0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)

1 Ansichten17 SeitenAug 11, 2020

Mylonakis_et_al_Kinematic_Moments_Geotechnique_2001

© © All Rights Reserved

0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)

1 Ansichten17 SeitenMylonakis_et_al_Kinematic_Moments_Geotechnique_2001

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 17

net/publication/245411107

DOI: 10.1680/geot.51.5.425.39973

CITATIONS READS

174 854

4 authors, including:

WSP University of Bristol

43 PUBLICATIONS 599 CITATIONS 229 PUBLICATIONS 3,452 CITATIONS

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

PREPARE: Enhancing PREParedness for East African Countries through Seismic Resilience Engineering View project

All content following this page was uploaded by George Mylonakis on 01 December 2014.

Nikolaou, S., Mylonakis, G., Gazetas, G. & Tazoh T. (2001). GeÂotechnique 51, No. 5, 425±440

S . N I KO L AO U , G . M Y L O NA K I S { , G . G A Z E TA S { a n d T. TA Z O H }

The passage of seismic waves through the soil surrounding a Le passage d'ondes sismiques dans le sol qui entoure une

pile imposes lateral displacements and curvatures on the pile impose des deÂplacements lateÂraux et des courbures aÁ la

pile, thereby generating `kinematic' bending moments even pile, engendrant de la sorte des couples de ¯exion `cineÂma-

in the absence of a superstructure. These moments are tiques' meÃme en l'absence d'une superstructure. Ces couples

concentrated in the vicinity of interfaces of alternating soft se concentrent dans le voisinage des interfaces de couches

and stiff soil layers and, in the case of restrained-head piles, alterneÂes de sol tendre et de sol rigide et, dans le cas de

at the pile head. The scope of this paper is threefold: (a) to piles aÁ teÃte retenue, au sommet de la pile. Cet exposeÂ a donc

critically review some existing design methods for kinematic trois objectifs : (a) passer en revue et juger certaines des

pile loading; (b) to develop new analytical results for piles in meÂthodes de conception existantes relatives au chargement

homogeneous and layered soils; (c) to present a case study in de pile cineÂmatique ; (b) deÂvelopper de nouveaux reÂsultats

which theoretical predictions are tested against ®eld mea- analytiques pour des piles dans des sols homogeÁnes et des

surements. To this end, an approximate beam-on-dynamic- sols constitueÂs de couches ; (c) preÂsenter une eÂtude de cas

Winkler-foundation (BDWF) model is implemented, speci®- dans laquelle les preÂdictions theÂoriques sont compareÂes aux

cally developed for the seismic response of piles in layered mesures prises sur le terrain. Dans ce but, nous avons utiliseÂ

soil. Both ®xed- and free-head piles, and different boundary une maquette approximative de Winkler (BDWF), deÂvelop-

conditions at the pile toe, are considered. It is shown that peÂe speÂci®quement pour eÂtudier la reÂaction sismique des

the magnitude of kinematic moments depends mainly on the piles dans des sols constitueÂs de couches. Nous eÂtudions les

stiffness contrast between the soil layers, the pile±soil stiff- piles aÁ teÃte ®xe et les piles aÁ teÃte libre ainsi que les

ness contrast, the excitation frequency, and the number of diffeÂrentes conditions limites au pied de la pile. Nous mon-

excitation cycles. A unique case history involving the instru- trons que la magnitude des couples cineÂmatiques deÂpend

mented pile foundation of a multistorey building in Japan is principalement du contraste de rigiditeÂ entre les couches de

presented. Time histories of bending and axial strains re- sol, du contraste de rigiditeÂ entre la pile et le sol, de la

corded at six locations along two piles are successfully com- freÂquence d'excitation et le nombre de cycles d'excitation.

pared with results computed from simple formulae and Nous preÂsentons une histoire de cas unique sur les fonda-

methods presented in the paper. tions de piles instrumenteÂes d'un baÃtiment de plusieurs

eÂtages au Japon. Les histoires de temps pour les deÂforma-

tions ¯eÂchies et axiales enregistreÂes aÁ six emplacements le

long de deux piles montrent une bonne correÂlation avec les

KEYWORDS: case history; dynamics; earthquakes; numerical reÂsultats calculeÂs d'apreÁs les formules et les meÂthodes sim-

modelling and analysis; piles; soil structure interaction. ples preÂsenteÂes dans cet exposeÂ.

Pile damage due to seismic shaking has been observed in and, especially, stiffness in the soil pro®le. The most likely

numerous post-earthquake investigations around the world (Ross cause is the relatively large curvatures imposed on the piles by

et al., 1969; Margason, 1975; CNEL-ENEL, 1976; Okamoto, the surrounding soil, as it deforms while excited by the up- and

1983; Nishizawa et al., 1984; EEFIT, 1986). Mizuno (1987) down- (after re¯ection) propagating seismic waves. The reason

reported 28 cases involving seismic failures of piles in Japan. is that soil shear strain is discontinuous across interfaces

More recently, pile damage was observed in the Loma Prieta because of the different shear moduli between the layers, and

earthquake (1989) and particularly in the Kobe earthquake thereby the associated soil curvature (the derivative of strain) is

(1995). Identi®ed or suspected causes of failure in the above in®nite. Accordingly, this type of distress is called kinematic, to

cases include: distinguish it from the inertial distress (type (b)) due to head

loading arising from the inertia forces in the superstructure.

(a) large pile movements due to liquefaction and subsequent

Tajimi (1969) and Penzien (1970) were among the ®rst

lateral soil spreading

to study the problem, by using an analytical and numerical

(b) excessive bending and shear forces transmitted to the piles

approach respectively. Following these early efforts, the

from the superstructure

problem was analysed by Margason (1975), Blaney et al.

(c) bending due to vibratory deformations induced by the

(1976), Kagawa & Kraft (1980), Flores-Berrones & Whit-

passage of seismic waves through the soil.

man (1982), Kaynia & Kausel (1982), Dobry & O'Rourke

Support for the third scenario comes from the fact that damage (1983), Barghouthi (1984), Tazoh et al. (1987), Mineiro

has often been observed too deep to have been caused by (1989), Mamoon & Banerjee (1990), Kavvadas & Gazetas

loading coming from the pile top, in soils that could not (1993), Nikolaou et al. (1995), Kaynia & Mahzooni (1996),

possibly have suffered a severe loss of strength (e.g. liquefac- Guin & Banerjee (1998) Luo & Murono (2001) and others.

tion). Analytical and ®eld evidence (Dobry & O'Rourke, 1983; Most of these studies focus on the dynamic response of the

Mizuno, 1987; Tazoh et al., 1987) have associated this type of pile head; the associated curvatures and bending moments

along the pile have received less attention. Reviews on the

subject have been presented by Novak (1991), Pender

Manuscript received 26 July 2000; revised manuscript accepted 9 March (1993), and Gazetas & Mylonakis (1998).

2001.

Despite the above research efforts, and some documented

Discussion on this paper closes 2 November 2001, for further details

see the inside back cover.

cases of kinematically induced damage to piles, this mode of

Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers, New York. response does not usually receive proper attention by engineers.

{ City University of New York. Instead, seismically loaded piles are traditionally designed to

{ National Technical University, Athens. withstand only the ¯exural stresses generated from the oscilla-

} Shimizu Corporation, Tokyo. tions of the superstructure. Nevertheless, the importance of

425

426 NIKOLAOU, MYLONAKIS, GAZETAS AND TAZOH

kinematic loading has started to be recognised in recent seismic elastic piles are ®nite. This gives rise to an interaction between

provisions. For example, Part 5 of the recently published the pile and the soil at the vicinity of the interface that cannot

European seismic code EC-8 (1996) states: be captured by equations (2) or (3). Third, results from these

methods may lead to erroneous design rules if carelessly inter-

`Piles shall be designed for the following two loading

preted. For instance, the peak bending strain, åp , in a cross-

conditions:

section of the pile is

(a) inertia forces from the superstructure . . . åp (1=R) r (4)

(b) soil deformations arising from the passage of seismic

where r is the distance from the neutral axis to the farthest

waves which impose curvatures and thereby lateral strain

®bre in the cross-section. Bending strain is useful in evaluating

on the piles along their whole length . . . Such kinematic

the seismic performance of a pile because

loading may be particularly large at interfaces of soil

layers with sharply different shear moduli. The design (a) it is dimensionless

must ensure that `no plastic hinge' develops at such (b) it is directly measurable experimentally

locations . . .' (c) it can be used to quantify damage

(d ) ultimate (`failure') bending strains do not vary signi®cantly

An analogous statement can be found in the Seismic guidelines

among common structural materials. (Typically, strains of

for ports (TCLEE, 1998), which in Part 6 deals with kinematic

the order of one thousandth are enough to in¯ict damage in

loads. The increasing awareness of practising engineers of the

conventionally designed concrete or steel beams)

importance of kinematic loading can be noticed from reports in

professional journals (e.g. European Foundations, Spring 1998; As mentioned earlier, Margason's method determines 1=R based

Pappin et al., 1998). only on the properties of the soil and the excitation (equations

This paper is aimed at improving current understanding of (2), (3)). Therefore, one would conclude from equation (4) that

the importance of kinematic loading on the seismic performance the peak bending strain increases proportionally with the pile

of piles. This is done in three parts: ®rst, two existing design radius r. This may lead to the conclusion (see Bertero et al.,

methods are critically reviewed; second, new analytical results 1974; Margason, 1975) that small-diameter piles are superior to

for piles in homogeneous and layered soil deposits are devel- large-diameter piles for kinematic loading. As will be shown

oped by implementing a pertinent bean-on-dynamic-Winkler later, this may or may not be true, depending on the circum-

foundation (BDWF) model; third, a case study is presented in stances.

which theoretical predicitons are tested against ®eld measure-

ments.

