## 5 Summary and Conclusions  
In Kazakhstan, the transition from the current design code (SP RK) to Eurocode represents the easiest way to increase the rate and quality of construction works. The introduction of Eurocode in Kazakhstan allows for the elimination of technical barriers in international collaboration and the creation of a unified base for design and construction works. Moreover, the results of code harmonization can benefit scientific collaboration by establishing identical design methods, as well as common requirements for construction. The harmonization of Kazakhstan building regulations with Eurocode requires the translation of the design code to the country's language, the performance of comparative analysis for the design of buildings and structures, and development of the National Annex (NA). The climatic, seismic, geological, and geographical features of Kazakhstan must be considered in the development of the NA. In addition, the transition process requires time  
Figure 8: Bearing resistance of pile foundations of varying lengths. Figure 7: Bearing resistance of raft foundations of varying widths. to avoid misunderstanding of the applied design principles. In this study, the procedure for the design of raft, pile, and piled raft foundations adhering to Kazakhstan building regulations and Eurocode 7 is provided. A comparative analysis of the considered design codes was performed based on the design example of Nur-Sultan city. Through this comparison, it was found that EC 7 provides general guidance, and further details are decided in accordance with NA, which would be more adaptable to different conditions as compared to SP RK. The design of raft, pile, and piled raft foundations showed that the obtained values of the bearing resistance, elastic settlement, and over-design factor adhering to the European approach exceeded the values from the Kazakhstan approach. The differences in these results were obtained due to the application of higher values of partial safety factors under EC 7. The ODF results adhering to the European approach were greater by 6% to 38% for both raft and pile foundations as compared to the results adhering to the Kazakhstan approach. It can be concluded that Eurocode 7 provides more conservative results--and, thus, a higher safety level--than Kazakhstan building regulations. The performed sensitivity analysis of raft foundation width and pile foundation length for the bearing capacity also supported the conclusions regarding the conservativeness of the considered design codes. The conservativeness of the European approach is explained by the fact that EC 7 synthesizes the design traditions and construction practices of various European countries, so the integration process led to a more conservative and detailed geotechnical design approach than that in Kazakhstan. Further studies comparing the Kazakhstan and European approaches for geotechnical design are required to enhance the obtained results. The following are available online at [[https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app11073099/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app11073099/s1)]([https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app11073099/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app11073099/s1)), Figure S1: Relationship between the design resistance under the base of driven piles in clay soil (_R_) and the liquidity index (_IL_) (Table 1 of SP RK 5.01-103-2013--Pile foundations), Figure S2: Relationship between the design resistance on the shaft surface of driven piles (_fi_) and the liquidity index (_IL_) (Table 2 of SP RK 5.01-103-2013--Pile foundations), Figure S3: Relationship between the coefficients (M\({}_{\gamma}\), M\({}_{\mathrm{q}}\), M\({}_{\mathrm{c}}\)) and friction angle (\(\varphi\)) (Table 5 of SP RK 5.01-102-2013--Foundations of buildings and structures). [PERSON] and S.[PERSON] conceptualized the study; [PERSON], [PERSON] and S.-W.M. implemented data processing under the supervision of [PERSON] and [PERSON]; the original draft of the manuscript was written by [PERSON], [PERSON] and S.-W.M.