Evolution and Ease of Use of the

Structural Eurocodes
Steve Denton
FREng FICE FIStructE
Head of Civil, Bridge and Ground Engineering, WSP
Visiting Professor, University of Bath
Chairman, CEN/TC 250

Evolution and ease of use of Eurocodes, 12 November 2018, London

50 0 0 0 0
En gin eers
50 0 0 0 0 € 65 Bil l ion
En gin eers
50 0 0 0 0 € 65 Bil l ion 10 -59
En gin eers
50 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
€ 65 Bil l ion 10 -59
En gin eers Pages
50 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
€ 65 Bil l ion 10 -59 10 55 NDPs
En gin eers Pages
50 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
€ 65 Bil l ion 10 -59 10 55 NDPs
En gin eers Pages

33
Cou n t ries
50 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
€ 65 Bil l ion 10 -59 10 55 NDPs
En gin eers Pages

97
33 SCs/W Gs/
Cou n t ries TGs
50 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
€ 65 Bil l ion 10 -59 10 55 NDPs
En gin eers Pages

97
33 SCs/W Gs/
€ 4.5
Cou n t ries M il l ion
TGs
50 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
€ 65 Bil l ion 10 -59 10 55 NDPs
En gin eers Pages

97
33 SCs/W Gs/
€ 4.5 € 11.5
Cou n t ries M il l ion M il l ion
TGs
50 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
€ 65 Bil l ion 10 -59 10 55 NDPs
En gin eers Pages

97 76 Project
33 SCs/W Gs/
€ 4.5 € 11.5
Cou n t ries TGs M il l ion M il l ion Team s
50 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
€ 65 Bil l ion 10 -59 10 55 NDPs
En gin eers Pages

97 76 Project
33 SCs/W Gs/
€ 4.5 € 11.5
Cou n t ries TGs M il l ion M il l ion Team s

25
Ph ase 1 PTs
50 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
€ 65 Bil l ion 10 -59 10 55 NDPs
En gin eers Pages

97 76 Project
33 SCs/W Gs/
€ 4.5 € 11.5
Cou n t ries TGs M il l ion M il l ion Team s

25 22
Ph ase 1 PTs Ph ase 2 PTs
50 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
€ 65 Bil l ion 10 -59 10 55 NDPs
En gin eers Pages

97 76 Project
33 SCs/W Gs/
€ 4.5 € 11.5
Cou n t ries TGs M il l ion M il l ion Team s

25 22 30 0 +
Ph ase 1&2
Ph ase 1 PTs Ph ase 2 PTs
Con t ract s
50 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
€ 65 Bil l ion 10 -59 10 55 NDPs
En gin eers Pages

97 76 Project
33 SCs/W Gs/
€ 4.5 € 11.5
Cou n t ries TGs M il l ion M il l ion Team s

25 22 30 0 + A u gu st
Ph ase 1&2
Ph ase 1 PTs Ph ase 2 PTs
Con t ract s 20 18
50 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
€ 65 Bil l ion 10 -59 10 55 NDPs
En gin eers Pages

97 76 Project
33 SCs/W Gs/
€ 4.5 € 11.5
Cou n t ries TGs M il l ion M il l ion Team s

25 22 30 0 + A u gu st
Ph ase 1&2 20 21
Ph ase 1 PTs Ph ase 2 PTs
Con t ract s 20 18
 Agenda

— Background
— Why Design Standards Matter
— Aims for the evolution of Structural Eurocodes
— Process and timing
17
 Agenda

— Background
— Why Design Standards Matter
— Aims for the evolution of Structural Eurocodes
— Process and timing
18
 My background

— Chairman of CEN/TC 250 Structural Eurocodes

— WSP’s Head of Civil, Bridge and Ground Engineering
— Visiting Professor at the University of Bath
— Advisor to Clients and Government
19
 CEN/TC 250 Structural Eurocodes

20
Background

“Like life in general our codes seem

to get more and more complicated.”
Background
If a d esign er-b uild er h as
d esign ed -b uilt a h om e for
a m an an d h is w ork is n ot
good , an d if t h e h ouse h e
h as d esign ed -b uilt falls in
Historical evolution (*)
Publication of the 2nd
generation of Eurocodes
Publication of the 1st
generation of Eurocodes

No. of design standards

Limit state design
an d kills t h e h ouseh old er,
t h at d esign er-b uild er
sh all b e slain Re-thinking of structural safety
concepts + Introduction of computers
Ru le 229 , Cod e of
Permissible stress approach
H a m m u ra b i
New mathematical theories of
materials and structural behaviour