Dobry & O'Rourke (1983)

A simple model for determining kinematic pile bending

REVIEW OF AVAILABLE DESIGN METHODS moments at the interface of two soil layers has been proposed

Margason (1975) and NEHRP (1997) by Dobry & O'Rourke (1983). Their main assumptions are as

In one of the earliest methods for kinematic pile bending, follows:

Margason (1975) assumes that a long pile follows the motion of

(a) The pile is long, and the two soil layers are suf®ciently

the surrounding soil. Based on this assumption, the kinematic

thick for the response of the pile outside these layers (e.g. at

bending moments are determined by considering the peak cur-

the pile head or at the pile toe) not to in¯uence the response

vature developing in the free-®eld soil:

at the interface.

M Ep I p (1=R) (1) (b) The soil is subjected to a uniform shear stress, which

generates uniform strain within each layer.

where M peak pile bending moment; (1=R) peak `soil'

curvature; (Ep I p ) pile ¯exural stiffness. To compute (1=R), Based on these assumptions, and modelling the pile as a beam

Margason proposes the following relation: on Winkler foundation, Dobry & O'Rourke derived an explicit

solution for the pile bending at the interface. Expressed in terms

(1=R) 2 ÄUff =Äz 2 (2)

of bending strain, their solution can be cast as

in which ÄUff is the relative lateral displacement between two åp 2r ë1 ã1 F (5)

points in the soil separated by a vertical distance Äz. This

relation is based on approximating the de¯ected shape of the where ã1 is the soil shear at the interface, and ë1 is the well-

pile by a circular arc: that is, assuming that the pile is subjected known Winkler parameter (Scott, 1981),

to pure bending. Margason (1975) argues that peak soil curva- 1=4

tures during severe earthquakes are not likely to exceed about k1

ë1 (6)

0´02 mÿ1 (if liquefaction does not develop). 4Ep I p

An analogous approach is proposed in the NEHRP (1997)

seismic provisions: assuming that the pile follows the free-®eld referring to the properties of the ®rst layer. k 1 denotes the

soil motion, and considering only vertically propagating S modulus of the Winkler springs in the ®rst (top) layer, and it

waves, the curvature in the free-®eld soil is obtained from the was taken by Dobry & O'Rourke as three times the shear

one-dimensional wave equation (Newmark, 1968; NEHRP, modulus of the material: that is, k 1 3G1 . F denotes the

1997): dimensionless function

(1=R) aff =Vs 2 (3) F cÿ3 (c ÿ 1)(c2 ÿ c 1) (7a)

where aff denotes the free-®eld soil acceleration and Vs the in which c expresses the ratio of the shear moduli of the two

propagation velocity of shear waves in the soil material. layers:

The accuracy of the above equations will be examined below.

In the interim, the following points are worthy of note. First, in c (G2 =G1 )1=4 (7b)

equations (2) and (3) the interaction between pile and soil is

neglected. Accordingly, several important parameters such as The Dobry±O'Rourke (1983) model provides a practical tool

the pile±soil relative stiffness, pile length to diameter ratio for determining kinematic interface moments. In contrast to the

(`slenderness ratio') and radiation damping are not incorporated. simplistic Margason/NEHRP method, the model takes into ac-

Second, the methods are inapplicable to interfaces between count the interaction between soil and pile and thus overcomes

different layers. As mentioned earlier, soil strains are discontin- the problem of singular soil curvature at the interface. Never-

uous across such interfaces, and thereby the corresponding soil theless, the dynamic nature of the excitation and the effect of

curvatures are theoretically in®nite. In contrast, curvatures in the ®nite thickness of the soil layers are not incorporated. In

KINEMATIC PILE BENDING DURING EARTHQUAKES 427

addition, as will be shown later on, this solution by substantially & Ventura, 1984) can then be utilised to obtain the response in

overpredict the actual pile bending in certain cases. the time domain. The model can accommodate precisely the

frequency dependence of k and c, in contrast to methods that

require frequency-independent parameters to obtain the response

BEAM-ON-DYNAMIC-WINKLER-FOUNDATION MODEL directly in the time domain. Moreover, moderate levels of non-

The response to vertical S-wave excitation of a single pile in linearity in the soil surrounding the pile could also be handled

a layered soil can be obtained numerically using suitable ®nite- approximately with this model. Such non-linearity may arise

element (FE) formulation with `wave transmitting' boundaries from the large stresses induced in the immediate vicinity of the

(e.g. the one described by Blaney et al., 1976), or a boundary- pile, and can be modelled approximately with a linear analysis

element-type code (e.g. the one described by Mamoon & Bane- of a radially inhomogeneous soil (Sheta & Novak, 1982;

rjee, 1990 and Banerjee 1995). However, such rigorous tools, Veletsos & Dotson, 1986; Michaelides et al., 1998). The springs

even if available, have well-known limitations when used in and dashpots resulting from such an analysis would re¯ect the

seismic design. This is particularly true if seismic analysis using non-linearities due to pile±soil interaction, rather than the non-

actual or simulated ground motions is to be performed in the linearities due to vertically propagating shear waves in the free-

frequency domain. Under these conditions, pile response must ®eld soil.

be computed for a large number of frequencies covering the However, for the kinematic problem studied herein, such

frequency content of the seismic signal. Therefore a simpli®ed non-linearities are not in our prime interest for two reasons:

analytical model would be quite useful provided it had been (a) The maximum bending moments occur at layer interfaces

shown to be in accord with the rigorous results for a wide range located at a certain depth, where the soil is well con®ned

of pile types, soil pro®les, and excitation frequencies. and offers greater resistance (e.g. ultimate lateral load,

The simpli®ed model adopted in the present study is based pu 9 Su compared with pu 2 Su at the surface, where

on the beam-on-dynamic-Winkler-foundation (BDWF) approach Su undrained soil shear strength).

(Fig. 1), in which the role of the soil±pile interaction is (b) The motion of the pile into the soil is not as signi®cant as

simulated through a set of springs and dashpots continuously in the inertially (head) loaded pile.

distributed along the pile, the frequency-dependent parameters

of which [k k(ù); cd cd (ù)] are determined through theor- Recall that a kinematically loaded pile follows all but the

etical models (Novak et al., 1978; Gazetas & Dobry, 1984) or details of the free-®eld soil motion (Kagawa & Kraft, 1980;

using calibrations with rigorous numerical solutions (Roesset, Kavvadas & Gazetas, 1993). Nevertheless, when applying the

1980; Dobry et al., 1982; Kavvadas & Gazetas, 1993). This results of the paper to practical problems, a judicious choice of

approach has been used extensively to estimate the dynamic soil moduli should account for some unavoidable non-linearity

impedance of piles in relation to inertial interaction analyses: and/or disturbance due to pile installation. Only linear analyses

that is, for loads applied at the pile head (Novak, 1991). A few are performed in this study, based on the ®nite-element-derived

studies have also used Winkler-type models to determine kine- springs and dashpots of Gazetas & Dobry (1984) and Makris &

matic response of piles (Penzien, 1970; Flores-Berrones & Gazetas (1992).

Whitman, 1982; Barghouthi, 1984; Kavvadas & Gazetas, 1993; Note also that the dynamic Winkler model developed here

Nikolaou et al., 1995). In these formulations, the springs and differs from those in the foregoing studies in that it is applied

dashpots connect the pile to the free-®eld soil; the wave-induced to layered (rather than homogeneous) deposits, it focuses on

motion of the latter (computed with any available method, such pile bending (as opposed to the motion of the pile head), and it

as Schnabel et al., 1972; Roesset, 1977) serves as the support proposes rational closed-form expressions for kinematic curva-

excitation of the pile±soil system (Fig. 1). tures and bending strains developing along the pile. Results are

Frequency-domain solutions to the kinematic problem using presented in three parts: (a) homogeneous soil; (b) two-layer

BDWF models have been presented, among others, by Nogami soil; (c) relation between harmonic and transient response.

et al. (1991), Kavvadas & Gazetas (1993), and Mylonakis et al.

