type and
ground conditions.

If prescriptive rules are used for verification, the inspection plan shall include quality measures to
ensure that the installed bolts fulfil the limitations specified for the prescriptive rule.

[Link] Verification by testing

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.6 shall apply to rock bolts and rock anchors.

NOTE For testing see 10.5.5.

[Link] Verification by Observational Method

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.7 shall apply to rock bolts and rock anchors.

The rock bolt and rock anchor spacing, length and diameter shall be determined by the rock quality
or weakness or weathered zone causing potential failure.

10.5.3 Serviceability limit state

prEN 1997-1:2022, 9 shall apply to rock bolts and rock anchors.

160
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

10.5.4 Implementation of design

prEN 1997-1:2022, Clause 10 shall apply to rock bolts and rock anchors.

Ground conditions shall be inspected at site by geotechnical mapping.

Grouted rock bolts without bearing plates shall be grouted over their full length of the rock bolt.

Grouted rock bolts should be installed in groundwater-controlled rock conditions.

If groundwater-controlled rock conditions cannot be achieved, additional measures should be used.

10.5.5 Testing

prEN 1997-1:2022, Clause 11 shall apply to rock bolts and rock anchors.

Acceptance tests, investigation tests and visual inspection of grouting shall be used to confirm an
adequate installation and to control the quality of the grout.

The required number of acceptance test shall de defined depending on the type, size, Geotechnical
Category, and condition of the structure to be supported.

NOTE 1 The minimum number of investigation test, acceptance tests and visual inspection is given in Table 10.2
(NDP), unless the national annex give different values.

NOTE 2 Investigation tests are considered as sacrificial bolt/anchor test.

NOTE 3 An investigation test is e.g. core drilling of the grouted bolt on its full length.

NOTE 4 Acceptance tests are considered as production tests.

Table 10.2 — (NDP) Minimum number of investigation and acceptance tests, and visual
inspection of grouting for rock bolts and rock anchors.

Geotechnical Investigation tests Investigation tests Visual inspection of

Category grouting

GC2 minimum of 3 minimum 1 %, with a Minimum 75 % of the

minimum of 3. grouted bolts/anchors.
GC3 minimum of 5 minimum 2 %, with a Minimum 100 % of the
minimum of 5. grouted bolts/anchors.

Acceptance test should be performed on the installed elements included in the final structure.

Rock bolts subjected to investigations tests shall be replaced by new bolts.

For acceptance test on the grout should comply with EN 12390-2.

Non-destructive in situ testing, such as acoustic or ultrasonic testing, should be used to confirm an
adequate installation of the rock bolt and to control the quality of the grout.

NOTE The tests are e.g. boltometer tests and RBT (Rock Bolt Tester) tests.

161
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

In alternative to (6) non-destructive in situ testing may be used, if specified by the relevant authority
or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific project by the relevant parties.

The acceptance criterion for grouted rock bolts shall be the verification of 10.5.4 (3).

If other acceptance criteria are used, these should be established by the relevant authority or, where
not specified, as agreed for a specific project by the relevant parties.

10.6 Soil Nails

10.6.1 Geotechnical analyses

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 7 shall apply to soil nails.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 7, the geotechnical analysis shall address all limit state
verifications listed in 10.2.4.

Horizontal and vertical displacement of a structure reinforced with soil nail should be analysed
according to 4, 5, or 7.

[Link] Resistance at the interface of the soil nail (pull-out)

The resistance of a soil nail due to pull-out from the ground shall be verified for both the part of the
soil nail in front and behind the potential critical failure surface.

NOTE Figure 10.1 gives an illustration of a soil nailed wall/cutting.

Key
1 Total length
2 Active zone
3 Passive zone
4 Connection to facing
5 Stability between nails and facing
6 Long nails may have joints and couplings

Figure 10.1 — Example of a wall/cutting reinforced with soil nails.

162
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The representative pull-out resistance (Rrep,po) of a soil nail shall be determined from Formula (10.3)

𝑅𝑅rep,po = 𝑃𝑃 ∙ 𝜏𝜏po ∙ 𝐿𝐿𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 (10. 3)

where:

P is the representative perimeter of the failure surface enclosing the soil nail per unit length, where
pull-out resistance is mobilised;
τpo is the representative interface shear resistance against pull-out along the ground-soil nail
interface;
Lpo is the total length of the soil nail in the zone, where pull-out resistance are mobilised.
NOTE Pull-out resistance can be influenced by dynamic actions.

For cases with large variations along the soil nail, of either the normal stress acting on the soil nail
or the ground conditions, Formula (10.3) should be replaced with an integral of the shear resistance
over the considered length.

Representative value of pull-out resistance between core and grouted body shall be determined
according to prEN 1992 (all parts).

NOTE The failure between core and grouted body can be neglected for soil nails that has been enhanced and
verified to avoid this failure mode.

The perimeter of the soil nail, P, should be determined as a nominal value with consideration of nail
type and ground properties.

NOTE For soil nails that is not circular e.g. L-shape or grouted soil nails, the perimeter is estimated based on
assumed shape of the failure surface enclosing the soil nail.

The perimeter of a grouted soil nail may be determined as a nominal value of the perimeter of the
drilled hole for installation.

Comparable experience shall be used to determine the representative value of the interface shear
resistance, τpo, with consideration of reinforcing type, installation method and ground conditions.

The interface shear resistance shall be confirmed by project-specific investigation tests, before or
during execution, see [Link].

NOTE Investigation test is used to confirm the ultimate interface friction in the passive zone, active zone or the
entire length of the nail.

As alternative to (8), for GC1 and GC2, prescriptive rules regarding values of interface shear
resistance for different ground conditions and soil nail types may be specified by the relevant
authority or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific project by the relevant parties.

An adequate installation and satisfactory performance of the production soil nails at the proof load
shall be demonstrated by acceptance tests, see [Link].

The representative pull-out resistance from the active zone (Figure 10.1 ) may be increased by any
resistance at the connection to the facing determined according to Formula (10.7).

163
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

10.6.2 Ultimate limit state

[Link] General

The design value of the ultimate limit state resistance of a soil nail (𝑅𝑅d,SN ) shall along its entire length
satisfy Formula (10.4) and Formula (10.5)

𝐸𝐸d ≤ 𝑅𝑅d,SN (10. 4)

𝑅𝑅d,SN = min(𝑅𝑅𝑑𝑑,𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 , 𝑅𝑅𝑑𝑑,𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 , 𝑅𝑅𝑑𝑑,𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ) (10. 5)

where:

Ed is the maximum value of the design value of the effects of actions (see [Link]);
Rd,po is the design value of a soil nails interface resistance (pull-out);
Rd,el is the design value of the resulting resistance of the core of the soil nail and any joints/couplings
that is part of it;
Rtd,con is the design value of the resulting resistance of the joints/couplings of different sections/parts
of one soil nail or the connection to the facing.
[Link] Verification by partial factor method

[Link].1 General

Partial factors for the verification of soil nails at the ultimate limit state shall be determined
according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1, using the Resistance Factor Approach

[Link].2 Failure at the interface between the ground and the soil nail (pull-out)

The design pull-out resistance (Rd,po) of a soil nail shall be determined from Formula (10.6).

𝑅𝑅rep,po
𝑅𝑅d,po = (10. 6)
𝛾𝛾R,po

where:

Rrep,po is the representative pull-out resistance of the reinforcing element;

γR,po is a partial factor, given in Table 10.3(NDP)

The representative pull-out resistance shall be determined from investigation tests or by

comparable experience.

NOTE The criteria to determine the pull-out resistance are given in [Link].

The design pull-out resistance shall be verified by acceptance tests according to [Link].

NOTE The minimum number of investigation and acceptance test is given in Table 10.2 (NDP), unless the
national annex gives different values.

164
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 10.2 — (NDP) Minimum number of investigation and acceptance tests for soil nails

Geotechnical Category Investigation tests Acceptance tests

GC2 Minimum 1 test per distinct Minimum 2 % of the production

geotechnical unit, with a total of nails, with a minimum of 3 nails.
minimum 3 test per site.
GC3 Minimum 2 test per distinct Minimum 3 % of the production
geotechnical unit, with a total of nails, with a minimum of 5 nails.
minimum 5 test per site.

[Link].3 Rupture of the soil nail (tensile and shear)

The design tensile resistance (Rtd,el) of steel soil nails shall comply with prEN 1993-1-1:2022, 8,
considering any anticipated loss of strength with time.

The design shear resistance (Rsd,el) of steel soil nails shall comply with prEN 1993-1-1:2022, 8,
considering any anticipated loss of strength with time.

If it can be proven, with comparable experience, that the contribution from the shear resistance of
the nail to the total resistance of the soil nail is significant, the shear resistance may be added as
contribution.

Where the corrosion protection is provided by sacrificial thickness allowance, the reduced cross-
sectional area shall be determined from [Link].

When the design includes shear and bending effects of the soil nail, the structural resulting resistance
shall be determined according to the prEN 1993-1-1:2022, 8.2.10 for combined axial, shear, and
bending actions.

[Link].4 Tensile resistance of connections, joints and couplings

The design tensile resistance of a connection, joint or coupling (Rd,con) shall be verified for the same
design load as the soil nail itself.

For steel soil nails, Rd,con shall comply with prEN 1993-1-1:2022, 8.

[Link].5 Partial factor

The ultimate geotechnical resistance of a reinforcing element should be verified using a factor γR,po on
resistance according to Formula (10.6).

NOTE Values of the partial factors are given in Table 10.3(NDP) for persistent and transient design situations
unless the National Annex gives different values.

165
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 10.3 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of resistance of soil nails for persistent
and transient design situations

Verification of Partial factor on Symbol Resistance Factor

Approach (RFA)

Structural resistance of reinforcing Steel See EN 1993-1-1

element and any connections.
Geotechnical resistance, mobilised at Pull-out γR,po 1,5
the interface between soil nail and
ground

[Link] Verification by prescriptive rules

Prescriptive rules may be used to verify soil nails for transient design situations, provided there is
comparable experience with the soil nail type in the specific ground conditions.

If prescriptive rules are used for verification, the Inspection plan shall include quality measures to
ensure that the installed soil nails fulfil the limitations specified for the prescriptive rules.

If the inspection in (2) gives that the soil nail is not complying with the limitations specified, testing
according to 10.6.5 shall be performed to confirm the design.

10.6.3 Serviceability limit state

prEN 1997-1:2022, 9 shall apply to soil nails.

10.6.4 Implementation of design

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10, EN 14490 shall apply to soil nails.

10.6.5 Testing

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022,11 shall apply to soil nails.

[Link] Pull-out resistance

Testing of soil nails should comply with EN 14490:2010, Annex C.

NOTE 1 Investigation tests are in EN 14490 referred to as sacrificial nail test.

NOTE 2 Acceptance tests are in EN 14490 referred to as production nail test.

NOTE 3 Limiting values for acceptance criteria in investigation and acceptance tests are given in Table
10.4(NDP), unless the National Annex gives different values.

166
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 10.4 — (NDP) Acceptance criterion for investigation and acceptance test of Soil nails.

Acceptance criteria Investigation test Acceptance test

Creep rate a at maximum proof load, Pp 2 mm 2 mm

Maximum measured extension of the < the elastic extension of Ldbb < the elastic extension of
head of the test nail at the proof load, Pp Ldb
a The creep rate is defined as (s2-s1)/log(t2/t1), where s1 and s2 are the measured nail displacement at time 1 and time 2
respectively. [time 2 > time 1]
b Ldb is the debonded length of the test nail, or if no specific part is debonded the elastic extension calculated as the
theoretical extension of any debonded length of the test nail.
The proof load for acceptance tests, Pp shall be equal to the design value of the effect of actions Ed
(see Formula (10.4)).

The design pull-out resistance has been verified with the acceptance test when the specified creep
rate in Table 10.4 (NDP) is not exceeded at the value of Pp.

For investigation tests the target proof load, Pp, should be estimated from the expected representative
pull-out resistance (see Formula (10.3.))

The representative pull-out resistance is determined as maximum test load in the investigation test,
where the creep rate does not exceed the acceptance criterion.

NOTE Values of the acceptance criterion for different tests are given in Table 10.4 (NDP).

The acceptance criteria of the creep rate may be adjusted to a smaller value in the design.

The test nails should be evenly distributed throughout the structure.

Investigation test should be performed for the part of the soil nail, which has to provide the design
pull-out resistance.

Acceptance test may be performed on the production nails full length, without debonding a specific
test part of the nail.

[Link] Face stability test

If the execution involves excavation, the face stability should be tested in accordance with EN 14490.

If the stability of the face can be verified by comparable experience, the face stability test may be
omitted.

10.7 Wire mesh

10.7.1 Geotechnical analyses

[Link] General

Wire mesh solutions may be used, to support loosened rock, spalling rock or rock blocks.

Wire mesh solutions may be used to support soil or fill in combination with geotextile or other
additional layers.

167
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Wire mesh solutions may be reinforced with steel ropes, if the mesh otherwise exceeds a limit state.

[Link] Rupture of wires

Wire mesh shall be designed to be connected to the ground appropriately, that its connection
element extends into firm ground beyond any discontinuity or weathered zone.

The capacity of the wires, ropes and connection of the wires in the wire mesh shall be verified.

The allowance of any small rock piece or crumb to fall through the mesh opening shall be defined to
dimension the type of mesh or meshes and size of mesh opening.

[Link] Rupture of connections

The design resistance of a connection (Rd,con) shall be verified for at least the same as the design
resistance of the wire mesh itself.

If the wire mesh is connected to bolts or nails, the connection resistance of the wire mesh to the
bearing plates shall be verified.

If the wire mesh is connected to bolts or nails, the size of bearing plates shall be appropriately sized
with respect to the size of the mesh opening.

If the wire mesh is connected to or embedded in sprayed concrete, the wire mesh verification shall
comply with the verification of the sprayed concrete.

10.7.2 Ultimate limit state

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2 shall apply to wire mesh.

The characteristic tensile strength of polymeric coated steel woven wire mesh reinforcing should be
determined in accordance with EN ISO 10319.

[Link] Verification by partial factor method

Partial factors for the verification of wire mesh at the ultimate limit state shall be determined
according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1, using the Resistance Factor Approach.

The design tensile resistance (Rtd,el) of steel of the wires shall comply with prEN 1993-1-1:2022, 8.

The design connection resistance (Rd,con) of a wire mesh shall be determined from Formula (10.7)

𝑅𝑅rep,con
𝑅𝑅d,con = (10. 7)
𝛾𝛾R,con

where:

Rrep,con is the representative connection resistance of the wire mesh to its connection element;
γR,con is a partial factor, given in Table 10.5 (NDP).
NOTE Values of the partial factors are given in Table 10.5 (NDP) for persistent and transient design situations
unless the National Annex gives a different value.

168
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 10.5 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of resistance of wire meshes for
persistent and transient design situations

Verification of Partial Symbol Value of partial

factor on factors

Structural resistance of steel wires. Steel See prEN 1993-1-1

Geotechnical resistance Connection γR,con 1,5

Connection wire mesh and its connection element.

[Link] Verification by prescriptive rules

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.5 shall apply to wire mesh.

Prescriptive measures may be used to verify wire mesh for transient design situations and for
structures belonging to GC1 and GC2, provided there is comparable experience with the wire mesh
interaction with the ground conditions.

If prescriptive rules are used for verification, the Inspection plan shall include quality measures to
ensure that the installed wire meshes fulfil the limitations specified for the prescriptive rule.

[Link] Verification by testing

NOTE See prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.6 shall apply to wire mesh.

When wire mesh is to be verified by testing also its connection should be tested.

[Link] Verification by Observational Method

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.7 shall apply to wire mesh.

The extent and locations of the wire meshes to be installed in relation to the observed conditions at
site should be part of the verification by the Observational Method.

10.7.3 Serviceability limit state

If project specific serviceability criterion is specified, the limit states of deformation and excessive
deformation should be verified.

10.7.4 Implementation of design during

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10 shall apply to wire mesh.

Ground conditions shall be inspected at site by geotechnical mapping.

For structures belonging to GC2 or GC3 loosened rock hanging on to the wire mesh should be
checked.

If the wire mesh is connected to bolts or nails, the bearing plates shall be visually inspected to see if
they are fully connected to the mesh and ground surface.

If the wire mesh is not fully connected, further inspection, assessment and measures shall be
designed and implemented.

169
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

If the wire mesh is embedded in sprayed concrete, it shall be checked that the wire mesh is fully
covered by sprayed concrete on both sides of the mesh.

10.7.5 Testing

Testing shall comply with prEN 1997-1:2022, 11, and with the appropriate sub-clause in this
standard for the involved geotechnical structure.

10.8 Sprayed concrete

10.8.1 Geotechnical analyses

The thickness, the resistance class and the reinforcement of the sprayed concrete shall be defined by
the demand of bearing capacity to resist the loads of soil or rock blocks, grade of jointed rock mass,
weathered zones and weakness of the rock mass to prevent outfall of ground.

NOTE Normally rock blocks are bolted before spraying with concrete and they will cover most of the support
of the rock bolts.

For reinforced fill structures and structures reinforced with soil nails the sprayed concrete shall be
designed to resist the earth pressure from the ground according to Clause 7.

The minimum thickness should consider the execution restrictions.

The minimum thickness should be defined taking into account the adverse effect of geometric
tolerances and variation in the surface unevenness.

NOTE Thicknesses of 30 mm or greater are recommended.

10.8.2 Ultimate limit state

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2 shall apply to sprayed concrete.

For the specifications and conformity of sprayed concrete EN 14487-1 should apply.

[Link] Verification by partial factor method

Partial factors for the verification of sprayed concrete at the ultimate limit state shall be determined
according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1, using the Resistance Factor Approach.

For sprayed concrete reinforcing verification prEN 1992 (all parts) shall apply.

[Link] Verification by prescriptive rules

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.5 shall apply to sprayed concrete.

If prescriptive rules are used for verification, the Inspection plan shall include quality measures to
ensure that the installed sprayed concrete fulfil the limitations specified for the prescriptive rule.

[Link] Verification by testing

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.6 shall apply to sprayed concrete.

NOTE For testing during execution see 10.8.5.

170
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link] Verification by Observational Method

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.7 shall apply to sprayed concrete.

The extent and thickness of the sprayed concrete to be installed in relation to the observed
conditions at site should part of the verification by the Observational Method.

10.8.3 Serviceability limit state

prEN 1997-1:2022, 9 shall apply to sprayed concrete.

10.8.4 Implementation of design

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10 shall apply to sprayed concrete.

Ground conditions shall be inspected at site by geotechnical mapping.

The ground surface should be verified for preparation / proper cleaning to achieve adhesion
bondage between ground and sprayed concrete.

Sprayed concrete should be specified to be installed in dry or controlled water conditions to avoid
reduction of adhesion.

Water leakages should be checked to be within specified limits before execution of sprayed concrete.

Preparation of the ground surface, according (2), (3) and (4) may be omitted, if transient design
situations demand for immediate spraying of concrete.

For water leakage areas groundwater control should be considered according to 12.

10.8.5 Testing

prEN 1997-1:2022, 11 shall apply to sprayed concrete.

EN 14487 (all parts) and EN 14488 (all parts) should apply.

Sprayed concrete shall be tested to verify its energy absorption capacity in accordance with EN
14488-5.

The sprayed concrete shall be tested on its adhesion/bond strength to the ground surface in
accordance with EN 14488-4.

Nominal sprayed concrete thicknesses shall be verified.

Thicknesses may be verified by surface scanning before and after constructing or by measuring it in
small, drilled holes through the sprayed concrete.

10.9 Facing element

10.9.1 Geotechnical analyses

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 7. The geotechnical analysis shall address all limit state
verifications listed in 10.2.4.

171
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Horizontal and vertical deformations of a structure reinforced with facing elements shall be analysed
according to Clauses 4, 5, 7 or 9, as appropriate.

10.9.2 Ultimate limit state

The structural resistance of geosynthetic facing elements shall comply with 9.6.

The structural resistance of facing elements of concrete, steel, masonry, and timber shall comply with
prEN 1992-1-1, prEN 1993-1-1, prEN 1996-1-1 and prEN 1995-1-1, respectively.

The design strength of facing elements may be determined by testing.

NOTE Guidance about design assisted by testing is given in prEN 1990:2021, Annex D.

The bending and shear resistance to bulging between facing elements shall be verified to prevent
bulging of the facing between reinforcement / facing connections.

The shear resistance between facing elements and reinforcement when the connection relies purely
on friction shall be verified.

The stability against toppling of the facing elements not connected to ground reinforcements above
the top layer of reinforcement shall be verified.

The punching resistance of the facing shall be verified.

The flexural resistance and reinforcement detailing of concrete, steel, and other hard facings shall be
verified.

The durability of the facing material itself and all connections for the design service life shall be
verified.

NOTE 1 The connection strength of mechanical connections between facing elements and reinforcing elements,
and/or between consecutive facing elements depends on the type and material of the connection and on the tensile
load distribution along the reinforcing element.

NOTE 2 The stability of a frictional connection between facing elements and reinforcing element and/or between
consecutive facing elements depends on the shear resistance between facing elements and reinforcements and
between consecutive facing elements.

10.9.3 Serviceability limit state

The bulging of segmental block and flexible facing systems shall be limited to ensure compliance with
the specification.

The deformations of the structure face shall be limited to avoid spalling and cracking of facing panels,
blocks or sprayed concrete.

Bulging at the toe of a reinforced veneer system shall be limited to values given in the specification.

10.9.4 Implementation of design

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10 shall apply to facing elements.

Ground conditions shall be inspected at site by geotechnical mapping.

172
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

10.9.5 Testing

Execution shall comply with prEN 1997-1:2022, Clause 11, and with the appropriate sub-clause in
this standard for the involved geotechnical structure.

10.10 Reporting

prEN 1997-1:2022, 12 shall apply to facing elements.

11 Ground improvement
11.1 Scope and field of application

This Clause shall apply to ground improvement for the following geotechnical structures:

− slopes, cuttings, and embankments (see 4);

− spread foundations (see 5);
− retaining structures (see 7).

Ground improvement design shall be classified according to Table 11.1:

− diffused ground improvement (classes AI and AII); or

− discrete ground improvement (classes BI and BII).

NOTE 1 Examples of ground improvement techniques for these two families are given in Annex G.

NOTE 2 Groundwater control techniques are addressed in Clause 12.

Table 11.1 — Classification of ground improvement

Class
Family

A – Diffused B – Discrete
I AI – Diffused with no unconfined BI – Discrete with non-rigid inclusions
compressive strength Inclusions, installed in the ground, with
The improved ground has an increased higher shear capacity and stiffness
shear strength higher than that of the compared to the surrounding ground. The
original ground. The improved ground can unconfined compressive strength of the
be modelled as a ground with improved inclusion is not measurable.
properties.
II AII – Ground improvement zone with BII – Discrete with rigid inclusions
unconfined compressive strength Rigid inclusions, installed in the ground,
The improved ground is modified from its with unconfined compressive strength
original natural state, has a measurable significantly stiffer than the surrounding
unconfined compressive strength and is ground. The inclusions can be an
significantly stiffer than the surrounding engineered material such as timber,
ground. Usually, it comprises a composite of concrete/grout or steel or a composite of a
a binder and ground. binder and ground.

For techniques belonging to class BII, the following conditions should be satisfied:

173
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

− structural loads are transferred through a load transfer platform into the ground directly to the
rigid inclusions;
− no structural connection with the foundation is existing (presence of a load transfer platform or,
in absence of load transfer platform, only contact between the improved ground and the
foundation).

In the absence of a load transfer platform, additional verifications may be considered during the
design and the execution according to the design situations.

NOTE In this context, examples of important issues are; stress concentrations at the top of the inclusions and
internal forces into the spread foundation or the raft.

If the ultimate resistance of the initial ground supporting the structure is not sufficient and in
absence of a load transfer platform, a single element of class BII used to transfer the structural loads
to the ground shall be designed as a pile (see 6).

11.2 Basis of design

11.2.1 Design situations

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2.2 shall apply to ground improvement.

For ground improvement subject to alteration over time, design of temporary works shall specify the
maximum design service life or specify any extensions to the period of temporary use.

NOTE Some forms of ground improvement might not have sufficient design service life for a temporary use
which could be extended. An example would be the use of some chemical grouts which deteriorate relatively quickly.

11.2.2 Geometrical properties

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.3 and prEN 1990:2021, 6.3 and 8.3.7 shall apply to ground improvement.

Geometric tolerances shall not less than those specified in the execution standards specified in 11.8.

In addition to prEN 1990:2021 6.3 and 8.3.7, and pr1997-1:2022, 4.3.3, minimum deviation ∆a of
geometrical properties shall be considered in ground improvement design.

NOTE Values of ∆a are given in Table 11.2 (NDP) unless the National Annex gives different values.

174
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 11.2 — (NDP) Minimum deviation of geometrical properties used in ground improvement
design
Geometrical
Value of Δa
property
No measurement and no Comparable experience Property is determined
comparable experience is is available by direct or indirect
available measurements

Soil 5 % of anom To be defined according To be defined according

mix/bored/vibr to comparable to measurements
ated inclusion experience
diameter

Individual et max (20 % of anom; 0.2 m) max (10 % of anom; 0.1 m) max (5 % of anom; 0.05 m)
Grout inclusion
diameter

Compaction max (20 % of anom; 0.2 m) max (10 % of anom; 0.1 m) To be defined according
Grout inclusion to measurements
diameter

Stone or sand 10 % of anom 5 % of anom To be defined according

inclusion to measurements
diameter

Driven or The value of ∆a is specified by the relevant standard, or by the relevant authority
vibrated or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific project by the relevant parties.
steel/wood or
concrete
inclusion
diameter

Inclusion/install The value of ∆a is specified by the relevant standard, or by the relevant authority
ation location or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific project by the relevant parties.
(setting out,
depth range, or
depth)

Deviation with The value of ∆a is specified by the relevant standard, or by the relevant authority
depth or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific project by the relevant parties.