Ten Books of
Architecture New
Code of (Vitruvius) construction
Hammurabi materials

2007

2020
~1850

~1926

~1945

~1970
~200 BC
~1750 BC

Years

(*) Th e grap h is in d icat ive

Background The Structural Eurocodes

Eurocodes European European

(EN1990 – EN1999) Product Execution
+ Standards Standards
National Annexes

European standards for construction

Non-contradictory
complementary
information

Client implementation and requirements

Support to the profession

 Agenda

— Background
— Why Design Standards Matter
— Aims for the evolution of Structural Eurocodes
— Process and timing
24
Why Design
Standards
Matter

Impact
Why Design
Standards
Matter

International trade
Why Design
Standards
Matter

Verification of adequacy
Why Design
Standards
Matter

Feedback
Why Design
Standards
Matter

New societal demands

Why Design
Standards
Matter

Research to application
 Agenda

— Background
— Why Design Standards Matter
— Aims for the evolution of Structural Eurocodes
— Process and timing
31
Aims of the
Evolution of the
Eurocode
Aims of the
Evolution of the
Eurocode

 En h an ced
Ease of Use
Aims of the
Evolution of the
Eurocode

 En h an ced  Ex em p l ary
Ease of Use l evel s of
in t ern at ion al
con sen su s
Aims of the
Evolution of the
Eurocode

 En h an ced  Ex em p l ary
Ease of Use l evel s of
in t ern at ion al
con sen su s
Aims of the
Evolution of the
CEN/TC 250’s vision on the second generation
Eurocode of the Structural Eurocodes

Whilst respecting the achievements of the past, our

vision for the second generation of Structural
Eurocodes is to create a more user-orientated suite
of design standards that are recognised as the most
trusted and preferred in the world.
Aims of the
Evolution of the
CEN/TC 250 Position Paper on Ease of Use
Eurocode

Five pillars to enhance ease of use of the Eurocodes

Aims of the
Evolution of the
CEN/TC 250 Position Paper on Ease of Use
Eurocode

Five pillars to enhance ease of use of the Eurocodes

Aims of the
Evolution of the
Recommendation 1: Statements of intent to
Eurocode meet users’ needs

PRIMARY TARGET AUDIENCE DEFINITION

Competent civil, structural and geotechnical engineers, typically qualified

Practitioners – Competent engineers
professionals able to work independently in relevant fields
Aims of the
Evolution of the
Recommendation 1: Statements of intent to
Eurocode meet users’ needs
CATEGORIES OF CEN/TC 250
EUROCODES’ USERS STATEMENTS OF INTENT

Practitioners – Competent engineers We will aim to produce Standards that are suitable and clear for all common
[Primary target audience] design cases without demanding disproportionate levels of effort to apply them

We will aim to produce Eurocodes that can be used by Graduates where

Practioners – Graduates necessary supplemented by suitable guidance documents and textbooks and
under the supervision of an experienced practitioner when appropriate

We will aim not to restrict innovation by providing freedom to experts to apply

Expert specialists
their specialist knowledge and expertise

Working with other CEN/TCs we will aim to eliminate incompatibilities or

Product Manufacturers
ambiguities between the Eurocodes and Product Standards

We will aim to provide unambiguous and complete design procedures.

Software developers
Accompanying formulae will be provided for charts and tables where possible

We will aim to use consistent underlying technical principles irrespective of the

Educators intended use of a structure (e.g. bridge, building, etc.) and that facilitate the
linkage between physical behaviour and design rules

We will endeavour to produce standards that can be referenced or quoted by

National regulator
National Regulations

We will continue to promote technical harmonization across European markets

Private sectors businesses
in order to reduce barriers to trade

We will produce Eurocodes that enable the design of safe, serviceable, robust
Clients and durable structures, aiming to promoting cost effectiveness throughout their
whole life cycle, including design, construction and maintenance

We will engage proactively to promote effective collaboration with those other

Other CEN/TCs
CEN/TCs that have shared interests
Aims of the
Evolution of the
Recommendation 1: Statements of intent to
Eurocode meet users’ needs

CATEGORIES OF CEN/TC 250

EUROCODES’ USERS STATEMENTS OF INTENT

Practitioners – Competent engineers We will aim to produce Standards that are suitable and clear for all common
[Primary target audience] design cases without demanding disproportionate levels of effort to apply them