(1997). The discrete fourier transform (DFT) method (Veletsos

HOMOGENEOUS SOIL: ANALYTICAL SOLUTIONS

As a ®rst application, the bending of a pile in homogeneous

Seismic free-field motion Seismic pile motion, Y(z) soil will be examined using the BDWF method. The analytical

aspects of the method are well known (see aforementioned

ρ1, E1, ν1, β1 references); only results are presented below.

Uff (z)

Based on analytical studies by Flores-Berrones & Whitman

ρi, Ei, νi, βi (1982), Barghouthi (1984), and Makris & Gazetas (1992), the

de¯ected shape Y (z) of a long ®xed-head pile in a homogeneous

halfspace, excited by vertically propagating harmonic S waves,

is given by

Y(z)

Y (z) ÃUff (z) (8)

where Uff (z) denotes the free-®eld soil motion, z the depth from

the soil surface, and Ã the dimensionless response factor:

k iùcd

k(z) Ã (9)

Ep I p (q 4 4ë4 )

the Winkler bed, with ù being the cyclic vibrational frequency

and i the imaginary unity; q ù=Vs is the wavenumber of the

Vertical

harmonic SH waves in the soil; ë is given by equation (6), but

shear waves

with the spring constant k replaced by the complex dynamic

Fig. 1. The beam-on-dynamic-Winkler-foundation (BDWF) model impedance (k iùc).

for a pile in a multi-layer soil pro®le, used in this study. The pile Differentiating equation (8) twice with respect to depth, z,

is excited by vertically propagating S waves after Fan, 1992 the ratio of the peak pile and soil curvatures is obtained as

428 NIKOLAOU, MYLONAKIS, GAZETAS AND TAZOH

(1=R)p in the bedrock such that the bending moment at the toe is zero

Ã (10)

(1=R)s (hinged-toe pile), the corresponding expression is

8 9

For a free-head pile, the corresponding solution gives < cos qh [cosh ëh cos ëh =

(Mylonakis, 1999) (1=R)p 2 sinh ëh (ë=q)2 [(1=Ã) ÿ 1]sin ëh]

Ã:1 ÿ 2 ;

(1=R)s cosh 2ëh cos 2ëh

(1=R)p (14)

Ã max[eÿëz (cos ëz sin ëz) ÿ cos qz] (11)

(1=R)s

Note that, with increasing pile length, the second term in the

The above expressions clearly indicate that pile curvature is not right-hand side of equations (13) and (14) converges to 1, and

equal to soil curvature (as assumed by Margason (1975) and both expressions duly reduce to equation (10).

NEHRP (1997)); its value depends on the characteristics of the Numerical values for the above equations are plotted in Fig.

soil and the pile, the excitation frequency, and the depth from 3. It can be seen that the curvature ratio may exceed 1 for a

the surface. wider range of frequencies than for the in®nitely long pile (Fig.

Equations (10) and (11) are plotted in Fig. 2 as functions of 2), and it is understandably higher with the hinged-toe than the

the dimensionless frequency factor a0 ùd=Vs, for a solid ¯oating-toe piles. Contrary to the trends incited by the Marga-

cylindrical pile of diameter d. It is seen that at low frequencies son/NEHRP equations (equations (2), (3)), no clear relation

pile and soil curvatures are approximately equal, which implies between curvature ratio and pile diameter can be drawn from

that the pile follows the free-®eld soil motion (Ã 1). With the graph. The jump observed at the fundamental natural period

increasing frequency, however, the curvature ratio decreases of the layer is associated with the sudden appearance of radia-

monotonically with frequency, and tends to zero as a0 tends to tion damping in the medium at that frequency (Blaney et al.,

in®nity. This can be interpreted as a progressively increasing 1976; Novak, 1991; Kavvadas & Gazetas, 1993; Guin & Bane-

destructive interference of the high-frequency (short-wavelength) rjee, 1998). The jump is clearly visible in the short layer

seismic waves exciting the pile. The trend is understandably (h=d 5), but less pronounced in the thicker ones.

stronger with large pile±soil stiffness contrasts. It is also ob- The response of the pile head can be determined analytically

served that the curvature ratio is always smaller than 1, and is with the BDWF model. The solution can be conveniently ex-

higher in free-head than in ®xed-head piles. An exception pressed through the so-called kinematic response factors I u and

occurs near a0 0: at such low frequencies and at shallow I f (Blaney et al., 1976; Kaynia & Kausel, 1982; Fan et al.,

depths, the last term in equation (11), cos qz, is practically equal 1991), which are de®ned, respectively, as the maximum trans-

to 1. Accordingly, it is straightforward to show that the maxi- lation, Y (0), and rotation, È(0), of the pile head normalised by

mum pile curvature occurs when ëz ð: the corresponding maximum displacement at the surface of the

free-®eld soil (i.e. I u Y (0)=Uff (0); I ö È(0)d=Uff (0)). For a

(1=R)p long pile whose head is free to rotate (free-head conditions), the

1 3 (eÿð 1) ' 1:04 (12) following closed-form solutions were obtained:

(1=R)s " 2 #

1 q

which in agreement with Fig. 2. Iu Ã 1 2 (15)

ë

and

Piles of ®nite length q2 d

Iö Ã (16)

For a ®xed-head pile of ®nite length in a homogeneous layer ë

of thickness h over a rigid base, the curvature ratio is given by In the case of zero rotation at the pile head (®xed-head

the expression (Mylonakis, 1999) conditions), the kinematic ratio, I u , is given by the simpler

(1=R)p expression

(1=R)s Iu Ã (17)

2 3

2 cos qh (sinh ëh cos ëh ÿ cosh ëh sin ëh) which elucidates the physical meaning of parameter Ã. Natu-

4 q (q=ë) cosh ëh cos ëh sin ëh5 rally, with ®xed-head piles, I ö 0. Equation (17) was appar-

Ã 1 (13)

ë sinh 2ëh sin 2ëh ently ®rst derived by Flores-Berrones & Whitman (1982) and

Barghouthi (1984).

The above expression corresponds to stress-free conditions at

the pile toe (¯oating-toe pile). For a pile with its toe socketed 1·5

Floating-toe pile (Equation (13))

1·5 Hinged-toe pile (Equation (14))

Fixed-head pile (Equation (10)) h/d = 20

Curvature ratio, (1/R)p/(1/R)s

Margason (1975)

Curvature ratio, (1/R)p/(1/R)s

1·04

1·0

h/d = 5

0·5

Ep/Es = 1000

0·5

Fundamental frequency

10 000 of soil layer

100 000 0

0 0·1 0·2 0·3 0·4 0·5

0 a0 = ωd/Vs

0 0·1 0·2 0·3 0·4 0·5

a0 = ωd/Vs Fig. 3. Ratio of peak pile and soil curvatures in a ®xed-head pile in

homogeneous soil layer over rigid rock, for various layer thicknesses

Fig. 2. Ratio of peak pile and soil curvatures for an in®nitely long and boundary conditions at the pile toe; Ep =Es 1000, rs =r rp 0:7,

pile in homogeneous halfspace: rs =rrp 0:7, í 0:4, â 0 í 0:4, â 0:05

KINEMATIC PILE BENDING DURING EARTHQUAKES 429

LAYERED PROFILES: PARAMETRIC ANALYSIS Note that three parameters remain invariable in all analyses:

With reference to layered soil pro®les, a comprehensive the distance from the pile tip to the bedrock (h3 =L 1), the

parameter study is presented in this section. It refers to harmo- Poisson's ratio of the soil (í1 í2 0:40), and the material

nic state±state bending strains in a pile in a two-layer soil damping in the soil ( â1 â2 10%). The damping values are

deposit subjected to vertically propagating seismic shear waves roughly consistent with strain levels caused by moderately

(Fig. 4). To conform with the analyses presented earlier, the pile severe shaking. The importance of the parameter (h3 =L), which

is modelled as a solid elastic cylinder of Young's modulus Ep , is related to the thickness of the soil pro®le, is examined later

moment of inertia I p , diameter d, and mass per unit length m. on.

