See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/282818067

Lateral capacity of single pile embedded in clay subjected to lateral loading

Conference Paper · October 2010

CITATIONS READS
0 1,455

3 authors, including:

Mourad Karray Mounir Bouassida

Université de Sherbrooke University of Tunis El Manar
142 PUBLICATIONS   256 CITATIONS    270 PUBLICATIONS   1,005 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

THE PIEZO-ELECRIC RING ACTUATOR TECHNIQUE (P-RAT) View project

Soil Liquefaction View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mounir Bouassida on 19 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Conference on Geotechnical Engineering. 2010

Lateral capacity of single pile embedded in clay subjected to lateral

loading

L. Hazzar
Université de Sherbrooke, Faculté de génie-Département de génie civil, Sherbrooke (QC)

M. Karray
Université de Sherbrooke, Faculté de génie-Département de génie civil, Sherbrooke (QC)

M. Bouassida
Ecole Nationale d’Ingénieurs de Tunis. UR ‘Ingénierie Géotechnique’, Tunis, Tunisie

ABSTRACT: Several methods are available for predicting the ultimate lateral resistance to piles in
cohesive soils. However these methods often produce significantly different ultimate resistance
values. This makes it difficult for practicing engineers to effectively select the appropriate method
when designing laterally loaded piles in cohesive soils. The work reported herein is aimed to study
numerically, via the method of finite differences, the lateral bearing capacity of a single pile
embedded in clay and subjected to lateral loading. In this study, the Modified Cam Clay (MCC) is
considered as constitutive law for this clay, and the effect of pile length, diameter length and axial
load are studied. Thus, a comparison between the results obtained and these deduced with the
graphs proposed by Broms (1964) is proposed. The effect of over-consolidation ratio at the value of
lateral resistance is treated and a conclusion for the importance of pre-consolidation pressure in
piles design.

Keywords: Pile, model, lateral bearing capacity, sensitive clay, deflection, finite differences
method.

1 INTRODUCTION

Piles have been used extensively for supporting axial and lateral loads for a variety of structures
including heavy buildings, transmission lines, power stations, and highway structures. In many
cases, lateral loads govern the design of piles. A key element in the design of laterally loaded piles
is the determination of the ultimate lateral resistance that can be exerted by the soil against the pile
(Murff and Hamilton, 1993). For example, the ultimate lateral resistance is required for calculating
the P-y curves, which are used in the analyses of piles.
Several methods have been published for predicting the ultimate lateral resistance of piles in
cohesive and cohesion less soils (Brinch Hansen, 1961; Broms, 1964; Poulos and Davis, 1980;
Fleming et al., 1992; Reese and Van Impe, 2001). However, these methods often produce
significantly different ultimate resistance values. This makes it difficult for engineers to effectively
select the appropriate method when designing laterally loaded piles in cohesive soils.
Because the problem of determining the ultimate resistance to a laterally loaded pile is three
dimensional and nonlinear, finding a rigorous solution is very unlikely. Thus existing solutions for
ultimate lateral resistance are either of a semi empirical nature or employ approximate analysis
which often involves considerable simplifications (Jamiolkowski and Garassino, 1977). These

467
approximations may account for the significantly different ultimate resistance values obtained from
the different methods.
This paper first reviews the existing methods for predicting the ultimate lateral resistance of
piles in cohesive soils, essentially the methods of Brinch Hansen (1961) and Broms (1964).
A finite difference program is used for the study. The investigations were carried out by
varying the length and diameter of piles in a type of clay used for several studies conducted at the
University of Sherbrook (Quebec).
Additionally, in Broms solution the effect of vertical loading on lateral bearing capacity of piles
did not consider it. Thus, the effect of this axial load is also studied. Finally, the significance of pre-
consolidation pressure, as involved factor in the design of piles, is discussed through the analysis of
its effect on the value of ultimate lateral capacity.