11.2.3 Zone of influence

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to ground improvement.

11.2.4 Actions and environmental influences

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.1 shall apply to ground improvement

175
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

In addition to (1) relevant clauses of prEN 1997-3:2022 shall apply to ground improvement.

The ground improvement method should be selected considering the following:

− the design situation and load variation;

− thickness and properties of the ground or fill material;
− water pressure in the various strata;
− nature, size and position of the structure to be supported by the ground;
− prevention of damage to adjacent structures or services during execution;
− whether the ground improvement is temporary or permanent;
− in terms of anticipated deformations, the relationship between the ground improvement method
and the construction sequence;
− the effects on the environment including pollution by deleterious substances or changes in
groundwater level;
− the durability of the improved ground;
− any long term deterioration of the ground.

[Link] Cyclic and dynamic actions

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to ground improvement.

prEN 1997-3:2022, [Link] shall apply to rigid inclusion.

[Link] Actions due to ground displacement

The adverse effects of vertical and horizontal ground movement on ground improvement inclusions
shall be considered.

A sensitivity analysis should be carried out to determine for each design situation whether the upper
or lower representative improved ground property is the less favourable.

[Link] Downdrag

For Class II ground improvement, downdrag shall be considered at the perimeter of the improved
ground zone.

The calculation of the maximum drag force shall consider the following:

− the shear resistance at the interface between the soil and the ground improvement zone;
− downward movement of the ground due to self-weight compression;
− any surface load around the ground improvement; or
− changes in groundwater levels.

An upper bound to the drag force on a ground improvement zone may be determined from the
weight of the surcharge or change in groundwater level causing the movement, considering any
changes in groundwater pressure due to groundwater lowering, consolidation or execution.

Interaction calculations should take account of the displacement of the ground improvement relative
to the surrounding moving ground.

NOTE [Link] in this document provides guidelines to assess the drag force.

176
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link] Heave

Where heave of the ground results in transfer of load to the ground improvement, it shall be
considered as an action.

If ground improvement is subject to heave that results in tensile forces or stresses, the introduction
of reinforcement should be considered.

[Link] Transverse loading

Transverse actions originating from ground movements, vehicles, or other sources around or above
a ground improvement zone shall be included in the verification of limit states.

Transverse loading of discrete ground improvement should be evaluated by considering the

interaction between the ground improvement inclusion, treated as stiff or flexible beams, and the
moving soil mass.

If ground improvement is subject to transverse loading that results in tensile forces or stresses
exceeding the material’s tensile strength, the introduction of reinforcement shall be considered.

Potential extrusion of low strength fine soil around or between discrete ground improvement
inclusions should be considered.

[Link] Environmental influences

prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link] shall apply to ground improvement.

11.2.5 Limit states

[Link] Ultimate limit states

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1, ultimate limit states for ground improvement shall be as for:

− slopes, cuttings, and embankments (see Clause 4);

− spread foundations (see Clause 5);
− retaining structures (see Clause 7).

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1, the following ultimate limit states shall be verified:

− bearing resistance failure below the ground improvement inclusion or zone;

− uplift or insufficient tensile resistance of the ground improvement;
− failure in the ground due to transverse loading of the ground improvement;
− failure of the ground improvement inclusion or zone in compression, tension, bending, buckling
or shear;
− combined failure in the ground and in ground improvement inclusion or zone;
− limit states caused by changes in groundwater conditions or groundwater pressures (see 11.4).

Potential ultimate limit states other than those given in (1) and (2) should be verified.

[Link] Serviceability limit states

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9, serviceability limit states for ground improvement shall be as
defined for:

177
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

− slopes, cuttings, and embankments (see Clause4);

− spread foundations (see Clause 5);
− retaining structures (see Clause 7).

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9, the following serviceability limit states shall be verified for all
ground improvement:

− ground improvement zone or inclusion settlement and differential settlements;

− heave;
− transverse movement;
− movement or distortion of the supported structure caused by ground improvement zone
movement.

Potential serviceability limit states other than those given in (1) and (2) should be verified.

11.2.6 Robustness

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.4 shall apply to ground improvement.

11.2.7 Ground investigation

[Link] General

prEN 1997-2:2022, 5 shall apply to ground improvement.

[Link] Minimum extent of field testing

The depth and horizontal extent of the field investigation shall be sufficient to determine the ground
conditions within the zone of influence of the structure according to prEN 1997-1:2022, [Link].

For all ground improvement classes, the minimum depth of in situ testing (dmin) below the
anticipated depth of any proposed ground improvement should be determined according to Formula
(11.1):

𝑑𝑑min = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚�5 𝑚𝑚; 3𝐷𝐷; 𝐵𝐵gi � (11. 1)

where:

D is the base diameter (for circular ground improvement inclusions) or one-third of the perimeter
(for non-circular ground improvement) of the inclusion with the largest base;
Bgi is the smaller plan dimension of a rectangle circumscribing the ground improvement zone, limited
to the depth of the zone of influence.
For inclusions founded on or in strong homogenous ground, dmin should be determined according to
Formula (11.2):

𝑑𝑑min = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚(2 𝑚𝑚; 3𝐷𝐷) (11. 2)

The minimum depth of field investigation for ground improvement by soil replacement may be
determined according to Formula (11.2) taking D as the depth of replaced soil.

The minimum depth of field investigation within medium strong (and stronger) rock masses may be
reduced provided there is comparable experience to allow the properties of the rock mass to be
predicted.

178
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

11.2.8 Geotechnical reliability

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.2 shall apply to ground improvement.

Ground improvement shall be classified as either Geotechnical Category GC2 or GC3.

11.3 Materials
11.3.1 Ground properties

prEN 1997-2:2022, Clause 7 to 12 shall apply to ground improvement.

Ground improvement parameters shall be adjusted to account for potential deterioration of the
ground improvement over its design service life.

11.3.2 Improved ground properties

[Link] General

The representative properties of improved ground should be initially selected based on comparable
experience.

The final representative values of the improved ground properties shall be verified by at least one of
the following;

− field investigation; or
− laboratory testing of exhumed material incorporated within the ground improvement, or
− comparable experience; or
− calculation; or
− monitoring.

Field investigation of discrete ground improvement should verify the response of the system, either
by testing individual inclusions or by testing the system.

When determining values of improved ground properties, the following shall be considered:

− information from relevant tests in appropriate improved ground conditions;

− the value of each improved ground property compared with local and general experience;
− variation or tolerances of improved ground properties relevant to the design;
− results of any laboratory or large-scale field trials and measurements from neighbouring
constructions;
− correlations between the results from more than one type of test;
− any significant deterioration in improved ground properties that can occur during the lifetime of
the structure.

[Link] Class I ground improvement

The determination of the representative values of the improved ground property shall comply with
prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.2.

To avoid degradation, material used for Class BI inclusion shall be sufficiently durable and chemically
inert according to the anticipated ground and groundwater conditions during execution and design
service life.

179
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The specification of material for Class BI inclusions should allow it to be compacted to form a dense
inclusion fully interlocked with the surrounding ground.

[Link] Class II ground improvement

The unconfined compressive strength should be determined on cylindrical undisturbed samples

with a height to diameter ratio of two.

Where the sample dimensions differ, a correction complying with EN 12716:2018, A.1, may be
applied.

The stiffness of ground improvement materials should be determined either from laboratory tests
on undisturbed samples, documented correlations, or by monitoring of deformation.

During the design, the representative value of unconfined compressive strength, qu,rep,imp should be
determined as a nominal value of the unconfined compressive strength shall according to
engineering judgement and comparable experience;

NOTE qu,rep,imp includes the factors ηt and ηc see Formula (11.4)

If more than 10 samples (≥ 10) are tested, a characteristic value of the unconfined compressive
strength, quk,imp should be determined according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.2, using a log-normal
distribution.

NOTE When assessing characteristic values, the confidence level is 90 % unless the National Annex gives a
different value.

Based on testing, if fewer than 10 samples are tested, the representative value of unconfined
compressive strength quk,imp should be determined using Formula 11.3.

𝑞𝑞uk,imp = 𝑘𝑘field 𝜇𝜇norm (11. 3)

where:

µnorm is the mean normal strength of field samples;

kfield is a factor depending on the coefficient variation (Figure 11.1).
NOTE The value of kfield is 0.52 unless the National Annex gives a different value.

As an alternative to (6) Figure 11.1 may be used to determine the correlation coefficient kfield based
either on measured coefficient of variation, Vmeas, or on comparable experience.

180
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
X Coefficient of variation Vnorm
Y kfield

Figure 11.1 — Relationship between Coefficient of variation Vnorm and kfield

Other approaches may be used to assess the characteristic value of the unconfined compressive
strength quk,imp.

NOTE These approaches can be based on the analysis of the minimal value, the mean, the standard deviation,
the modes or the cumulative frequency for the measured values taking into account the different types of ground
(sub-population).

If undisturbed sampling is impractical, the strength may be determined by documented correlations

from other in-situ tests.

The selected field strength and coefficient of variation shall be documented in the Geotechnical
Design Report.

The design value of unconfined compressive strength (qud) of improved ground shall be determined
from Formula (11.4):

𝑞𝑞u,rep,imp 𝜂𝜂t ∙ 𝜂𝜂c ∙ 𝑞𝑞uk,imp

𝑞𝑞ud = = (11. 4)
𝛾𝛾M 𝛾𝛾M

where:
qu,rep,imp is the representative value of the unconfined compressive strength of the improved ground;
quk,imp is the characteristic value of the unconfined compressive strength of the improved ground;
γM is a partial material factor;
ηt is a factor accounting for the difference in time between testing (typically 28 days) and when
the improved ground is exposed to the designed stresses;
ηc is a reduction factor accounting for long term effects.

181
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE 1 The value of ηc is 0.85 unless the National Annex gives a different value.

NOTE 2 The value of γM is given in Table 4.7 in prEN 1997-1:2022.

The value of ηt should be determined directly from testing for the specific type of ground
improvement.

In the absence of testing and comparable experience, the value of ηt for Ordinary Portland cement-
based inclusions should be determined from Formula (11.5):

𝜂𝜂t = 0.375 + 0.187 ln 𝑡𝑡 ≤ 1.40 (11. 5)

where:

t is the time in days since the ground improvement inclusion was installed.

NOTE When t = 28 days, ηt = 1.0.

The design strength of concrete, wood, and steel inclusions shall be determined in accordance with
prEN 1992-1-1, EN 1995-1-1, and prEN 1993-1-1, respectively.

[Link] Weight density

For diffused ground improvement in Class I, the improved or modified weight density should be
estimated from empirical data, comparable experience, reduction in volume or field testing.

For Class II ground improvement, especially for jet grouting and deep soil mixing, the improved or
modified weight density should be determined.

The weight density in (2) should be determined by considering the volume of binder being
incorporated within the volume of installed inclusion, with consideration of empirical data,
comparable experience, reduction in volume and/or field investigation.

NOTE 1 Density assessment can be impacted by incomplete filling of voids or bleeding within inclusions prior to
set.

NOTE 2 Samples can be taken during execution to verify the design assumptions of the weight density of the
improved ground.

11.4 Groundwater

pEN 1997-1:2022, 6 shall apply to ground improvement.

11.5 Geotechnical analysis

11.5.1 General

An analysis of the interaction between structure, ground improvement and ground should be carried
out to verify that the ultimate and serviceability limit states are not exceeded.

The method of analysis selected should consider the stiffness ratio of discrete inclusions to the
surrounding ground.

182
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

11.5.2 Diffused ground improvement design (AI and AII classes)

For Class AI and AII ground improvement techniques the resulting modified ground properties
should be used in the verification of the corresponding structure in accordance with:

− slopes, cuttings, and embankments (see Clause 4);

− spread foundations (see Clause 5);
− retaining structures (see Clause 7).

NOTE 1 Design of slopes, cuttings and embankments, spread foundations and retaining structures with the use
of AI and AII techniques is similar to the design of these geotechnical structures without the use of any ground
improvement technique.

NOTE 2 For AI and AII techniques, the main issue is the assessment of the improved ground properties.

NOTE 3 This calculation model is applicable when the behaviour of the improved ground can be conveniently
modelled by conventional ground models. In order to follow this method, the designer can evaluate the change of
ground properties (i.e. cohesion, friction angle, permeability, etc.) and can consequently define the “improved
representative values” for the material properties.

For material with unconfined compressive strength in Class AII, ultimate limit states may be verified
by demonstrating that design effects of actions do not exceed the stress envelope.

NOTE See Annex G.3 for further guidance.

11.5.3 Discrete ground improvement design (BI and BII classes)

Where Class BI or BII ground improvement is used to support or retain a structure an interaction
calculation model shall include:

− the evaluation of the interaction effects between the ground, discrete inclusions, and the
overlying structure, embankment, or load transfer platform;
− the derivation of the neutral plane for Class BII corresponding to the point where the inclusion
settlement equals the ground settlement (see Figure 11.2);
− the derivation of the distribution ratio to determine the proportion of the load applied to
individual discrete inclusions;
− a verification of the structural resistance of the individual discrete inclusions;
− a verification of buckling resistance depending on slenderness and soil support parameter (see
Annex C13 especially for BII techniques).

NOTE The interaction effects relevant to Class BII ground improvement are similar to those relevant for a piled
raft (see Figure 11.2), whereby a load transfer platform causes additional interaction effects influencing the load
distribution between rigid inclusions and supporting ground and initialising negative skin friction in the upper part
of the rigid inclusions.

The representative total resistance Rsys,rep of a ground improvement system with rigid inclusions
should be determined from Formula (11.6):
𝑛𝑛
(11. 6)
𝑅𝑅rep,sys = � 𝑅𝑅ri,i + 𝑅𝑅g
𝑖𝑖=1

where:

183
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Rri,i is the resistance of a rigid inclusion i, depending on its position within the group;
n is the number of rigid inclusions;
Rg is the resistance of the ground supporting the load transfer platform or the raft or single footing
in the net area between the columns.
Analysis of inclusions may be based on numerical modelling including nonlinear stress-strain model
for the ground and the interactions between ground and inclusions.

The resistance of a rigid inclusion Rri shall be assessed according to Clause 6, depending on the
technique used to carry out the rigid inclusion.

Rigid inclusions may be allowed to reach the limiting value of the geotechnical resistance provided
an ultimate limit state is not exceeded either in the overall system or in the structural inclusions.

NOTE The limiting value of the rigid inclusions is not the same as that of a single column, since it can include
group effects and further interaction effects as shown in Figure 11.2

Load transfer platforms incorporating tensile elements should be designed in accordance with
Clause 9.

Load transfer platforms without tensile elements should be designed in accordance with Clause 5.

For embankments, when the embankment and the load transfer platform are merged, they should
be verified accordingly.

184
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
X1 Settlement 6 S ground
X2 Inclusion axial force 7 Neutral plane
Y Depth 8 S inclusion
1 Embankment 9 Positive skin friction
2 σ inclusion 10 Inclusion
3 σ ground 11 Load transfer platform
4 Negative skin friction 12 Structure (e.g. raft)
5 Differential settlement

Figure 11.2 — Interaction effects of a ground improvement with rigid inclusions

185
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

11.6 Ultimate limit states

11.6.1 General

For all form of ground improvement, the following ultimate limit states shall be verified:

− overall stability;
− external stability (including sliding, bearing capacity and loss of static equilibrium if relevant);
− compound stability;
− internal stability.

Methods used to verify ultimate limit states for different class and family of ground improvement
and different geotechnical structures should be selected according to Table 11.3.

NOTE Table 11.3 (NDP) gives appropriate verification methods unless the National Annex gives different
methods.

Table 11.3 — (NDP) Methods used to verify ultimate limit states of ground improvement
Class Family
A – Diffused B – Discrete
I 1. Determine improved ground 1. Determine properties of non-rigid inclusion
properties according to 11.3 and prEN according to 11.3 and prEN 1997-1:2022,
1997-1:2022, 4.3.2 4.3.2
2. Verify ULS according to 11.2.4, 11.5.2 2. Verify ULS of the system using separate
and appropriate clauses of prEN 1997- ground and inclusion properties;
3:2022 3. Verify ULS according to 11.2.4, 11.5.3 and
appropriate clauses of prEN 1997-3:2022
4. Verify compression and shear resistance in
inclusion and soil according to 11.2.3 and
11.2.4. (bulging, etc.)
5. For Geotextile Encased Inclusion, determine
the strength of the reinforcing element of
according to 9.6

II 1. Determine improved design ground 1. Determine improved design ground

properties according to 11.3 properties of the rigid inclusion in
2. Verify ULS according to 11.2.4 with according to 11.3 and especially [Link]
calculation methods in 11.5.2 2. Verify ULS according to 11.2.4
3. Verify structural resistance 3. Verify structural resistance of the rigid
inclusions

11.6.2 Class BI and BII ground improvement

The design resistance of Class BI and BII ground improvement (Rsys,d) should be determined from
Formula (11.7):

𝑅𝑅rep,sys ∑𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖 𝑅𝑅ri,i 𝑅𝑅g

𝑅𝑅d,sys = 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 � + � (11. 7)
𝛾𝛾R,sys 𝛾𝛾Rd,sys 𝛾𝛾Rd 𝛾𝛾Rc 𝛾𝛾g

where:

186
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Rrep,sys is the representative value of the total resistance of the ground improvement system with rigid
inclusions;
γR,sys is a partial resistance factor for the rigid inclusion system, given in 11.6.3;
γRd,sys is a model factor.
NOTE 1 The value of γRd,sys is 1.0 unless the National Annex gives a different value.

NOTE 2 The values of γRd is given in Table 6.3

NOTE 3 The value of γRc is given in Table 6.7.

NOTE 4 The value for γg is taken equal to γR,raft = 1.4, unless the National Annex gives a different value.

11.6.3 Partial factors

Partial factors for the verification of structures using ground improvement with technique BI and BII
at the ultimate limit state shall be determined according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.4.1, using either the
Material Factor Approach or the Resistance Factor Approach

NOTE 1 The National Annex can specify which Factor Approach to us.

NOTE 2 Values of the partial factors for BI and BII techniques are given in Table 11.4 (NDP) for persistent,
transient and accidental design situations unless the National Annex gives different values.

Table 11.4 — (NDP) Partial factors for the verification of ultimate resistance of ground
improvement for fundamental (persistent and transient) and accidental design situations

Verification of Partial factor on Symbol Material factor Resistance factor

approach approach (RFA)
(MFA), both
combinations (a) and
(b)
(a) (b)
Overall stability See Clause 4

Compressive Actions and γF

resistance of VC1 VC3
effects-of-actionsa and γE
diffused ground
Refer to other clauses
improvement (AI
Ground as appropriate
and AII) or discrete γM M1 M2
ground propertiesb,c
improvement (BI)
Axial compressive Actions and effects-
γF and γE VC4 VC3 VC1
resistance of of-actions1
discrete rigid
inclusions Ground properties γM M1 M3 Not factored

Bearing resistance of
γR Not factored Refer to Clauses 5 and 9
LTP
Overall system
γR,sys Not used 1.4 (1.2)d
resistance
Transverse Actions and effects- γF VC4
resistance of VC3 Not used
of-actionsa and γE (EFA)e

187
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Verification of Partial factor on Symbol Material factor Resistance factor

approach approach (RFA)
(MFA), both
combinations (a) and
(b)
(a) (b)
discrete and
Ground propertiesb,c γM M1 M2
diffused ground
improvement Transverse
γRe Not factored
resistance
a Values of the partial factors for Verification Cases (VCs) 1, 3, and 4 are given in prEN 1990.
B Values of the partial factors for Sets M1 and M2 are given in prEN 1997-1:2022 Annex A.
c Including the properties if any improved ground
d Values in brackets are given for accidental design situations.
E See prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.2

11.7 Serviceability limit states

Serviceability limit states of structures founded on ground improvement shall be verified according
to all relevant clauses of prEN 1997-3:2022, by calculation or testing.

11.8 Implementation of design

11.8.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10 shall apply ground improvement.

The execution of ground improvement techniques shall comply with an appropriate standard, as
specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific project by the
relevant parties.

Where no execution standard exists, the method of execution control shall be specified in the
Execution specification.

11.8.2 Inspection

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.3 shall apply ground improvement.

Where ground improvement is to be installed within ground that contains natural or artificial
chemicals or materials, additional inspection tests shall be carried out to ensure that the required
improved ground properties are achieved.

Inspection tests may be based on:

− laboratory testing of improved ground samples;

− laboratory testing of binders utilising groundwater;
− other testing to determine specific properties.

Where materials are to be used for which there is no European testing standard available, inspection
tests shall be carried out as specified by the relevant authority or, where not specified, as agreed for
a specific project by the relevant parties.

188
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Installation parameters for the ground improvement should be monitored and recorded either in
real time using bespoke instrumentation or manually by site personnel in agreement with the
corresponding execution standard.

11.8.3 Monitoring

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.4 shall apply ground improvement.

11.8.4 Maintenance

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.5 shall apply ground improvement.

Where the ground improvement is exposed to the effects of the environment, which can cause
deterioration of performance over time, the design shall specify the maintenance activities and
protection of the ground improvement to deterioration and loss of resistance.

NOTE Some ground improvement, for example, jet grouted or soil mixing retaining walls can be negatively
exposed to freeze/thaw and wet/dry cyclic effects so need to be protected.

11.9 Testing
11.9.1 General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 11 shall apply to ground improvement.

The types of testing should be determined according to the ground improvement technique.

NOTE Execution standards usually contain lists of typical tests relevant to the specific techniques.

Ground improvement techniques trial test before or at the beginning of execution may be conducted,
comprising:

− extraction and testing of ground samples to verify the suitability of the foreseen ground
treatment; or
− extraction and testing of improved ground samples; or
− execution of trial elements for verification of geometry; or
− execution of trial elements with extraction and testing of samples of treated soil; or
− trial execution and verification by field testing or load testing.

The minimum number of control test should vary based on local experience, ground conditions and
the applied ground improvement technique.

For class AII: testing on extracted treated soil samples to verify unconfined compressive strength
and other properties;

− for class BI: field testing inside and/or in between inclusions, dummy footing test on improved
ground (individual inclusion and surrounding ground), zone load test on a group of inclusions
(group of inclusions and surrounding ground);
− for class BII: load test on isolated rigid inclusions, zone load test on a group of rigid inclusions
(group of rigid inclusions and surrounding ground,) UCS test on rigid inclusion material.

The minimum frequency of control testing shall be given by the execution standard or by the relevant
authority or, where not specified, as agreed by the relevant parties for a specific project.

189
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE The minimum frequencies for control test for each ground improvement class are given in Table 11.5
(NDP) unless the National Annex gives different values.

11.9.2 Investigation tests

Investigation tests should be zone loading tests, dummy footings (or skip tests) or extraction and
testing of samples.

For AII and BII classes, samples for testing should be taken either by core drilling (EN 12504-1), fresh
sampling (EN 12390-2) or, from spoil return if they can be expected to be representative.

The diameter of the sample should be correlated with the largest grain size.

Prior to testing the suitability of the samples for testing may be assessed in accordance with EN
12716:2018, Annex B.

Table 11.5 — (NDP) Testing frequency for ground improvement (control tests)
Ground
Type of test Number of tests
Improvement Class
Field and laboratory testing
AI to the full depth of the As per prEN 1997-2:2022 Clause 5.4.3
improved ground
Tests on extracted treated-
AII 1 test per 125m2 with minimum of 4 tests
soil samples
≤ 600 elements 1 in 100
Dummy footing tests or zone 6 + 1 additional per 200
601 to 2000 elements
load test (maximum 13)
BI ≥ 2000 elements 13 + 1 additional per 250
Field and laboratory testing
to the full depth of the As per prEN 1997-2:2022 Clause 5.4.3
improved ground
≤ 600 elements 1 in 100
Load test on isolated 6 + 1 additional per 200
601 to 2000 elements
inclusion or zone lad test (maximum 13)
BII
≥ 2000 elements 13 + 1 additional per 250
UCS test on rigid inclusion
1 UCS test per 125m2 with minimum of 4 tests
material

11.10 Reporting

prEN 1997-1:2022, 12 shall apply to ground improvement.

190
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

12 Groundwater control
12.1 Scope and field of application
12.1.1 General

This clause shall apply to groundwater control measures, to prevent limit states in the geotechnical
structure due to changes in groundwater and/or surface water.

The design and verification of the geotechnical structure, including the implicated groundwater
control measures, shall be conducted in accordance with the clauses for that geotechnical structure.

NOTE Geotechnical structures are, but not limited to: dams, levees, embankments, slopes, cuttings, excavations,
reinforced fill structures, retaining structures and foundations.

The serviceability criteria and corresponding limiting design value for the groundwater control
measures shall be determined by the appropriate clause in this standard.

NOTE 1 Embankments, slopes, cuttings and excavations see Clause 4.

NOTE 2 Spread foundations see Clause 5.

NOTE 3 Retaining structures see Clause 7.

NOTE 4 Reinforced fill structures see Clause 9.

This clause shall not apply to the verification of water retention by dams and levees.