We will aim to produce Eurocodes that can be used by Graduates where

Practioners – Graduates necessary supplemented by suitable guidance documents and textbooks and
under the supervision of an experienced practitioner when appropriate

We will aim not to restrict innovation by providing freedom to experts to apply

Expert specialists
their specialist knowledge and expertise

Working with other CEN/TCs we will aim to eliminate incompatibilities or

Product Manufacturers
ambiguities between the Eurocodes and Product Standards
Aims of the
Evolution of the
Recommendation 1: Statements of intent to
Eurocode meet users’ needs
CATEGORIES OF CEN/TC 250
EUROCODES’ USERS STATEMENTS OF INTENT

We will aim to provide unambiguous and complete design procedures.

Software developers
Accompanying formulae will be provided for charts and tables where possible

We will aim to use consistent underlying technical principles irrespective of the

Educators intended use of a structure (e.g. bridge, building, etc.) and that facilitate the
linkage between physical behaviour and design rules

We will endeavour to produce standards that can be referenced or quoted by

National regulator
National Regulations

We will continue to promote technical harmonization across European markets

Private sectors businesses
in order to reduce barriers to trade

We will produce Eurocodes that enable the design of safe, serviceable, robust
Clients and durable structures, aiming to promoting cost effectiveness throughout their
whole life cycle, including design, construction and maintenance

We will engage proactively to promote effective collaboration with those other

Other CEN/TCs
CEN/TCs that have shared interests
Aims of the
Evolution of the
Recommendation 2: Principles and related
Eurocode priorities
General principles (primary)
1 Improving clarity and understandability of technical provisions of the Eurocodes
2 Improving accessibility to technical provisions and ease of navigation between them
3 Improving consistency within and between the Eurocodes
4 Including state-of the-art material the use of which is based on commonly accepted results of research and
has been validated through sufficient practical experience
5 Considering the second generation of the Eurocodes as an “evolution” avoiding fundamental changes to the
approach to design and to the structure of the Eurocodes unless adequately justified
Specific principles (secondary)
6 Providing clear guidance for all common design cases encountered by typical competent practitioners in the
relevant field
7 Omitting or providing only general and basic technical provisions for special cases that will be very rarely
encountered by typical competent practitioners in the relevant field
8 Not inhibiting the freedom of experts to work from first principles and providing adequate freedom for
innovation
9 Limiting the inclusion of alternative application rules
10 Including simplified methods only where they are of general application, address commonly encountered
situations, are technically justified and give more conservative results than the rigorous methods they are
intended to simplify
11 Improving consistency with product standards and standards for execution
12 Providing technical provisions that are not excessive sensitive to execution tolerances beyond what can be
practically achieved on site
Aims of the
Evolution of the
Recommendation 2: Principles and related
Eurocode priorities

General principles (primary)

1 Improving clarity and understandability of technical provisions of the Eurocodes
2 Improving accessibility to technical provisions and ease of navigation between them
3 Improving consistency within and between the Eurocodes
4 Including state-of the-art material the use of which is based on commonly accepted results of research and
has been validated through sufficient practical experience
5 Considering the second generation of the Eurocodes as an “evolution” avoiding fundamental changes to the
approach to design and to the structure of the Eurocodes unless adequately justified
Aims of the
Evolution of the
Recommendation 2: Principles and related
Eurocode priorities

Specific principles (secondary)

6 Providing clear guidance for all common design cases encountered by typical competent practitioners in the
relevant field
7 Omitting or providing only general and basic technical provisions for special cases that will be very rarely
encountered by typical competent practitioners in the relevant field
8 Not inhibiting the freedom of experts to work from first principles and providing adequate freedom for
innovation
9 Limiting the inclusion of alternative application rules
10 Including simplified methods only where they are of general application, address commonly encountered
situations, are technically justified and give more conservative results than the rigorous methods they are
intended to simplify
11 Improving consistency with product standards and standards for execution
12 Providing technical provisions that are not excessive sensitive to execution tolerances beyond what can be
practically achieved on site
Aims of the
Evolution of the
CEN/TC 250 Position Paper on Ease of Use
Eurocode

Five pillars to enhance ease of use of the Eurocodes

 Enhancing Ease of Use

— Appointment of Technical Reviewer

— Detailed review of deliverables
— Development of TC 250 document
N1250 ‘Policy Guidelines and
Procedures’
47

— Provision of examples and advice

 Enhancing Ease of Use
— Guidance materials, examples and briefings developed

48
Aims of the
Evolution of the
Eurocode

 En h an ced  Ex em p l ary
Ease of Use l evel s of
in t ern at ion al
con sen su s
Aims of the
Evolution of the
Eurocode

 En h an ced  Ex em p l ary
Ease of Use l evel s of
in t ern at ion al
con sen su s
Future
Challenges
The chairman shall do everything possible to
obtain a unanimous decision of the Technical
Committee. If unanimity on a subject is not
obtainable, the chairman shall try to seek
consensus rather than rely simply on a majority
decision.

