Indian Geotechnical Journal, 41(3), 2011, 155-161

Technical Note

Finite Element analysis of Laterally Loaded Piles on Sloping Ground

K. Muthukkumaran1 and N. Almas Begum2

Key words
Lateral load, finite element
model, cohesionless soil, pile-
soil interaction, embedment
length
Abstract: Pile foundations are slender structural elements used to transfer loads from structures
into deep hard strata below the ground level. It should withstand various types of loads including
axial and lateral loads. The load transfer mechanism for laterally loaded pile is more complex when
it is located on the sloping ground. It is time consuming and expensive to carry out field test over
the piles in larger lengths. Model test can be carried out as an alternative to field test, even though
scaling effects influence the results of study involves great significance. Computer simulations of
Finite Element Modelling will allow for in depth studies to analyze the pile – soil interaction of
laterally loaded piles in sloping ground. This paper presents results of a finite element analysis for
the lateral response of pile located at the crest of slopes: Horizontal (H), 1V:2H (S1), 1V:1.5H (S2)
with relative densities: 30%, 45%, and 70%. Equivalent sheet-pile wall is represented as a pile, and
plane strain analysis is performed. A soil stratum is represented by 15 noded triangular elements
of elastic-plastic Mohr Coulomb model. FEA and Model test results are compared and analyzed.
Conclusions are drawn regarding application of the analytical method to study the effect of slope
on laterally loaded pile.

Introduction placed in the sloping ground is different from piles

The ultimate resistance of a vertical pile to a
lateral load and the deflection of the pile as the load
build up to its ultimate value are complex phenomena
involving the interaction between a structural element
and the soil, which deforms partly elastically and partly
plastically (elasto – plastic analysis). In the case of long
pile, failure takes place at the point of maximum
bending moment, and for the purpose of analysis a
plastic hinge capable of transmitting shear is assumed
to develop at the point of fracture. The analytical
approaches developed for single pile and pile group
under lateral load are the subgrade reaction approach,
the elastic approach and the finite element approach.
The main disadvantage of the subgrade reaction
approach is that the continuum nature of soil is ignored,
whereas the elastic approach assumes the soil to be an
ideal elastic continuum. This approach does not take
into account the soil yielding and it is therefore only
suitable for prediction of load-deflection response of
laterally loaded piles at small strain levels. Due to the
limitation of the above mentioned methods two
dimensional nonlinear finite element analysis has been
considered to predict the actual load-deflection
behaviour of pile under lateral load.
Many transmission towers, high –rise buildings
and bridges are constructed near steep slopes and are
supported by piles. These structures may be subjected
to large lateral loads such as violent winds and
earthquakes. Under lateral loads, the behaviour of pile
placed in the horizontal ground, resulting in a reduction
of pile carrying capacity. The reduction depends mainly
on reduction of soil mass around the pile and the fixity
condition of the pile. And also, the initial horizontal
confining pressure acting on the piles on the slope side
is smaller than in horizontal ground. Hence, the study of
laterally loaded pile on sloping surface is also necessary.
The design of pile located on sloping surface subjected
to lateral loading from horizontal soil movements may
be based on semi-empirical or theoretical analysis. The
literature on the adequacy of the finite element method
(FEM) modeling of the laterally loaded pile located on
sloping surface is limited. The available data are
generally limited in extent and complicated by variations
in geometry or soil conditions. Hence, there are many
uncertainties in the estimation of bending moments and
lateral deflections induced in piles under these
conditions. If the bending moments and deflections
induced in piles can be accurately estimated, then more
cost-effective construction procedures may be
confidently implemented to take advantage of sizes and
configurations of an alternative pile. In this paper, a
finite element approach is described for analysis of piles
subjected to lateral load which is located on sloping
surface. The approach is based on a plane strain
representation of the problem. Results are compared
with model test results.