NOTE 1 For these structures additional provisions are needed.

NOTE 2 Methods of assessing critical hydraulic gradients are given in The International Levee Handbook, CIRIA
Report C731 (2013).

This clause shall apply to the verification of the appropriate ground water control measures to verify
the limit states, durability and robustness of the geotechnical structure involved.

This clause shall apply to verification of the limit states, durability and robustness of the
groundwater control measure itself.

Groundwater control measures shall be defined according to this clause to ensure that serviceability
criterion according to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9 and 4.2.5 is not violated.

NOTE Serviceability criterion is expressed as a limiting design value including required water level, allowed
water flow and groundwater pressure.

Groundwater control measures may be divided in three main groups:

− measures to reduce the hydraulic conductivity;

− dewatering or infiltration to control the groundwater and/or surface water;
− impermeable barriers to control the groundwater by preventing and/or cutting off the flow.

Ground improvement techniques to increase strength, stiffness, and/or accelerate consolidation and
consolidation-rate of the ground shall be verified in accordance with Clause 11.

Measures from different groups may be combined to achieve the needed groundwater control.

191
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

12.1.2 Reduction of hydraulic conductivity

Reasons to measures to reduce hydraulic conductivity may include, but are not limited to:

− create a barrier in any groundwater flow under, around or aside a geotechnical structure;
− reduce and control water ingress into the excavation;
− reduce and control water egress out of or out to the surrounding environment;
− create suitably dry conditions for excavation and/or installation of ground reinforcement
elements;
− control uplift from groundwater pressure on the geotechnical structure;
− reduce groundwater pressure downstream the geotechnical structure;
− environmental and contamination reasons.

The following techniques may be for groundwater control to reduce hydraulic conductivity, but are
not limited to:

− grouting;
− soil mixing;
− ground freezing.

12.1.3 Dewatering and infiltration

Reasons to dewatering or infiltration may include, but are not limited to:

− create controlled groundwater and/or surface water flow under, around or aside the geotechnical
structure;
− control water ingress into the excavation;
− maintain a controlled existing, transient or new permanent level of groundwater;
− control uplift from groundwater and/or reduce pressure on the geotechnical structure.

12.1.4 Impermeable barriers

Reasons to impermeable barriers may include, but are not limited to:

− create a barrier in groundwater flow under, around or aside a geotechnical structure;

− maintain a controlled existing, transient or new permanent level of groundwater;
− control or cut off water ingress into the excavation;
− increase length of seepage path to decrease gradients;
− control groundwater pressure.

12.2 Basis of design

12.2.1 Design situation

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2.2 shall apply to groundwater control.

The selection of measures for groundwater control shall be determined according to its purpose for
the geotechnical structure involved.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2.2, the design situations for groundwater control measures shall
include, but are not limited to:

− temporary or permanent nature of the groundwater control;

192
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

− location of discontinuities, weathered zones and layers in the ground with high hydraulic
conductivity;
− impact within in the zone-of-influence due to the groundwater control measures.

12.2.2 Geometrical properties

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.3 shall apply to measures for groundwater control

12.2.3 Actions and environmental influences

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.3.1 shall apply to measures for groundwater control.

The limiting design value of the involved geotechnical structure’s serviceability criterion for the
groundwater pressure and/or groundwater flow shall be obtained from one of the following:

− verification of limit states for the involved geotechnical structure;

− limiting values to avoid impact in the zone of influence.

NOTE The limiting design value of the relevant geotechnical structures serviceability criterion can be
expressed as:

− required groundwater level or surface water level;

− allowed hydraulic conductivity;
− allowed flow of water; or
− maximum groundwater pressure acting on the structure.
12.2.4 Limit States

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.2.5, 8.1.4, 9.1, and 9.4 shall apply to measures for groundwater control.

In addition to (1) prEN 1990:2021, 8.4.1 shall apply to measures for groundwater control.

Potential limit states other than those given in prEN 1997-1 and prEN 1990, should be verified.

NOTE Examples of other limit states are e.g. environmental demands.

For uplift, hydraulic heave, internal erosion, and piping prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1.4 shall apply.

12.2.5 Robustness

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.4 shall apply to measures for groundwater control.

12.2.6 Ground investigation

In addition to prEN 1997-2:2022, 5, provisions for groundwater and geohydraulic properties prEN
1997-2:2022, 11, shall apply.

The zone of influence in the ground, into which groundwater control measures extends, shall be
included in the ground investigation.

Ground investigations shall provide results to identify groundwater properties, hydrogeological

conditions and hydraulic properties.

NOTE Examples of groundwater properties are level, quality, and flow.

Water flow or hydraulic measurements should be applied to identify hydrogeological conditions.

193
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

12.2.7 Geotechnical reliability

prEN 1997-1:2022, 4.1.2 shall apply to measures for groundwater control.

12.3 Material
12.3.1 Ground

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.1 and prEN 1997-2:2022 shall apply to measures for groundwater control.

12.3.2 Groundwater

prEN 1997-1:2022, 6.1 and prEN 1997-2:2022 shall apply to measures for groundwater control

12.3.3 Grouting materials

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.4 shall apply for cement-based grout.

12.3.4 Materials for Dewatering and infiltration

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.3 shall apply for geosynthetic drainage systems.

12.3.5 Materials for Impermeable barriers

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.3 shall apply to geomembrane, geosynthetic or plastic barrier

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.4 shall apply to impermeable grouted barriers

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.5 shall apply to concrete barriers or sealings.

prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.6 shall apply to steel pile and sheet pile barriers.

EN 1538 should apply to diaphragm walls.

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 5.3, ISO/TS 13434 may be applied for geomembrane, geosynthetic
or plastic barriers.

12.3.6 Other materials

Materials other than specified shall only be used, if they comply with a standard specified by the
relevant authority or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific project by appropriate parties.

12.4 Groundwater

prEN 1997-1:2022, 6 shall apply to measures for groundwater control.

12.5 Reduction of hydraulic conductivity

12.5.1 Geotechnical analysis

[Link] General

Techniques and materials to reduce hydraulic conductivity shall be selected to avoid violation of the
limiting design value of groundwater pressure or groundwater flow required in 12.2.4 for the
geotechnical structure involved.

194
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The selection of an appropriate technique to reduce hydraulic conductivity should account for:

− suitability with respect to ground conditions;

− design service life;
− design situation;
− impact within the zone of influence;
− environmental influences;
− possibility of inspection and maintenance.

For design considerations of grouting EN 12715 should apply.

Penetrability of grout or other injection material in the ground shall be incorporated in the
geotechnical analysis.

The effects and risks of execution techniques shall be incorporated in verification of limit states.

[Link] Material specification

The grout design shall take into account the following, but is not limited to:

− time related properties, related to mixing, hydration and hardening;

− ratios of material and water components;
− rheological properties, such as viscosity;
− penetration related properties, such as grain size vs. apertures;
− pressures of grouting and groundwater;
− salinity of groundwater;
− necessity and types of additives;
− chemical ingredients and their effect on the environment.

[Link] Design specification

The grouting technique and sequence shall be considered in the design and verification of grouting.

The execution specification should include on-site verification and stop-criteria, based on pressure,
flow or mass regulation.

The design of grouting shall take into account other possible measures, structures or elements in the
ground, that affects grouting results.

The execution specification of grouting shall include, but is not limited to:

− required limitation for groundwater control;

− required grout penetration depth or spread;
− geometry of the grouting holes, including location, length, direction, overlap and frequency;
− grouting pressures, flows and volumes;
− depth of packer in relation with grouting pressure and failure due to grouting pressure;
− type and use of equipment;
− sequence or sequences of grouting of the holes;
− timing of the grouting in relation with excavation works.

The selection of appropriate grouting may include multiple different types of grouting materials.

195
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

12.5.2 Ultimate limit states

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1.4, the following ultimate limit states, potentially caused by the
groundwater control, shall be verified in accordance with the geotechnical structure involved:

− failure of the ground due to excessive grout pressure;

− failure of the packers due to excessive grout pressure.

The limiting design value of the hydraulic conductivity of the ground inside the zone of influence of
the geotechnical structure involved shall be verified.

12.5.3 Serviceability limit states

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9.4, the following serviceability limit states, potentially caused by
the groundwater control, shall be verified:

− filling of basement or other constructed underground opening with grout due to excessive grout
inflow.

The limiting design value of the geotechnical structure involved, may be expressed in terms of:

− limiting values of groundwater level changes within the zone-of-influence;

− limiting value of leakage per unit area;
− limiting value of groundwater flow;
− limiting value of hydraulic conductivity or transmissivity.

Inspection and monitoring shall be used to verify the compliance with (1) during the design service
life of the groundwater control system.

12.6 Dewatering and infiltration

12.6.1 Geotechnical analysis

Techniques for dewatering and infiltration shall be selected to avoid violation of the limiting design
value of groundwater level, pressure or flow required in 12.2.4 for the geotechnical structure
involved.

The selection of an appropriate dewatering or infiltration system should account for

− suitability for the considered ground conditions;

− design service life;
− design situation;
− impact within the zone of influence;
− environmental influences;
− possibility of inspection and maintenance.

NOTE Typical parts of drainage systems are listed below, but not limited to.

− drains, liners, infiltration and well pipes;

− ditches, wells, well points and bore holes;
− pumps, submersible, external and vacuum pumps;
− mains, basins, filters, separators and flow meters.

The necessity for the use of pumps should be determined.

196
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Pumping capacity requirements should be established.

The verification of the appropriateness of the selected dewatering or infiltration system shall
include;

− quantity and pressure of any discharge;

− chemical content of any discharge.

Unless it can be demonstrated by comparable experience and assessment of any water discharge
that the dewatering or infiltration system will operate adequately without maintenance, a
Maintenance Plan shall be specified.

It shall be demonstrated, both by comparable experience and by assessment of any water discharge,
that the drainage system will operate adequately without maintenance.

The execution specification for the dewatering or infiltration system shall include, but is not limited
to:

− required limitation for groundwater control;

− material selection;
− installation technique and sequence;
− type and use of equipment;
− timing of the groundwater control installation in relation with excavation works.

12.6.2 Ultimate limit states

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1.4, the following ultimate limit state, potentially caused by the
groundwater control, shall be verified in accordance with the geotechnical structure involved:

− Failure of ground outside the barrier due to increase in groundwater pressure, as a result of cut-
off groundwater flow.

12.6.3 Serviceability limit states

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9, the following serviceability limit states, potentially caused by
the groundwater control, shall be verified:

− deformations of adjacent geotechnical structures due to lowering of groundwater;

− deformation of adjacent geotechnical structures due to infiltration.

The limiting design value of the geotechnical structure involved, may be expressed in terms of:

− groundwater levels at different locations within the zone-of-influence;

− groundwater flow;
− drawdown;
− quantity of water to be pumped;
− head losses.

Inspection and monitoring shall be used to verify the compliance with (1) during the design service
life of the groundwater control system.

197
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

12.7 Impermeable barriers

12.7.1 Geotechnical analysis

Techniques for barriers shall be selected to avoid violation of the limiting design value of
groundwater level, pressure or flow required in 12.2.4, for the geotechnical structure involved.

The selection of an appropriate barrier should account for

− suitability for the considered ground conditions;

− design service life;
− design situation;
− impact within the zone of influence;
− environmental influences;
− possibility of inspection and maintenance.

The execution specification for the impermeable barrier shall include, but is not limited to:

− required limitation for groundwater control;

− material selection;
− installation technique and sequence;
− geometry of the impermeable barrier;
− type and use of equipment;
− timing of the grouting in relation with excavation works.

12.7.2 Ultimate limit states

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.1.4, the following ultimate limit states, potentially caused by the
groundwater control, shall be verified in accordance with the geotechnical structure involved:

− Structural capacity of any vertical cut-off wall or horizontal bottom sealing.

Verification of any structural resistance of the cut-off wall shall comply with clause 7.

12.7.3 Serviceability limit states

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 9, the following serviceability limit state potentially caused by the
groundwater control, shall be verified:

− flooding of adjacent geotechnical structures and utilities due to installation of barriers, as a result
of cut-off groundwater flow.

The limiting design value of the geotechnical structure involved, may be expressed in terms of:

− groundwater levels at different locations within the zone-of-influence;

− groundwater flow;
− leakage under or around the barrier.

Inspection and monitoring shall be used to verify the compliance with (1) during the design service
life of the groundwater control system.

198
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

12.8 Implementation of design

12.8.1 General

The hydraulic conductivity of all geotechnical units inside the zone of influence shall be considered
both before and after execution to ensure that the design is applicable.

For the application of the Observational Method during execution prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.6 shall
apply.

Execution of grouting should comply with EN 12715.

Execution of jet-grouting should comply with EN 12716.

Execution of vertical drainage should comply with EN 15237.

Execution of barriers by diaphragm walls should comply with EN 1538.

Execution of deep mixing should comply with EN 14679.

12.8.2 Supervision

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.2 shall apply to measures for groundwater control.

12.8.3 Inspection

[Link] General

prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.3 shall apply to measures for groundwater control.

Inspection shall include check of proper installation of groundwater control system and functionality
control of it.

Inspection shall include the check of the grouting equipment in relation with the design, demands
and assumptions used in the design.

Inspection shall include the ground or groundwater conditions on site in relation with the
assumptions made in the Geotechnical Design Model.

Groundwater conditions should be measured.

NOTE Table 12.1 (NDP) give measures to check the groundwater conditions within the zone of influence,
unless the national Annex give different guideline.

199
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table 12.1 — (NDP) Measures for checking groundwater conditions within the zone of influence
Geotechnical Measures / Measurements
Category

GC3 All the items given below for GC2 and, in addition:
- More detailed examination that includes additional measurements and
observations.
GC2 All the items given below for GC1 and, in addition:
- measurements of groundwater levels and groundwater pressures;
- measurements of groundwater flow and chemistry, if they affect the method
of construction or the performance of the structure.
GC1 All the items given below:
- direct observations;
- documented comparable experience;
- any other relevant evidence.

The following items should be inspected in relation to groundwater control:

− Groundwater flow and groundwater pressure regime;

− effects of dewatering operations on groundwater table;
− effectiveness of measures taken to control seepage inflow or egress;
− internal erosion processes and piping;
− chemical composition of groundwater;
− corrosion potential;
− adequacy of systems to ensure control of groundwater pressures in all aquifers where excess
pressure could affect stability of slopes or base of excavation, including artesian pressures in an
aquifer beneath the excavation;
− disposal of water from dewatering systems;
− depression of groundwater table throughout entire excavation to prevent boiling or quick
conditions, piping and disturbance of formation by construction equipment;
− diversion and removal of rainfall or other surface water.

[Link] Reduction of hydraulic conductivity

The reduction in hydraulic conductivity shall be measured or derived from other measurements.

The ingress, flow and/or egress of water should be measured.

The reduction in hydraulic conductivity water should be measured or derived from other
measurements.

Inspection shall include the compliance of grouting sequencing with the design, demands and
assumptions used in the design.

Control measures should be conducted on the hydraulic properties after execution

200
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link] Dewatering and infiltration

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.3, the Inspection Plan should specify measures to check:

− efficient and effective operation of dewatering systems throughout the entire construction
period, considering encrusting of well screens, silting of wells or sumps;
− wear in pumps;
− clogging of pumps
− control of dewatering to avoid disturbance of adjoining structures or areas;
− effectiveness, operation and maintenance of water recharge systems, if installed;
− effectiveness of any sub-horizontal borehole drains;
− standby equipment to maintain groundwater controls in case of pumping failure/power.

The Inspection Plan should include:

− chemical composition of groundwater;

− durability of the reinforcing element.

[Link] Impermeable barriers

The groundwater levels on both sides of the barrier shall be measured prior to installation.

The groundwater levels, absence of flow ingress, and/or egress of water on both sides of the barrier
should be measured after installation.

12.8.4 Monitoring

[Link] General

In addition to prEN 1997-1:2022, 10.4 the Monitoring Plan should include:

− observations of piezometric levels;

− flow measurements.

The results of monitoring should define the necessity and steer the implementation of further
groundwater control.

Groundwater levels and/or groundwater pressure shall be monitored.

Groundwater level monitoring should be conducted continuously or semi-continuously in adequate

intervals.

Groundwater level monitoring should be conducted prior, during and after groundwater control
works and works affecting groundwater levels.

[Link] Reduction of hydraulic conductivity

Grouting time, pressures, flow and mass intake shall be monitored during grouting.

Groundwater levels and changes herein shall be monitored.

For work in freezing conditions the air and rock temperature should be monitored.

In case of freezing conditions heating or frost prevention measures should be implemented.

201
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

[Link] Dewatering and infiltration

Groundwater levels pressure under buildings or in adjoining areas should be monitored.

NOTE Especially important if deep drainage or permanent dewatering systems are installed or if deep
basements are constructed.

When pumps are installed, the pumping amounts shall be monitored.

The effects of dewatering operations on the groundwater table shall be monitored.

[Link] Impermeable barriers

The groundwater levels, on both sides of the barrier shall be monitored prior to installation and use.

The groundwater levels, absence of flow ingress, and/or egress of water on both sides of the barrier
should be monitored after installation and during use.

12.9 Testing

prEN 1997-1:2022, 11 shall apply to measures for groundwater control.

NOTE For geohydraulic testing see prEN 1997-2:2022, 11

Testing of grout material properties shall be conducted.

One or more of the following testing methods should be used for design and verification of rock
grouting:

− hydrostatic pressure build-up testing in the bore hole;

− water leakage measurements from the rock mass into the bore hole;
− water loss measurements from the bore hole into the rock mass.

Testing of grouting should be conducted prior to start of grouting and after grouting.

Pumps and pumping system should be tested prior to installation.

The functioning of drainage systems should be tested.

NOTE An option to enhance is to rinse or flush after installation.

Flow rate of geo-composite drains should be measured according to EN ISO 12958-1 or EN ISO
12958-2.

12.10 Reporting

prEN 1997-1:2022, 12 shall apply to measures for groundwater control .

202
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Annex A
(informative)

Slopes, cuttings, and embankments

A.1 Use of this Informative Annex

This Informative Annex provides complementary guidance to Clause 4 regarding slopes, cuttings,
and embankments.

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

This Informative Annex covers calculation methods for the stability of slopes, cuttings and
embankments in soil, fill and rock.

A.3 Calculation models for analysing the stability of soil and fill

A calculation method for analysing the stability of soils and fills should only be used if it is
appropriate for the Ground Model, potential failure surface, and loading conditions.

NOTE 1 Table A.1 provides a non-exhaustive list of calculation models based on limiting equilibrium.

NOTE 2 Procedures for numerical models are given in prEN 1997-1:2022, 8.2.

Three-dimensional effects may be considered in design verification when using a two-dimensional

calculation method, provided the adjustment is on the safe side and the method is validated.

When choosing a calculation model for analysing the stability, the following should be included in
the Geotechnical Design Model, but is not limited to:

− weight density determined using the single source principle [see prEN 1990:2021, 6.1.1(4)];
− soil layering;
− occurrence and orientation of zones or layers of low strength;
− seepage and groundwater pressure distribution;
− drained or undrained behaviour or a combination;
− creep deformations due to shear;
− type of anticipated failure;
− possibility of progressive failure along the slip surface (strain compatibility);
− external actions, their duration and direction;
− use of stabilizing measures;
− adjacent or intersecting structures;
− strength anisotropy; and
− interface with underlying rock.

203
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table A.1 — Calculation methods for analysing the stability of soil and fill

Methodc Type of methoda,b Special design Comments and

conditions/limitations assumptions

Simplified ignores
Bishop
Not recommended with interslice shear forces
1 (simplified and Slices, circular arc
external horizontal loads when interslice forces
rigorous)
are horizontal
Generalized limit Slices, any shape of
2 ---
equilibrium surface
Location of interslice
Janbu generalized
3 normal force is assumed
(modified) Applicable with all slope by a line of thrust
Slices, circular arc, geometries and soil
profiles Direction of interslice
Morgenstern- non-circular,
4 forces by variable user
Price polyline
function
Constant interslice
5 Spencer
forces function
Seismic loading, critical
Can include non-vertical
acceleration. Static
6 Sarma Slices, polyline slices and multi-wedge
conditions: horizontal
failure mechanisms
load set to zero
Multiple body, Based on the
Kinematical
blocks, circular, compatibility of velocity
7 approach of limit ---
planar or fields, no consideration
analysis
logarithmic spiral to stress diffusion
Earth-pressure can be
Pre-defined planar failure
Block/wedge Multiple body, used as driving and
8 surface. Divided into
method polyline resisting force. No
three segments
moment equilibrium
Multiple body,
Multiple wedge
9 blocks, wedges, ---
method
plane surfaces
10 Infinite slope Long shallow slopes No moment equilibrium.
Single body, plane
Culmann, surface Steep slopes, drained
11
finite slope analysis
Logarithmic Single body; Homogeneous soil, Satisfies moment and
12
spiral logarithmic spiral drained analysis force equilibrium
a Where ground or embankment material is relatively homogeneous and isotropic, circular failure surfaces can
normally be assumed, except when high external loads are present.
B Polyline includes interconnected plane surfaces.
C See 1) Bishop (1965); 2) Fredlund and Krahn (1977); 3) Janbu (1954); 4) Morgenstern and Price (1965); 5)
Spencer (1967); 6) Sarma (1979); 8)9) DIN 4084:2009-01; 11) Coulomb (1776), adapted by Cullman (1866); 12)
Froelich (1953).

204
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

A.4 Calculation models for analysing the stability of rock mass

A calculation method for analysing the stability of rock mass should only be used if it is appropriate
for the Ground Model, potential failure surface, and loading conditions.

NOTE Table A.2 provides a non-exhaustive list of calculation models for rock mass based on limiting
equilibrium.

When choosing a calculation method for analysing the stability of rock masses, the following should
be included in the Geotechnical Design Model, but is not limited to:

− weight density;
− rock layering, weakness zones and discontinuities;
− Interfaces with soil and soil layers on top;
− geometrical properties of weakness zones and discontinuities;
− infill of weakness zones and discontinuities;
− seepage and groundwater pressure distribution;
− types of anticipated failure;
− external actions and their duration and direction;
− use of stabilizing measures; and
− adjacent or intersecting structures;

Table A.2 — Calculation models for analysing the stability of rock mass

No. Type of failure Methoda Special design Comments and

conditions/limitations assumptions

1 Circular failure Bishop, Janbu, Blocky or weathered rock

Morgenstern, mass.b Method of slices, circular
Large slope Spencerd Tension crack with or (see Table A4.1)
derformationsg Limit equilibriume without water
2 Tension crack with or
Plane failure Limit equilibriume Plane surface, blocks
without water
3 Tension crack with or
Wedge failure Limit equilibriume Wedge
without water
4 Block toppling Limit equilibriume --- Blocks
5 Flexure toppling Limit equilibriume --- Columns
6 Block-flexure
Limit equilibriume --- Blocks and columns
toppling
7 Secondary
Limit equilibriume --- ---
toppling
8 Block trajectories, bounce
Limit equilibriume,
heithts, velocities,
Rock fallc rigid body, Blocks
energies, run out
Goodman Shyf
distances
a All methods for 1 to 7 can address circular and plane failure.
B Only valid for failure not controlled by discontinuities.
C Rock fall is the results of type 2 to 7, but 8 addresses the consequence of rock fall to underlying structure.

205
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

D See Table A.1 for references

e Limit equilibrium methods include Finite Element, Finite Difference and Discrete Element Methods. see
Poisel and Preh (2004), Wyllie (2017)
f See Goodman & Shi (1985)
g Without formation of a sliding plane, i.e. without detachment of rock mass (e.g. slope creep, kink band
slumping)

206
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Annex B
(informative)

Spread foundations

B.1 Use of this Informative Annex

This Informative Annex provides complementary guidance to Clause 5 regarding spread

foundations.

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.

B.2 Scope and field of application

This Informative Annex covers:

− checklists;
− calculation models for bearing resistance; and
− calculation models for foundation settlement.

B.3 Checklists

The following features may affect the resistance of a bearing stratum:

− depth of the adequate bearing stratum;

− inclination of the adequate bearing stratum;
− depth of the groundwater level;
− depth above which shrinkage and swelling of clay soils, due to seasonal weather changes, or to
trees and shrubs, can cause appreciable movements;
− depth above which frost damage, including heave due to groundwater freezing, can occur;
− excavation below the level of the water table in the ground;
− ground movements and reductions in the resistance of the bearing stratum by seepage or climatic
effects or by construction procedures;
− liquefaction caused by cyclic or dynamic loading;
− excavations for services close to the foundation potentially causing bearing failure or foundation
movement beyond a serviceability limit state;
− high or low temperatures transmitted from the building, causing desiccation and settlement or
groundwater freezing and heave;
− scour;
− variation of water content due to long periods of drought, and subsequent periods of rain, on the
properties of volume-unstable soils in arid climatic areas;
− the presence of soluble materials, e.g. limestone, claystone, gypsum, salt rocks; and
− the presence of existing voids formed by geological processes or prior human activities.

The following features of rock may affect the design of spread foundations on rock

− deformability and strength of the rock mass and the permissible settlement of the supported
structure;
− presence of any weak layers, for example solution features or fault zones, beneath the foundation;

207
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

− presence of bedding joints and other discontinuities and their characteristics (for example filling,
continuity, width, spacing);
− state of weathering, decomposition and fracturing of the rock; and
− disturbance of the natural state of the rock caused by construction activities, such as, for example,
underground works or slope excavation, being near to the foundation.