2 METHODS OF PREDICTION OF ULTIMATE LATERAL RESISTANCE

The methods of calculation lateral resistance of vertical piles can be broadly divided into two
categories: methods of calculating ultimate lateral resistance and methods of calculating acceptable
deflection at working lateral load.
Terzaghi (1955) was an attempt to rationalize the pile resistance by using a variable passive
coefficient which is a function of the mobilized angle of shearing resistance. In 1960’s, ultimate
lateral resistance approaches for rigid piles by assuming that the full passive Rankine earth
pressures were mobilized. In the method proposed by the Brinch Hansen (1961), the pile is
assumed to rotate about a single point, the ultimate lateral load is calculated and the shearing force
and bending moment diagrams are drown. Broms (1964) presented methods to determine the
ultimate lateral load in cohesive and cohesionless soils. Kasch et al. (1977), state that using
Rankine’s passive states will result in a very conservative solution. Reese (1977) developed a
computer program that widely used to predict the performance of piles subjected to lateral loading.
This program solves differential equation derived on the assumption that pile is linearly elastic and
that the soil reaction may be represented as a line load. In recent years, extensive research and
developments have been undertaken to predict theoretically the beahvior of laterally loaded piles in
clayey soils (Poulos and Davis, 1980; Brown and Shie, 1991; Fleming et al., 1992; Liang, 1998;
Reese and Van Impe, 2001). Nowadays, Broms solution is widely used for calculation of lateral
bearing capacity of piles because of its simplicity. Some of these methods are briefly reviewed in
this paper and proposed for the comparison.

a. Brinch Hansen (1961)

Brinch Hansen (1961) presented an expression for predicting the ultimate lateral resistance of piles
in a general c-φ’ soil, c and φ’ are, respectively, the cohesion and the effective internal friction
angle of the soil.
This method assumes that the pile material is enough stiff so that no yield hinge can develop in
it. In the state of failure, it can therefore be assumed to rotate as a rigid body with respect a point at
depth z below the ground surface. Above the centre of rotation passive earth pressures will act on
the right side of the pile and active in the left. Below the rotation centre the opposite behaviour is
assumed.
Using this technique, the ultimate lateral resistance per unit front area of the pile at any depth,
pu, is given by equation (1).
pu = K qγ z + cK c (1)

Kq and Kc = Hansen earth pressure coefficients which are function of φ’; and γ = effective unit
weight of soil.

468
 b. Broms (1964)

Broms (1964) had proposed a method for lateral resistance of vertical piles similar to the
mechanism developed by Hansen, but c-φ’soil parameters are not considered, this method is not
applicable to layered system. In fact, Broms’s method is based on earth pressure for calculation of
lateral resistance of vertical piles, but quite simple assumptions are made for the distribution of
ultimate soil resistance along the pile length. By this method, piles are divided into two classes,
short rigid and long flexible. Thus, ultimate lateral load capacity graphs are elaborated for each
class as illustrated in figure 1.

Figure 1. Ultimate lateral load capacity of piles in cohesive soils; (a) Short pile, (b) long pile (Broms,
1964).

Broms method calls for some comments that will be discussed later. Indeed as main limitation
of Broms solution the vertical loading on lateral bearing capacity of pile is not considered.
In this study, the finite differences method is used, the investigations are carried out by varying
the length of piles. In this study the effect of diameter of piles is investigated and the vertical
component of loading as well.
Therefore, the main objective is to elaborate a series of graphs to simplify the design of laterally
loaded pile in cohesive soils.

3 PROPOSED MODEL

a. Geometry of the model

A two-dimensional finite difference programme FLAC 2D has been used to model a single pile
embedded in a clay layer by using the concept of plain strain condition. This pile is modeled by
using plate elements which consists of beam elements with two translation degrees of freedom and
a rotation degrees of freedom.
The geometry of a typical finite difference model adopted for the analysis is shown in figure 2. The
finite difference analyses were primarily carried out for horizontal load applied on the head of pile.