Each soil layer j ( j 1, 2) is characterised by its shear wave Selected results are given in Figs 5±7. Fig. 5 presents the

velocity Vj, thickness hj , mass density rj, hysteric damping ratio envelopes of harmonic bending strain pro®les for cases A1 and

âj , and Poisson's ratio íj . The harmonic excitation is described A2, for both ®xed-head and free-head piles. The moments are

through the harmonic base rock acceleration ar exp(iùt). presented in terms of maximum dimensionless bending strain:

Peak harmonic steady-state bending strains along the pile are

determined for different groups of ®xed dimensionless para- M d

åp (18)

meters, with the ratio V1 =V2 being the main variable (Table 1). Ep I p 2

The analyses are divided into four groups (A±D). For each

group, four cases (1±4) are investigated, corresponding to dif- Several interesting points are worthy of note:

ferent stiffness contrasts between the two layers. Both free-head

(a) The kinematic bending strain in a free-head pile in homo-

and ®xed-head conditions are considered atop the pile, while

geneous soil (case A1) increases with depth, reaching its

the pile toe is assumed stress free. Thirty-two sets of parametric

maximum at approximately the mid-length of the pile. In

results were obtained in total.

contrast, for a ®xed-head pile, bending strain is a decreasing

function of depth, having its maximum at the pile head.

(b) For a two-layered pro®le (case A2), the bending strain

as eiωt diagram exhibits a pronounced peak close to (but not

exactly at) the interface between the two layers. This is in

agreement with the foregoing discussion about the con-

V1, ρ1 centration of kinematic moments in the vicinity of layer

β1, ν1 h1 interfaces.

Ep, lp, m (c) The bending strain diagrams of free-head and ®xed-head

piles converge with depth and become practically identical

beyond a certain distance from the surface. This depth

coincides with the so-called `active pile length', beyond

which a head-loaded pile behaves as in in®nitely long beam.

h2 Using the well-known approximate formula (Poulos & Davis,

1980; Randolph, 1981; Velez et al., 1983)

V2, ρ2 1=4

β2, ν2 Ep

La 1:5 d (19)

Es

d

h3 one obtains La =d 1:5 3 (1000)1=4 8:4, which is agreement

with the results of Fig. 5. The values shown in the plots

ar eiωt represent response envelopes, which may entail different excita-

tion periods. However, in most cases examined the envelopes

were dominated by the fundamental period of the soil pro®le.

SH Evidence on this is presented immediately below.

waves Case A2 is examined further in Fig. 6. In this graph, transfer

functions relating bedrock acceleration to surface acceleration

Fig. 4. The system used in the parameter study: a single pile and bedrock acceleration to pile bending strain are portrayed as

embedded in a two-layer pro®le on rigid bedrock, excited by functions of frequency for two characteristic points: the pile top

harmonic SH seismic waves (or the soil surface when referring to the free-®eld motion), and

Table 1. Parameter cases for maximum harmonic steady-state kinematic bending strains. In

all cases í1 í2 0:4; â1 â2 10%; h3 =L 1

Group Case L=d Ep =E1 h1 =L V1 =V2 r1 =r2

A 1 20 1000 2/3 1 1

2 0´5 0´8

3 0´25 0´7

4 0´1 0´6

B 1 20 5000 1/2 1 1

2 0´5 0´8

3 0´25 0´7

4 0´1 0´6

C 1 40 5000 1/2 1 1

2 0´5 0´8

3 0´25 0´7

4 0´1 0´6

D 1 20 10 000 1/2 1 1

2 0´5 0´8

3 0´25 0´7

4 0´1 0´6

430 NIKOLAOU, MYLONAKIS, GAZETAS AND TAZOH

0 10

Case A1

Soil surface

Interface

8

5

6

Depth, z/d

10

15

Fixed-head pile 2

Free-head pile

20 0

(a)

0 15

Case A2

Pile top

Interface, fixed-head pile

12

5 Interface, free-head pile

Depth, z/d

9

10 Equation (20)

Equations (5)–(7)

(Dobry & O'Rourke, 1983)

6

15

3

Equation (20)

Equations (5)–(7) (Dobry & O'Rourke, 1983)

20

0 5 10 15 20 0

0 1 2 3

Pile bending strain, εp: 10–4 Normalised excitation period, T/T1

(b)

Fig. 5. Steady-state kinematic bending strains along a ®xed-head

and a free-head pile in a homogeneous deposit (top) and a two-layer Fig. 6. Case A2: amplitudes of steady-state response for (a) free-®eld

deposit (bottom): L=d 20; Ep =E1 1000; V1 =V2 1=2. The response and (b) pile bending strain in a two-layer soil pro®le

dashed line indicates the depth of the interface

the point at some depth where a peak occurs in pile bending M=(as r1 h1 d 3 ), which accounts for the different free-®eld soil

strain. The similarity between the free-®eld transfer functions ampli®cation effects, the difference in the results is less than

(Fig. 6(a)) and the bending strain transfer functions (Fig. 6(b)) 10% even for high values of h3 =L.

is evident. The maximum bending strains occur at or near The most important conclusions that have emerged from

resonance (T =T1 1) for both the interface and the pile top. these analyses are as follows (see also Nikolaou et al., 1995):

(The small deviation from unity can be attributed to damping in

the system.) Also, although the free-®eld soil response at the (a) For a given excitation frequency, the kinematic bending

surface and the interface are quite different, the corresponding strain depends mainly on: the stiffness contrast (V1 =V2 )

transfer functions of bending strain are very similar and resem- between any two consecutive soil layers in the deposit; the

ble closely that of the free-®eld surface response. boundary conditions at the pile head or cap; the proximity

Cases B2, B3 and B4 are portrayed in Fig. 7. In case B2 it of the excitation period, T , to the fundamental (®rst) natural

can be seen that with a stiff pile (Ep =Es 5000) the active pile period, T1 , of the soil deposit, and to a lesser degree to the

length moves below the interface (from equation (19): second natural period, T2 , of the deposit; and the relative

La =d 1:5 3 (5000)1=4 12:6, in accord with the plotted re- depth, h1 =La , measured from the top of the pile down to the

sults). Apparently, this makes the kinematic distress at the pile interface of the layers with the sharpest stiffness contrast,

top (®xed-head conditions) more pronounced than that at the normalised with respect to the active length, La , of the pile.

interface. In cases B3 and B4 the shear wave velocity of the (b) The bending strains are largest either at the pile head or at

second soil layer, V2 , has been increased, respectively, to four the vicinity of the interface of soil layers with the sharpest

and ten times the V1 . Notice that the increase in stiffness stiffness contrasts. The strains at the interface for free-head

contrast leads to signi®cantly larger bending strain at the inter- and ®xed-head piles are almost identical, except when the

face, while bending at the top remains almost practically pile is `short' and/or `rigid' (i.e. when h1 , La ).

unaffected (see B2). With the sharpest impedance contrast (c) In most cases, the maximum harmonic bending strain

between the two layers in case B4, the bending strain at the occurs at the fundamental natural period of the soil deposit.

interface exceeds that at the pile head. The pile strain transfer functions display a very rapid

The effect of the dimensional parameter h3 =L is presented in reduction when moving away from resonance (Fig. 6). The

Table 2. Changing this ratio will dramatically affect the natural variation of kinematic bending strain with frequency

period of the pro®le and alter the free-®eld soil response. follows, more or less, the ampli®cation of the free-®eld

Nevertheless, it is evident from Table 2 that an increase or acceleration: as =ar (Figs 6(a), 6(b)). This shows the great

decrease in h3 =L does not have any major effect on the in¯uence of the ®rst mode of vibration on the magnitude of

maximum pile bending strain at the interface. In particular, bending strain, and contradicts some earlier statements in

when speaking in terms of the dimensional moment the literature that higher modes would produce larger

KINEMATIC PILE BENDING DURING EARTHQUAKES 431

0 Table 2. Effect of relative height, h3 =L, on peak steady-state

Case B2 kinematic pile bending

max M

Case h3 =L åp (10ÿ4 ) as r1 h1 d 3

5

A3 1 16´8 27´9

0´5 14´6 27´3

4 21´2 32´4

Depth, z/d

C3 1 92´6 69´1

10

0´5 76´2 66´1

4 76´6 79´6

D3 1 62´6 90´8

0´5 50´0 85´7

15

4 54´3 97´2

0 develop at the interface, as a function of the free-®eld

Case B3 acceleration at the soil surface, as :

ôc as r1 h1 (20a)

5

The ®tted formula is written

0:30 0:65 0:50

3 L Ep V2

Depth, z/d

:

M 0 042 ôc d (20b)

10 d E1 V1

Predictions obtained using the above formula are shown in Figs

5±7. Corresponding predictions using the Dobry & O'Rourke

15 (1983) solution are also shown for comparison. The good

Fixed-head pile performance of equation (20) is evident in all graphs. In

Free-head pile contrast, the Dobry±O'Rourke solution overestimates pile bend-

ing in certain cases (Figs 5, 7).