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirapalli, 620015,Email: kmk@nitt.edu
2 Ph.D. scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirapalli,620015, Email: n_almas@rediffmail.com

Finite Element Analysis of Laterally Loaded Piles on Sloping Ground
K. Muthukkumaran and N. Almas Begum
Geotechnical Data
Laboratory tests were carried out to find the
properties of the soil sample used in model test. Direct
shear test, triaxial test and relative density tests were
performed to obtain the soil design parameters, which
are presented in Table 1.
Numerical Modeling
Numerical models involving FEM can offer
several approximations to predict true solutions. The
accuracy of these approximations depends on the
modeler’s ability to portray what is happening in the
field. Often the problem being modeled is complex and
has to be simplified to obtain a solution. Two of the
major factors which have a vast impact on both the real
and model piles are; (1) the constitutive properties of
the sand and (2) the soil– structure interaction at the
interface over the structural surface.
The important literature reported on a single pile
and pile groups under lateral loads are Matlock and
Reese (1960) provided generalised solution for elastic
and rigid pile under lateral load. Poulos (1971) and
Banerjee and Davies (1978) reported the elastic
solution for laterally loaded pile. Pise (1983) presented
theoretical results for fixed head piles while Pise (1984)
presented theoretical results for free head piles. Budhu
and Davies (1988) reported elasto-plastic analysis of
laterally loaded pile based on boundary-element
method. Alizadeh and Lalvani (2000) provided useful
results of full-scale, field lateral load tests on four
instrumented single piles installed in sand. Finite
element method has become popular as a soil response
prediction tool. Chae et al. (2004) presented the finite
element analyses of short rigid piles and a prototype
pier foundation located near the crest of a slope and
compared the measurements of model tests and field
tests. Johnson et al. (2006) conducted numerical
modeling for both square and circular piles, to explore
the effect of pile shape, sand properties, pile length and
Table 1 Soil Properties
Nature of Young’s Unit
soil modulus(Es) Weight ()
[N/mm2] [KN/m3]
Loose 80 16.0
Sand
Medium 100 16.6
Sand
Dense 120 17.6
Sand
156
loading conditions on the capacity of a pile. Karthigeyan
et al. (2006) used 3-dimensional finite element program
GEOFEM3D, developed by authors to analyse the pile –
soil interaction. The validity of this model was verified by
back predicting the pile load test data for two different
cases (short rigid pile and long flexible pile). Martin and
Chen (2005), evaluated the response of piles caused by
an embankment slope, induced by a weak soil layer or a
liquefied layer beneath the embankment using FLAC3D
program. Sensitivity studies varying soil and pile
parameters were also presented.
Plane strain representation
Several forms of finite element analysis with
various approximations have been proposed to assess
the response of piles influenced by lateral soil
movements. The finite element approaches are three-
dimensional finite element analysis, plain strain analysis
and axisymmetric finite element analysis. In this present
study, plain strain finite element approach is adopted.
Randolph (1981) performed a site-specific plane-strain
analysis, where the piles were replaced by an equivalent
sheet-pile wall. The sheet pile wall was modeled with
stiffer elements within the finite element mesh. Naylor
(1982) extended this type of approach by connecting
the sheet-pile wall to the soil with link elements, thus
allowing relative displacement of the soil and the wall,
and more closely approximating the true three
dimensional behaviour around the piles. However,
limiting soil pressure between the soil and wall was not
allowed for, since the soft stratum, embankment and
link elements were represented by linear elastic models.
They concluded that link elements were not required in
cases where the piles were quite flexible or the soft layer
was deep. A similar approach was adopted by Rowe and
Poulos (1979) for the analysis of stabilizing piles
installed at the crest of a slope, although an elastic–
plastic soil model was used and limiting soil pressure on
the piles were specified to allow plastic flow of the soil
past the piles.
Poisson’s Angle of Dilation
ratio () internal angle (ψ)
friction () []
[]
0.3 29.50 0
0.3 31.50 1.50
0.3 38.00 8.00
157
Indian Geotechnical Journal, 41(3), 2011
Description of approach
For this study, the model tests are analyzed using
a plane strain finite element approach, with the piles
represented as equivalent sheet-pile wall. Plane strain
analysis is the most straightforward of the finite element
approaches described above, and allows good
representation of the pile group configuration and
geometry, without being unduly complicated. The
equivalent sheet-pile walls are modeled with beam-
column elements connected to the finite element mesh,
and the soil strata are represented by 15 noded
triangular elements of elastic–plastic Mohr–Coulomb
model. Soil–structure interaction is modeled by means
of a bilinear Mohr–Coulomb model. The finite element
program PLAXIS is used for this study. In the model
study, the same dimensions of the model test
conducted in the laboratory are adopted. The soil strata
are modeled with 15 noded triangular elements and the
equivalent sheet-pile walls are defined by 5 noded
beam-column elements with nodes separate from those
defining from the soil. The soil nodes and pile nodes are
connected by bilinear Mohr–Coulomb interface
elements. This allowed an approximate representation
of the development of lateral resistance with relative
soil-pile movement and ultimately the full limiting soil
pressure acting on the piles. Then the self-weight load is
applied to the mesh for generating the initial stress
condition. The typical finite element discretization of the
sloping ground is shown in Figure 1.
Fig. 1 Discretization of finite element mesh (fine
mesh)
It is assumed that sloping ground has an effect
on the load-displacement behavior of the pile-soil
system. The problem shown in figure was modeled using
a two-dimensional (2-D), plane strain FE model of a
sloping ground. In this model, symmetry boundary
conditions were applied on the top and bottom
boundaries of the mesh as shown in figure. The left and
right boundaries of the mesh were initially constrained
in the x-direction to establish initial states of stress
under geostatic conditions. Hydrostatic state of stress
with Ko = 1.0 was considered as a initial state of stress,
where Ko represents the coefficient of lateral earth
pressure at rest. The pile-soil interface was modeled
with contact elements using interface condition. The soil
stratum is idealized by 15 nodes triangular elements
with elastic–plastic Mohr Coulomb model and the
structural elements are idealized by beam element.
Soil properties
The analyses are conducted with sand
represented by Mohr–Coulomb model. The Mohr–
Coulomb model is used for the proposed (linear elastic–
plastic) model, with plastic flow governed by an
associated flow rule. Values of angle of internal friction
and dilatancy angle for loose, medium and dense sand
are obtained from laboratory tests. The required density
of the sand in the test tank was achieved by a sand
raining device. This arrangement contains a hopper
connected to a 750 mm long pipe and an inverted cone
at the bottom, with a holding capacity of about 78N of
sand. The sand poured through a 31mm internal
diameter pipe and was dispersed by 60o due to the
inverted cone placed at the bottom. By varying the
height of free fall of dispersed sand particles, the
density of the sand was varied. The height of free fall
from the bottom of the pipe was maintained constant
using an adjustable length pointer fixed at bottom. This
arrangement was calibrated by number of trials to get
height of fall required for relative density corresponding
to 30%, 45%, and 70% and it was found to be 50 mm,
205 mm, and 710 mm respectively.
The angle of internal friction and dilatancy angle
(Table-1) were obtained for the corresponding relative
density, which are given as the soil input parameters. A
small cohesion intercept of 1N/mm2 was chosen in
order to make the problem stable numerically. The soil
shear strength parameters used in the FE analyses are
under undrained loading condition. Young’s modulus
(Es) of soil profile is estimated by using the triaxial test
stress strain relation. Poisson’s ratio values are
appropriately selected based on the relative density of
the sand. The values of soil properties are presented in
Table 1.
Structural properties
The pile is represented by three noded plate
elements. The plate elements are used to simulate the
behavior of pile based on Mindlin’s beam theory. This
theory allows for beam deflection due to shearing as
well as bending. Bending (flexural rigidity) stiffness EI
and axial stiffness EA are input as the average of the
soil and pile properties over an equivalent 1-m thickness
of the mesh. As the soil stiffness is much lower than the
structural stiffness, the equivalent wall properties are
 158