B.4 Calculation model for bearing resistance using soil parameters

The undrained bearing resistance factors in Formula (5.3) may be determined from Formula (B.1):

𝑁𝑁cu = 𝜋𝜋 + 2
𝑁𝑁γu = −2 sin 𝛽𝛽 (B.1)

where:

β is the slope of the ground surface, downwards from the edge of the foundation.
The following non-dimensional factors may be used in Formula (5.3):

− base factor bcu;

− depth factor dcu;
− ground inclination factor gcu;
− load inclination factor icu; and
− shape factor scu.

The non-dimensional factors in (2) may be determined from Formula (B.2):

2𝛼𝛼 𝐷𝐷
𝑏𝑏cu = 1 − 𝑑𝑑cu = 1 + 0,33tan−1 � �
𝜋𝜋 + 2 𝐵𝐵
2𝛽𝛽 1 𝑇𝑇
𝑔𝑔cu = 1 − ≥0 𝑖𝑖cu = �1 + �1 − � , 𝑇𝑇 ≤ 𝐴𝐴′𝑐𝑐u (B.2)
𝜋𝜋 + 2 2 𝐴𝐴′𝑐𝑐u

𝐵𝐵′
𝑠𝑠cu = 1 + 0,2 � ′ � for a rectangular foundation or 1,2 for circular foundation
𝐿𝐿

where:

α is the inclination of the foundation base (in radians);

D is the embedment depth of the foundation;
B is the breadth of the foundation;
β is the inclination of the ground surface, downwards from the edge of the foundation (in radians);
B′ is the effective width of the foundation;
L′ is the effective length of the foundation;
T is the force applied tangentially to the base of the foundation;
A′ is the foundation’s effective area on plan;
cu is the soil undrained shear strength,
NOTE dcu should be taken as 1.0 when the strength of the soil above the embedment depth D is less than that
at the foundation level.

208
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The drained bearing resistance factors in Formula (5.7) may be determined from Formula (B.3):

𝜑𝜑′
𝑁𝑁q = 𝑒𝑒 𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋′ tan2 �45 + �
2
(B.3)
𝑁𝑁c = �𝑁𝑁q − 1�𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐′
𝑁𝑁γ = 2�𝑁𝑁q + 1�tan𝜑𝜑 ′ for a rough base (i. e. δ ≥ ϕ′/2)

where:

ϕ′ is the soil angle of internal shearing resistance;

δ Is the angle of interface friction between the foundation and the ground.
The following non-dimensional factors may be used in Formula (5.7):

− base factors bc, bq, and bγ;

− depth factors dc, dq, and dγ;
− ground inclination factors gc, gq, and gγ;
− load inclination factors ic, iq, and iγ; and
− shape factors sc, sq, and sγ.

The non-dimensional factors in Formula (5.7) may be calculated from Formula (B.4):

1 − 𝑏𝑏q
𝑏𝑏c = 𝑏𝑏q − � � ; 𝑏𝑏q = 𝑏𝑏γ = (1 − 𝛼𝛼 tan 𝜑𝜑′ )2
𝑁𝑁c tan 𝜑𝜑′
1 − 𝑑𝑑q
𝑑𝑑c = 𝑑𝑑q − � � ; 𝑑𝑑γ = 1
𝑁𝑁c tan 𝜑𝜑 ′
𝑑𝑑q = 1 + 2 tan 𝜑𝜑′ (1 − sin 𝜑𝜑′ )2 (𝐷𝐷⁄𝐵𝐵) for 𝐷𝐷/𝐵𝐵 ≤ 1.0
𝑑𝑑q = 1 + 2 tan 𝜑𝜑′ (1 − sin 𝜑𝜑′)2 tan−1 (𝐷𝐷⁄𝐵𝐵) for 𝐷𝐷/𝐵𝐵 > 1.0
1 − 𝑔𝑔q 𝑔𝑔q 𝑁𝑁q − 1
𝑔𝑔c = 𝑔𝑔q − � ′
�=� � ; 𝑔𝑔q = 𝑔𝑔γ = (1 − tan 𝛽𝛽)2
𝑁𝑁c tan 𝜑𝜑 𝑁𝑁q − 1
1 − 𝑖𝑖q 𝑖𝑖q 𝑁𝑁q − 1 𝑇𝑇 𝑚𝑚 𝑇𝑇 𝑚𝑚+1
𝑖𝑖c = 𝑖𝑖q − � �=� � ; 𝑖𝑖q = �1 − � ; 𝑖𝑖γ = �1 − �
𝑁𝑁c tan 𝜑𝜑′ 𝑁𝑁q − 1 𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁
2 + (𝐵𝐵′⁄𝐿𝐿′) (B.4)
𝑚𝑚 = 𝑚𝑚𝐵𝐵 = when 𝑇𝑇 acts in the direction of 𝐵𝐵′
1 + (𝐵𝐵′⁄𝐿𝐿′)
2 + (𝐿𝐿′⁄𝐵𝐵′)
𝑚𝑚 = 𝑚𝑚𝐿𝐿 = when 𝑇𝑇 acts in the direction of 𝐿𝐿′
1 + (𝐿𝐿′⁄𝐵𝐵′)
𝑚𝑚 = 𝑚𝑚𝜃𝜃 = 𝑚𝑚𝐿𝐿 cos2 𝜗𝜗 + 𝑚𝑚𝐵𝐵 sin2 𝜗𝜗 for other loading directions
𝑠𝑠q 𝑁𝑁q − 1
𝑠𝑠c = � �
𝑁𝑁q − 1
𝐵𝐵′
𝑠𝑠q = 1 + � ′ � sin 𝜑𝜑′ for a rectangular or circular (𝐵𝐵′ = 𝐿𝐿′) foundation
𝐿𝐿
𝐵𝐵′
𝑠𝑠γ = 1 − 0.3 � ′ � for a rectangular or circular (𝐵𝐵′ = 𝐿𝐿′) foundation
𝐿𝐿

where, in addition to the symbols defined for Formula (B.2):

ϕ′ is the angle of effective friction;

209
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

N is the force applied normally to the base of the foundation;

θ is the angle on plan between the L axis and the direction of T.
NOTE dc, dq, and dγ should be taken as 1.0 when the strength of the soil above the foundation depth D is less
than that at foundation level.

To account for the effect of groundwater level on groundwater pressure and effective weight density
in Formula (5.7), when all the ground is fully saturated and there is no seepage, the following values
for q′ and γ′ may be adopted:

− for groundwater level at ground surface:

q′ = (γ – γw)D and γ′ = (γ – γw)
− for groundwater level at a depth Dw below the ground surface but above the foundation level:
q′ = γDw + (γ – γw)(D – Dw) andγ′ = (γ – γw)
− for groundwater at the foundation level:
q′ = γD and γ′ = (γ – γw)
− for groundwater at a depth exceeding 1.5 B below the foundation level:
q′ = γD and γ′ = γ.

B.5 Calculation model for bearing resistance on ground underlain by a weaker layer

NOTE Figure B.1 illustrates foundation on a stronger layer over a weaker layer

Key
1 Stronger layer
2 Weaker layer
B Width of the foundation
D1 Thickness of the upper layer below the base of the foundation
Cu1 Shear strength in total stress analyses in upper (stronger) layer
Cu2 Shear strength in total stress analyses in lower (weaker) layer

Figure B.1 — Foundation on a stronger layer over a weaker layer

In total stress analysis, the bearing resistance RNu of a rectangular spread foundation founded on a
stronger fine soil layer above a weaker fine soil layer, as shown in Figure B.1, may be determined
from Formula (B.5):

𝑅𝑅Nu = 𝐴𝐴′(𝑘𝑘1 𝑐𝑐u1 𝑁𝑁cu 𝑏𝑏cu 𝑠𝑠cu 𝑖𝑖cu + 𝑞𝑞)

𝑐𝑐u2 𝐷𝐷 𝐷𝐷1 (B.5)
𝑘𝑘1 = �1 + � �1 + � ≤ 1.0
𝑐𝑐u1 𝐵𝐵 𝐿𝐿

where:

210
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

cu1 is the undrained strength of the upper (stronger) layer;

cu2 is the undrained strength of the lower (weaker) layer;
D1 is the thickness of the upper layer below the base of the foundation.

NOTE This formula assumes that the stress from the foundation spreads at a rate of 1 horizontal to 2 vertical
through the stronger layer.

The bearing resistance RN of a rectangular spread foundation founded on a stronger coarse soil layer
above a weaker fine soil layer may be determined from Formula (B.6):

0.2𝐵𝐵 2𝐷𝐷 𝐾𝐾ps 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝜑𝜑1 ′

𝑅𝑅Nu = 𝐴𝐴 �1 + � (𝜋𝜋 + 2)𝑐𝑐u2 + 𝐴𝐴′𝛾𝛾1′ 𝐷𝐷1 2 �1 + �� � + 𝐴𝐴′𝛾𝛾1 𝐷𝐷
𝐿𝐿 𝐷𝐷1 𝐵𝐵
(B.6)
𝑞𝑞2 (𝜋𝜋 + 2)𝑐𝑐u2
λ= =
𝑞𝑞1 0.5𝛾𝛾1 ′𝐵𝐵𝑁𝑁γ

where:

ϕ′1 is the coefficient of friction for effective stress analyses for upper coarse soil layer;
cu2 is the undrained strength of the lower fine soil layer;
D1 is the thickness of the upper layer;
λ is the ratio of the bearing pressure in the lower layer (q2) to that in the upper layer (q1);
q2 is the bearing pressure in the lower layer;
γ′ 1 Is the effective weight density of the upper layer;
Kps is a punching shear coefficient given in Table B.1.

Table B.1 — Values of the punching shear coefficient Kps

λ = q2/q1 Value of Kps for ϕ′1 equal to…

30° 35° 40°

0 0.8 1.2 2.1

0.2 1.8 2.7 4.3
0.4 2.8 4.4 6.9
1.0 5.4 7.9 12.4

B.6 Calculation model for bearing resistance from pressuremeter test results
The bearing resistance RN of a spread foundation to normal loads may be determined from the result
of Ménard Pressuremeter Tests using Formula (B.7):

∗ (B.7)
𝑅𝑅N = 𝐴𝐴 𝜎𝜎v0 + 𝐴𝐴′ 𝑘𝑘p 𝑝𝑝LM,e

211
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

where:

A is the area of the foundation on plan;

A′ is the effective area of the foundation on plan;
σv0 is the total vertical stress at the level of the foundation base (after the execution of the
foundation);
kp is a bearing resistance factor given by graphs according to ground type and foundation shape in
Table B.2;
p*LM,e is the geometric mean on a thickness of 1.5B below the foundation base, of the representative
values of the net limit pressure, defined in Formula (B.8);
pLM(z) is the representative value of the Ménard limit pressure at a depth z;
p0(z) is the total (initial) stress at a depth z, defined as p0(z)=K0 (σv(z)-u(z))+u(z);
K0 is the at-rest earth pressure coefficient;
σv(z) is the total vertical stress at the level of the Ménard Pressuremeter Test at a depth z;
u(z) is the groundwater pressure at the level of the Ménard Pressuremeter Test at a depth z.
NOTE 1 The effect of the load inclination is considered by an additional parameter applied on kp

NOTE 2 This method is described in NFP 94-261.

𝑛𝑛 𝑛𝑛
𝑛𝑛 𝑛𝑛
∗ ∗
𝑝𝑝LM,e = �� 𝑝𝑝LM = ���𝑝𝑝𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿(𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧) − 𝑝𝑝0(𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧) � (B.8)
𝑖𝑖=1 𝑖𝑖=1

NOTE Figure B.2 give the resistance factor kp for different ground and foundation shapes.

212
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
X De/B 1 Q1 3 Q3 5 Q5 7 Q7
Y kp 2 Q2 4 Q4 6 Q6 8 Q8

Figure B.2 — Bearing resistance factor kp versus equivalent embedment depth De divided by
foundation width B for ground types and foundation shapes given in Table B.2

Weak ground above the foundation level should not be accounted for in the assessment of the
equivalent embedment depth, De, defined as the thickness of ground above the foundation level
having a similar limit pressure as the ground below the foundation.

Table B.2 — Correlations for deriving the bearing resistance factor kp for spread foundations

Ground type Correlation curves from Figure B.2 to obtain the bearing
resistance factor kp

Strip foundation Square pad

Clay and silt Q1 Q2
Sand and gravel Q3 Q4
Chalk Q5 Q6
Marl and weathered rock Q7 Q8

213
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

B.7 Calculation model for settlement evaluation based on adjusted elasticity method

The total settlement s of a spread foundation on fine or coarse soil may be determined from Formula
(B.9):

𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝(1 − 𝜐𝜐 2 )𝐼𝐼s
𝑠𝑠 = (B.9)
𝐸𝐸m

where:

p is the bearing pressure linearly distributed on the base of the foundation;

B is the width of the foundation;
Is is an influence factor;
Em is the representative value of the ground elasticity modulus (see also (4) for rocks) ; and
υ is Poisson’s ratio of the ground.
NOTE 1 The value of Is depends on the stiffness and shape of the foundation area, the variation of stiffness with
depth, the thickness of the compressible formation, the distribution of the bearing pressure and the point for which
the settlement is determined.

NOTE 2 Values of Is to calculate the average settlement of a spread foundation on a deep elastic soils are given in
Table B.3.

Table B.3 — Values of the influence factor Is

Foundation stiffness Value of the influence factor Is for foundation shape…

Circle Square Rectangle with L/B equal to

2 5 10 100
Flexible 0,85 0,95 1,30 1,83 2,25 3,69
Rigid 0,79 0,82 1,20 1,70 2,10 3,47

If no reliable settlement results, measured on neighboring similar structures in similar conditions

are available, the design drained modulus Em of the deforming stratum for drained conditions may
be estimated from the results of laboratory or in-situ tests.

The adjusted elasticity method should only be used if the stresses in the ground are such that no
significant yielding occurs and if the stress-strain behaviour of the ground is considered to be linear.

NOTE Great caution is required when using the adjusted elasticity method in the case of non-homogeneous
ground.

In case of a spread foundation on rocks, the design value of Em may be determined from Formula
(B.10).

𝐸𝐸m = 𝐸𝐸rm (B.10)

where:

214
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Erm is the rock mass modulus (see prEN 1997-2:2022, 9.1.4 (5));

NOTE In literature, there are other expressions for Erm that can be used considering their applicability and
limitations.

B.8 Calculation model for settlement evaluation based on stress-strain method

The total settlement of a spread foundation on fine or coarse soil may be evaluated using the stress-
strain calculation method as follows:

− computing the stress distribution in the ground due to the loading from the foundation;
o this may be determined on the basis of elasticity theory, generally assuming
homogeneous isotropic soil and a linear distribution of bearing pressure;
− computing the strain in the ground from the stresses using stiffness moduli values or other stress-
strain relationships determined from laboratory tests (preferably calibrated against field tests),
or field tests; and
− integrating the vertical strains to find the settlements;
o using the stress-strain method a sufficient number of points within the ground beneath
the foundation should be selected and the stresses and strains computed at these points.

B.9 Calculation model for settlements without drainage

The short-term components of settlement of a foundation on fine soil, which occur without drainage,
may be evaluated using either the stress-strain method or the adjusted elasticity method.

The values adopted for the stiffness parameters should in this case represent the undrained
behaviour with υ = υu = 0.5

B.10 Calculation model for settlements caused by consolidation

To calculate the settlement of a spread foundation caused by consolidation, a confined one-

dimensional deformation of the soil in an oedometer test may be assumed and the consolidation test
curve used.

Empirical corrections may be applied to the addition of settlements in the undrained and
consolidation state to avoid overestimation of the total settlement.

B.11 Calculation model for time-settlement behaviour

With fine soils the rate of consolidation settlement before the end of the primary consolidation may
be estimated by using consolidation parameters obtained from a laboratory compression test.

the rate of consolidation settlement should be obtained using permeability values obtained from in-
situ tests.

B.12 Calculation model for settlement evaluation using pressuremeter test results

The settlement of a spread foundation may be determined from the results of Ménard pressuremeter
tests using Formula (B.11):

215
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

2𝐵𝐵0 𝜆𝜆d 𝐵𝐵 𝛼𝛼𝑟𝑟 𝛼𝛼r 𝜆𝜆c 𝐵𝐵

𝑠𝑠 = (𝑞𝑞 − 𝜎𝜎v0 ) � � � + �
9𝐸𝐸d 𝐵𝐵0 9𝐸𝐸c
(B.11)
1 0.25 0.3 0.25 0.1 0.1
= + + + +
𝐸𝐸d 𝐸𝐸1 𝐸𝐸2 𝐸𝐸3↔5 𝐸𝐸6↔8 𝐸𝐸9↔16

where:

B is the width of the foundation;

Bo is a reference width of 0,6 m;
Ec is the value of EM measured in a ground of thickness B/2 immediately below the foundation;
Ed is the weighted harmonic mean of EM measured in ground of thickness 8B below the foundation;
Ei↔j is the harmonic mean value of EM measured in layers B/2 thick, counted from 1 below the
foundation down to 16 as a depth of 8B;
q is the design normal pressure applied on the foundation;
αr is a rheological factor depending on the nature of ground, as given in Table B.5;
λd, λc are shape coefficients depending on the ratio L/B, as given in Table B.4;
σv0 is the total (initial) vertical stress at the level of the foundation base.

Table B.4 — Shape coefficients for settlement of spread foundations

L/B Circle Square 2 3 5 20

λd 1 1,12 1,53 1,78 2,14 2,65

λc 1 1,1 1,2 1,3 1,4 1,5

Table B.5 — Correlations for deriving the rheological factor αr for spread foundations

Type of ground Description EM/pLM αr

Peat 1,00
Clay Over-consolidated > 16 1,00
Normally consolidated 9 – 16 0,67
Remoulded 7–9 0,5’
Silt Over-consolidated > 14 0,67
Normally consolidated 5 – 14 0,50
Sand --- > 12 0,50
5 – 12 0,33
Sand and gravel --- > 10 0,33
6 – 10 0,25
Rock Highly weathered rock 0,67
Disintegrated rock mass --- 0,33

216
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Highly fractured rock mass 0,50

Normally fractured, very blocky rock mass 0,67

B.13 Calculation model for settlement evaluation using cone penetration test results

The settlement of a spread foundation on coarse soil under load pressure (q) may be determined
from the results of cone penetration using Formula (B.12):
𝑧𝑧1
′ )
𝐼𝐼𝑧𝑧
𝑠𝑠 = 𝐶𝐶1 𝐶𝐶2 (𝑞𝑞 − 𝜎𝜎v0 � 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 (B.12)
0 𝐶𝐶3 𝐸𝐸 ′

where:

C1 Is 1 – 0,5 × [σ’v0/(q – σ’v0)];

C2 is 1,2 + 0,2 × lg t;
C3 is the the correction factor for the shape of the spread foundation
1,25 for square foundations; and
1,75 for strip foundations with L > 10B;;
t is the time, in years
σ’v0 is the initial effective vertical stress at the level of the foundation
E’ the value for Young’s modulus of elasticity (E’) derived from the cone penetration resistance
(qc), to be used in this method is: E’ = 2,0 qc,.
Iz is a strain influence factor (see Figure B.3 ) where the distribution of the strain influence factor
(Iz) are given for axisymmetric (circular and square) spread foundations and for plane strain
(strip spread foundations)

NOTE Figure B.3 gives the influence factor for the calculation model published by Schmertmann (1970) and
Schmertmann et al (1978)

217
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
x rigid footing vertical strain influence factor Iz
y relative depth below footing
1 axi-symmetric (L/B=1)
2 plane strain (L/B > 10)
3 B/2 (axi-symmetric); B (plane strain)
4 depth to Izp

Figure B.3 — Strain influence factor diagrams

B.14 Relative stiffness of a spread foundation and subgrade modulus

The relative stiffness Ks of a rectangular spread foundation may be determined assuming elastic
behaviour for the foundation and the ground and Formula (B.13):

𝐸𝐸f �1 − 𝜐𝜐g2 � 𝐵𝐵 0.5 𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓 3

𝐾𝐾s = 5.57 � � � � � � (B.13)
𝐸𝐸g �1 − 𝜐𝜐f2 � 𝐿𝐿 𝐿𝐿

where:

Ef is the Young’s modulus of the foundation material;

Eg is the representative Young’s modulus for the ground beneath the foundation (i.e. the value of
Young’s modulus at a depth equal to the radius of a circular footing or half the foundation width);
νg is Poisson’s ratio of the ground;
νf is Poisson’s ratio of the foundation material;
B is the foundation width;
L is the foundation length; and
Df is the foundation depth (thickness).

218
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

A foundation may be assumed to be rigid when Ks is greater than 10 and flexible when Ks is less than
0,05.

NOTE For Ks values between these values the relative deflection and the bending moments in the foundation
are a function of Ks.

When designing a spread foundation as a beam resting on a series of springs, the subgrade modulus
k may be determined from Formula (B.14):

0.65𝐸𝐸′
𝑘𝑘 = (B.14)
𝐵𝐵(1 − 𝜐𝜐 2 )

where:

E′ is Young’s modulus of the ground;

υ is Poisson’s ratio of the ground; and
B is the foundation width.

B.15 Linear elastic spring stiffnesses of surface foundation

Ground reaction may be represented by springs for all degrees of freedom.

NOTE 1 In general, the springs are non-linear and frequency dependent.

NOTE 2 A rigid foundation on deformable ground has 6 degrees of freedom, 3 translational (in x, y, z directions)
and 3 rotational (rx, ry, rz about the x, y and z axes).

For certain foundation shapes (circle, strip, rectangle) and ground profiles (for example,
homogeneous half-space and soil layer on rock), the stiffness coefficients may be obtained from
available solutions based on linear elasticity.

The linear elastic spring stiffnesses of a rectangular foundation on the surface of a homogeneous
half-space may be calculated using Formulae (B.15) to (B.20).

GL  
0,85
B
K yy
= 2 + 2,5   (B.15)
2 − ν  L 

GB  
0,65
L
=K xx 1,2 + 3,3   (B.16)
2 − ν  B 

GL  
0,75
B
=K zz 0,73 + 1,54    (B.17)
1 − ν  L 

GB 3   L 
=K rx 0,4 + 3,2   (B.18)
8 (1 − ν )   B 

219
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

GB 3   L  
2,4

K ry = 3,6  (B.19)
8 (1 − ν )   B  

GB 3  
2,45
L
=K rz 4,1 + 4,2   (B.20)
8  B 

where:

G is the ground shear modulus;

B is the foundation width (smallest dimension);
L is the foundation length (largest dimension);
Kxx is the stiffness coefficient in the horizontal X direction;
Kyy is the stiffness coefficient in the horizontal Y direction;
Kzz is the stiffness coefficient in the vertical Z direction;
Kry is the rocking stiffness coefficient around the horizontal X direction;
Krz is the torsional stiffness coefficient around the vertical Z direction;

ν is the ground Poisson’s ratio.

Key
B Width of the foundation

Figure B.4 — Definition of the degrees of freedom

220
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Annex C
(informative)

Piled foundations

C.1 Use of this Informative Annex

This Informative Annex provides complementary guidance to Clause 6 regarding piled foundations.

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.

C.2 Scope and field of application

This Informative Annex covers:

− examples of pile types in different classes;

− method for the determination of the coefficient of variation;
− calculation model for pile bearing capacity based on ground parameters;
− calculation model for pile bearing capacity based on CPT profiles;
− calculation model for pile bearing capacity based on PMT profiles;
− calculation model for pile bearing capacity based on empirical tables;
− calculation model for downdrag (vertical ground movements);
− calculation model for a pile block subject to axial tension loads;
− calculation model for single pile settlement using load transfer functions;
− calculation model for single pile lateral displacement using load transfer functions;
− calculation for model for buckling and second order effects.

C.3 Examples of pile types

NOTE Table C.1 give examples of pile types classified according to Table 6.1 .

221
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table C.1 — Examples of pile types in different classes

Pile type Class Example pile types

Displacement Full Driven cast-in-place concrete piles;

piles displacement Solid section precast concrete piles;
Driven closed-ended tubular steel piles;
Driven closed-ended tubular precast concrete piles;
Driven open-ended tubular steel piles (plugged);
Driven open-ended tubular precast concrete piles (plugged)
Driven steel H-section piles (plugged);
Driven micropiles;
Driven timber piles;
Cast-in-place concrete screw piles.

Partial Driven open-ended tubular steel piles (unplugged);

displacement Driven steel H-section piles (unplugged);
Driven and grouted steel H-section piles;
Driven steel sheet piles;
Cast-in-place concrete screw piles;
Continuous (flight auger) helical displacement piles;
Displacement auger piles;
Drilled or bored pressure-grouted micropiles.

Replacement Replacement Bored cast-in-place piles installed using continuous flight auger;
piles Cased continuous flight auger piles;
Bored cast-in-place concrete piles with permanent casing;
Bored cast-in-place concrete piles with temporary casing;
Bored cast-in-place concrete piles with slurry or polymer support;
Bored cast-in-place concrete piles excavated without support;
Bored or drilled steel tubular piles;
Bored ribbed piles;
Drilled or bored micropiles;
Caissons excavated by hand or by machine;
Barrettes;
Diaphragm walls;
Grouted piles or battetts.

Piles not listed above Steel helical piles;

Compressed-air driven piles

222
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

C.4 Pile shaft resistance based on ground parameters.