20

0

Case B4 TIME AGAINST FREQUENCY-DOMAIN RESPONSE

Harmonic steady-state results can only rarely be used directly

in design. This is because only a hypothetical harmonic excita-

5 tion with a very large number of cycles would produce a

response with amplitude equal to the steady-state value. A more

transient excitation, as in earthquake shaking, would tend to

produce smaller response.

Depth, z/d

comprehensive numerical parameter study has been carried out,

using (a) three actual soil pro®les (I, II, and III, as depicted in

Fig. 8), (b) nine accelerograms (eight actual records and one

15 arti®cial motion; see Table 3 and Fig. 9).

The three deposits were chosen to represent cases where the

Equation 20 use of piles is the most likely engineering solution. The use of

Equations 5–7 (Dobry & O'Rourke, 1983) realistic soil pro®les was considered necessary in these analyses

20 to better represent the complicated transfer functions in actual

0 20 40 60 80 soil deposits. Sketched in Fig. 8, the soil pro®les are:

Pile bending strain, εp: 10–4

(a) a `soft clay' pro®le, a two-layer idealisation of an actual soil

Fig. 7. Steady-state kinematic bending strains along a ®xed-head that consists of a very soft clay underlain by stiff sand

and a free-head pile in a two-layer deposit; L=d 20, Ep =E1 having thickness that varies parametrically from 30 m to

5000. From top to bottom: V1 =V2 1=2, 1=4 and 1=10 94 m. The shallow version of the pro®le (total thickness

h 30 m) has a natural period of 0´52 s, while the deep

version ( h 94 m) has a period of 1´1 s.

(b) a `Boston' pro®le, an idealisation of an actual pro®le from

downtown Boston. The calculated natural period is

kinematic bending (Dobry & O'Rourke, 1983; Kavvadas &

approximately 0´5 s.

Gazetas, 1993). Indeed, while higher frequencies tend to

(c) a `Bay Area' pro®le, an idealised pro®le typical of the

generate `wavy' shapes of de¯ection (and thus have the

stiffer San Francisco Bay Area formations. The distribution

potential for inducing relatively large curvatures at the

of the shear wave velocity with depth does not show the

interface), the actual curvature is also affected by the overall

abrupt changes of the previous pro®les. The fundamental

drift between the top and the bottom of the pile. This drift

natural period of this pro®le is roughly 0´8 seconds.

usually becomes maximum at the ®rst natural mode, and

thereby produces the largest bending at the ®rst resonance. Additional information on the soil properties is given in

(d ) A closed-form expression has been developed for comput- Nikolaou et al. (1995).

ing approximately the maximum steady-state bending Since only linear analyses were performed, the wave veloci-

moment at the interface between the two layers (Nikolaou ties shown in Fig. 8 are considered as strain-compatible (`effec-

et al., 1995; Nikolaou & Gazetas, 1997). The expression is tive') quantities. In view of the strong seismic excitation that is

based on a `characteristic' shear stress ôc , which is presumed to be imposed, this means that the low-strain (`elas-

432 NIKOLAOU, MYLONAKIS, GAZETAS AND TAZOH

Vs: m/s Vs: m/s Vs: m/s

0 200 400 0 200 400 0 200 400

0 0 0

Soft Fill

5

clay

7

9

9·5

Bay

Blue mud

clay

Dense

20

sand

22

27

Glacial

30 till Dense

(or 94) clayey

sand

Vsr = { ∞1200 35

Vsr = 1400

40

Vsr = 550

Idealised soft clay Idealised Boston Idealised Bay Area

profile profile profile

Event Record Peak ground Approximate Range of

acceleration: number of predominant

g{ cycles, Nc periods, T : s

p

Northridge (1994) Pac_down, ch. 1 0´43 2±3 0´15±0´50

Pyrgos (1993) Pyrtran 0´46 1 0´12±0´45

La116th, ch. 1 0´39 4±5 0´10±0´25

Whittier (1987) Pacoima, ch. 1 0´16 3±4 0´10±0´30

Tarzana, ch. 3 0´4 10 0´30±0´40

Loma Prieta (1989) Anderson, downstr 0´25 6±7 0´15±0´30

Kobe (1995) Kobe JMA, NS 0´83 4 0´3±0´9

Mexico (1985) La Villita, 08 0´12 3 0´5±0´6

{ Before normalisation.

Based on the 5%-damped acceleration spectrum (Fig. 9).

tic') S-wave velocities would be larger than the shown ones by corresponding maximum steady-state strains. It is evident from

a factor of the order of 1´5. A variation in damping ratio from this ®gure that the envelope of peak moments (in the `time

10% at the surface to 7% at the bottom was considered in all domain') has a distribution with depth that is of the same shape

pro®les. The piles used in the analyses are ®xed head with as the distribution of steady-state amplitudes (in the `frequency

d 1:3 m, Ep 25 MPa, and r 2:5 Mg=m3 . Their lengths domain'). But the values of the latter are about three to ®ve

are shown in Fig. 9. times larger than the former, depending on the excitation. It is

The nine selected accelerograms cover a broad range of worth mentioning that some of the peak strains are of the order

possible rock motions. They are assumed to consist solely of of one thousandth (0´1%), which is enough to damage the pile.

vertically propagating S waves, and are all normalised to peak Based on these analyses, it is proposed that a reduction factor

rock acceleration of 0´20 g. The characteristics of the records ç be applied to the maximum steady-state pile bending strain

are shown in Table 3. The duration of these motions, expressed (or moment) in the frequency domain to arrive at the corre-

as number of strong motion cycles, ranges between one and sponding peak value in the time domain:

seven cycles. Their dominant periods extend from about 0´1 to

0´9 s. The normalised acceleration response spectra of all mo- max åp (t)

ç (21)

tions are depicted in Fig. 9. max åp (ù)

The more than 80 parameter analyses performed showed that

the basic conclusions drawn from the harmonic analyses are still Data for ç obtained from the parameter analyses are presented

valid, except that the transient strains are of signi®cantly smaller in Fig. 11. The data are plotted as function of the effective

magnitude. Fig. 10 portrays the envelopes of pile bending number of cycles in the record, Nc , grouped in two categories:

strains calculated using the nine excitations, plotted against the (a) resonant conditions (denoted by the solid dots), which

KINEMATIC PILE BENDING DURING EARTHQUAKES 433

6 itudinal (vertical) pile strains, arising from axial and bending

Tarzana, Whittier

loading, at six different depths. At each elevation four gauges

were installed in the periphery of the piles, from which axial

and bending strains in the x and y directions were recorded

5 (Fig. 12).

The soil pro®le is shown in Fig. 13. It consists of about 39 m

of soft saturated high-plasticity silty clay (PI 50) having a

LA116, Anderson, Loma Prieta

Whittier

measured shear wave velocity, Vs , ranging between 135 and

240 m=s, underlain by stiff mudstone with Vs 480 m=s. These

4 La Villita, Mexico

velocities are low-strain (Vs, max ) values determined in situ using

PS logging (plank hammering method). Soil properties are also

Spectral amplification

under the Tokyo Bay area (358129N; 1398489E) on 2 February

3 1992 with a magnitude 5´9, focal depth 93 km, and epicentral

distance from the site 32 km. The largest acceleration recorded

on the ground surface was about 0´05g.

JMA Kobe

Acceleration time histories in the x and y directions just

Pacoima,

2 Northridge

under the ground surface (GL ÿ 2 m) and the base mudstone

(GL ÿ 40 m) are plotted in Fig. 14. Their response spectra are

shown in Fig. 15. Predictions using the equivalent-linear com-

puter code SHAKE are also shown for comparison. Computed

and recorded motions are in very good agreement despite the

1

fact that in the theory the soil is modelled as a series of

Pacoima, Whittier Pyrgos perfectly horizontal layers subjected to vertically propagating

shear waves. The prevailing period of approximately 1 s obser-

ved in the surface spectra is in agreement with the fundamental

0

0 0·25 0·50 0·75 1·00 1·25

natural period of the soil layer: T1 4 h=Vs 43

Structural natural period, T: s 39=150 1 s. It is worth mentioning that because of the

relatively low accelerations in the soil (ar 0:025 g) and the

Fig. 9. Normalised 5%-damped spectra of the earthquake motions high plasticity index of the material (PI 50), the reduction in

considered soil shear modulus predicted by SHAKE using the Vucetic &

Dobry (1991) G±ã curves does not exceed a mere 10% (see

Fig. 13). Similarly, soil damping is estimated to be about 3±

correspond to the case when the fundamental natural period of 4%. However, a slightly higher material damping of about 5%

the deposit lies within the range of the predominant periods of was found necessary to match the amplitude of accelerations at

the excitation; (b) non-resonant conditions (denoted by the open the soil surface. To achieve this using the aforementioned G±ã

dots), when the fundamental period of the deposit lies outside curves, a plasticity index PI 30 had to be used (Fig. 15). This

the dominant periods of the earthquake motion. Least-square small discrepancy can be attributed to the material character-

®tted lines to the data are also presented. They are described by istics of the clay. The G(ã), â(ã) curves for PI 30 were used

ç ' 0:04Nc 0:23 (22a) thereafter.

