Investigation of the influence of vertical loads on the ... - CyberLeninka

0 downloads 0 Views 2MB Size Report
Investigation of the influence of vertical loads on the lateral. 1 response of pile foundations in sands and clays. 2. 3. Lassaad Hazzar a,*. , Mahmoud N. Hussien.
Accepted Manuscript Investigation of the influence of vertical loads on the lateral response of pile foundations in sands and clays Lassaad Hazzar, Mahmoud N. Hussien, Mourad Karray PII:

S1674-7755(16)30043-9

DOI:

10.1016/j.jrmge.2016.09.002

Reference:

JRMGE 274

To appear in:

Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering

Received Date: 5 July 2016 Revised Date:

1 September 2016

Accepted Date: 4 September 2016

Please cite this article as: Hazzar L, Hussien MN, Karray M, Investigation of the influence of vertical loads on the lateral response of pile foundations in sands and clays, Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering (2016), doi: 10.1016/j.jrmge.2016.09.002. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 2

Investigation of the influence of vertical loads on the lateral response of pile foundations in sands and clays

3

a

Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Sherbrooke University, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt

b

8 9 10 11 12 13 14

*

Corresponding author. Tel: + 1 819 821-8000 (63922) E-mail adresses: [email protected] (L. Hazzar), [email protected] (M.N. Hussien), [email protected] (M. Karray).

15

M AN U

16

RI PT

7

Lassaad Hazzara,*, Mahmoud N. Hussiena, b, Mourad Karraya

SC

4 5 6

Abstract

19

Although the load applied to pile foundations is usually a combination of vertical and lateral components,

20

there have been few investigations on the behavior of piles subjected to combined loadings. Those few studies

21

led to inconsistent results with regard to the effects of vertical loads on the lateral response of piles. A series

22

of three-dimensional finite differences analyses is conducted to evaluate the influence of vertical loads on the

23

lateral performance of pile foundations. Three idealized sandy and clayey soil profiles are considered: a

24

homogeneous soil layer, a layer with modulus proportional to depth, and a two-layered stratum. The pile

25

material is modelled as linearly elastic, while the soil is idealized using the Mohr-Coulomb constitutive model

26

with a non-associated flow rule. In order to confirm the findings of this study, soils in some cases are further

27

modelled using more sophisticated models (i.e., CYsoil for sandy soils and MCC for clayey soils). Numerical

28

results showed that the lateral resistance of the piles does not appear to vary considerably with the vertical

29

load in sandy soil especially at the loosest state. However, the presence of a vertical load on a pile embedded

30

in homogeneous or inhomogeneous clay is detrimental to its lateral capacity, and it is unconservative to

31

design piles in clays assuming that there is no interaction between vertical and lateral loads. Moreover, the

32

current results indicate that the effect of vertical loads on the lateral response of piles embedded in multi-

33

layered stratum depends on the characteristics of soil not only surrounding the piles but also those located

34

beneath their tips.

AC C

EP

TE D

17 18

35 36

Keywords: Pile foundations, Vertical loads, Lateral loads, Finite differences, Mohr circle.

37 38 39

1

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

40

1. Introduction Pile foundations are extensively used in many civil structures to support vertical and lateral loads.

42

In conventional design methods, the vertical and lateral responses of piles are often evaluated

43

separately neglecting their possible interaction. This would lead to an erroneous design, as pile

44

foundations for several types of structures are often subjected to simultaneous vertical and lateral

45

loading. The separate consideration of the vertical and lateral loading therefore cannot be expected to

46

account properly for the pile behavior (Georgiadis and Saflekou, 1990; Zhang et al., 2002; Hussien et al.,

47

2014a, 2014b).

SC

RI PT

41

The behavior of pile foundations under either vertical or lateral loads has been investigated for

49

more than a century through full-scale tests (e.g., Brown et al., 1987, 1988; Rollins et al., 1998,

50

2005), centrifuge model tests (e.g., McVay et al., 1995, 1998; Tobita et al., 2004), and analytical

51

(e.g., Matlock and Reese, 1960; Randolph and Wroth, 1978; Zhu and Chang, 2002) as well as numerical

52

solutions (e.g., Ottaviani, 1975; Hussien et al., 2010, 2012; Hazzar et al., 2013) among others. The

53

procedures used for modelling soil range from rigorous soil continuum discretization such as finite

54

element (FE) or finite differences (FD) formulation to simplified interaction models such as the

55

subgrade reaction approach. In the conventional subgrade reaction approach, soil is modelled by

56

spring elements attached to the pile at different depths. These springs generally have nonlinear load-

57

displacement characterizations called (t-z) and (p-y) curves for vertical and lateral loading,

58

respectively. These two types of springs are generally uncoupled and therefore soil reactions along

59

the corresponding degrees of freedom are also uncoupled. In other words, the influence of load

60

acting in one direction on the characteristics of the spring in the other direction is neglected (Hussien

61

et al., 2014a). Anagnostopoulos and Georgiadis (1993) have reported through model tests supported

62

by two-dimensional (2D) FE analysis that the modified status of soil stresses and local plastic

63

volume changes in the soil continuum under combined vertical and lateral loads cannot be accounted

64

for in general by the subgrade reaction and elastic half space methods of analysis. Therefore, they

65

suggested using a nonlinear three-dimensional (3D) FE or FD technique for analyzing the problem.