For total stress analysis, the representative value of unit shaft friction, qs,rep in fine soils and fills may
be derived from Formula (C.1):

𝑞𝑞s,rep = 𝛼𝛼𝑐𝑐u,rep (C.1)

where:

cu,rep is the representative undrained shear strength of the ground;

α is an adhesion factor for piles in soil.
NOTE 1 The adhesion factor α is an empirical coefficient that depends on the strength of the soil, effective
overburden pressure, pile type, and method of execution.

NOTE 2 The value of α typically ranges between 0.15 and 1.0 for low strength normally consolidated fine soils,
and between 0.4 and 0.75 for high-strength over-consolidated fine soils.

The value of qs,rep in weak and medium strong rock masses may be derived from Formula (C.2):

𝑞𝑞s,rep 𝑞𝑞u,rep 𝑘𝑘2

= 𝑘𝑘1 � � (C.2)
𝑝𝑝ref 𝑝𝑝ref

where:

qu,rep is the representative unconfined compressive strength of the rock mass;

pref is a reference pressure (= 100 kPa);
k1, k2 are empirical coefficients.
NOTE 1 The value of k1 typically varies between 0.7 and 2.1 for cemented rocks and 1.0-1.29 for soft rocks.

NOTE 2 The value of k2 typically varies between 0.57 and 0.61 but is commonly taken as 0.5.

Under effective stress conditions, the value of qs,rep in fine soils, fills, and rock mass may be derived
from Formula (C.3):

𝑞𝑞s,rep = 𝐾𝐾s ����

������� σ′v 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝛿𝛿rep = 𝛽𝛽����
σ′v (C.3)

where:

σ′v is the vertical effective stress at the depth being considered;

Ks is an earth pressure coefficient;
δrep is the representative angle of interface friction between the pile and the ground;
β is an empirical coefficient (= Ks tanδrep);
− denotes the average value along the pile shaft.
NOTE 1 The earth pressure coefficient depends on the strength of the soil, pile type, method of execution, and
distance above the pile base.

NOTE 2 The value of Ks typically ranges between 0.5 and 0.9 for replacement piles and between 0.8 and 1.2 (or
higher) for displacement piles.

223
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE 3 The value of δrep is typically taken as ϕrep for cast-in-place concrete piles and between 0.67ϕrep and
0.75ϕrep for precast concrete and steel piles, where ϕrep is the representative value of the so’l’s angle of internal
friction.

NOTE 4 For fine soils or fills, β is typically between 0.2 and 0.3. For coarse soils and fills, β increases with density
index and is typically between 0.5 and 2.0.

C.5 Pile base resistance based on ground parameters

For total stress analysis, the representative value of unit base resistance qb,rep in fine and coarse soils,
and fills may be derived from Formula (C.4):

𝑞𝑞b,rep = 𝑁𝑁c 𝑐𝑐ub,rep + 𝜎𝜎vb (C.4)

where:

cub,rep is the representative undrained shear strength of the ground at the pile base;
Nc is a bearing factor;
σvb is the total overburden pressure at the depth of the pile base.
NOTE The value of Nc typically ranges between 6 and 10, although Nc = 9 is commonly used.

When the self-weight of the pile is not included as a separate action, the term σvb in Formula (C.4)
should be omitted.

The value of qb,rep in very weak and weak fine-grained rock masses may be derived from Formula
(C.5):

𝑞𝑞b,rep 𝑞𝑞u,rep 𝑘𝑘4

= 𝑘𝑘3 � � (C.5)
𝑝𝑝ref 𝑝𝑝ref

where:

qu,rep is the representative unconfined compressive strength of the rock mass;

pref is a reference pressure (= 100 kPa);
k3, k4 are empirical coefficients.
NOTE 1 The value of k3 typically about 15 for cemented rocks.

NOTE 2 The value of k4 typically varies between 0.4 and 0.6 but is commonly taken as 0.5.

For effective stress analysis, the value of qb,rep i may be derived from Formula (C.6):

𝑞𝑞b,rep = 𝑞𝑞′b,rep + 𝑢𝑢b = 𝑁𝑁q σ′vb + (𝜎𝜎′vb + 𝑢𝑢b ) (C.6)

where:

σ′vb is the vertical effective stress at the depth of the pile base;
Nq is a bearing factor;

224
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

ub is the pore water pressure at the depth of the pile base.

NOTE The bearing factor depends on the angle of internal friction of the ground, density index, and vertical
effective stress at the pile base.

When the self-weight of the pile is not included as a separate action, the term (σ′vb + ub) in Formula
(C.6) should be omitted.

C.6 Axial pile resistance based on CPT profiles

The representative value of unit shaft qs,rep in coarse soils and fills may be derived from Formula
(C.7):

𝑞𝑞s,rep = 𝑐𝑐s 𝑞𝑞c (C.7)

where:

qc is the measured cone resistance (Mpa);

cs is an empirical cone factor for shaft resistance.
NOTE 1 If qc ≥ 12 Mpa over a continuous depth interval ≥ 1 m, then qc is limited to 15 Mpa over this interval. If qc
≥ 12 Mpa over an interval < 1 m, then it is limited to 15 Mpa.

NOTE 2 The empirical factor cs depends on ground and pile types (see Table C.2 and Table C.3).

Table C.2 — Typical values of cs and cb for sands

Pile type cb cs

Driven precast concrete pile or closed ended steel pipe pile 0.70 0.010a

Cast in place piles made by driving a steel tube with a closed end, 0.70 0.014a
with the steel tube being reclaimed during concreting
Driven open ended steel tube or H-pile 0.70 0.006a

Cast-in-place with temporary casing on top of a screw pile-tip, with 0.63 0.009a
the casing being removed and the screw tip remaining in the
ground
Continuous flight auger pile 0.56 0.006a

Bored pile 0.35 0.006a

a Values given for fine to coarse sands. For very coarse sands, reduce the values by 25 % and for gravels by
50 %

225
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table C.3 — Typical values of cs for piles in clays, silts, and peats

Soil type Cone resistance qc (Mpa) cs

Clay ≥ 2.5 0.03

2.0-2.5 0.02 (qc – 1.0)a

< 2.0 0.02

Silt --- min(fr, 0.025)b

Peat --- 0

a qc entered in Mpa
b fr = measured (uncorrected) friction ratio

The representative value of unit base resistance qb,rep in coarse soils and fills may be derived from
Formula (C.8):

𝑞𝑞c,I,mean + 𝑞𝑞c,II,mean
𝑞𝑞b,rep = 0.5𝑐𝑐b 𝑘𝑘shape � + 𝑞𝑞c,III,mean � < 15𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 (C.8)
2

where:

qc,X,mean is the mean measured cone resistance in zone X (= I, II, or III), as defined in Figure C.1;

cb is an empirical cone factor for base resistance;

kshape is a factor (see Figure C.2) that accounts for the relative size of the pile base Bb,eq and shaft
Bs,eq and the thickness h of any base plate (see Figure C.3.)

NOTE 1 The empirical factor cb depends on ground and pile types (see Table C.2).

NOTE 2 Figure C.1 gives the definition for zones I, II, and III and Figure C.2 a chart to determine kshape..

NOTE 3 In Figure C.3 a chart to determine h is given.

226
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
X qc (Mpa)
Y z (m)
1 zone I
2 zone II
3 Zone III
4 8Bb,eq
5 0.7 to 4Bb,eq
6 pile base level
Bb,eq equivalent pile diameter

Figure C.1 — Definition of zones I, II, and III

227
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
X Bb,eq2/Bs,eq2 3 kshape=0.8
Y h/Bb,eq 4 kshape=0.7
1 kshape=1.0 5 kshape=0.6
2 kshape=0.9

Figure C.2 — Chart to determine kshape

228
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Figure C.3 — Chart to determine h

For piles installed by driving or vibration into over-consolidated soils, the value of qc in Formulae
(C.7) and (C.8) should be multiplied by √(1/OCR), where OCR is the overconsolidation ratio of the
soil.

For piles installed from an excavated depth that is deeper than that from which the cone penetration
tests were executed, the value of qc in in Formulae (C.7) and (C.8) should be reduced accordingly.

C.7 Axial pile resistance from PMT profiles

The representative value of unit shaft friction qs,rep may be derived from Formula (C.9):
∗
𝑞𝑞s,rep = min (𝑘𝑘s,PMT (𝑎𝑎PMT 𝑝𝑝𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 + 𝑏𝑏PMT )(1 − 𝑒𝑒 −𝑐𝑐PMT 𝑝𝑝l ); 𝑞𝑞s,max ) (C.9)

where:

ks,PMT is a dimensionless parameter that depends on pile type and ground type;
∗
𝑝𝑝𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 is the PMT net limit pressure (Mpa) at a depth z; and
aPMT, bPMT, cPMT are parameters that depend on ground type.
NOTE 1 Values of ks,PMT are given in Table C.4 for selected pile types.

NOTE 2 Values of aPMT, bPMT, and cPMT are given in Table C.5 for selected pile types.

NOTE 3 Values of qs,max are given in Table C.6 for selected pile types.

229
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table C.4 — Values of ks,PMT for selected pile types

Class Installation technique Ground type

Fine soil Coarse Chalk Marl/marly Weathered

soil limestone rock
masses

1 Mud bored 1.25 1.4 1.8 1.5 1.6

piles/barrettes
Bored (temporary 1.25 1.4 1.7 1.4 ___
casing)
2 Continuous flight auger 1.5 1.8 2.1 1.6 1.6
bored
3 Cast in situ screwed 1.9 2.1 1.7 1.7 ___
4 Driven precast or 1.1 1.4 1 0.9 ___
prestressed concrete
Closed-ended driven 0.8 1.2 0.4 0.9 ___
steel
5 Open-ended driven 1.2 0.7 0.5 1 1
steel
6 Driven H-shaped 1.1 1 0.4 1 0.9
7 Driven sheet piles 0.9 0.8 0.4 1.2 1.2
8 Injected pile/micro-pile 2.7 2.9 2.4 2.4 2.4
III

Table C.5 — Values of aPMT, bPMT, and cPMT for selected pile types

Parameter Ground type

Fine soil Coarse soil Chalk Marl/marly Weathered

limestone rock masses

aPMT 0.003 0.010 0.007 0.008 0.010

bPMT 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.08
cPMT 3.5 1.2 1.3 3.0 3.0

230
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table C.6 — Values of qs,max (in kPa) for selected pile types

Class Installation Ground type

technique/
parameter
Fine soil Coarse Chalk Marl/marly Weathered
soil limestone rock
masses

1 Mud bored 90 90 200 170 200

piles/barrettes
Bored (temporary 90 90 170 170 -
casing)
2 Continuous flight auger 90 170 200 200 200
bored
3 Cast in situ screwed 130 200 170 170 -
4 Driven precast or 130 130 90 90 -
prestressed concrete
Closed-ended driven 90 90 50 90 -
steel
5 Open-ended driven 90 50 50 90 90
steel
6 Driven H-shaped 90 130 50 90 90
7 Driven sheet piles 90 50 50 90 90
8 Injected pile/micro-pile 200 380 320 320 320

The representative value of unit base resistance qb,rep may be derived from Formula (C.10):

3𝑧𝑧2
1 ∗
𝑞𝑞b,rep = 𝑘𝑘b,PMT � 𝑝𝑝𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 (𝑧𝑧)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 (C.10)
𝑧𝑧1 + 3𝑧𝑧2 −𝑧𝑧1

where:

kb,PMT is a dimensionless parameter that depends on pile type and ground type;
∗
𝑝𝑝𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 (z) is the netPMT limit pressure at a depth z;
z1 is a depth equal to min(z2, h);
z2 is a depth equal to min(Db/2, 0.5 m);
Db is the base diameter of the pile;
h is the embedment depth of the pile in the bearing geotechnical unit.
NOTE Values of kb,PMT are given in Table C.7 for selected pile types.

231
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table C.7 — Values of kb,PMT for selected pile types

Class Installation technique Ground type

Fine soil Coarse Chalk Marl/marly Weathered

soil limestone rock
masses

1 Bored 1.15 1.1 1.45 1.45 1.45

2 Continuous flight auger 1.3 1.65 1.6 1.6 2.0
3 Cast-in-place screwed 1.55 3.2 2.35 2.10 2.10
4 Closed-ended driven 1.35 3.1 2.30 2.30 2.30
5 Open-ended driven 1.0 1.9 1.4 1.4 1.2
6 Driven (H-shaped) 1.20 3.10 1.7 2.2 1.5
7 Driven (sheet) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.2
8 Micropilea 1.15 1.1 1.45 1.45 1.45
a For micropiles, base resistance is usually not taken into account

C.8 Axial pile resistance based on empirical tables

The representative value of unit shaft resistance qs,rep for bored piles in soils may be determined from
Table C.8.

NOTE The values of qs,rep and qb,rep given in this sub-clause are based on an empirical database of results from
predominantly static pile load tests. The lower bound of the ranges specified is a 10 % quantile whereas the upper
bound is a 50 % quantile.

The 10 % quantile values given in Table C.8 should be used, unless site-specific pile load testing
confirms the use of the 50 % quantile values.

Table C.8 — Representative values of unit shaft resistance qs,rep for bored piles in soils

Fine soils Coarse soils

Undrained shear qs,rep (kPa)a, b Mean cone qs,rep (kPa)a,b

strength cu (kPa) resistance q (Mpa)

60 30-40 7.5 55-80

150 50-65 15 105-140
≥ 250 65-85 ≥ 25 130-170
a The lower value represents the 10 % quantile and the upper value the 50 % quantile
b Intermediate values can be obtained by linear interpolation

The values given in Table C.9 should be reduced by 25 % for bored piles with enlarged bases.

232
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table C.9 — Representative values of unit base resistance qb,rep for bored piles in soils

Fine soils Coarse soils

cu (kPa) qb,rep (kPa)a,b for s/D equal to c … qc qb,rep (kPa)a,b for s/D equal to c …

(Mpa)
2% 3% 10 % 2% 3% 10 %

100 350-450 450-550 800-1000 7.5 550-800 700-1050 1600-2300

150 600-750 700-900 1200-1500 15 1050-1400 1350-1800 3000-4000
≥ 250 950-1200 1200-1450 1600-2000 ≥ 25 1750-2300 2250-2950 4000-5300
a The lower value represents the 10 % quantile and the upper value the 50 % quantile.
B Intermediate values can be obtained by linear interpolation
c s = pile head settlement; D = pile diameter

The load-settlement curve for bored piles in soils may be determined from Figure C.4, with the
settlement ssg given by Formula (C.11):

𝑠𝑠sg = 𝑘𝑘sg 𝑅𝑅sk + 5𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ≤ 30𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 (C.11)

Rsk is the shaft resistance calculated from Table C.8;

ksg is a factor equal to 5 mm/MN.

NOTE Figure C.4 gives Load-displacement curves for bored piles

233
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
X Pile capacity
Y Pile head settlement s

Figure C.4 — Load-displacement curves for bored piles

C.9 Downdrag due to vertical ground movements

C.9.1 General

The drag force caused by downdrag should be classified as a permanent action.

NOTE 1 ‘Downdrag’ is the term used to describe relative movement between settling ground and the pile shaft.
A drag force occurs where the ground settlement exceeds the pile settlement.

NOTE 2 Pile settlement due to downdrag continues until the combination of imposed actions from the structure
and the drag force come into equilibrium with the mobilised pile resistance.

Potential downdrag should be included in the verification of serviceability limit states.

Potential downdrag should be included in the verification of ultimate limit states when the drag force
exceeds any variable compressive actions applied to the pile.

C.9.2 Rigorous interaction model for downdrag

The calculation model shown in Figure C.5 may be used to calculate the drag force owing to potential
downdrag.

NOTE 1 In this model, the neutral point marks the boundary between forces that act downwards and upwards
acting along the pile shaft. The neutral point differs between ULS and SLS conditions.

NOTE 2 Figure C.5 illustrated the force distribution for assessment of dragforce on a pile subjected to downdrag.

234
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
X spile
Y sground

1 𝑠𝑠𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝,𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 = 𝑓𝑓 �� 𝐺𝐺k,i + � 𝜓𝜓2,j 𝑄𝑄k,j �

i≥1 j≥1

2 𝑠𝑠𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝,𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 = 𝑓𝑓 �� 𝛾𝛾G,i 𝐺𝐺k,i + � 𝛾𝛾Q,j 𝜓𝜓0,j 𝑄𝑄k,j �

i≥1 j≥1

3 neutral point (ULS)

4 neutral point (SLS)

Figure C.5 — Force distribution for assessment of drag force on a pile subject to downdrag

NOTE 3 The neutral point will be at a different level for SLS or ULS conditions, but in both cases, corresponds to
the level at which the settlement of the pile spile and the surrounding ground sground are equal. For the ULS case, the
neutral point will be at a higher level compared to that for the SLS case.

The settlement of the ground at any particular time sground should be estimated from anticipated
changes in effective stress, ground stiffness, and depth of compressible ground.

The ground settlement of should include immediate and primary consolidation, together with
potential secondary consolidation (creep).

The settlement of the pile spile may be estimated using analytical models, empirical relationships,
numerical analysis, or other suitable method that take account of the stress distribution.

As an alternative to (2) and (4), the values of sground and spile may be determined by an interaction
analysis to find the depth of the neutral point Ldd where spile = sground.

In addition to prEN 1990-1:2021, [Link], the design value of the compressive action applied to the
pile at the serviceability limit state should be determined from Formula (C.12):

235
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

⎧ � 𝐺𝐺k,i + 𝑄𝑄k,1 + � 𝜓𝜓2,j 𝑄𝑄k,j

⎪ i≥1 j>1
𝐹𝐹cd,SLS = max (C.12)
⎨� 𝐺𝐺k,i + 𝐷𝐷rep,SLS + � 𝜓𝜓2,j 𝑄𝑄k,j
⎪
⎩ i≥1 j≥1

where:

Gk,i is the i-th characteristic permanent action;

Qk,1 is the leading characteristic variable action;
Qk,j is the j-th accompanying characteristic variable action;
Drep,SLS is the representative drag force at the serviceability limit state;
ψ2,j is a combination value for accompanying variable actions.
NOTE Formula (C.12) is a modification of the quasi-permanent combination of actions given in prEN 1990-1.

In addition to prEN 1990-1:2021, [Link], the design value of the compressive action applied to the
pile at the ultimate limit state should be determined from Formula (C.13):

⎧ � 𝛾𝛾G,i 𝐺𝐺k,i + 𝛾𝛾Q 𝑄𝑄k,1 + � 𝛾𝛾Q,j 𝜓𝜓0,j 𝑄𝑄k,j

⎪ i≥1 j>1
𝐹𝐹cd,ULS = max (C.13)
⎨� 𝛾𝛾G,i 𝐺𝐺k,i + 𝛾𝛾F,drag 𝐷𝐷rep,ULS + � 𝛾𝛾Q,j 𝜓𝜓0,j 𝑄𝑄k,j
⎪
⎩ i≥1 j≥1

Drep,ULS is the representative drag force over the depth of ground above the neutral plane
under ultimate conditions;
γG,i, γQ,j are partial factors applied to permanent and variable actions, respectively;
ψo,j is a combination factor for accompanying variable actions;
γF,drag is a partial factor dependent on the assumptions regarding ground parameters and
the particular method of analysis used to determine Drep,ULS.
C.9.3 Simplified approach for calculating downdrag

For simple cases, approximate approaches may be used.

If the pile settlement spile at the ultimate limit state is greater than the settlement of the surrounding
soil or fill sground, the neutral point may be assumed to be located at the ground surface.

In this case of (2) the drag force may be disregarded for the verification of the ultimate limit state.

If the pile settlement spile at the ultimate limit state is much smaller than the settlement of the
surrounding soil or fill sground, the neutral point may be assumed to be located at the base of the settling
soil or fill layer.

For (4) the representative value of the drag force Drep may be taken as an upper (superior) value
determined for the full thickness of the settling soil or fill.

236
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

For SLS conditions, the neutral plane may be assumed to be located at the base of the settling fill or
soil layer.

Representative values for the drag force Drep should be determined for the full thickness of the settling
soil or fill.

C.9.4 Representative downdrag

The representative value of downdrag within the settling ground may be determined from C.4, using
upper (superior) values of ground strength properties.

C.10 Pile groups subject to axial tension

NOTE Possible mechanisms for groups of tension piles in layered soils are illustrated in Figure C.6.

Key
A Pull-out from ground
B Lift-off a block of soil
C Combined pull-out and lift-off

Figure C.6 — Possible mechanisms for groups of tension piles in layered soils

For the evaluation of the block failure, the representative weight of the soil block surrounding an
individual pile Wblock,rep (see Figure C.7 ) may be determined from Formula (C.14):

1
𝑊𝑊block,rep = 𝑛𝑛z �𝑠𝑠x 𝑠𝑠y �𝐿𝐿 − ��𝑠𝑠x 2 + 𝑠𝑠y 2 � cot 𝜑𝜑rep �� 𝜂𝜂𝑧𝑧 𝛾𝛾 (C.14)
3

where:

L is the embedded depth of the pile;

sx, sy are the grid spacings of the piles in the group;
nz is the number of piles in the group;
φ is the representative value of the internal friction angle of the soil block;
ηz is a coefficient commonly taken as 0.8;
γ is the weight density of the soil block.

237
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE Figure C.7 illustrates block failure of single pile.

Key
sx, sy are the grid spacings of the piles in the group;
φ is the representative value of the internal friction angle of the soil block;

Figure C.7 — Block failure of a single pile under tension as part of a pile group

C.11 Calculation model for single pile settlement using load transfer functions
Settlement of single piles may be determined using load transfer functions.

NOTE Examples of load transfer functions are given in Table C.10.

Load transfer functions used for the assessment of pile settlement should be calibrated with
comparable experience.

238
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table C.10 — Example load transfer functions

Curve Cubic root Hyperbolic

Shaft Base Shaft Base

Shape

Ya = qs Yb = qb Yc = qs Yd = qb
Xa = Ss Xb = Sb Xc = Ss Xd = Sb
1= Ss,max 2 = Sb,lim 4
3 𝑠𝑠s 3 𝑠𝑠b 𝑠𝑠s 𝑠𝑠b
q/qult � �
𝑠𝑠s,max 𝑠𝑠b,max 𝑀𝑀s 𝐵𝐵 + 𝑠𝑠s 𝑀𝑀b 𝐵𝐵 + 𝑠𝑠b

Deformation sb,max, depending Ms Mb

ss,max
parameter on diameter
Initial slope ∞ ∞ qs,ult/MsB qb,ult/MbB

C.12 Calculation model for single pile lateral displacement using load transfer
functions
C.12.1 General

The behaviour of transversally loaded piles may be considered by a bilinear model, representing the
non-linear soil resistance as shown in Figure C.8.

NOTE Figure C.8 illustration of the bilinear model for transversally loaded piles.

239
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
X y, transversal deflection;
Y p, lateral pressure:
1 pf, lateral pressure of the ground at failure
2 pfd, design value of the lateral pressure of the ground at failure
3 yf, transversal deflection of the pile at failure
4 Dashed line – soil resistance defined by Formula (C.15)
5 Dashed curve – actual soil resistance

Figure C.8 — Model of soil resistance as a function of the transversal deflection of a pile

The lateral pressure may be determined by Formula (C.15)

𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓
𝑝𝑝 = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 � ∙ 𝑦𝑦; 𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓 � (C.15)
𝑦𝑦𝑓𝑓

where
pf is the lateral pressure of the ground at failure;
p is the lateral pressure;
yf is the transversal deflection off the pile.
Specific non-linear soil models may be used for buckling.

NOTE A non-linear soil model is given in prEN 1990-1 and provides information about the soil resistance p
at small transversal deflections y.

For design situations where seismic loading potentially results in loss of shear strength in soils
susceptible to liquefaction, pf should be assumed to be equal to zero.

NOTE Examples of design situation in (4) is e.g. saturated sand of loose density and collapsible fine-grained
soils.

240
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

C.12.2 P-y curves from undrained soil properties

The design value of the ultimate transversal ground resistance during short-term loading in
undrained situations may be expressed by 𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 = 9 ∙ 𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢 .

To account for long-term deformations resulting from creep of a highly viscous soil, 𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 = 6 ∙ 𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢 .
May be applied.

NOTE Examples of highly viscous soils is low strength clay or organic clay.

A weighted average of the undrained soil response may be applied in the case of combined long-term
and short-term loads.

To account for limited soil resistance to close the ground surface 𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 may be determined using
formula (C.16):

2 𝑧𝑧
𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓,𝑑𝑑 = 𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑢𝑢𝑢 ∙ �2 + ∙ � + 𝜎𝜎′𝑧𝑧 (C.16)
3 𝐵𝐵

where
pf,d is the design lateral pressure of the ground at failure;
cud is the design undrained shear strength of the ground;
𝜎𝜎′𝑧𝑧 is the effective vertical stress of the soil at the depth z;
B is the pile diameter
z is the depth below the ground surface.
C.12.3 P-y curves from drained soil properties

(C) For drained soil conditions the ultimate transversal ground resistance may be determined using
formula C.17

𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 = 𝐾𝐾𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 ∙ 𝜎𝜎′𝑧𝑧 + 𝐾𝐾𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ∙ 𝑐𝑐′𝑑𝑑 (C.17)

where
pf,d is the design lateral pressure of the ground at failure;
c’d is the design effective cohesion of the ground;
𝜎𝜎′𝑧𝑧 is the effective vertical stress of the soil at the depth z;
Kqd, Kcd is coefficients for calculation the ultimate drained soil resistance.
NOTE In Key
X z/D [-]
Y1 Kqd
Y2 Kcd
Figure C.9 gives the graphs for calculating the ultimate drained soil resistance according to Brinch Hansen (1961).