The ratio of the recorded response spectra at the surface

and (ÿ2 m) and the base (ÿ40 m) of the pro®le is plotted in Fig.

ç ' 0:015Nc 0:17 ' 0:2 (22b) 16, for both x and y directions. The substantial ampli®cation

(about eight times) observed close to the fundamental natural

for the resonant and non-resonant conditions respectively. It is period of the pro®le is evident in the graph. The slightly higher

seen that for non-resonant conditions ç is quite small, and fundamental natural period and smaller ampli®cation in the x

practically independent of Nc . By contrast, for resonant condi- direction could be attributed to the stronger excitation imposed

tions, ç is understandably much more cycle-dependent, and may along the x axis. The similar ampli®cation patterns observed in

exceed the value of 0´5. the two directions lends further support to the assumption of

An analogy with the single-degree-of-freedom oscillator is one-dimensionality of the wave propagation, as adopted in our

worthy of note: while in such systems the steady-state spectral analyses.

ampli®cation at resonance (for 5% damping) is approximately The computed and measured time histories of pile bending

equal to 1=(2â) 1=(2 3 0:05) 10, the maximum spectral strain at the depth of 31 m (interface 1; see Fig. 13) are

ampli®cation in code acceleration spectra is usually taken as 2´5 compared in Fig. 17. Note that our method refers to a single

(NEHRP, 1997; Eurocode EC-8, 1996), which is equivalent to pile, and therefore the computed results for piles A and B are

an ç factor of 2:5=10 0:25. This value is somewhat smaller identical (only one curve shown). Several interesting trends are

than the average observed in Fig. 11 for resonant conditions. worthy of note. First, the bending strains in the corner and

This `discrepancy' can be attributed to, among other reasons, centre piles are very similar. This indicates that group effects

the higher-mode resonances that can develop in a soil layer but are minor for kinematic response, which is in agreement with

not in a simple one-degree-of-freedom oscillator. the analytical studies of Kaynia & Kausel (1982), Fan et al.

(1991), Kaynia & Mahzooni (1996), and others. (By contrast,

pile-to-pile interaction due to dynamic loading at the pile cap

CASE STUDY: SEISMIC RESPONSE OF INSTRUMENTED `ERVIC' has been shown to have a profound effect on the response of

BUILDING PILE FOUNDATION' the group; see Kaynia & Kausel (1982), Dobry & Gazetas

The Ervic building is a 12 storey structure located in (1988).) Second, the prevailing period of the records is very

Yokohama, Japan. Its foundation consists of a one-¯oor base- close to 1 s, which elucidates the role of soil response (as

ment supported by 20 reinforced concrete piles, 35 m long and opposed to loading due to structural inertia forces) on the

1´7 m in diameter. Comprehensive instrumentation of this build- development of kinematic pile bending at depth. Third, the

ing was conducted by the Institute of Technology of Shimizu computed peak values tend to overestimate the measurements

Corporation. Accelerometers were installed on the building and by as much as 50%. While modelling errors are a `usual

in the free-®eld soil, as depicted in Fig. 12. Two piles, one suspect', this may also imply that the location of the strain

located at the corner (pile A) and the other near the centre (pile gauges might not be exactly at the interface between the two

B) of the foundation plan, were chosen for measuring long- layers, as was assumed in the analyses. Another possibility is

434 NIKOLAOU, MYLONAKIS, GAZETAS AND TAZOH

0 0

Soft clay Boston

5

10

Depth, z: m

Depth, z: m

15

10

20

15 25

0 10 20 30 0 5 10 15 20

0

Bay Area

5 Steady state

Pacoima, Whittier

Artificial, EC8

10

Tarzana, Whittier

Depth, z: m

Pacoima, Northridge

15 Anderson, Loma Prieta

JMA, Kobe

La villita

20

Pyrgos

LA116, Whittier

25

0 5 10 15

Pile bending strain, εp: 10–4

Fig. 10. Comparison of envelopes of pile bending strains for various earthquake motions, plotted against the

maximum steady-state strains, for four different soil pro®les (scaling to 0´2 g peak rock acceleration was

considered for all motions)

that the stiffness contrast between the two layers may be less

than the V2 =V1 240=135 1:8 value assumed in our ana-

0·8 Data for T1 ≠ Tp (non-resonance) lyses, thereby leading to smaller bending strain. Nevertheless,

Data for T1 ≈ Tp (resonance) the agreement between the predicted and recorded time histories

Least-square fitted lines

is quite satisfactory from an engineering point of view.

The distributions along the pile of the peak values of

0·6 computed and measured bending strains are compared in Fig.

18. The computed values are solely the result of loading from

the surrounding soil (kinematic response): that is, the inertia of

the superstructure is ignored. However, the measured values are,

η 0·4 of course, the superposition of both kinematic (i.e. due to soil)

and inertial (i.e. due to structure) strains. The results of the

0·23

Nc + comparison show that:

0·04

0·015 Nc + 0·

17 (a) Theory and reality are in reasonable accord at the four

0·2

deeper elevations below the active pile length, estimated as

(equation (19))

La (1:5)(350)1=4 (1:7) 11 m (23)

0

0 2 4 6 The under-prediction by the analysis of the strains close to

Number of 'effective' excitation cycles, Nc

the pile head is understood, as such bending strains arise

mainly from structural loading.

Fig. 11. Proposed design curves for the frequency-to-time reduction (b) Kinematically induced bending strains are pronounced close

factor ç as a function of the number of `effective' excitation cycles to interface 1. This con®rms the signi®cance of kinematic

and resonance conditions. The dots correspond to the motions bending in deposits containing consecutive layers with

shown in the legend of Fig. 10 and in Fig. 9 sharply different stiffness.

KINEMATIC PILE BENDING DURING EARTHQUAKES 435

24·8 m

m

·4

28

RF

28·4 m

46·6 m

7F

24·8 m

Pile B

Pile A

GL

B1F 0 10

y (+) Scale: m

x (+)

y

Soil Building accelerometer

Strain

transducer Ground accelerometer

z a

Dynamic strain transducer

x b

y d x

Pile B

Pile A c

GL –39 m

Supporting

layer

(c) Strains at the (even sharper) interface 2 are less pronounced L=d 34:9=1:7 ' 20:5 (26)

in our analysis because of the lack of adequate pile length V2 =V1 240=135 ' 1:78 (27)

below the interface to mobilise bending moments. Unfortu-

nately, the authors could not ®nd a convincing explanation The resonant pile bending moment is obtained using equation

for the relatively high strain recorded at that depth in the y (20a):

direction. : : :

M 0:042 3 21 3 1:73 3 20:50 3 3 3500 65 3 1:780 5

Computation of kinematic pile bending strain using equations

(20)-(22) which corresponds to bending around the y axis.

As an example, the peak kinematic bending strain at inter- Assuming non-resonant conditions (a reasonable approxima-

face 1 (i.e. at z 31 m) will be computed using the approx- tion in view of the well-separated predominant periods of the

imate method proposed in equations (20)±(22). For simplicity, bedrock motion ( 0:1±0:3 s) and fundamental natural period of

only the strain in the x direction (along which the excitation is the soil layer ( 1 s)), and about three to four effective excita-

stronger) will be analysed. It will be shown that realistic tion cycles, the frequency-to-time conversion factor ç is ap-

estimates of the response can be obtained using this simpli®ed proximately (equation (22b), Fig. 11)

approach. ç 0:015 3 3 0:17 0:22 (29)

The characteristic stress at the interface is computed from

equation (20a): From equation (21), the peak bending moment at the interface

ôc (0:045 3 9:81) 3 1:55 3 31 21 kPa (24) is

max M(t) 0:21 3 650 143 kN m (30)

The pile±soil stiffness contrast is approximately

Finally, the peak bending strain in the pile is obtained through

Ep 2:7 3 107 equation (18).