469
 Figure 2. Adopted model.

b. Material properties

i. Description of the soil

The soil used is soft post-glacial clay, of marine origin, coming from site located in the Grande
Baleine River (Demers, 1980). Two tests (COE-01 & COE-02) are adopted in this study. Table 1
summarizes the oedometeric characteristics of the soft clay.

Table 1. Results of oedometric tests.

Test n° Depth ω Sr e0 σ’p Cc Cs

(m) (%) (%) (-) (kPa) (-) (-)
COE-01 5.05 57.8 100 1.59 105 0.90 0.08
COE-02 5.09 58.3 100 1.57 112 0.88 0.06

A friction angle of about 20°, and total unit weight equals 16.7 kN/m3 are adopted for the
studied clay.

ii. Soil parameters adopted for numerical simulation

A Modified Cam-Clay Model (CCM) is chosen to identify the parameters of this clay. In fact, the
CCM may be used to represent materials when the influence of volume change on bulk property
and resistance up to failure should be taken into consideration, as for soft clays.
The required soil parameters for this study are determined from test COE-01 (Table 2).

470
 Table 2. Soft clay parameters according to modified Cam Clay Model.

Test n° COE-01
Unit weight: ρ (kg/m3) 1670
Poisson’s ratio: µ (-) 0.33
Bulk modulus: K (MPa) 83.33
Shear modulus: G (MPa) 38.46
Slope of normal consolidation line: λ (-) 0.262
Slope of elastic swelling line: κ (-) 0.065
Frictional constant: M (-) 0.77
Specific volume: υ (-) 5.3
Reference pressure: p1(Pa) 1

iii. Pile proprieties

By the present numerical study, pile is modelled as element of structure made up of concrete
material characterised by a Poisson’s ratio of 0.2, a unit mass of 2500 kg/m3, and Young’s modulus
equals to 25 GPa.
The length D and the diameter of pile are variable in order to investigate their influences on
lateral bearing capacity of pile.
The lateral load capacity of pile is discussed in terms of dimensionless factor: (see figure 3 on y
axis).

iv. Soil-pile interface

An interface between a pile and the soil is involved in the model. The material proprieties assigned
to this interface are summarized in a normal and shear stiffness that are be set to ten times the
equivalent stiffness of the stiffest neighbouring zone. Also a friction and cohesion, equal to those of
the soil, are proposed for this interface.
A comparison between the numerical study with and without interface is showed during the
several results.

4 EFFECT OF SOIL STIFFNESS ON LATERAL RESISTANCE

In order to study the soil stiffness effect on ultimate soil resistance, it is recommended to vary the
undrained shear strength of clays soils. Since a cap plasticity model is employed, it is possible to
vary the specific volume υ that is uniquely related to the undrained shear strength. This
analysis has been done with ec=0 (ec is free distance from the soil surface to head of pile) and
varied D/B (D is the embedment of pile in the soil). The obtained results are compared with Broms
graphs (figure 3). At this stage, it can be seen that Broms assumption overestimates the ultimate
resistance of clays that was assumed 9Bcu, but predictions show that the soil will collapse much
earlier.

471
 Figure 3. Effect of soil stiffness on lateral load capacity compared with Broms method.

The numerical resulting deflection is also compared with that predicted from Broms graphs
(figure 4). One sees also the effect of soil stiffness on lateral displacement of pile and the
overestimation of Broms graphs.

Figure 4. Comparison of predicted deflection with Broms method.

5 EFFECT OF PILE DIAMETER ON LATERAL RESISTANCE

In order to present more generalized design graphs, the influence on pile diameter has been also
investigated. As shown in figure 5, the variation of pile diameter does not significantly affect the
normalized ultimate lateral bearing capacity.

472
 Figure 5. Effect of diameter on lateral bearing of capacity pile.

6 INFLUENCE OF VERTICAL LOAD

As considered in Broms method, the vertical load was not considered by prior analyses. In the
present investigation the influence of vertical load on ultimate lateral bearing capacity is studied.
At this stage, first, the ultimate vertical bearing capacity is obtained, then by introducing a factor of
safety equals 3 the allowable vertical load is deduced. The ultimate lateral bearing capacity of pile
is finally determined. Results of figure 6 show up that the ultimate lateral resistance will decrease
when the vertical load component increases. Therefore special care to choose the ultimate lateral
bearing capacity of a pile should be taken.