241
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
X z/D [-]
Y1 Kqd
Y2 Kcd

Figure C.9 — Coefficients Kqd and Kcd for calculating the ultimate drained soil resistance

C.12.4 P-y curves from drained soil properties

If a bilinear ground model according to formula (C.15) is used for the soil resistance, the necessary
transversal displacement y resulting from the flexural buckling of the pile to mobilize p , may be
assumed according to Table C.11

Table C.11 — Values of transversal displacement yf.

Soil conditions yf

Coarse soils 0,1 B

Fine soils, long-term loading 0,12 B
Fine soils, short-term loading 0,05 B

The buckling resistance, C.13, may also be determined for y>yf provided it can be verified that the
soil does not undergo strain softening and that the necessary reduction is made to the overall
transversal ground resistance.

NOTE A reduction to the ultimate ground resistance pf when y>yf can be calculated assuming equivalent overall
ground pressure along the buckling length.

C.12.5 P-y curves from other field tests

If a bilinear ground model as shown in Figure C.8 may be used derived from cone penetration test or
pressuremeter test measurements.

242
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

C.13 Buckling and second order effects

C.13.1 General

For piles subjected to compression, the structural resistance shall be verified by second order theory
if the slenderness ratio is higher than the limits described in section C13.5.

The buckling resistance of a slender pile under compression and embedded in soil should be
determined by a validated model, either analytic or numerical, according to second order theory
considering the support of the soil.

NOTE 1 The mobilisation of the ground resistance is dependent on the transversal deflection of the pile (see
Figure C.11). The ground resistance is limited by different failure mechanisms which are dependent on the subsoil
conditions as well as on the foundation geometry.

NOTE 2 The differential equation in Formula (C.18) is a validated calculation model for buckling of a uniform
pile in uniform soil:

𝑑𝑑4 𝑦𝑦 𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 ∙ + 𝐶𝐶 ∙ 𝑦𝑦 + 𝐹𝐹 ∙ =0 (C.18)
𝑑𝑑𝑥𝑥 4 𝑑𝑑𝑥𝑥 2

where
x is the distance along the pile axis;
y is the transversal deflection of the pile;
EI is the flexural stiffness product of the pile;
C is the subgrade reaction modulus;
F is the axial force applied to the pile

The structural resistance (ULS) and the deformation of piles (SLS) shall be verified in accordance
with the structural design codes for concrete structures (prEN 1992 all parts), steel structures (prEN
1993 all parts), composite steel and concrete structures (prEN 1994 all parts) and timber structures
(prEN 1995 all parts).

For closely placed piles, where the centre to centre distance is less than 3D, a reduction in the
transversal resistance shall be considered.

C.13.2 Buckling resistance by numerical methods

The numerical method shall consider the second order moment caused by the transversal
deformation during the axial loading of the pile.

NOTE 1 Numerical methods can be used for heterogeneous ground conditions and for piles with non-uniform
cross section along the pile length.

NOTE 2 Numerical methods are usually based on Formula (C.18) for which the eigenvalues corresponds to the
buckling forces.

An initial deformation of the pile according to C13.2 should be applied, using values that are
proportional to the buckling eigenmodes.

243
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

C.13.3 Buckling resistance by analytical methods

C.13.3.1 Buckling resistance

The design value of buckling resistance 𝑁𝑁𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 for a fully embedded pile may be determined using
Formula (C.19):

𝜋𝜋 2 𝐿𝐿 2
𝑦𝑦𝑓𝑓 ∙ 𝐸𝐸𝑑𝑑 𝐼𝐼 · �𝐿𝐿 � + 𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 ∙ 𝐵𝐵 ∙ � 𝜋𝜋𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 �
𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 (C.19)
𝑁𝑁𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 =
𝑦𝑦𝑓𝑓 + 𝑒𝑒0𝑑𝑑

where:

𝑦𝑦𝑓𝑓 is the relative deformation between the pile and the supporting soil where 𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓 is obtained
𝐸𝐸𝑑𝑑 𝐼𝐼 is the flexural stiffness of the pile, design value according to the structural Eurocodes
𝐿𝐿𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 is the buckling length, design value
𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 is the design value of the ultimate transversal ground resistance [force/unit area] which
may be reached with the deflection 𝑦𝑦 = 𝑦𝑦𝑓𝑓 at 𝑧𝑧 ∗ = 𝐿𝐿𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 ⁄2, see Figure C.8 and Figure C.11
𝐵𝐵 is the shaft diameter or width of the pile in contact with the ground
𝑒𝑒0𝑑𝑑 Is the maximum transversal deformation of the initial curvature over the buckling length,
design value
C.13.3.2 Buckling length

The design value of the buckling length 𝐿𝐿𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 for a fully embedded pile should be determined using
Formula (C.20):

4 𝐸𝐸𝑑𝑑 𝐼𝐼 ∙ 𝑦𝑦𝑓𝑓
𝐿𝐿𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 = 𝜋𝜋 · � (C.20)
𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 ∙ 𝐵𝐵

where symbols are defined in Formula (C.19)

NOTE 1 For layered soils and soils with variable undrained strength over the buckling length 𝐿𝐿𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 , a combined
average value of 𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑦𝑦𝑓𝑓 , can be used.

NOTE 2 For a pile with a length 𝐿𝐿 < 𝐿𝐿𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 and where the pile top and base are pinned but free to rotate, 𝐿𝐿𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 = 𝐿𝐿
can be assumed.

C.13.3.3 Initial curvature

An initial curvature of the pile shall be applied, considering production imperfections, installation
effects and angular distortion of joints.

With a given initial curvature, the parameter 𝑒𝑒0𝑑𝑑 may be determined using Formula (C.21):

(𝐿𝐿𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 )2
𝑒𝑒0𝑑𝑑 = (C.21)
8 ∙ 𝑅𝑅0d

where

244
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

𝑒𝑒0𝑑𝑑 is the maximum transversal deformation of the initial curvature over the
buckling length, design value;
𝑅𝑅0d is the curvature;
𝐿𝐿𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 is the buckling length, design value.
If no information about geometrical imperfections for a pile embedded in soil is known, the design
curvature with 𝑅𝑅0𝑑𝑑 within the buckling length may be assumed according to table C13.1.

NOTE Smaller values of 𝑅𝑅0𝑑𝑑 are likely for piles with B<150 mm and for driven piles encountering boulders or
heavily inclined bedrock.

Pile type 𝑹𝑹𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎 𝑹𝑹𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎

no joints one jointa

bored steel and composite steel-concrete tube piles 300 m 150 m

driven steel and composite steel-concrete piles 200 m 100 m
precast concrete piles 200 m 100 m
cast insitu concrete piles 100 m -
timber piles 100 m
a within the buckling length

The following addition to e0d should be made to steel piles to account for manufacturing residual
stresses in the pile, depending on the cross-sectional type:

− Type a0, a: 0,0003 · 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿

− Type b: 0,0013 · 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿
− Type c: 0,0025 · 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿
− Type d: 0,0045 · 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿
NOTE Classification of cross-sectional types for buckling is found in Table 6.2 in FprEN 1993-1-1:2022.

C.13.4 Corresponding second order moment

Cross-sectional checks shall be performed according to the structural Eurocodes taking into to
account the corresponding second order moment during axial loading.

For a pile of length equal or greater than Lbd according to Formula (C.20), the corresponding second
order moment during axial loading may be accounted for by using Formula (C.22) and Formula
(C.23):

𝑒𝑒0𝑑𝑑 + 𝑦𝑦
𝑀𝑀2𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 = 𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 · (C.22)
2

𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 · 𝑒𝑒0𝑑𝑑
𝑦𝑦 =
𝑝𝑝 (C.23)
2 · ��𝐵𝐵 � 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓�𝑦𝑦𝑓𝑓 � 𝐸𝐸𝑑𝑑 𝐼𝐼� − 𝑁𝑁𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸

where:

245
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NEd is the applied axial load, NEd ≤ Nbd

𝑀𝑀2𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 is the corresponding moment with second order effects
y is the transverse deflection caused by the axial force (y ≤ yf), see Figure C.10.

NOTE Figure C.10 illustrates the transverse deflection of a pile caused by a compressive force.

Key
y transversal displacement
z depth
1 surface
2 buckling mode NEd≤Nbd
3 Axis of imperfect pile for NEd

Figure C.10 — Transverse deflection of a pile caused by a compressive force.

C.13.5 Slenderness of piles

C.13.5.1 General

The slenderness ratio λ of a fully embedded pile should be calculated by Formula (C.24):

𝐿𝐿bd 𝐿𝐿𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏
𝜆𝜆 = = (C.24)
√2 ∙ 𝑖𝑖 �2 ∙ 𝐼𝐼 ⁄𝐴𝐴

where
𝑖𝑖 is the radius of gyration;
𝐿𝐿𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 is the buckling length calculated according to Formula (C.20);

246
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

A is the cross-sectional area of the pile.

C.13.5.2 Concrete piles

Second order effects should be calculated for precast or cast insitu concrete piles if the slenderness
ratio λ of the pile is greater than the limiting value λlim given in prEN 1992-1-1:2021, [Link].

At least half of the cross-sectional area of an unreinforced pile should be subjected to compression.

C.13.5.3 Steel piles

Second order effects should be calculated for steel piles if the slenderness ratio λ is large, or the axial
force NEd is large compared to the ideal critical elastic force Ncr.

NOTE 1 A large slenderness ratio is λ ≥ 0.2, and a large axial force is NEd/Ncr ≥ 0.04, according to prEN 1993-1-
1:2022, [Link](4). For piles fully embedded in the ground a large axial force is NEd/Ncr ≥ 0.10 according to EN 1993-
5:2007, 5.3.3(3).

NOTE 2 For a fully embedded straight pile the critical buckling load is determined according to Formula (C.25)

𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓 ∙ 𝐵𝐵
𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 2 · �𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 ∙ (C.25)
𝑦𝑦𝑓𝑓

where
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 is the flexural stiffness of the pile, design value according to the structural
Eurocodes;
Ncr is the critical elastic force;
𝑦𝑦𝑓𝑓 is the relative deformation between the pile and the supporting soil where pf
is obtained;
B is the cross-sectional area of the pile;
𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓 is the value of the ultimate transversal ground resistance.
C.13.5.4 Composite steel-concrete piles

Second order effects should be calculated for composite steel-concrete piles if NEd/Ncr ≥ 0.10.

NOTE Ncr is calculated using Formula (C.25) with the effective flexural stiffness (EI)eff according to EN 1994-
1-1:2004, [Link].

C.13.5.5 Timber piles

Second order effects for timber piles should be calculated if the relative slenderness ratio λrel of the
pile is greater than 0.3 as specified in prEN 1995-1-1:2004, 6.3.2.

The relative slenderness may be determined by Formula (C.26)

𝜆𝜆 𝑓𝑓𝑐𝑐,0,𝑘𝑘
𝜆𝜆𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 = ·� (C.26)
𝜋𝜋 𝐸𝐸0,05

247
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

where
𝜆𝜆𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 is the relative slenderness ratio;
𝜆𝜆 is slenderness ratio;
𝑓𝑓𝑐𝑐,0,𝑘𝑘
𝐸𝐸0,05
C.13.6 Partial factors

Superior or inferior representative values should be adopted for the ground stiffness and ground
strength depending on which is critical.

NOTE High values are sometimes critical when transversal loads, e.g. from settling soil, are present.

Partial factors on the ultimate transversal ground resistance pf derived from ground strength
parameters shall be in accordance to set M2 in prEN 1997-1:2022, Annex A.

A partial factor of γpf = 1,4·KM should be applied to a measured value of ultimate transversal ground
resistance, 𝑝𝑝𝑓𝑓 .

C.14 Cyclic effects

C.14.1 Pile stability diagrams

The concept of stability diagram may be used to determine whether the axial loads applied at the
pile head can induce some cyclic effects.

NOTE Figure C.11 gives an example of a stability diagram.

248
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
X Gave,rep/Rc
Y ∆Qrep/Rc
Rc Axial compressive resistance;
Gave,rep Representative value of the average load applied on the pile;
∆Qrep Representative value of the half amplitude variable load
A Stable domain: no cyclic effects
B Metastable domain: Limited cyclic effects inducing low reduction of the pile bearing
capacity with limited displacements
C Unstable domain: significant cyclic effects inducing strong reduction of the pile bearing
capacity until failure

Figure C.11 — Principle of cyclic stability diagram for axially loaded piles.

Stability diagram should be developed considering specific ground conditions and pile types.

NOTE Examples of stability diagrams can be found in the literature.

When a representative cyclic stability diagram leads to identify a metastable domain or an unstable
domain for specific ground conditions and pile types, more detailed verifications should be
conducted to assess the impact of the cyclic loads for both the SLS (cumulative pile head
displacements) and ULS (degradation of ultimate resistance).

NOTE Detailed cyclic pile design procedures have been developed by the offshore industry (EN ISO 19901-4).

249
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Annex D
(informative)

Retaining structures

D.1 Use of this Informative Annex

This Informative Annex provides complementary guidance to that given in Clause 7, retaining
structures.

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

This Informative Annex covers:

− limit values of earth pressures;

− at rest values of earth pressures;
− compaction effects;
− additional earth pressures induced by thermal effects for integral bridges;
− general principles and application of calculation models: limit equilibrium, beam on springs,
numerical models;
− vertical equilibrium of embedded walls;
− basal heave; and
− interaction between anchors and retaining structures.

D.3 Calculation model to determine limit values of earth pressures on vertical walls

In addition to 7.5.4, the values of the active earth pressure coefficients Kaγ, Kaq, and Kac may be
determined according to (3), (5), (8), and (9) of this sub-clause.

In addition to 7.5.5, the values of the passive earth pressure coefficients Kpγ, Kpq, and Kpc may be
determined according to (4), (6), (8), and (9) of this sub-clause.

Selected values of Kaγ and Kpγ may be determined from Figure D.2 and Figure D.3.

NOTE Values are also given in tabular form by Kérisel and Absi (1990).

The value of Kaq may be determined from Formula (D.1):

𝐾𝐾aq = 𝑘𝑘aq cos 𝛿𝛿 (D.1)

where:
kaq is the inclined active earth pressure coefficient;
Kaq is the component of kaq normal to the wall face.

The value of Kpq may be determined from Formula (D.2):

250
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

𝐾𝐾pq = 𝑘𝑘pq cos 𝛿𝛿 (D.2)

where:

kpq is the inclined passive earth pressure coefficient; and

Kpq is the component of kpq normal to the wall face
The values of kaq and kpq may be determined from Formulae (D.3)-(D.8):

cos 𝛿𝛿 − sin 𝜑𝜑 cos 𝜔𝜔δ −2𝜀𝜀 tan 𝜙𝜙

𝑘𝑘aq = � � 𝑒𝑒 a (D.3)
cos 𝛼𝛼 + sin 𝜑𝜑 cos 𝜔𝜔α

cos 𝛿𝛿 + sin 𝜑𝜑 cos 𝜔𝜔δ 2𝜀𝜀 tan 𝜙𝜙

𝑘𝑘pq = � � 𝑒𝑒 p (D.4)
cos 𝛼𝛼 − sin 𝜑𝜑 cos 𝜔𝜔α

sin 𝛿𝛿
sin 𝜔𝜔δ = (D.5)
sin 𝜑𝜑

sin 𝛼𝛼
sin 𝜔𝜔α = (D.6)
sin 𝜑𝜑

(𝜔𝜔a + 𝑎𝑎) (𝜔𝜔δ − 𝛿𝛿)

𝜀𝜀a = + + 𝛽𝛽 − 𝜆𝜆 (D.7)
2 2

(−𝜔𝜔a + 𝑎𝑎) (𝜔𝜔δ + 𝛿𝛿)

𝜀𝜀p = − + 𝛽𝛽 − 𝜆𝜆 (D.8)
2 2

where:
ϕ is the angle of internal friction of the soil;

δ is the angle of inclination of the earth pressure;

α is the angle of inclination of the surcharge;

β is the inclination of the ground surface;

λ is the inclination of the wall.

NOTE 1 Positive orientations of these angles are indicated in Figure D.1.

NOTE 2 When δ = α = β = λ = 0, Kaγ = Kaq = tan2(π/4 – ϕ/2) and Kpγ = Kpq = tan2(π/4 + ϕ/2).

NOTE 3 When α = β = λ = 0, Kaq is approximately equal to Kaγ and Kpq to Kpγ.

251
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
X definition for X
Y definition for Y
α is the angle of inclination of the surcharge;
β is the inclination of the ground surface;
δ is the angle of inclination of the earth pressure;
λ is the inclination of the wall.

Figure D.1 — Orientation for angles α, β, δ, and λ (left: active earth pressure; right: passive)

When ϕ > 0, the values of Kac and Kpc may be determined from Formulae (D.9)-(D.12):

cos 𝛿𝛿 − sin 𝜑𝜑 cos 𝜔𝜔δ −2𝜀𝜀a tan 𝜙𝜙

1−� 1 + sin 𝜑𝜑 � 𝑒𝑒 cos 𝛿𝛿
𝐾𝐾ac = (D.9)
tan 𝜑𝜑

cos 𝛿𝛿 + sin 𝜑𝜑 cos 𝜔𝜔δ −2𝜀𝜀p tan 𝜙𝜙

� 1 − sin 𝜑𝜑
� 𝑒𝑒 cos 𝛿𝛿 − 1
𝐾𝐾pc = (D.10)
tan 𝜑𝜑

(𝜔𝜔δ − 𝛿𝛿)
𝜀𝜀a = + 𝛽𝛽 − 𝜆𝜆 (D.11)
2

(𝜔𝜔δ + 𝛿𝛿)
𝜀𝜀p = − 𝛽𝛽 + 𝜆𝜆 (D.12)
2

where ωδ and ωα are given in Formula (D.3)-(D.8) and the other symbols are as defined in (6).

NOTE These expressions are based on the assumption that a/c = (tan δ)/(tan ϕ), where a is the adhesion
between the ground and wall.

When ϕ = 0 and λ = β = 0, the values of Kac (= kac,u) and Kpc (= kpc,u) may be determined from Formula
(D.13):

252
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎
𝐾𝐾ac,u = 𝐾𝐾pc,u = 1 + sin−1 � � + 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 �sin−1 � �� (D.13)
𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐

where
a is the adhesion between the ground and wall
c is the cohesion
NOTE 1 Figure D.2 give the coefficients of effective active earth pressure with inclined retained surface.

NOTE 2 Figure D.3 give the coefficients of effective passive earth pressure with inclined retained surface.

Key
X angle of friction
Y Ka effective active earth pressure (horizontal component)

Figure D.2 — Coefficients of effective active earth pressure Ka (horizontal component) with
inclined retained surface (δ/ϕ′ = 0,66)

253
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
X angle of friction
Y Kp effective passive earth pressure (horizontal component)

Figure D.3 — Coefficients of effective passive earth pressure Kp (horizontal component) with
inclined retained surface (δ/ϕ′ = 0,66)

D.4 Calculation model to determine at-rest values of earth pressure

In addition to 7.5.6, the at-rest earth pressure coefficient K0 in soils may be determined only for
unloading stress paths from Formula (D.14):

𝐾𝐾0 = (1 − sin𝜑𝜑)�𝑅𝑅o × (1 + sin𝛽𝛽) ≤ 𝐾𝐾pγ (D.14)

254
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

where:

ϕ is the soil’s internal angle of shearing resistance;

Ro is the over-consolidation ratio at depth z0 (equal to σ′v,max / σ′v);
σ′v,max is the maximum effective overburden pressure at depth z0;
σ′v is the current effective overburden pressure at depth z0; and
β is the inclination of the ground surface above the horizontal;
Kpγ is the passive earth pressure coefficient.
Formula (D.14) should not be used for very high values of Ro or in circumstances involving geological
reloading.

NOTE Formula (D.14) can lead to unrealistic values of K0 close to the ground surface, where the vertical stress
is low.

The direction of the resulting force should be assumed to be parallel to the ground surface.

A distinction may be made between:

− K0, the earth pressure coefficient in the initial stage before the works begin;
− Ki, the earth pressure coefficient in the initial stage after completion of the retaining wall but
before the start of excavation; and
− Kd, the ratio between variations in horizontal and vertical stresses during excavation assuming
at-rest conditions, that is without horizontal displacement of the retaining wall

NOTE 1 Assuming linear elastic behaviour and considering reloading stress paths, where υ is Poisson’s ratio of
the soil, Kd can be determined from Formula (D.15)

𝐾𝐾𝑑𝑑 = υ⁄(1 − υ) (D.15)

NOTE 2 In practice, due to the poor knowledge about reliable values for Ki and Kd, it is typically assumed that K0
= Ki= Kd.

NOTE 3 For overconsolidated cohesive soils, in which excavation may lead to a significant stress relief, Ki < K0.

D.5 Earth pressures due to compaction

The effective compaction earth pressure normal to the wall face (p′c) at a depth (z) below ground
surface may be determined from Formulae (D.16)-(D.18):

NOTE Measurements indicate that additional pressures depend on the applied compaction energy, the soil
moisture content, the thickness of the compacted layers and the travel pattern of the compaction machinery.
Horizontal pressure normal to the wall in a layer can be reduced when the next layer is placed and compacted. When
backfilling is complete, the additional pressure normally acts only on the upper part of the wall.

𝐾𝐾pγ 𝛾𝛾�c z for 𝑧𝑧 ≤ 𝑧𝑧c,min

𝑝𝑝′c = �𝑝𝑝′c,max for 𝑧𝑧c,min ≤ 𝑧𝑧 ≤ 𝑧𝑧c,max (D.16)
𝐾𝐾0 𝛾𝛾�c z for 𝑧𝑧 ≥ 𝑧𝑧c,max

255
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

𝑝𝑝′c,max
𝑧𝑧c,min = (D.17)
𝛾𝛾�c 𝐾𝐾pγ

𝑝𝑝′c,max
𝑧𝑧c,max = (D.18)
𝛾𝛾�c 𝐾𝐾0

where:

p′c,max is the maximum horizontal earth pressure due to compaction;

𝛾𝛾�c is the average weight density of the ground over depth zc,max;
Kpγ,0 is the passive earth pressure coefficient (with wall friction equal to zero);
K0 is the at-rest earth pressure coefficient;
zc,min is the minimum depth at which p′c applies;
zc,max is the maximum depth at which p′c applies.
For non-yielding walls, compaction pressure may be represented by the bi-linear profile shown in
Figure D.4(b).

NOTE Compaction pressures from soil placement in layers, more realistically produces a distribution similar
to that shown in Figure D.4(a).

Key
A compaction earth pressure
B simplified profile for non-yielding
C yielding wall
1 Ko line

Figure D.4 — Distribution of compaction earth pressure (a); simplified profile for non-yielding
wall (b) and yielding wall (c)

The value of the maximum compaction earth pressure p′c,max may be taken from Table D.1.

For yielding walls, the simplified depth profile shown in Figure D.4c may be adopted.

256
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

In case the wall displacement is associated with earth pressures between active and at-rest
conditions, interpolated values may be used.

Table D.1 — Values of the maximum compaction earth pressure p′c,max (kPa)

Wall Intensive compaction Light compaction (vibratory

compactor mass ≤ 250 kg)
Width b of backfilled space

b ≤ 1.0 m b ≥ 2.5 m

Non-yielding 40 25 15
Yielding 25 (z = 2.0 m) 15 (z = 2.0 m)
NOTE Use interpolation for intermediate values of b

D.6 Earth pressures caused by cyclic thermal movement for integral bridges

The earth pressure on a structural element subjected to cyclic thermal movements should be
calculated based on the thermal movement range as well as the direction (expansion or contraction)
and actual amount of the relative movements.

Earth pressures caused by cyclic thermal movements may be assessed by soil-structure interaction
methods calibrated against comparable experience, laboratory modelling and/or case history data
experience.

Maximum and minimum values of the earth pressure applicable to structural design should be
considered coincident with the values of the effects (temperature, creep, shrinkage) causing the
expansion or contraction, respectively.

The value of the enhanced pressure coefficient K* for a given value of the maximum expansion should
be determined based on a recognized method.

NOTE The enhanced pressure is bounded by the earth pressure mobilised by the maximum thermal expansion
(lower limit) and the full passive earth pressure (upper limit).

D.7 Basal heave

Mechanical heave due to excavation is generally associated with settlements outside and should be
considered as part of overall stability mechanisms.

Specific models may be used to deal with the following situations:

− conventional models for overall stability calculation;

NOTE 1 These models do not take account of specific geometry (narrow and deep excavation for instance).

− concentration of vertical hydraulic gradients along the embedded part of the retaining wall;

NOTE 2 These models can locally initiate an instability process for which rigid block mechanisms cannot be
considered as realistic enough.

− mechanical extrusion of soft clay that occurs simultaneously with excavation at depth.

257
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE 3 These models cannot be realistically compensated by external shear resistance, as conventional rigid
block mechanisms would assume.

Shear resistance may be considered.

NOTE Figure D.5 illustrates verification against basal heave.

Figure D.5 — Verification against basal heave

Simplified models may be used for fine or coarse soils in which the external and internal shear
resistance above the toe level of the retaining wall is neglected and the same mechanisms as for
bearing capacity of shallow foundations are considered.