' ' 350 (25)

E1 135 3 1:5 3 2 3 (1 0:4)

2

åp 143=(2:7 3 107 3 0:41) 3 1:7=2 1:1 3 10ÿ5 (31)

where 0´4 is an approximate estimate of the Poisson's ratio of

the clay. The pile slenderness ratio and stiffness contrast at which is in accordance with the recorded values in Fig. 18.

interface 1 are, respectively, As a ®nal remark, we should point out that the recorded peak

436 NIKOLAOU, MYLONAKIS, GAZETAS AND TAZOH

0 10 20 30 40 50 100 200 300 400 500

0

Fill

5 silty sand

A1

10

Low strain A2

15 A3

Strain compatible

20 Alluvial

Depth: m

silty clay

A4

ρs = 1·5 Mg/m3

25

30

Interface 1 A5

35

ρs = 1·6 Mg/m3

Tuffaceous clay

Clay with sand Interface 2

Gravel A6

40

Mudstone

ρs = 1·6 Mg/m3

Fine sand

Mudstone

45

Fig. 13. Soil pro®le and properties; location of transducers in pile A and accelerographs in the building basement (open

circles) and the surrounding soil (open triangles)

Table 4. Summary of soil/foundation characteristics of Ervic Build- overall strains at the interface. More research is needed to

ing (mass density and shear-wave velocity values are shown in Fig. explore the interplay of these actions.

13.)

Depth Soil{ Pile

0±7 m Alluvial sand :

Ep 2 7 3 107 kPa CONCLUSIONS

rp 2:5 Mg=m3 A comprehensive analytical study was presented for the

Alluvial silty clay (CH-MH) L 35 m bending of single piles in homogeneous and layered soil depos-

wn 95% d 1 :7 m its under the passage of vertically propagating seismic SH

e 2 :6 waves. The method is based on a beam-on-dynamic-Winkler-

7±32 m W L 100% foundation (BDWF) model equipped with frequency-dependent

PI 55 spring and dashpot moduli. The main conclusions of the study

Su 45 kPa

are as follows:

Clay with sand (CH) (a) Pile curvatures are not equal in many instances to soil

wn 75% curvatures as assumed in some existing design methods, but

e 2 :0

32±40 m W L 30%

their values depend on the characteristics of the soil and the

PI 50 pile, the excitation frequency, and the depth from the soil

Su 75 kPa surface.

(b) Contrary to trends indicated by the Margason and NEHRP

.40 m Mudstone methods, no clear relation between imposed curvature and

{ Hysteretic damping 5% and Poisson's ratio 0´4 were considered for all

pile diameter can be inferred. It therefore follows that the

layers. seismic behaviour of slender piles is not always superior to

that of large-diameter piles.

(c) Kinematic bending strains are largest at the head of a

capped pile, and at the location of relatively deep interfaces

between layers with very different stiffnesses. The maxi-

mum harmonic steady-state moment at the interface occurs

strains are not large enough to in¯ict damage to the pile. In at the fundamental natural period of the soil deposit. Its

fact, even with a tenfold increase in the intensity of the value depends on a number of soil and pile parameters.

excitation (0´25 g on rock), the peak pile bending strain would Equation (20) was developed for estimating approximately

be of the order of 10ÿ4 (assuming linear response), which is this maximum moment in practical applications.

still below yielding. Sharper stiffness contrasts between the soil (d ) Peak pile bending due to transient excitation is only a

layers at the interface (V2 =V1 . 1:8) could, however, induce fraction, ç, of the maximum value (with respect to

bending distress. Also, other factors such as dead loads, nega- frequency) under harmonic steady-state excitation. ç can

tive skin friction and axial pile vibrations may increase the be estimated using equations (22) and the chart of Fig. 11.

KINEMATIC PILE BENDING DURING EARTHQUAKES 437

x direction y direction

0·05

–2 m –2 m

computed computed

–0·05

0·05

Ground acceleration, aff: g

–2 m –2 m

recorded recorded

–0·05

0·05

–40 m –40 m

recorded recorded

–0·05

5 10 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time, t: s Time, t: s

Fig. 14. Predicted and recorded acceleration time histories of the free-®eld soil response

x direction y direction

0·15

–2 m –2 m

computed computed

Elastic Elastic

0·10 β = 5% β = 5%

50 50

0·05

SHAKE, PI = 30

SHAKE, PI = 30

0

0·15

Spectral acceleration, SA: g

–2 m –2 m

recorded recorded

0·10

0·05

0·15

–40 m –40 m

recorded recorded

0·10

0·05

0

0 0·5 1·0 1·5 0 0·5 1·0 1·5

Period, T: s Period, T: s

Fig. 15. Predicted and recorded 5% damped acceleration response spectra in the free-®eld soil

438 NIKOLAOU, MYLONAKIS, GAZETAS AND TAZOH

10 Peak pile bending strain: 10–5

9 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4

Average 0

8 y direction, computed x direction y direction

recorded

7 5

SAsurface/SAbase

A1

6

10 Active A2

5 x direction, pile

recorded length

4 15 Strain A3

compatible

3 PI= 30

20 Strain

Depth: m

2 Elastic compatible

β = 5% PI= 30 A4

1 25 Elastic

β = 5%

0

0 0·5 1·0 1·5 30

Period, T: s A5

Fig. 16. Ratio of response spectra (RSS) at the surface (ÿ2 m) and 35

at rock (ÿ40 m). Note the similar ampli®cation patterns in the x

and y directions 40 A6

45

(e) Time histories of pile bending strain recorded at six corner pile centre pile

locations along two piles in an instrumented building in

Fig. 18. Measured and predicted peak pile bending strains

Japan compare favourably with results obtained from the

methods developed in the paper. Examination of the

recordings indicates that the prevailing period of the time ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

histories of pile bending strain at depth is close to the The data on the Ervic Building were kindly provided by the

fundamental natural period of the soil deposit. This Institute of Technology of Shimizu Corporation.

elucidates the role of soil response (as opposed to building

response) in the development of kinematic pile bending.

Group effects are of only minor importance for kinematic NOTATION

response. Comparison of recorded and computed strains a0 dimensionless frequency ( ù d=V s )

shows that theory and reality match reasonably well at aff , as , ar free-®eld soil acceleration, surface soil acceleration, rock

elevations deeper than the active pile length. acceleration

x direction y direction

20

–31 m –31 m

computed computed

–20

20

Pile bending strain, εp: 10–6

recorded recorded

–20

20

–31 m, pile A –31 m, pile A

recorded recorded

–20

5 10 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time, t: s Time, t: s

Fig. 17. Computed and recorded time histories of pile bending strain 31 m below the surface

KINEMATIC PILE BENDING DURING EARTHQUAKES 439

c (G2 =G1 )1=4 Gazetas, G. & Mylonakis, G. (1998). Seismic soil±structure interaction:

cd Winkler dashpot modulus new evidence and emerging issues. Geotech Earthq. Engng & Soil

d pile diameter Dynamics III, vol. 2, pp. 1119±1174. ASCE.

Es , Ei Soil Young's modulus; Young's modulus in layer i Guin, J. & Banerjee, P. K. (1998). Coupled soil±pile±structure inter-

Ep pile Young's modulus action analysis under seismic excitation. J. Struct. Engng, ASCE

F dimensionless function related to pile bending moment at 124, No. 4, 434±444.

the interface Kagawa, T. & Kraft, L. M. (1980). Lateral load±de¯ection relationships

G soil shear modulus of piles subjected to dynamic loads. Soils Found. 20, No. 4, 19±36.

h, hi soil thickness; thickness of soil layer i Kavvadas, M. & Gazetas, G. (1993). Kinematic seismic response and

Ip pile cross-sectional moment of inertia

p bending of free-head piles in layered soil. GeÂotechnique 43, No. 2,

i ÿ1 207±222.

I u, I ö kinematic response factors Kaynia, A. M. & Kausel, E. (1982). Dynamic stiffness and seismic

k Winkler spring modulus response of pile groups, Research Report R82±03. Massachusetts

L, La pile length, active pile length Institute of Technology.

M pile bending moment Kaynia, A. M. & Mahzooni, S. (1996). Forces in pile foundations under

m mass per unit pile length seismic loading. J. Engng Mech., ASCE 122, No. 1, 46±53.

Nc number of effective excitation cycles Luo, X. & Murono, Y. (2001). Seismic analysis of pile foundations

q SH wavenumber ( ù=V s ) damaged in the January 17, 1995 South Hyogo earthquake by using

r distance from neutral axis to farthest ®ber in pile cross the seismic deformation method. Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Recent Ad-

section vances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics,

PI soil plasticity index San Diego.

R radius of curvature Makris, N. & Gazetas, G. (1992). Dynamic pile±soil±pile interaction.

SA spectral acceleration Part II: Lateral and seismic response. Earthquake Engng & Struct.

t time Dynamics 21, No. 2.

T, Ti period; ith natural soil period Mamoon, S. M. & Banerjee, P. K. (1990). Response of piles and pile

Tp predominant period of earthquake record groups to traveling SH-waves. Earthquake Engng & Struct. Dy-

U ff horizontal soil displacement namics 19, No. 4, 597±610.