CEN Internal Regulations -

Responsibility of the Chairman of a CEN TC
 Different perspectives Points of agreement
Issue /
fully understood noted and then
disagreement
(including underlying disagreement
identified
concerns) isolated

Options set out Decision taken based

(and refined) on options
 Agenda

— Background
— Why Design Standards Matter
— Aims for the evolution of Structural Eurocodes
— Process and timing
53
Evolution European Commission Mandate M/515
process and
timing
Evolution CEN/TC 250 Technical response
process and
timing
• 138 pages
• Over 1000 experts from across
Europe involved
• Structure of tasks and sub-tasks
• Phased programme
Evolution Tiered structured with detailed task plans
process and
timing SC / WG
Task 1 Sub-task
etc Sub-task
Sub-task
Sub-task
Task 2
Sub-task
Sub-task
Sub-task
Task n Sub-task

Sub-task
Sub-task
Sub-task
Sub-task
Evolution CEN/TC 250 Work Programme (as proposed)
process and
timing

• 76 tasks
• Four overlapping
phases of drafting
work
• Actual start dates
have changed from
original plan
 timing
Evolution
process and

EN 1990

EN 1991

EN 1992
Key changes

EN 1993

EN 1994

EN 1995
Assessment

EN 1996
Robustness

Ease of use

EN 1997
Climate change

EN 1998

EN 1999

Glass

FRP

Membrane
Evolution Responding to systematic review comments
process and
timing

Mandate M515 Work

Programme

Evolution of Eurocodes
Eurocode Systematic
Review Comments
Evolution Drafting approach and further details
process and
timing

 Follow CEN Internal Regulations

 Specific information available in

CEN/TC 250 document N1250
[CEN, Eurocodes]

 Further details available in

Phase 1 call for experts
specification (Vol 3) [NEN,
Eurocodes 2020]
Evolution Drafting approach and further details
process and
timing

 Follow CEN Internal Regulations

 Specific information available in

CEN/TC 250 document N1250
[CEN, Eurocodes]

 Further details available in

Phase 1 call for experts
specification (Vol 3) [NEN,
Eurocodes 2020]
 Eurocodes started

1975
ENVs started
Tim elin e
First

Publication of ENVs
gen era t ion

Conversion of ENV to EN

Publication 1st generation of the Eurocodes

1990 1992 1998 2007
 Eurocodes started

1975
ENVs started
Tim elin e
First

Publication of ENVs
gen era t ion

Conversion of ENV to EN

Publication 1st generation of the Eurocodes

1990 1992 1998 2007

Programming Mandate

Response to Programming Mandate

Specific Mandate
secon d gen era t ion
Prep a ra t ory w ork on

Response to Specific Mandate

2010 2011 2012 2013
 Eurocodes started

1975
ENVs started
Tim elin e
First

Publication of ENVs
gen era t ion

Conversion of ENV to EN

Publication 1st generation of the Eurocodes

1990 1992 1998 2007

Programming Mandate

Response to Programming Mandate

Specific Mandate
secon d gen era t ion
Prep a ra t ory w ork on

Response to Specific Mandate

2010 2011 2012 2013

Start PT Phase 1
2015

Start PT Phase 2
2017

Start PT Phases 3&4

End PT Phase 1

First standards made available to NSBs

End PT Phase 2
W ork on t h e

End PT Phases 3&4

2018 2019* 2020 2021
secon d gen era t ion

Novem b er 20 18
Prelim ina ry p la n a t
 Eurocodes started

1975
ENVs started
Tim elin e
First

Publication of ENVs
gen era t ion

Conversion of ENV to EN

Publication 1st generation of the Eurocodes

1990 1992 1998 2007

Programming Mandate

Response to Programming Mandate

Specific Mandate
secon d gen era t ion
Prep a ra t ory w ork on

Response to Specific Mandate

2010 2011 2012 2013

Start PT Phase 1
2015

Start PT Phase 2
2017

Start PT Phases 3&4

End PT Phase 1

First standards made available to NSBs

End PT Phase 2
W ork on t h e

End PT Phases 3&4

2018 2019* 2020 2021
secon d gen era t ion

Last standards made available to NSBs

Novem b er 20 18
*Prelim ina ry p la n a t
2023*

Date of withdrawal
2025*
 0
work
Start PT

Drafting by PTs
(1st, 2nd and final draft)