In such conditions, the limit value of the effective vertical stress that can be applied at toe level
outside the excavation σ'v1 may be determined from Formula (D.19)

𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾
𝜎𝜎′v1 = 𝑁𝑁 + 𝜎𝜎′v2 𝑁𝑁q + 𝑐𝑐𝑁𝑁c (D.19)
2 γ

where:

Nγ, Nq, and Nc are bearing capacity factors (see Clause 5);
γ is the unit weight of soil under the wall;
B is the width to consider outside the excavation;
c is the cohesion;
σ'v2 is the effective vertical stress at toe level inside the excavation.
Mechanical heave during excavation in fine soils may be analysed assuming undrained conditions
and total stress analysis, using Nγ = 0.

Mechanical heave in coarse soils may be analysed assuming hydraulic gradients are concentrated
within a narrow area very close to the wall, allowing the width B to be neglected.

Verification of resistance to mechanical heave caused by hydraulic gradients in coarse soils should
be based on an effective stress analysis, considering effective cohesion c′, as well as effective stresses
σ′v1 and σ′v2.

258
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The values of σ′v1 and σ′v2 in Formula (D.19) should consider weight densities (γ′ + i1γw) and (γ′ - i2γw),
where i1 is the average gradient along the retained side of the wall and i2 the average gradient along
the wall on the excavated side.

In addition to (9), hydraulic gradients and unit weights also shall be evaluated and considered for
the calculation of the retaining wall itself.

Verification of resistance to mechanical heave during excavation in fine soils should be based on a
total stress analysis based on Bjerrum and Eide approach in Formula (D.20)

𝛾𝛾𝐻𝐻𝑒𝑒 + 𝑞𝑞𝑠𝑠 ≤ 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑢 =

𝐻𝐻𝑒𝑒 𝐵𝐵 𝐻𝐻𝑒𝑒 𝐵𝐵 (D.20)
𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤ℎ 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 = 5 ∗ �1 + 0.2 � ∗ �1 + 0.2 � 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 ≤ 2.5, 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 = 7.5 �1 + 0.2 ∗ �
𝐵𝐵 𝐿𝐿 𝐵𝐵 𝐿𝐿

where:

Ηe is the depth of the excavation;

qs Is the surface load;
cu is the undrained shear strength;
Nc is a shape factor depending on the length and the width of the excavation.
NOTE 1 For more details, see, Bjerrum and Eide, (1956).

NOTE 2 Figure D.6 illustrate basal heave in fine soils.

Key
He Depth of excavation
B Width of excavation
qs Surface load
A, B, C, D, E, F, Volume of the ground subjected to the basal heave mechanism

Figure D.6 — Basal heave in fine soils (Bjerrum and Eide, 1956)

259
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

D.8 Limit equilibrium models

Limit equilibrium models may be used both for:

− for gravity walls;

− for retaining walls to estimate the minimum embedded length and support reactions that are
necessary to prevent rotational resistance (see [Link]).

NOTE 1 Limit equilibrium models consist of analysing horizontal stability of embedded retaining walls by
assuming that limiting values of earth pressures are reached on both sides of the wall.

NOTE 2 Earth pressure envelopes, which can be used for walls with multiple supports, can be found in the
literature. For only partially compliant walls a weighted average of active pressure and earth pressure at rest is
commonly assumed.

NOTE 3 Limit equilibrium models are simplified models that do not provide information relative to
displacements; they are generally used for the design of flexible embedded walls and stiff single propped walls.
These models ignore construction sequences, and structural stiffness or prestressing effects.

When limit equilibrium models are used to justify plastic hinges in metallic structures accordingly
with EN 1993-5, limit displacements associated with limit earth pressures may be estimated based
on conventional order of magnitude, traditionally expressed as a proportion λa of the wall height on
the retained side, and λp of the embedded depth on the excavated side.

NOTE The values of λa and λp are 0.1-0.3 % and 1-5 %, respectively, unless different values are given in the
National Annex.

D.9 Beam-on-spring models

Beam-on-springs models may be used to check the following limit states, in accordance with 7.6 and
7.7:

− serviceability limit states involving horizontal displacements, within the limits given in D.7;
− structural limit states;
− rotational resistance(see [Link]).

Unless additional effects are introduced into the calculation, limit equilibrium and beam-on-springs
models should not be used to determine: slope instability, interaction between the retaining
structure and rear anchors, or interaction between front and rear quay walls.

NOTE Wall displacements are usually calculated relative to the ground surface, ignoring any displacement of
the ground surface.

Intermediate values of earth horizontal pressures may be determined by use of the subgrade
reaction coefficient, k = ∆σ / ∆y, where ∆σ is the variation of earth pressure associated with a
variation of horizontal wall displacement ∆y.

NOTE 1 This is a simplification that assimilates the ground to independent springs.

NOTE 2 Due to its empirical nature, values of the coefficient of subgrade reaction should always be determined
from comparable experience in similar conditions. Guidance is provided in D.8.

NOTE 3 Spring stiffness values are very software specific.

260
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

When redistribution of earth pressure due to arching effects caused by the compliance of the earth
retaining structure is likely to occur, limit and intermediate values of earth pressure on the retained
side should be determined from methods that take account of such redistribution.

NOTE 1 Such methods include empirical (see D.6) and continuum numerical models.

NOTE 2 Relative movements within the retained ground can cause redistribution, for example when rigidities of
different support layers significantly differ from each other or when high spans exist between adjacent rigid
supports.

NOTE 3 Beam-on-springs models are able to consider increased earth pressures behind rigid supports when
they are prestressed.

Empirical relationships based on past experience may be used to derive soil settlements behind the
wall from its horizontal displacement.

NOTE Ratios between maximum vertical and maximum horizontal displacements usually lie between 0.5 and
1.

D.10 Calculation model to determine intermediate values of earth pressure

The value of the subgrade reaction coefficient k may be estimated from the approximate Formula
(D.21):

𝐸𝐸𝑠𝑠
𝑘𝑘 = (D.21)
𝑑𝑑

where:

Es is the secant soil’s modulus of elasticity; and

d is the interaction length.
When determining the interaction length d, the following should be considered:

− the interaction length cannot be larger than the total embedment length D of the wall;
− in practice, it generally is considered that d < 2/3 D;
− during intermediate excavation stages, for which passive earth pressure is only mobilized along
a limited part of the embedded height, an order of magnitude, consistent with the theory of beams
resting on elastic supports and confirmed by a large series of monitoring results, is d = 1.5 l0,
where l0 = (4EI / k)1/4, and EI is the bending stiffness of the wall per linear metre;
− in specific circumstances where the embedded length is determined by hydraulic considerations
rather than by the mechanical mobilization of passive earth pressure due to excavation, the
interaction length is no longer depending on the bending stiffness, as high differential water
pressures affect the total height.

NOTE 1 Example of hydraulic considerations are pumping phases without excavation, tidal effects on quay walls,
high water head and increased embedded length in order to reach an impervious layer.

NOTE 2 In current situations for which the interaction height is dependent on the bending stiffness, an estimate
determined from the relationships above is k = 0.4 Es4/3/(EI)1/3.

NOTE 3 The soil modulus Es to consider is intermediate between the initial loading modulus and the unload-
reload modulus.

261
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

As an alternative to (1) and (2), other methods may be used for structures that mobilize passive
pressure in backfill.

NOTE For example, bridge abutments.

Backfill soil reaction forces on bridge abutments should consider the increase in passive earth
pressure with wall movement.

NOTE For temperature induced seasonal wall movements, the predominant pattern is a combination of
horizontal translation and rotation about the wall base.

The horizontal component of the mobilised passive earth pressure coefficient Kph,mob along the wall
height may be determined from Formula (D.22):

𝑣𝑣(𝑧𝑧)⁄𝑧𝑧
𝐾𝐾ph,mob (𝑧𝑧) = 𝐾𝐾0 + �𝐾𝐾ph − 𝐾𝐾0 � (D.22)
𝑎𝑎 + 𝑣𝑣(𝑧𝑧)⁄𝑧𝑧

where:

K0 is the coefficient of earth pressure at rest;

Kph is the horizontal component of the coefficient of passive earth pressure;
z is the depth;
v(z) horizontal displacement at depth z (positive towards the backfill); for a rigid wall rotating about
its base, v(z) = sh(1 – z/h);
sh horizontal displacement at the wall top;
h Is the height of the retaining wall;
a is a backfill-dependent coefficient.
In the absence of detailed specifications, the value a = 0.02 may be used.

D.11 Numerical continuum models

The most critical geotechnical failure mechanism or combination of failure mechanisms may be
determined by numerical continuum models using shear strength reduction approach.

NOTE Examples of combination of failure mechanisms are overall or bottom instability, rotational failure,
foundation failure.

Information relative to settlements should be considered carefully when simplified linear elastic
models are used, since such models cannot take account of different soil behaviours during a primary
loading and an excavation.

NOTE 1 In the case of retaining structures, only non-linear models provide relevant information with respect to
both horizontal and vertical displacements within the ground mass.

NOTE 2 Current soil models rarely take account of the anisotropic behaviour of alluvial soils, which is likely to
influence the relationship between horizontal and vertical displacements around a retaining structure.

In undrained conditions, when calculation is performed in terms of effective stresses, attention

should be paid to the decrease of groundwater pressures induced by the dilatancy generated with
an inappropriate constitutive law.

262
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

D.12 Vertical wall stability

According to [Link], the skin friction needed to ensure vertical equilibrium of an embedded wall,
and the vertical components of active and passive earth pressures needed to ensure its horizontal
equilibrium should be consistent with each other.

Consistency between skin friction (in bearing capacity calculations) and vertical components of
earth pressure (used to justify horizontal equilibrium) should be checked above the depth at which
the shear force applied to the embedded part of the wall is equal to 0 (see Figure D.7).

NOTE 1 This level can be considered as a rotation axis above which it is essential that earth pressures are not
underestimated on the retained side and are overestimated on the excavated side; beneath this level, such
eventualities become on the safe side.

NOTE 2 Mobilising skin friction to equilibrate vertical forces changes the inclination of earth pressures δ, that
tends to increase the active earth pressure earth side if structural forces are exerted downwards, or decrease the
passive earth pressure on the excavated side if structural forces are exerted upwards (e.g. inclined struts resting on
the excavated surface).

NOTE 3 Despite using a negative value of the inclination δ to derive earth pressure on the retained side, the
vertical component can be significantly lower than the friction that could be mobilised without stress relief and, for
this reason, it is often neglected in bearing capacity calculations.

NOTE 4 Figure D.7 illustrates the depth at which shear force applied to embedded wall is zero.

Key
X definition for X
Y is the horizontal displacement of the retaining structure;
M is the bending moment;
V is the shear force;
pa is the active earth pressure applied to the wall;
pp is the passive earth pressure applied to the wall
τs is the shaft friction mobilized to equilibrate the vertical anchor force

Figure D.7 — Depth at which shear force applied to embedded wall is zero

263
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

D.13 Determination of the anchor length to prevent interaction between anchors and
retaining structures

Potential interaction between a retaining structure and any deadman anchors used to stabilize it
may be ignored when the passive wedge mobilized by the anchor does not intersect with the active
wedge acting on the structure.

The model illustrated in Figure D.8 may be used to ensure that grouted anchors do not interfere with
a retaining structure:

− the anchor's reaction is assumed to be balanced by the shear resistance that is mobilised along
the conventional failure surface shown in Figure D.8, so not to increase earth pressures directly
acting on the wall;
− equilibrium of forces acting on the ground between the retaining wall and the anchors provide
the maximum anchor force that can be equilibrated without increasing earth pressures on the
wall;
− interaction is neglected when the ratio between this maximum anchor force, and the applied
anchor force based on previous calculations of the retaining wall, is higher than 1.5.

NOTE 1 If this condition in Figure D.8 is not met, the shear resistance that the soil mobilizes along the
conventional failure surface is insufficient to dissipate the force applied by the anchor. Consequently, the retaining
structure has to provide more reaction to ensure overall equilibrium of the soil mass that needs to be considered in
the calculation model, or the free length of the anchor has to be increased until it is justified that interaction can be
neglected.

NOTE 2 The stabilizing reaction A1 to introduce in the calculation is equal and opposite to the resulting effective
earth pressure considered for the design of the retaining structure itself.

NOTE 3 The consequence is that the equilibrium of forces applied to the volume ABCD provides a value of the
anchor force, F, that is the maximum one that the anchor can apply within the soil mass without increasing the
resulting earth pressure, A1, that has been considered in the design of the retaining structure.

NOTE 4 Figure D.8 illustrates a model used to determine anchor length to prevent interaction with retaining
structure.

264
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
ABCD is the volume of soil comprised between the rear face of the retaining wall, AB, the conventional failure
surface, BC, and the vertical surface intercepting the point C where the resulting anchor force is applied,
CD;
W is the effective weight of the volume ABCD;
F is the destabilising force applied by the anchor on the volume ABCD;
A2 is the destabilising earth pressure applied on CD;
A1 is the stabilizing reaction applied by the retaining structure;
R is the frictional component of the shear resistance of the soil on the failure surface BC;
C is the additional shear resistance due to the cohesion.

Figure D.8 — Determination of anchor length to prevent interaction with retaining structure

For grouted anchors, the resulting force exerted in the ground may be assumed to act in the middle
of the fixed anchor length.

NOTE This assumption is relevant in standard ground conditions for which friction may be considered as
uniformly distributed along the anchored length.

If micropiles or other anchoring elements without a free length are used, an equivalent free length
shall be determined before applying (2) and (3).

The equivalent free length shall be consistent with the fixed anchor length along which friction is
considered when verifying the bearing capacity of the micropiles according to 6.

265
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Annex E
(informative)

Anchors

E.1 Use of this Informative Annex

This Informative Annex provides complementary guidance to that given in Clause 8 regarding
anchors.

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.

E.2 Scope and field of application

This Informative Annex covers layout of anchors

E.3 Example for anchor design models

The free anchor length should be determined during the design of the anchored structure.

NOTE Examples of design models for anchored structures are given in Annexes A and D.

E.4 Layout of anchors

The layout of anchors should consider the proximity of the load-bearing stratum and the execution.

NOTE 1 Examples of the configuration of anchors are given in Figure E.1, Figure E.2, and Figure E.3.

NOTE 2 In Figure E.3(a), all the grout bodies are outside the active earth pressure wedge. There is no additional
earth pressure to the retaining wall. If the grout bodies are very close to the support (see Figure E.3(b)), additional
earth pressure act.

266
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
1 grout input info borehole and gravel 6 >4 m
2 gravel 7 sand
3 silt 8 transition zone
4 Lfree>5 m 9 clay
5 Lfixed

Figure E.1 — Examples of good (right side) and bad (left side) anchor configurations in stratified
ground

267
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
A1 PLAN: wrong B1 PLAN: right C1 PLAN: right
A2 SECTION: wrong B2 SECTION: right C2 SECTION: right

Figure E.2 — Examples of good and bad spreading and staggering of anchors

268
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
A1 PLAN: E=Ea B1 PLAN: E>Ea 1 Active earth pressure wedge
A2 SECTION: E=Ea B2 SECTION: E>Ea 2 Corner designed to transfer tension
3 Additional arth pressure

Figure E.3 — Examples of anchoring a protruding wall corner

269
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Annex F
(informative)

Reinforced fill structures

F.1 Use of this Informative Annex

This Informative Annex provides complementary guidance to that given in Clause 9 for reinforced
fill structures.

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.

F.2 Scope and field of application

This Annex covers calculation models for reinforced fill structures.

F.3 Calculation models for reinforced fill structures

F.3.1 Method of slices for slip surface analysis

Slip surface analysis using the method of slices may be used for verifying internal and compound
stability.

In the case of reinforced slopes, the horizontal interslice forces may be ignored only if (3) is applied
as well.

It may be assumed that reinforcement elements are only considered where they intersect the
assumed failure surface on a particular slice only if (2) is applied as well.

The force applied in slip surface analysis to account for reinforcement elements should be limited to
the resistance of the reinforcement element (see Figure F.1(a)).

The force change due to its distribution within the particular slice should be added to the forces
acting on that particular slice (see Figure F.1(b)).

NOTE Figure F.1 illustrates implementation of forces from reinforcing element into the method of slices.

270
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Figure F.1 — Forces from reinforcing element – implementation into method of slices

F.3.2 Coherent gravity method

The coherent gravity method may be used for direct calculation of the load in each layer of soil
reinforcements for internal stability check.

The coherent gravity method may be used for non-extensible reinforcement that develops its tensile
design strength at a strain < 1 %.

NOTE Figure F.2 illustrates the coherent gravity method.

Figure F.2 — Coherent gravity method

The coherent gravity method may be used.

The stress state within the reinforced soil block should be taken to be proportional to K0 at the
effective ground surface reducing to Ka at a depth of 6 m.

271
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The maximum tensile force Tj to be resisted by the jth layer of reinforcement (at a depth of hj from
the top of the wall) should be determined from Formula (F.1F.1):

𝑅𝑅v,j
𝑇𝑇j = 𝑇𝑇p,j + 𝑇𝑇s,j + 𝑇𝑇f,j = 𝐾𝐾𝜎𝜎v,j 𝑆𝑆v,j + 𝑇𝑇s,j + 𝑇𝑇f,j = 𝐾𝐾 � � 𝑆𝑆 + 𝑇𝑇s,j + 𝑇𝑇f,j (F.1)
𝐿𝐿j − 2𝑒𝑒j v,j

The line of maximum tension in the reinforcement should be assumed as indicated on Figure F.2.
Tp,j is the tensile force per metre width due to the vertical loads of self-weight and UDL surcharge;
Ts,j is the tensile force per metre width due to any strip loading;
Tf,j is the tensile force per meter width due to any horizontal loads;
K is the earth pressure coefficient within the reinforced soil block at the depth of the jth layer of
reinforcement;
σv,j is the vertical stress on the jth layer of reinforcements;
Sv,j is the vertical spacing of the reinforcements at the jth level in the wall; = |hj+1 – hj-1|/2
Rv,j is the resultant vertical load excluding external strip loads on the jth layer of reinforcement
Lj is the length of the j-th layer of reinforcement
ej is the eccentricity of the resultant vertical load at the level of the jth layer of reinforcement.
The tensile resistance of a reinforcing element at the line of maximum tension in the j-th layer shall
be greater than the maximum tensile force Tj.

NOTE Detailed calculation procedure of coherent gravity method can be found in NF P 94 270.

F.3.3 Tie-back wedge method

The tie-back wedge method may be used for direct calculation of the load in each layer of soil
reinforcements for internal stability check.

The tie-back wedge method may be used for extensible reinforcement that develops its tensile design
strength at a strain > 1 %.

The stress state within the reinforced soil block should be taken to be proportional to Ka for all
reinforcement layers.

The verification of tensile resistance of a reinforcing element should comply with F.3.2 and Formula
(F.1) with K equal to Ka, where the influence of the eccentricity of the resultant vertical load is not
considered.

The stability of a series of potential straight line failure planes forming wedges through the
reinforced soil block should also be checked considering beneficial effect from the tensile resistance
within each reinforcement layer that crosses the failure plane (see Figure F.3).

The tensile resistance of each reinforcing element shall comply with 9.6.2.

NOTE 1 Detailed calculation procedure can be found in BS 8006-1.

NOTE 2 Figure F.3

272
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The tie-back wedge method may be used for internal and compound stability check.

Key
E …
F ..
G …
1 Active zone
2 Passive zone
3 Foundation width
4 Potential failure surface

Figure F.3 — Tie-back wedge method

F.3.4 Multi-part wedge method

The multi-part wedge method may be used for internal and compound stability check.

If the potential failure mechanism is assumed to be a two-part wedge, the lower part of the wedge
(Prism 1) should pass through the reinforced soil structure and the upper part of the wedge (Prism
2) through the retained (unreinforced material) behind it (see Figure F.4).

The stability of any combination of wedges should be checked accounting for beneficial effect from
the reinforcing elements in each layer cut by the failure plane of any wedge.

NOTE Figure F.4 illustrates the two-part wedge method.

273
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
1 Wedge 1
2 Wedge 2

Figure F.4 — Two-part wedge method

F.4 Calculation models for reinforced embankment bases

F.4.1 Resistance to transverse sliding

The lateral sliding stability of the embankment should be determined by examining any preferential
slip surfaces that pass above the basal reinforcement layers.

The lateral thrust Flt from the embankment fill should be determined from Formula (F.2):

𝐹𝐹lt = 0.5𝐾𝐾𝑎𝑎 𝐻𝐻(𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 + 2𝑊𝑊s ) (F.2)

where:
Ka is an active pressure coefficient;
γ is the weight density of the fill;
H is the height of the embankment; and
Ws is the surcharge load.
The tensile resistance of the reinforcing elements shall be greater than the lateral thrust.

The sliding resistance along the top of the reinforcement layers beneath the embankment side slope
shall be greater than the lateral thrust below the embankment crest from (2) (see Figure F.5).

NOTE Figure F.5 illustrates a calculation model to determine resistance to sliding.

274
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
1 Soil foundation
2 Embankment
3 Fill
4 Reinforcement
P1 Lateral thrust from formula (F.2)
Tds Is Rt,el

Figure F.5 — Calculation model to determine resistance to sliding

F.4.2 Resistance to foundation extrusion

Where the thickness of low strength fine foundation soil is relatively small compared to the
embankment width (thickness ≤ 0.25 embankment width) foundation extrusion, squeezing, should
be determined.

The side slope of the embankment should be long enough to develop resistance to prevent the
mobilization of the outward shear stresses in the foundation soils (see Figure F.6).

NOTE Figure F.6 illustrates a calculation model to determine resistance to extrusion.

275
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
1 Soil foundation
2 Embankment
3 Fill
4 Reinforcement

Figure F.6 — Calculation model to determine resistance to extrusion

The minimum side slope length required should be determined using Formula (F.3):

(𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 + 𝑊𝑊s − 4𝑐𝑐u )𝑧𝑧c

𝐿𝐿e = (F.3)
(1 + 𝛼𝛼′ds )𝑐𝑐u

where:

𝛾𝛾 is the unit weight of the embankment fill;

H is the maximum height of the embankment;
Ws is the surcharge load;
cu is the undrained shear strength of the soft foundation soil;
zc is the depth of the foundation soil when the depth is limited and cu is constant throughout;
α′ds is a soil/reinforcement interaction coefficient relating to cu.

F.5 Calculation models for load transfer platform over rigid inclusions
F.5.1 General

Basal reinforcement should be designed to transfer the load from the embankment onto the discrete
inclusions.

NOTE Figure F.7 give a schematic concept of load transfer platform over discrete inclusions.

276
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

The part of the load from the embankment weight γH and surface surcharge ws that acts on the
reinforcement should be determined by different calculation methods.

The tensile force FLTP shall be smaller than tensile resistance in the reinforcement determined from
isochronous creep curves for specified limiting strain for an analysed limit state.

Key
1 Fill 5 Reinforcement
2 Soil arching 6 Embankment
3 ε, strain 7 Pile cap
4 Fill 8 Pile

Figure F.7 — Schematic concept of a load transfer platform over discrete inclusions

F.5.2 Hewlett and Randolph method

In the Hewlett and Randolph method, the surcharge on the load transfer platform strips between
adjacent inclusion caps should be assumed to be uniform.

NOTE In Figure F.7 the surcharge on the load transfer platform is WT.

For geosynthetic reinforcement that allows some deformation, the tensile force FLTP in a reinforcing
element should be determined from Formula (F.4):

277
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

𝑊𝑊𝑇𝑇 �𝑠𝑠p − 𝐵𝐵� 1

𝐹𝐹LTP = �1 + (F.4)
2𝐵𝐵 6ε

where:

WT is the vertical uniformly distributed load on the reinforcement;

sp is the centre to centre spacing of the inclusions;
B is the breadth of the inclusion cap or inclusion diameter;
ε is the limiting strain in the reinforcement.
NOTE 1 This formula assumes that there is no support from underlying low bearing strata.

NOTE 2 Detailed information about the Hewlett and Randolph method can be found in BS 8006-1.

F.5.3 EBGEO method

In the EBGEO method, the surcharge on the load transfer platform shall be assumed to be triangular.

NOTE In Figure F.7 the surcharge on the load transfer platform is WT.

The determination of surcharges and resistances of individual system elements should be

determined by iterative calculation procedure.

NOTE Details of the calculation procedure can be found in EBGEO.

F.5.4 Concentric Arches method

In the Concentric Arches method, the surcharge on the load transfer platform shall be assumed to
have a shape of inverse triangle or uniform load with respect to embankment height and subsoil
resistance support.

NOTE In Figure F.7 the surcharge on the load transfer platform is WT.

Surcharges and resistances of individual system elements should be determined by an iterative

calculation procedure.

NOTE Details of the calculation procedure can be found in CUR 226.

F.6 Calculation models for embankments over voids

In areas prone to the development of voids or deep depressions soil reinforcement may be used to
provide a short term indicating function or a long term permanent solution.

The design void diameter should be assumed based on comparable experience.

The maximum differential settlement of the ground surface above a void should be as specified by
the relevant authority or, where not specified, as agreed for a specific project by the relevant parties.

NOTE The maximum differential settlement is typically 1-7 % for roads, depending on the class of road. For
railways, it is typically < 0.5 %, depending on the permitted speed of the trains.

