Eurocode 7 - geotechnical design

Eurocode 7 - geotechnical design

ETC10 Questionnaire 2.3/benchmark


	General Q1. Please provide your contact details in case we need to clarify your submission. (These details will be kept strictly confidential.) Name Affiliation Email address Q2. How many structures of this kind have you previously designed? None 1-2 3-6 More than 6 Q3. Having completed your design to Eurocode 7, how confident are you that the design is sound? Very unsure Unsure Confident Very confident Q4-5. Not used. Serviceability limit state Q6. Which parameters did you use for the SLS design of the pile foundation? Cone resistance q_c SPT blow count N Corrected SPT blow count (N₁)₆₀ UU triaxial test strength c_u Pressuremeter limit pressure p_lim Undrained Young's modulus of elasticity E_u Drained Young's modulus of elasticity E' Poisson's ratio n Shear modulus of elasticity G Other (specify) Q7-15. Not used. Q16. Which calculation model did you use to determine settlement? Method from national annex (specify) Method from national standard (specify) Finite element analysis Finite difference analysis Other (specify) Q17. What length does the pile need to avoid a serviceability limit state? L_SLS (in m) = Ultimate limit state Q18. Which parameters did you use for the ULS design of the pile foundation? Cone resistance q_c SPT blow count N Corrected SPT blow count (N₁)₆₀ UU triaxial test strength c_u Pressuremeter limit pressure p_lim Other (specify) Q19-22. Not used. Q23. Which calculation model did you use to determine shaft and base resistance? Annex D.6 from EN 1997-2 Annex D.7 from EN 1997-2 Annex E.3 from EN 1997-2 Alternative given in a national annex (specify) Alternative given in a national standard (specify) Finite element analysis Finite difference analysis Other (specify) Q24. Which country's National Annex did you use to interpret EN 1997-1? Q25. Which Design Approach did you use for verification of the Ultimate Limit State (ULS)? Design Approach 1 Combinations 1 and 2 Design Approach 1 Combination 1 only Design Approach 1 Combination 2 only Design Approach 2 Design Approach 2* Design Approach 3 Other (specify) Q26. What values of partial factors did you use for this ULS verification? g_G g_Q g_f g_c g_cu g_s g_b g_t Q26a. If you used a second combination of partial factors, what values did you use for this second combination? g_G g_Q g_f g_c g_cu g_s g_b g_t Q27. What correlation factors (if any) did you use for this verification? x₃ x₄ Q28. What model factor (if any) did you use for this verification? g_Rd Q29. What length does the pile need to avoid an ultimate limit state? L_ULS (in m) = Q30. What is the design compressive force that the pile must be designed for according to Eurocode 2? Design compressive force, F_cd (in kNm) = Concluding questions Q31. What other assumptions did you need to make to complete your design? Q32. Please specify any other data that you would have liked to have had to design this type of foundation Q33. How conservative do you consider your previous national practice to be for this design example? Very conservative Conservative About right Unconservative Very unconservative Q34. How conservative do you consider Eurocode 7 (with your National Annex) to be for this example? Very conservative Conservative About right Unconservative Very unconservative Q35. How does your Eurocode 7 design compare with your previous national practice? Much more conservative More conservative About the same Less conservative Much less conservative Q36. Please provide any other relevant information needed to understand your solution to this design exercise

Eurocode 7 website

Evolution Groups

Training courses