Finite Element Analysis of Laterally Loaded Piles on Sloping Ground

K. Muthukkumaran and N. Almas Begum

effectively independent of the soil properties and do not

vary with depth. The structural member’s properties are
presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Pile properties used in finite element analysis

Normal Stiffness EA 3.842E06 N

Flexural Rigidity EI 2.878E08

Nmm2
Equivalent d 29.982 mm
Thickness
Poisson’s Ratio  0.3

Analysis Sequence
The analyses are carried out in total stresses by
generating initial stresses using the drained parameters
of soils and connection with soil element presented in
Table 1 and the structural parameters presented in
Table 2. The single model tests were conducted
considering three different slopes [zero slope, 1V:2H,
1V:1.5H] and three different relative density [30%, 45%,
70%] having the embedment length of 775mm.

Load Deflection Behaviour

Lateral load behaviour of the pile was studied by Fig. 2 Deformed shape of pile and shear strain
using lateral load – deflection curves which shows the shading of soil
lateral load applied and the lateral deflection at the soil
surface. The lateral load was applied at a distance of
75mm above the ground surface and lateral deflections
were measured at the soil surface. Figure 2 shows the
deformed shape of the pile and relative shear strain
shading of the soil movement towards slope. It is
observed that the soil movement is much greater in top
layers due to initial horizontal confining pressure acting
on the piles on the slope side is smaller than that in the
horizontal ground. Hence lateral resistances of piles
near slopes will be small, compared to the piles on
horizontal ground. This reduction is due to reduction in
passive resistance mobilized in front of the pile. The
deflection of piles on sloping ground will be more than
that on the horizontal ground. From the deformed shape
of the mesh, it can be observed that the failure zone is
like a circular slip failure.

