Development of an Approximate

Development of an Approximate
Nonlinear Analysis of Piled Raft
Nonlinear Analysis of Piled Raft
Foundations
Foundations
2008.04.02 2008.04.02
Myung Jun Song Myung Jun Song
Ph.D. Candidate Ph.D. Candidate
Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering Lab Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Engineering Lab
Seoul National University Seoul National University
Contents

Introduction

Approximate Nonlinear Analysis

Modeling

Pile-Soil Interaction

Pile-Soil-Pile Interaction

Raft-Soil-Pile interaction

Evaluations

Comparison with 3D FEM analysis

Conclusions

Further Study
2/24
Design Philosophies of Piled Rafts

Conventional Pile Design Method

Disregard of the capacity of raft

Increase the number of piles or length of piles

Very small allowable settlement

Piled Raft Design Method

Design for fully utilization of pile capacity

Settlement Reducing Pile

Design for the calculation of settlement

Consideration of Complex Soil-Structure

Interaction(Pile-Raft-Soil)

Consideration of the optimal location of piles to

decrease the differential settlement and bending
moment of raft
3/24
Design Philosophies of Piled Rafts

Curve 0 : raft only(settlement excessive)

Curve 1 : raft with piles designed for

conventional safety factor

Curve 2 : raft with piles designed for lower

safety factor

Curve 3 : raft with piles designed for fully

utilization of capacity

Load settlement curves for piled rafts (Poulos, 1997)

Increasing number of piles
4/24
Application of Piled Raft Foundations to Civil Structure
5/24
Modeling Summary
6/24

Linear elastic spring for raft-soil interaction

Nonlinear behavior of pile

Applicable to multi-layered ground

Description of apparent stiffness reduction phenomena

Description of stiffness hardening phenomena

q : Distributed Load
Q : Point Load
Raft
Soil Spring
w
Q
s
Shaft Resistance
Q
psi
w
net
Q
pb
w
net
Base Resistance
Iteration
for
Compatibility Q
p
: Pile Load
Q
p
: Pile Load
Raft analysis on the spring Pile group behavior analysis
Pile-Soil Interaction

Kondner(1963)
w
p
q
pbu
k
pb
q
pba
q
psu(i)
q
psa(i)
k
ps(i)
pba
p
pb
p
pb
q
w
K
w
q
+

1
) ( ) (
) (
1
i psa
p
i ps
p
i ps
q
w
K
w
q
+

w
p
w
p
: settlement
q
pb
: unit end bearing
k
pb
: initial stiffness of toe(Randolph & Worth, 1978)
q
pba
= q
pbu
/R
f
: an asymptote of q
pb
q
pbu
: ultimate unit end bearing
R
f
: reduction factor
q
ps
(i) : unit skin friction at element i
k
ps
(i) : initial stiffness of skin at element i
q
psa
(i) = q
psu
(i)/R
f
: an asymptote of q
ps
(i)
q
psu
(i) : ultimate unit skin friction at element i
End bearing Skin friction
7/24
Pile-Soil-Pile Interaction

Apparent stiffness reduction due to ground settlement generated by pile

settlement(Randolph & Worth, 1979)
r
p
w
s
w
( )
m p
m
s
p s
s
r r r
r
r
G
r
r w < <

,
_

, ln

( )
m s
r r r w > , 0
( )
p s p
r w w
) (
p s p
r w w
w
s
(r)
w
s
(r
p
)
w
slip
w
p
=w
s
(r
p
)+w
slip

No interface slip

Interface slip
p fe slip p p s
w R w w r w ) (
p
p s
p
slip p
fe
w
r w
w
w w
R
) (

8/24
Pile-Soil-Pile Interaction
i j
j i
r
,
( ) i w
p
( ) i i w
p
,
( ) ( )
,
,
p s i j
w i j w r
( ) ) (i r w
p s
( ) i w
slip
( ) ) ( j r w
p s
( ) j w
slip

Superposition of settlement with the effects of the adjacent piles

settlement makes apparent stiffness reduction in the group pile.

The slip of pile does not affect to adjacent piles settlement.

) ( ) ( )) ( ( ) , ( ) , ( ) (
, j i s slip p s p p p
r w i w i r w j i w i i w i w + + +
) (
)) ( (
) , ( ) , ( ) (
, j i s
fe
p s
p p p
r w
R
i r w
j i w i i w i w + +

,
_

+ +

,
_

,
_

+ + +
n i
m
p
i
m
p
i
m
p
fe
p p p p
r
n r
n r n
r
r
r
r
r
r
R
n i w i w i w i w
,
2 , 1 ,
) (
ln ) ( ) (
) 2 (
ln ) 2 ( ) 2 (
) 1 (
ln ) 1 ( ) 1 (
1
) , ( ) 2 , ( ) 1 , ( ) (

'

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
]
1

,
_

,
_

,
_

,
_

,
_

,
_

,
_

,
_

,
_

'

) (
) 2 (
) 1 (
) (
ln
) ( ) 2 (
ln ) 2 (
) 1 (
ln ) 1 (
) (
ln ) (
) 2 (
ln
) 2 ( ) 1 (
ln ) 1 (
) (
ln ) (
) 2 (
ln ) 2 (
) 1 (
ln
) 1 (
) (
) 2 (
) 1 (
, 2 , 1 ,
, 2 2 , 2 1 , 2
, 1 2 , 1 1 , 1
n
r
n r
R
n r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
n r
n r
r
r
R
r
r
r
r
r
n r
n r
r
r
r
r
r
R
r
n w
w
w
n n
m
fe
p
n
m
p
n
m
p
n
m
p
m
fe
p m
p
n
m
p
m
p
m
fe
p
p
p
p