Y horizontal pile displacement Margason, E. (1975). Pile bending during earthquakes. Lecture, 6 March

V s, V 1, V 2 soil shear wave velocities, soil shear wave velocity in 1975, ASCE-UC/Berkeley Seminar on Design Construction and Per-

layers 1 and 2 formance of Deep Foundations (unpublished).

z depth from soil surface Michaelides, O., Gazetas, G., Bouckovalas, G. & Chrysikou, E. (1998).

Approximate nonlinear analysis of piles. GeÂotechnique, 48, No. 1,

â hysteretic damping coef®cient 33±54.

Ã dimensionless kinematic response parameter Mineiro, A. J. C. (1989). Simpli®ed procedure for evaluating earthquake

ã soil shear strain loading on piles. In De Mello Volume (eds J. E. Morewira and L.

åp pile bending strain DeÂcourt), CõÂrculo do Livro SA, p. 567.

ç frequency-to-time conversion factor Mizuno, H. (1987). Pile damage during earthquakes in Japan. In

ë Winkler wavenumber parameter Dynamic response of pile foundations (ed. T. Nogami), ASCE

í soil Poisson's ratio Special Publication, pp. 53±78.

r mass density Mylonakis, G., (1999). Analytical solutions for seismic pile bending.

ôc characteristic soil shear stress at layer interface Unpublished research report, City University of New York.

ù cyclic oscillation frequency Mylonakis, G., Nikolaou, A. S. & Gazetas, G. (1997). Soil±pile±bridge

seismic interaction: kinematic and inertial effects. Part I: Soft soil.

Earthquake Engng & Struct. Dynamics 26, 337±359.

NEHRP (1997). Recommended provisions for seismic regulations for

REFERENCES new buildings and other structures. Washington, DC: Building

Banerjee, P. K. (1995). The boundary element methods in engineering. Seismic Safety Council.

McGraw-Hill, New York. Newmark, N. M. (1968). Problems in wave propagation in soil and

Barghouthi, A. F. (1984). Pile response to seismic waves. PhD disserta- rock. Proceedings of the international symposium on wave propaga-

tion, University of Wisconsin, Madison. tion and dynamic properties of earth materials, University of New

Bertero, V., Lin, T. Y., Seed, H. B., Gerwick, B. C., Brauner, H. A. and Mexico Press.

Fotinos, G. C. (1974). Aseismic design of prestressed concrete Nikolaou, A. S. & Gazetas, G. (1997). Seismic design procedure for

piling. Proc. 7th Cong. Federation Internationale de la Precon- kinematically loaded piles. Proc. 14th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found.

trainte, New York. Engng, Hamburg, Special Volume, ISSMFE TC4 Earthquake geo-

Blaney, G. W., Kausel, E. & Roesset, J. M. (1976). Dynamic stiffness of technical engineering, 253±260.

piles. Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Num. Methods Geomech., Blacksburg VA Nikolaou, A. S., Mylonakis, G. & Gazetas, G. (1995). Kinematic

2, 1010±1012. bending moments in seismically stressed piles. Report NCEER-95-

CNEL-ENEL (1976). Contribution to the study of the Fruili earthquake 0022, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research. Buffa-

of May 1976, Rome. lo: State University of New York.

Dobry, R. & Gazetas, G. (1988). Simple method for dynamic stiffness and Nishizawa, T., Tajiri, S. & Kawamura, S. (1984). Excavation and

damping of ¯oating pile groups. GeÂotechnique 38, No. 4, 557±574. response analysis of a damaged rc pile by liquefaction. Proc. 8th

Dobry, R. & O'Rourke, M. J. (1983). Discussion on `Seismic response World Conf. Earthquake Engng 3, 593±600.

of end-bearing piles' by Flores-Berrones, R. & Whitman, R. V. J. Nogami, T., Jones, H. W. and Mosher, R. L. (1991). Response analysis

Geotech. Engng Div., ASCE p. 109. of pile-supported structure assessment of commonly-used approxima-

Dobry, R., Vincente, E., O'Rourke, M. J. & Roesset, J. M. (1982). tions, Third International Conference on recent advances in Geotech-

Horizontal stiffness and damping of single piles. J. Geotech. Engng nical Engineering and soil dynamics, University of Missouri-Rolla,

Div., ASCE 108, No. 3, 439±459. Missouri, 931±940.

EEFIT (1986). The Mexican earthquake of 19 September 1985. London: Novak, M. (1991). Piles under dynamic loads: state of the art. Proc.

Institution of Civil Engineers. 2nd Int. Conf. Recent Adv. Geotech. Earthquake Engng Soil Dy-

Eurocode EC-8 (1996). Structures in seismic regions, Part 5: Founda- namics, St Louis 3, 2433±2456.

tions, retaining structures, & geotechnical aspects. Commission of Novak, M., Nogami, T. & Aboul-Ella, F. (1978). Dynamic soil reaction for

the European Communities. plane strain case. J. Engng Mech. Div., ASCE 104, No. 4, 953±959.

Fan, K., Gazertas, G., Kaynia, A., Kausel, E. and Ahmad, S. (1991). Okamoto, S. (1983). An introduction to earthquake engineering, 2nd

Kinematic seismic response of single piles and pile groups. J. edn. University of Tokyo Press.

Geotech. Engng Div., ASCE 117, No. 12, 1860±1879. Pappin, J., Ramsey, J., Booth, E. & Lubkowski, Z. (1998). Seismic

Fan, K. (1992). Seismic response of pile foundations evaluated through response of piles: some recent design studies. Proc. Inst. Civ. Engrs,

case histories. PhD thesis, State University of New York at Buffalo. Geotech. Engng 131, 23±33.

Flores-Berrones, R. & Whitman, R. V. (1982). Seismic response of end- Pender, M. (1993). Aseismic pile foundation design analysis. Bull. NZ

bearing piles. J. Geotech. Engng Div., ASCE 108, No. 4, 554±569. Nat. Soc. Earthquake Engng 26, No. 1, 49±160.

Gazetas, G. & Dobry, R. (1984). Simple radiation damping model for piles Penzien, J. (1970). Soil±pile foundation interaction. In Earthquake

and footings. J. Geotech. Engng Div., ASCE 110, No. 6, 937±956. engineering (ed. R. L. Wiegel), Ch. 14. New York: Prentice Hall.

440 NIKOLAOU, MYLONAKIS, GAZETAS AND TAZOH

Poulos, H. G. & Davis, E. H. (1980). Pile foundation analysis and Tajimi, H. (1969). Dynamic analysis of structure embedded in elastic

design. John Wiley & Sons. stratum. Proc. 4th World Conf. Earthquake Engng, Santiago, 53±69.

Randolph, M. F. (1981). The response of ¯exible piles to lateral loading. Tazoh, T., Shimizu, K. & Wakahara, T. (1987). Seismic observations

GeÂotechnique 31, No. 2, 247±259. and analysis of grouped piles. In Dynamic response of pile founda-

Roesset, J. M. (1977). (eds C. S. Desar and J. T. Christian). Soil tions: experiment, analysis and observation, Geotechnical Special

ampli®cation of earthquakes. Numerical Methods in Geotechnical Publication No. 11. ASCE.

Engineering, McGraw-Hill, 639±682. Technical Council on Lifeline Earthquake Engineering (TCLEE) (1998).

Roesset, J. M. (1980). Stiffness and damping coef®cients of foundations. Seismic guidelines for ports (ed. S. D. Werner). ASCE.

Proc ASCE Geotech. Engng Div. Nat. Conv. 3, 1±30. Veletsos, A. S. & Dotson, K. W. (1986). Impedances of soil layer with

Ross, G. A., Seed, H. B. & Migliaccio, R. (1969). Bridge foundations in disturbed boundary zone. J. Geotechn. Engng, ASCE 112, No. 3.

the Alaska earthquake. J. Soil Mech. Found. Engng, ASCE, 95. Veletsos, A. S. & Ventura, C. E. (1984). Ef®cient analysis of dynamic

Schnabel, P. B., Lysmer, J. & Seed, H. B., (1972). SHAKE: A computer response of linear systems. Earthquake Engng & Struct. Dynamics

program for earthquake response analysis of horizontally layered 12, 521±536.

sites, EERC 72-12. Berkeley: University of California. Velez, A., Gazetas, G. & Khrishnan, R. (1983). Lateral dynamic

Scott, R. F. (1981). Foundation Analysis, Prentice Hall, New York. response of constrained-head piles. J. Geotech. Engng Div., ASCE

Sheta, M. and Novak, M. (1982). Vertical vibration of pile groups, 109, No. 8, 1063±1081.

Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 108, GT4, Vucetic, M. and Dobry, R. (1991). Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic

570±590. response. J. Geotech. Engng Div., ASCE 117, No. 1, 89±107.

## Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.

Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.

Jederzeit kündbar.