Figure 3 shows the comparison of experimental

results of Almas et al. (2008) with results from present
FE analysis. The present FE analysis results have
reasonable agreement with the experimental result. It is Fig. 3 Experimental and FEA lateral load
found that the lateral resistance of the pile decreases as
displacement curves for 30% Dr
the slope of surface increases.
159
Indian Geotechnical Journal, 41(3), 2011
Figure 4 shows the lateral load-deflection curves
of different relative density (30%, 45% and 70%) for
different slopes of H, S1 and S2. The load carrying
capacity of the pile embedded in S2 slope is lower than
that of the pile embedded in the horizontal and S1
sloping ground.
Fig. 4 Lateral load displacement curves for various
slopes and Dr
Generally, determining the ultimate load from
lateral pile load tests depends on the tolerance of the
structure supported by the piles. Where no such
criterion is available, the criterion usually accepted for
estimating the ultimate lateral load is corresponding to
20% of pile diameter lateral movement or displacement
normal to the pile axes (Narasimha Rao et al. 1998).
The ultimate lateral load capacities of the piles were
established based on this criterion and are presented in
Figure 5.
Fig. 5 Lateral load capacity versus relative density for
different slope surfaces
The figure clearly shows that pile located in zero
slope (horizontal ground) has more ultimate load
capacity than pile located in slope S1. It is also observed
that the ultimate lateral load capacity of pile located in
S1 slope having 30% and 45% relative density is exactly
equal to the pile located in S2 slope having relative
density of 45% and 70% respectively. From this
observation it is concluded that even in steeper slope
the lateral carrying capacity can be increased by
increasing the relative density of the soil.
Figure 6 shows the relationship between the load
ratio and displacement at the loading point. It is found
that the value of load ratio is affected markedly in the
small displacement range by increasing the relative
density for the two slopes. However the load ratio is
constant value as the displacement increases. The
value of load ratio is approximately 0.73 when the pile is
located in a higher density sand (Dr = 70%) for the slope
S1 and for the pile located in slope S2 the value of load
ratio is approximately 0.63 for the same relative density.
To obtain a load ratio = 1 (equivalent to the horizontal
ground condition), it may be necessary to increase the
relative density of the soil greater than 70% and the
embedment length of the pile can also be increased.
Fig. 6 Normalized loading curves
The distribution of the bending moment along the
pile shaft at different load increments has the same
pattern for all cases and also the moments in the pile
increase with applied load as expected. Figure 7 shows
the bending moment variation along the depth for the
three ground surfaces and three relative density of sand
for an applied lateral load of 60N. The value of the
moment increases regularly as the slope of the surface
increases and also the location of the maximum
bending moment slightly deeper with increase in the
steepness of the slope, which shows that the load is
transferred further down the pile with increasing load.
The maximum bending moment occurs (also called
depth of fixity) at about 12%, 14% and 16% of the
embedded depth of the pile for the horizontal ground,
S1 and S2 slope respectively.
 160

Finite Element Analysis of Laterally Loaded Piles on Sloping Ground

K. Muthukkumaran and N. Almas Begum

 Pile located in zero slope had a larger ultimate load

than pile located in slope S1, which in turn had a
larger ultimate load than pile located in slope S2.

 The lateral behaviour of pile located in S1 slope

having 30% and 45% relative density is almost
equal to the pile located in S2 slope having relative
density of 45% and 70% respectively.

 It is found that the value of load ratio is affected

markedly in the small displacement range by
increasing the relative density for the two slopes.