9/24
Raft-Soil-Pile Interaction

Apparent stiffness reduction of pile by raft

Relative settlement for the calculation of pile reaction

) ( ) ( ) ( i w i w i w
s p net

) 1 (
s
w
) 2 (
s
w
) 3 (
s
w
) 4 (
s
w
) 0 (
s
w
0
1
2
3
4
w
p
0 ) 0 (
net
w
) 1 (
net
w
) 2 (
net
w
) 3 (
net
w
) 4 (
net
w
10/24
Raft-Soil-Pile Interaction

Apparent stiffness reduction of soil spring in raft by piles

w
s,raft
node i node i
pile j
w
s,pile
+
w
s,piled raft
(i)= w
s,raft
(i)+ w
s,pile
(i)
node i
) (
) (
) (
,
,
i w
i Q
i k
raft s
raft s

) ( ) (
) (
) (
) (
) (
, , ,
,
i w i w
i Q
i w
i Q
i k
pile s raft s raft piled s
raft piled s
+

) (
) ( ) (
) (
) (
,
, ,
,
,
i k
i w i w
i w
i k
raft s
pile s raft s
raft s
raft piled s
+

11/24
Raft-Soil-Pile Interaction

Stiffness hardening of piles by raft would be considered by

increasing the effective stress and unit skin friction
) , ( ) , ( ) , (
' ' '
z i z i z i
v vi v
+
k
) , ( z i
v

q
pile i
z
s
q
w
psu
q
psu
q
q
psu
: ultimate unit skin friction
12/24
Raft-Soil-Pile Interaction reduced scale test

Set-up of Test Piles

Comparison of Load -Settlement Curves
13/24
Comparison with 3D FEM Analysis
(PLAXIS 3D Foundation)

Example models for the evaluation of developed analysis program

0
2107
3650
4712
5576
6322
6989
7598
8162
8689
9186
9657
10107
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
9
z(m) E
s
(kPa)
12
= 18kN/m
3
c = 0
= 30
E
r
= 30,000,000 kPa
B
r
= 6m
L
r
= 6m
t
r
= 1.2m
E
p
= 30,000,000 kPa
D
p
= 0.5m
L
p
= 10m
n
p
= 33
spacing = 2m
Single Raft Single Pile
Piled Raft
14/24
Comparison with 3D FEM Analysis

3D FEM mesh model for piled raft analysis

Soil model raft and pile model
15/24
Comparison with 3D FEM Analysis

Analysis results of raft foundation without piles

0
20
40
60
80
100
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Load(MN)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
m
m
)
Plaxis 3D
Present Study
16/24
Comparison with 3D FEM Analysis

Analysis results of single pile

0
20
40
60
80
100
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Load(kN)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
m
m
)
Plaxis 3D
Present study
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Load(kN)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
m
m
)
Plaxis 3D
Present study
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Load(kN)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
m
m
)
Plaxis 3D
Present study
Toe Skin Total
17/24
Comparison with 3D FEM Analysis

Pile behaviors from the piled raft foundation analysis

Plaxis 3D This study
0
40
80
120
160
200
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Load(kN)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
m
m
)
Center
Edge
Corner
Single
0
40
80
120
160
200
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Load(kN)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
m
m
)
Center
Edge
Corner
Single
18/24
Comparison with 3D FEM Analysis

Raft behaviors from the piled raft foundation analysis

0
20
40
60
80
100
0 1 2 3 4 5
Load(MN)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
m
m
)
Raft only (Plaxis3D)
Piled raft (Plaxis3D)
Raft only (present study)
Piled raft (present study)
19/24
Comparison with 3D FEM Analysis

Total behavior of piled raft

0
20
40
60
80
100
0 2 4 6 8 10
Load(MN)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
m
m
)
Plaxis3D
Present study

Piled raft coefficient

0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
L
o
a
d
o
n
P
i
l
e
s
(
%
)
Settlement(mm)
Plaxis 3D
Present Study
20/24
Comparison with other approximate programs

Comparison with linear elastic analysis programs

0
20
40
60
80
100
0 2 4 6 8 10
Load(MN)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
m
m
)
Plaxis3D
Pile+R
FEAR8.1
Present study
21/24
Conclusions

An approximate method has been developed for the practical design

of piled raft foundations, which analyze non-linear behaviors and soil-
structure interaction effects efficiently in multi-layered soils.

This method considers the apparent stiffness reduction in piles by the

adjacent piles and raft and apparent stiffness reduction in raft by the
piles and generates very similar results to 3D FEM analysis.

The effect of stiffness hardening of pile is under estimated. So, it

makes conservative results in comparison with 3D FEM analysis.

The results of comparisons with 3D FEM analysis also show the

sufficient applicability to practical analysis and design of piled raft
foundations.
22/24
Further Study

Intelligent soil spring

Linear spring for raft-soil interaction was applied in this study.

Intelligent soil spring is needed to model true raft-soil interaction

and depend on the followings;

the relative stiffness of the raft and soil

the plan size and shape of the foundation

the distribution of applied loading on the raft

Intelligent soil spring will be determined by the iterative process of

soil spring reaction and ground settlement analysis.

Variable shape of raft foundation

Field test

Proto type field test

Centrifuge test
23/24
24/24