Informal
enquiry

Publication process outline

3 months
by
PTs
3 months
Review
End
of PT

by
Review

“Y” months
SCs/WGs

Translation
& editing
produced
Final draft

3.25 months

CEN Enquiry
3 months

Translation previous to
“Z” months
SCs/WGs

FV optional. If
comments by

necessary, 1,5 months

Consideration of

to be added

Formal vote
2 months
Date of Ratification (DoR)
Finalisation – 1 month after vote
2 months
EN 1991-1-5

Date of Ratification (DoR) – 1 month after

EN made available by CEN to NSBs (DAV)

Date of Announcement (DoA)

Date of Withdrawal (DoW)

Date of Publication (DoP)
SC1.T5
(recommendations

vote
produced in
Phase 1)

HGB.T1
(recommendations
produced in Final draft
Phase 1) standard
produced

SC1.T4

Finalisation
Work at national level

CEN Enquiry

Formal vote
Translation
Consideration

& editing
(draft standard

Editing
Work on draft standards by (development of NAs and
of comments
developed in SCs/WGs time to update supporting
by SCs/WGs
Phase 2) industry guidance material)

SC1.T6
(clauses produced
in Phase 3)
 Start PT work End of PT +
sign-off of PT
work

Review of

Informal
enquiry
3 months
Drafting by PTs deliverables by
(1st, 2nd and final draft of the deliverables) PTs
3 months

Time (Months)
 SCs/WGs

from other PTs

Input / contributions
Work on draft standards by

Translation
standard
produced
Final draft

& editing

CEN Enquiry

Time (Months)

Translation previous to FV
Consideration of
comments on draft

optional. If necessary, 1,5

standards by SCs/WGs

months to be added

Editing
Option to skip FV

Formal vote
Date of Ratification (DoR)
– 1 month after vote
Finalisation

EN made available by CEN

to NSBs (DAV)
EN made available by CEN

Date of Announcement

Date of Withdrawal
Date of Publication
to NSBs (DAV)

(DoW)
(DoA)

(DoP)
Development of NAs Time to update supporting industry guidance material

Removal of national conflicting standards

max. 36 months, otherwise go to BT

Time (Months)
 Current stage (review of
Phase 1 deliverables)

Start Production of Standard made

PT 1st 2nd 3rd final deliverable, Opportunity to start available by Date of
work draft draft draft end of PT work working on NAs CEN to NSBs withdrawal

Informal
enquiry

Final edits (and

Development of

Formal Vote

translation)
CEN formal
and editing
Translation

potentially
National Annexes

enquiry

Editing
Review Review
(NAs) and
Drafting of the of the
supporting
standard standard
guidance as
needed

Legend
Potential
Potential input
input from
from other
other
Project Team work
Potential
PTs in the input
same from
phase orother
inin PTs
PTs in
in the the same
sameofphase phase or
or in other SC/WG work
other
other phases the work
phases of the workwork
programme
phases of the
CEN work
programme
programme
Work at national level
 Objectives for CEN/TC 250 publication plan for
second generation of Eurocodes (1 of 2)

1. Ensure that we have a fully compatible suite of standards at all

times for use by industry.
2. Schedule enquiries and formal votes so that they do not place
an excessive burden on CEN members and their mirror
72
committees, and on SCs and WGs .
 Objectives for CEN/TC 250 publication plan for
second generation of Eurocodes (2 of 2)

3. Make new Eurocode parts available as early as possible, whilst

respecting interdependencies with other Eurocode parts.
4. Ensure that sufficient time is available for development of
National Annexes.
73

5. Ensure that sufficient time is available for removal of national

conflicting standards by NSBs and update of supporting
industry guidance material.
 — Det ail ed p l an w it h
Pu b licat ion p l an in t erd ep en d en ces
— Id en t if icat ion of sl ot s
f or u n d ert ak in g CEN
en q u iries an d Form al
Vot e
— M an agem en t of NSBs
w ork l oad
Thank you

wsp.com