NOTE Figure F.8 illustrates the parameters required for using Formula F.6)

278
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
1 Embankment
2 Reinforcement
ds Depression at surface
d Depression at reinforcement

Figure F.8 — Parameters required for Formula (F.6)

Provided the deformed shape of the geosynthetic reinforcement is parabolic, the strain in the
reinforcement layer ε shall be determined from Formula (F.5):

8 𝑑𝑑ₛ 2
𝜀𝜀 = � � (F.5)
3 𝐷𝐷ₛ

where:

ds is the deformation at the surface; and

Ds is the diameter of the depression at the surface,

The tensile force Fvo in the geosynthetic reinforcement for a circular void and for case a of Figure F.8
shall be determined from Formula (F.6):

𝐹𝐹vo = 0.5(𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 + 𝑤𝑤ₛ)𝐷𝐷�1 + 1/6𝜀𝜀 (F.6)

where:

H is the height of material above the geosynthetic layer;

ws is the surcharge;
D is the diameter of the void at the level of the geosynthetic layer;
γ is the weight density of the embankment fill;
ε is the reinforcement strain given in Formula (F. 5).
For cases b and c shown in Figure F.8, more complex calculation procedures should be followed to
determine the force Fvo.

NOTE For further details, see EBGEO.

279
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

As an alternative to (6), cases b and c may be analysed using a different method provided it has been
calibrated and validated against comparable experience.

The tensile force Fvo shall be smaller than tensile resistance in the reinforcement determined from
isochronous creep curves for specified limiting strain for an analysed limit state.

F.7 Veneer reinforcement

The stability of a soil veneer above a potential sliding plane should be determined by assuming a
tension crack at the top of the slope and a resistant passive wedge at the toe.

The contribution of friction down the slope should take the value of the lowest frictional interaction
between the multiple layers that form the veneer system.

NOTE Veneer systems can be made up of multiple synthetic and mineral layers with different frictional
characteristics.

The tensile force Tven required to hold the veneer system on the slope without water should be
determined from Formula (F.7):

𝐶𝐶𝑃𝑃 + 𝑊𝑊𝑃𝑃 tan 𝜑𝜑

𝑇𝑇𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣 = 𝑊𝑊𝐴𝐴 sin 𝛽𝛽 − 𝑊𝑊𝐴𝐴 cos 𝛽𝛽 tan 𝛿𝛿 − 𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴 − (F.7)
cos 𝛽𝛽 − sin 𝛽𝛽 tan 𝜑𝜑

where:

Tven is the tensile force to hold the veneer CP is the cohesion along the passive wedge
system on the slope without water

WA is the weight of the active wedge β is the inclination of the ground surface

WP is the weight of the passive wedge δ is the ground-structure interface friction

angle

CA is the cohesion along the active wedge φ is the soil’s angle of friction

The tensile force Fven shall be smaller than tensile resistance in reinforcing element for an analysed
limit state.

The stability of the horizontal anchorage at the top of the veneer without water should be verified
using Formula (F.8):

𝑇𝑇ven sin 𝛽𝛽
𝑇𝑇ven ≤ � + 𝛾𝛾cs 𝑑𝑑cs � 𝑓𝑓ds 𝐿𝐿ds (F.8)
𝐿𝐿ds

where:

Tven is the tensile force to hold the veneer dcs is the depth of the cover soil
system on the slope without water

280
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Lds is the pullout (fixed) length of the β is the inclination of the ground surface
veneer reinforcement

γcs is the weight density of the coversoil fds is the direct shear factor

When water is present or a different shape of anchorage is used, Formulae (F.8) and (F.9) should be
amended accordingly.

NOTE Additional details on calculation procedure are given by Rimoldi (2018).

F.8 Durability, reduction factor for tensile strength

F.8.1 Reduction factors for geosynthetic reinforcing element

NOTE See 9.3.3

The value of the reduction factor for tensile strength of geosynthetic reinforcement, ηgs shall be
determined from Formula (F.9):

𝜂𝜂gs = 𝜂𝜂cr ∙ 𝜂𝜂dmg ∙ 𝜂𝜂w ∙ 𝜂𝜂ch ∙ 𝜂𝜂dyn ∙ 𝜂𝜂con (F.9)

where:

ηcr is a factor accounting for the adverse effect of tensile creep due to sustained static load over the
design service life of the structure at the design temperature;
ηdmg is a factor accounting for the adverse effects of mechanical damage during transportation,
installation and execution;
ηw is a factor accounting for the adverse effects of weathering;

ηch is a factor accounting for the adverse effects of chemical and biological degradation of the
reinforcing element over the design service life of the structure at the design temperature;
ηdyn is a factor accounting for the adverse effects of intense and repeated loading over the design
service life of the structure (fatigue);
ηcon is a factor accounting for the adverse effects of joints and seams for geosynthetic reinforcing
elements and polymeric coated steel woven wire mesh.
NOTE 1 The values of ηcr, ηdmg, ηw, and ηch are the reciprocals of the reduction factors specified in ISO TR 20432,
as RFCR, RFID, RFW, and RFCH, respectively.

NOTE 2 The value of ηdyn is the reciprocal of the reduction factor specified in EBGEO as A5.

NOTE 3 The value of ηcon is the reciprocal of the reduction factor specified in EBGEO as A3, based on test
complying with EN ISO 10321.

NOTE 4 Values of ηcr, ηdmg, ηw, and ηch is given in ISO TR 20432 and values ofηdyn is given in EBGEO, unless the
national annex gives different values.

NOTE 5 For short term or rapid loading ηcr can be modified in accordance with ISO TR 20432 to allow for the
nature of the applied load.

NOTE 6 ηcr include creep strain based on isochronous curves, to allow for creep and limiting elongation.

281
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

NOTE 7 The factor ηw can have a value less than 1,0 if the reinforcement is not covered by soil within one day of
installation.

F.8.2 Reduction factors for steel woven wire meshes

NOTE See 9.3.5

The value of the reduction factor for tensile strength of steel woven wire meshes, ηpwm shall be
determined from Formula (F.10):

𝜂𝜂pwm = 𝜂𝜂dmg ∙ 𝜂𝜂cor (F.10)

where:

ηdmg is a reduction factor accounting for the adverse effects of mechanical damage during
transportation, installation and execution;

ηcor is a reduction factor accounting for the adverse effects of degradation of the element by
corrosion over the design service life of the structure, corrosion being triggered by the local loss
of watertightness due to chemical degradation of the polymeric coating and/or the loss of the
Zinc or Zinc/Aluminium layer by corrosion.

NOTE 1 The value of ηcor is determined by testing standard to be developed.

NOTE 2 The values of ηdmg is the reciprocal of the reduction factor specified in ISO TR 20432, as RFID.

NOTE 3 The value of ηdmg can have a value lower than 1.0 only if the steel wires get damaged during execution,
while damage to the coating is irrelevant for the decrease of tensile strength at short term and is accounted in the
determination of ηcor. The damage of the coating is considering in ηcor as it will induce corrosion of the exposed wire.

F.9 Typical grades of steel used for soil reinforcement elements

F.9.1 General

This clause provides complementary guidance to 9.3.4 for typical grades of steel used for tension
elements in reinforced fill structures and applies to tension elements for reinforced structures only.

F.9.2 Grades of steel used for tension elements

Tension elements may be made using any of the steel grades given in Table F.9.1.

Other grades of steel may be used, provided they comply with the provisions of 9.3.4.

282
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Table F.9.1 — Typical grades of steels used for tension elements

Type of Relevant Steel Name Yield strengtha Tensile Strengthb Strength
Steel Standard distribution
symbol N/mm2 symbol N/mm2 across section

Hot-rolled EN 10025-2 S235 fy 235 fu 360-510 uniform

strips
S355 fy 355 fu 470-630

S460 fy 460 fu 550-720

Reinforcin EN 10080 B400Bc f0.2k 400 ftk ≥432 non-uniform

g steel (unless
B450Bc f0.2k 450 ftk ≥486 otherwise
demonstrate
B500Bc f0.2k 500 ftk ≥542
d by testing)
B550Bc f0.2k 550 ftk ≥594

B600Bc f0.2k 600 ftk ≥648

a Values stated are minimum where f0.2k = Rp0.2 (specified proof strength at 0.2 % strain) and ftk = Rm (specified tensile
strength) in accordance with EN 10080
b The grades shown are common, commercially available, grades. Consult with manufacturers for available diameters.
c Minimum ductility Class B according to Table 5.5 of prEN 1992-1-1:2021

283
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Annex G
(informative)

Ground improvement

G.1 Use of this Informative Annex

This Informative Annex provides complementary guidance to that given in Clause 11 for ground
improvement.

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.

G.2 Scope and field of application

This Informative Annex:

− gives examples of diffused ground improvement techniques in Table G.1;

− gives examples of discrete ground improvement techniques in Table G.2;
− indicates which European execution standards (if any) apply to each technique.

G.3 Examples of ground improvement techniques

NOTE Table G.1 and Table G.2 give typical families and classes used for design.

Table G.1 — Examples of diffused ground improvement techniques

Method Technique Family Description Execution
and Standard
Class

Grouting Permeation AII Replacement of interstitial water or gas of a porous medium EN 12715
Methods grouting with a grout, also known as “impregnation” grouting. Suitable
for a wide range of soils to considerable depths.

Jet grouting AII Hydraulic disaggregation of soils using high velocity jets. EN 12716

Compaction AI Displacement grouting method which is the injection of a EN 12715

grouting medium/low slump mortar into the soil to compact/densify it
by expansion alone. Suitable for a wide range of soils to
considerable depths.

Compactive Deep vibration AI Densification of generally granular soil by the insertion of a EN 14731
Methods vibrating poker. Significant depths of suitable soils can be
treated and marine operation is possible.

Dynamic AI Densification of soil by the impact of heavy weights from None

compaction significant heights. Significant depths of suitable soils can be
treated and marine operation is possible.

Impact roller AI Compactive effort provided by a non-circular roller, usually None

compaction three or four sided. Only shallow depths of suitable soils can
be treated.

284
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Method Technique Family Description Execution

and Standard
Class

Rapid impact AI Compactive effort provided by weight dropping with a rapid None
compaction control mechanism usually mounted on a vertical arm.
Shallow/medium depths of suitable soils can be treated.

Micro-blasting AI Compactive effort provided by detonating small charges of None

explosive at depths below ground level. The weight and
arrangement of explosive charge is tailored to the depth and
type of soil present. It can be used over water and can treat
considerable depths.

Compaction AII Injection of grout into a host medium or ground in such a None
grouting manner as to deform, compress, or displace the ground.

Soil Soil I Replacement of unsuitable soil with engineered materials with None
Replacement replacement or without georeinforcement. Depth limited by excavation
stability.

Thermal Ground AII Freezing of interstitial water within soils to create hardened None
Methods freezing bodies of significant strength and very low hydraulic
conductivity. More suitable for granular soils but can be used
in cohesive soils with care due to potential soil expansion.

Ground AI The use of thermal methods to generally remove water from None
heating AII fine grained soils with a resultant increase in strength.
Ultimately with very high temperatures, soil can be fused in a
rock like structure.

Consolidation Surcharge AI Use of additional load in advance of construction, generally on None

Methods soft clays, to force consolidation and reduce long term residual
settlements

Vertical drains AI Use of sand or prefabricated geotextile drains in combination EN 15237

& surcharge with surcharge to reduce drainage paths within soft cohesive
soils to force accelerated consolidation and accelerated
groundwater pressure dissipation during construction in
order to reduce overall programme and to reduce residual
long-term settlements. Land and marine based rigs available to
considerable depths.

Dewatering AI Lowering of the ground water table or depressurisation of the None

groundwater pressure within soils to increase effective
strength, force consolidation and reduce long term residual
settlements.

Vacuum AI Use of a vacuum instead of surcharge in advance of EN 15237

consolidation construction, generally on soft cohesive soils, to force
accelerated consolidation and accelerated groundwater
pressure dissipation during construction in order to reduce
overall programme and to reduce residual long-term
settlements.

Mixing Dry methods AII Mechanical disaggregation of soils while introducing a dry EN 14679
Methods binder pneumatically and commonly cement. Most usually

285
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Method Technique Family Description Execution

and Standard
Class

executed highly compressible fine grained soil. Land and

marine based rigs available to considerable depths.

Wet methods AII Mechanical disaggregation of soils while introducing a fluid EN 14679
binder. Generally more powerful system than the dry system
and can be executed in various type of soils. Land and marine
based rigs available to considerable depths.

Jet grouting AII Hydraulic disaggregation of soils using high velocity jets of EN 12716
fluid binder combined or not with either water or water and
air. Suitable for most soils and available for land or marine use
to considerable depths.

Table G.2 — Examples of discrete ground improvement techniques

Method Technique Family Description Execution
and Standard
Class

Mixing Dry methods BII Mechanical disaggregation of soils while introducing a dry EN 14679
Methods binder pneumatically and commonly cement. Most usually
executed highly compressible fine grained soil. Land and
marine based rigs available to considerable depths.

Wet methods BII Mechanical disaggregation of soils while introducing a fluid EN 14679
binder. Generally more powerful system than the dry system
and can be executed in various type of soils. Land and marine
based rigs available to considerable depths.

Jet grouting BII Hydraulic disaggregation of soils using high velocity jets of EN 12716
fluid binder combined or not with either water or water and
air. Suitable for most soils and available for land or marine use
to considerable depths.

Granular Stone columns/ BII Compacted stone columns are created in the ground to form a EN 14731
Inclusions Vibro- composite ground with the surrounding soil. Most often used
replacement in soft cohesive soils but in granular soils as well to improve
strength and stiffness of the overall system and accelerate
drainage with possible densification of the surrounding soil
depending on the soil type. Land and marine based rigs
available to considerable depths.

Sand columns/ BI Compacted sand columns are created in the ground to form a EN 14731
Sand composite ground with the surrounding soil. Most often used
compaction piles in soft cohesive soils but in granular soils as well to improve
strength and stiffness of the overall system and accelerate
drainage with possible densification of the surrounding soil
depending on the soil type. Land and marine based rigs
available to considerable depths.

Dynamic BI The use of dynamic compaction to drive bulbs of granular None

replacement material into soft soils thereby both improving the soil by the
dynamic compaction and the introduction of competent
granular piers. Most often used in soft cohesive soils to

286
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Method Technique Family Description Execution

and Standard
Class

improve strength and stiffness of the overall system and

accelerate drainage. Land and marine based rigs available.

Geosynthetics BI Stone or sand columns, encased in a geotextile casing, formed None

encased in very soft soils where the lateral restraint is too small to
columns prevent very significant column bulging. The geotextile casing
provides support to the columns and prevents excessive
bulging under load. Land and marine based rigs available to
significant depths.

Steel/Wood Vibrated BII Rigid columns of steel or wood are vibrated into the ground, None
Inclusions with possible densification effort to the existing ground
depending on the soil type, to form a composite ground with
various type of soil and providing support to the structure
above through load distribution between the soil and
inclusions. Land and marine based rigs available to
considerable depths.

Bored BII Rigid columns of steel or wood are bored into the ground, None
sometimes with associated compactive effort, to form a
composite ground with various type of soil and providing
support to the structure above through load distribution
between the soil and inclusions. Land and marine based rigs
available to considerable depths.

Driven BII Rigid columns of steel or wood are driven into the ground, None
causing some densification, to form a composite ground with
various type of soil and providing support to the structure
above through load distribution between the soil and
inclusions. Land and marine based rigs available to
considerable depths.

Concrete/ Vibrated BII An improvement method whereby columns of concrete or None

Grout concrete mortar are backfilled in the ground during withdrawal of a
Inclusions columns vibrating pipe or poker to form a composite ground with
various type of soil, providing support to the structure above
through load distribution between the soil and inclusions
possible densification effort to the existing ground depending
on the soil type.

Bored BII An improvement method whereby columns of concrete or None

mortar are backfilled in the ground during withdrawal of a
boring auger to form a composite ground with various type of
soil, providing support to the structure above through load
distribution between the soil and inclusions sometimes with
associated compactive effort to the existing ground.

Driven BII An improvement method whereby columns of concrete or None

mortar are backfilled in the ground during withdrawal of a
driven pipe to form a composite ground with various type of
soil, providing support to the structure above through load
distribution between the soil and inclusions and possible

287
prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Method Technique Family Description Execution

and Standard
Class

densification effort to the existing ground depending on the

soil type.

Grouted stone BII An improvement method whereby compacted and grouted None
columns stone columns are created in ground to form a composite
ground with the surrounding soil. Providing support to the
structure above through load distribution between the soil
and inclusions and possible densification effort to the existing
ground depending on the soil type. Land and marine based
rigs available to considerable depths.

Compaction BII Injection of grout into a host medium or ground in such a None
grouting manner as to deform, compress, or displace the ground.

G.4 Use of stress envelope to determine acceptable limit states

When the design is based on the explicit calculation of the principal stresses it shall be verified that
the design values pf the principal stresses do not exceed the states of stress defined in Figure G.1.

In addition to (1) the principal tensile stress shall not exceed 10 % of fm,d.

For Class BII rigid inclusions subjected to eccentricities, resulting stresses within the cross section
shall be verified to be within the stress envelope given in Figure G.1.

When the design is not based on the explicit calculation of principal stresses, the design value of the
normal stresses and of the shear stresses shall not exceed 0.7 fm,d and 0.2 fm,d respectively.

NOTE Figure G.1 illustrates the allowable stresses in rigid ground improvement material.

288
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Key
1 Envelope for allowed states of stress
2 Examples for states of stress σ1, σ3, allowed

3 State of stress in a uniaxial compression test: σ3 = 0, σ1 = fm,d

Figure G.1 — Allowable stresses in rigid ground improvement material

ϕd (strengthened soil) = ϕ′d (unimproved soil)
tan ϕd = tan ϕk ⁄ γϕ

289
prEN 1997-3:2022 (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 206, Concrete — Specification, performance, production and conformity

EN 771-3, Specification for masonry units — Part 3: Aggregate concrete masonry units (Dense and
lightweight aggregates)

EN 1536, Execution of special geotechnical work — Bored piles

EN 1538, Execution of special geotechnical work — Diaphragm walls

EN 1563, Founding — Spheroidal graphite cast irons

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

EN 1995-1-1:2004, Eurocode 5: Design of timber structures — Part 1-1: General — Common rules and rules
for buildings

EN 10218-2, Steel wire and wire products — General — Part 2: Wire dimensions and tolerances

EN 10223-3, Steel wire and wire products for fencing and netting — Part 3: Hexagonal steel wire mesh
products for civil engineering purposes

EN 10245-1, Steel wire and wire products — Organic coatings on steel wire — Part 1: General rules

EN 12063, Execution of special geotechnical work — Sheet-pile walls

EN 12390-2, Testing hardened concrete — Part 2: Making and curing specimens for strength tests

EN 12504-1, Testing concrete in structures — Part 1: Cored specimens — Taking, examining and testing in
compression

EN 12699, Execution of special geotechnical works — Displacement piles

EN 12715, Execution of special geotechnical work — Grouting

EN 12716, Execution of special geotechnical work — Jet grouting

EN 13251, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products — Characteristics required for use in earthworks,
foundations and retaining structures

EN 13670, Execution of concrete structures

290
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

EN 14081-1, Timber structures — Strength graded structural timber with rectangular cross section —
Part 1: General requirements

EN 14199, Execution of special geotechnical works — Micropiles

EN 14487 (all parts), Sprayed concrete

EN 14488 (all parts), Testing sprayed concrete

EN 14490:2010, Execution of special geotechnical works — Soil nailing

EN 14679, Execution of special geotechnical works — Deep mixing

EN 15237, Execution of special geotechnical works — Vertical drainage

EN 15258, Precast concrete products — Retaining wall elements

EN 16907-5, Earthworks — Part 5: Quality control

EN ISO 12957 (all parts), Geosynthetics — Determination of friction characteristics

EN ISO 12958-1, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products — Determination of water flow capacity in
their plane — Part 1: Index test (ISO 12958-1)

EN ISO 12958-2, Geotextiles and geotextile-related products — Determination of water flow capacity in
their plane — Part 2: Performance test (ISO 12958-2)

EN ISO 13793, Thermal performance of buildings — Thermal design of foundations to avoid frost heave
(ISO 13793)

EN ISO 14689, Geotechnical investigation and testing — Identification, description and classification of
rock (ISO 14689)

EN ISO 22282-4, Geotechnical investigation and testing — Geohydraulic testing — Part 4: Pumping tests
(ISO 22282-4)

EN ISO 22477 (all parts), Geotechnical investigation and testing — Testing of geotechnical structures

References given in permissions (i.e. “may” clauses)

The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
expresses a course of action permissible within the limits of the Eurocodes. For dated references, only
the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including
any amendments) applies.

EBGEO, Recommendations for design and analysis of earth structures using geosynthetic reinforcements,
(English Translation) Deutsche Gesellschaft für Geotechnik, Ernst & Sohn, München, Germany, 2011.

EN 12716:2018, Execution of special geotechnical work — Jet grouting

ISO/TS 13434, Geosynthetics — Guidelines for the assessment of durability

291
prEN 1997-3:2022 (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.

prEN 1991-2:2022, Eurocode 1 – Action on structures – Part 2 Traffic loads on bridges and other civil
engineering works

EN 1994-1-1:2004, Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures — Part 1-1: General rules
and rules for buildings

prEN 1998 (all parts), Eurocode – Design of structures for earthquake resistance

ISO 6707-1, Buildings and civil engineering works — Vocabulary — Part 1: General terms

EN 12794, Precast concrete products. Foundation piles

EN 13369, Common rules for precast concrete products

EN 14731, Execution of special geotechnical works — Ground treatment by deep vibration

EN 16907 (all parts), Earthworks

EN ISO 10321, Geosynthetics — Tensile test for joints/seams by wide-width strip method (ISO 10321)

EN ISO 19901-4, Petroleum and natural gas industries — Specific requirements for offshore structures —
Part 4: Geotechnical and foundation design considerations (ISO 19901-4)

EN ISO 22477-1:2018, Geotechnical investigation and testing — Testing of geotechnical structures —

Part 1: Testing of piles: static compression load testing (ISO 22477-1:2018, Corrected version 2019-
03)

EN ISO 22477-4:2018, Geotechnical investigation and testing — Testing of geotechnical structures —

Part 4: Testing of piles: dynamic load testing (ISO 22477-4:2018)

EN ISO 22477-5:2018, Geotechnical investigation and testing — Testing of geotechnical structures —

Part 5: Testing of grouted anchors (ISO 22477-5:2018)

EN ISO 22477-10:2016, Geotechnical investigation and testing — Testing of geotechnical structures —

Part 10: Testing of piles: rapid load testing (ISO 22477-10:2016)

ISO/TR 20432, Guidelines for the determination of the long-term strength of geosynthetics for soil
reinforcement

Bishop, A. W., The use of the slip circle in the analysis of slopes. Geotechnique, Vol 5, (1965) Proc. Europ.
conf. on stability of earth slopes., Stockholm, Vol. I, pp 1-14 (1954).
Bjerrum and Eide, (1956), Stability of strutted excavations in clay, Géotechnique, Vol. 6, No. 1. pp. 32-47.

Brinch Hansen, J., (1961): The Ultimate Resistance of Rigid Piles Against Transversal Forces, Geoteknisk
Institut, Copenhagen, Bulletin No. 12

BS 8006-1, Code of practice for strengthened/reinforced soils and other fills.

292
 prEN 1997-3:2022 (E)

Coulomb, C.A., Essai sur une application des regles des maximis et minimis a quelquels problemesde statique
relatifs, a la architecture. Mem. Acad. Roy. Div. Sav., Vol. 7, pp 343–387 (1776).

Cullman, Die graphiscehe statik. Zürich: Verlag van Meyer & Zeller (1866).

CUR226 (2016). Van Eekelen, S.J.M. & Brugman, M.H.A., Editors. Design Guideline Basal Reinforced Piled
Embankments (CUR226). CRC press, Delft, the Netherlands (English translation). ISBN 9789053676240.

Goodman.R.E. and Shi.G. (1985). Block theory and its application to rock engineering. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ, Prentice-Hall.

DIN 4084:2009-01, Baugrund – Geländebruchberechnungen. Berlin: Beuth Verlag;

Fredlund D.G., Krahn J., Comparison of slope stability methods of analysis, Canadian Geotechnical J. Vol. 29,
no 3 (1977).

Froelich, O.H., The factor of safety with respect to sliding of soil along the arc of a logarithmic spiral. Proc.
of the 3rd ICSMFE Conference, Vol. 2, Switzerland (1953).

Janbu, N., Application of composite slip surfaces for stability analysis. Proc. Europ. conf. on stability of earth
Slopes., 1954 Stockholm, Vol. 3, pp 43-49 (1955).

Kérisel, J., Absi, E, Active and passive earth pressure tables, 3rd Edition, [Link], Rotterdam, 1990.

Morgenstern, N. R., Price, V. W., The analysis for the stability of general slip surfaces. Geotechnique, Vol 15,
pp 79-93 (1965).

NF P 94 270 Calcul géotechnique - Ouvrages de soutènement - Remblais renforcés et massifs en sol cloué.

Poisel,Rainer, and Preh, Alexander (2004), Rock slope initial failure mechanisms and their mechanical
models, Felsbau 22, no 2

Rimoldi, P. (2018). Semi-probabilistic approach to the stability of veneer reinforcement. Proc. 11th
International Conference on Geosynthetics, Seoul, Korea.

Sarma S.K., Stability analysis of embankments and slopes, Journal of the geotechnical engineering division.
ASCE, Vol. 105, no GT12 (1979).

Spencer, E., A method of analysis of the stability of embankments assuming parallel inter-slice forces,
Geotechnique, Vol. 17, pp 11-26 (1967).

Wyllie, Duncan C. (2017), Rock Slope Engineering, Civil Applications, Fifth Edition, CRC Press, 620pp.

293