Figure 6. Effect of vertical load, ec/B =0.

473
7 EFFECT OF OVER-CONSOLIDATION RATIO

The over-consolidation ratio, OCR, is defined as the ratio of initial pre-consolidation pressure to in
situ overburden stress. OCR is useful for the characterisation of the behaviour of Cam-clay
material.
Figure 7 shows the effect of OCR on the ultimate lateral capacity of pile. When the OCR
increases from 2 to 10 the increase of lateral bearing capacity is of about 20%. Thus, it is concluded
that the role of pre-consolidation pressure cannot be neglected for the design of piles.

Figure 7. The ultimate lateral capacity vs OCR.

8 CONCLUSION

A numerical analysis has been carried out to evaluate the ultimate lateral bearing capacity of a pile
in cohesive soils. The study primarily aimed at presentation of the design which cover a variety of
piles of different diameter, the failure criteria suggested by Broms has adopted. From obtained
results the conclusions below are drawn.
- The soil collapse is expected earlier than that predicted by Broms method that is
overestimated.
- The effect of pile diameter was studied; it would not have significant effect on normalized
ultimate bearing capacity.
- The effect of pile stiffness, the ultimate lateral resistance of pile increase and the curves go
toward Broms curve.
- Vertical allowable load applied on pile and presented more general graphs. It is shown that
the axial load decrease ultimate bearing capacity and a special care to choose the ultimate
bearing capacity of pile should be taken.
- The CCM is a suitable model to describe sensitive clays, and it is necessary to take care of
the value of OCR or pre-consolidation pressure in the design of piles embedded in cohesive
soils.

REFERENCES
Brinch Hansen, J. 1961. The ultimate resistance of rigid piles against transversal forces. Bulletin No. 12,
Danish Geotechnical Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark: 5-9.

474
 Broms, B. B. 1964. Lateral resistance of piles in cohesive soils. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., 90(2): 27-64.
Brown, D.A & Shie, C.F. 1991. Evaluation of the relative influence of major parameters for laterally
loaded piles in three dimensional finite element models, Civil Engineering Department, Harbert Engineering
Center. Auburn University, Alabama.
Demers, B. 1980. Résistance cyclique d’une argile extra-sensible. Thesis M.Sc., University of Sherbrook,
Quebec, Canada.
Fleming, W. G. K., Weltman, A. J., Randolph, M. F. & Elson, W. K. 1992. Piling engineering. Surrey
University Press, London.
Jamiolkowski, M. & Garassino, A. 1977. Soil modulus for laterally loaded piles. Proc., 9th Int. Conf. Soil
Mechanics Foundation Engineering. Tokyo: 87-92.
Kasch, V. R. 1977. Lateral load test of drilled shaft in clay. Research report 211-1. Texas Transportation
Institute, Texas A&M University.
Liang, R. 1998. Development and Implementation of New Driven Piles Technology. The Ohio
Department of Transportation and the US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.
Murff, J. D. & Hamilton, J. M. 1993. P-ultimate for undrained analysis of laterally loaded piles. J.
Geotech. Eng. 119(1): 91-107.
Poulos, H. G. & Davis, E. H. 1980. Pile foundation analysis and design. Wiley, New York.
Reese, L. C. 1977. Laterally loaded piles: Program documentation. J. Geotech. Eng. Div., ASCE.
103(GT4): 287-305.
Reese, L. C. & Van Impe, W. F. 2001. Single piles and piles groups under lateral loading. A. A.,
Balkema, Rotterdam.
Terzaghi, K. 1955. Evaluation of coefficients of subgrade reaction. Geotechnique. 5(4): 297-236.

475

View publication stats