 The load ratio is constant value as the

Fig. 7 Bending moment variation along the depth for
different slopes and Dr
 The value of bending moment increases regularly
The effect of relative density on maximum
bending moment is shown in Figure 8 for different
ground surfaces. The increase in relative density of the
soil decreases the maximum bending moment due to
decrease the relative stiffness of the pile soil system (T),
which leads to act the pile as more flexible in nature.
The decrease in relative stiffness of the pile soil system
has lead to decreases the depth of maximum bending
moment occurrence (depth of fixity).
 The increase in relative density of the soil
displacement increases. The value of load ratio is
approximately 0.73 when the pile is located in a
higher density sand (Dr = 70%) for the S1 slope and
for the pile located in S2 slope the value of load
ratio is approximately 0.63 for the above said
relative density.
as the slope of the surface increases. The location
of the maximum bending moment becomes slightly
deeper with increase in the slope. The maximum
moment occurs at about 12% of the embedded
depth of the pile for the horizontal ground surface,
14% of the embedded depth of the pile for S1 slope
and 16% of the embedded depth of the pile for S2
slope.
decreases the maximum bending moment due to
increase in the relative stiffness of the pile and the
soil. The range of percentage decrease in maximum
bending moment when the relative density of the
soil changes from 30% to 45% is by 2.5% to 3.0%
and for the relative density 45% to 70% is by 3% to
3.5% for all the three slopes.

References
Almas Begum, N., Seethalakshmi, P. and Muthukkumaran,
K. (2008): ‘Lateral load capacity of single pile located at
slope crest’, Indian Geotechnical Journal, 38(3), pp.
279-295.

Banerjee, P.K. and Davies, T.G. (1978): ‘The Behaviour of

Axially and Laterally Loaded Single Piles Embedded in
Fig. 8 Effect of relative density on maximum bending Nonhomogeneous Soils’, Geotechnique, 28(3), pp.309-
moment for various slopes 326.

Budhu, M. and Davis, T.G. (1988): ‘Analysis of Laterally

Conclusions Loaded Piles in Soft Clays’, J. of Geotechnical
Engineering, ASCE, 114(1), pp.21-39.
The behavior of single pile subject to lateral load
Chae, K.S., Ugai, K. and Wakai, A. (2004): Lateral
located on sloping ground has been investigated
Resistance of Short Single Piles and Pile Groups
through a series of 2D finite element analysis. Based on
Located Near slopes’, Int. J. of Geomechanics, 4(1), pp.
the results from this analysis the following conclusions 93-103.
can be drawn
161
Indian Geotechnical Journal, 41(3), 2011
Karthigeyan, S., Ramakrishna, V.V.G.S.T. and Rajagopal, K.
(2006): ‘Influence of Vertical Load on the Lateral
Response of Piles in Sand’, Computers and
Geotechnics, 133(5), pp. 512-521.
Martin, G.R. and Chen, C.Y. (2005): ‘Response of Piles due
to Lateral Slope Movement’, Computers and Structures,
83(8-9), pp. 588-598.
Matlock, H. and Reese, L.C. (1960): ‘Generalized Solution
for the Laterally Loaded Piles’, J. of Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Div., ASCE, 86(5), pp. 63-91.
Mokwa, R.L. and Duncan, J.M. (2001): ‘Experimental
Evaluation of Lateral-Load Resistance of Pile Caps’, J. of
Geotech and Geoenv Engg, 127(2), pp. 185-192.
Narasimha Rao, S., Ramakrishna, V.G.S.T. and Babu Rao,
M. (1998): ‘Influence of rigidity on laterally loaded pile
groups in marine clay’, J of Geotech and Geoenv Engg,
124(6), pp. 542-549.
Naylor, D.J. (1982): ‘Finite element study of embankment
loading on piles’, Report for the Department of
Transport, Department of Civil Engineering, University
College of Swansea.
Peck, R.B., Hansen, W.E. and Thornburn, T.H. (1974):
Foundation Engineering, 2nd ed., John Wiley and Sons,
New York.
Pise, P.J. (1983): ‘Lateral Response of Free-Head Pile’, J. of
Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 109(8), pp. 1126-
1131.
Pise, P.J. (1984): ‘Lateral Response of Free-Head Pile’, J. of
Geotechnical Engineering, 110(12), pp. 1805-1809.
Poulos, H.G. (1971): ‘Behaviour of Laterally Loaded Piles I-
Single Piles’, J. of Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Division, ASCE, 97(5), pp. 711-732.
Randolph, M.F. (1981): ‘Pilot study of lateral loading of
piles due to movement caused by embankment
loading’, Report for the Department of Transport,
Cambridge University.
Rowe, R.K. and Poulos, H.G. (1979): ‘A method for
predicting the effect of piles on slope behaviour’, Proc.
Third Int. Conf. on Numerical Methods in
Geomechanics, Aachen, 3, pp. 1073-1085.