66

Achmus and Thieken (2010) used the 3D FE to investigate the behavior of piles in non-cohesive soil

67

under combined lateral and vertical loading, and they reported that the combined loading on piles

68

induces interaction effects due to simultaneous mobilization of passive earth pressure due to lateral

69

loads and pile skin friction due to vertical loads. Karthigeyan et al. (2006 and 2007) showed through

70

a series of 3D FE analyses on piles that the presence of vertical loads increases the lateral load

AC C

EP

TE D

M AN U

48

2

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

capacity of piles in sandy soils and decreases it in clayey soil. Hussien et al. (2012, 2014a and

72

2014b), using simplified soil-pile interaction FE models, reported a little increase in the lateral

73

capacity of free-head piles installed in sandy soil due to the presence of vertical loads and attributed

74

this increase to the increase in the confining pressures in the sand deposit surrounding the upper part

75

of the pile. In fact, the scopes of the previous attempts examining this problem using 3D FE models

76

have been limited to the behavior of piles installed in homogeneous sandy or clayey soils. Little

77

work has been devoted to the behavior of piles subjected to combined effects of vertical and lateral

78

loads in inhomogeneous and/or layered soils which is often encountered in geotechnical projects.

79

Moreover, the mechanisms regarding the influence of vertical loads on the lateral response of pile

80

foundations in inhomogeneous and/or layered soils may be quite different from those of piles in

81

ideal homogeneous situations.

M AN U

SC

RI PT

71

In view of the above mentioned issues, this paper presents and discusses the results of a series of

83

3D FD analyses carried out using FLAC3D (Itasca, 2009) in order to recapitulate and to evaluate the

84

influences of vertical loads on the lateral response as well as internal forces of piles installed in four

85

idealized sandy and clayey soil profiles: a homogeneous sandy layer; a clayey layer with constant

86

undrained shear strength; a clayey layer with undrained shear strength proportional to depth, and a

87

two-layered stratum. Numerical models are validated and then analyses were carried out to

88

investigate the influences of vertical loads on the lateral capacity and bending moment of piles as

89

affected by typical soil characteristics such as relative density of sandy soil and undrained shear

90

strength as well as over-consolidation ratio (OCR) of clayey soils. Combined load analyses were

91

performed for vertical loads equal to 25 %, 50 %, 75 %, and 100 % of the ultimate vertical load

92

capacity of the pile, Vult.

EP

AC C

93

TE D

82

94

2. Finite differences modeling and parameters identification

95

2.1. Finite differences

96

The 3D FD program FLAC3D (Itasca, 2009) was employed to study the behavior of piles under

97

lateral and vertical loading. Full 3D geometric models were used to represent the coupled soil-pile

98

system. Taking advantage of symmetry, only half of the actual model was built, thus significantly

99

reducing the computational effort. Fig. 1 shows the general layout and meshing of the FD half model

100

used for the analysis of the soil-pile system. A floating pile with a diameter, B was embedded in the

3

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

soil to a depth of L while the total thickness of the soil stratum was selected at L+6B. The soil-pile

102

system was meshed with 8-node brick elements, and the soil elements are fairly small adjacent to the

103

pile and gradually increase in size as they move away from it. The soil element size was kept

104

uniform at 0.5 m in the vertical direction. The total mesh size was extended to a horizontal distance

105

of 16B from the center of the pile. This distance was decided after performing a number of initial

106

trial analyses with several horizontal distances until the displacements and stresses of the pile did not

107

change significantly with further increasing of the distance. All displacements were restrained at the

108

bottom of the meshes while those at the vertical “external faces” were fully fixed in the x- and y-

109

directions. The symmetry face (indicated in red in Fig. 1) were fixed against displacement normal to

110

the symmetry plane, but were free to move on the surface of the plane.

SC

RI PT

101

112

M AN U

111

2.2. Soil model

113

The Mohr-Coulomb model, extensively used in geotechnical engineering practice, was adopted in

114

this study to simulate the nonlinear behavior of soil. In FLAC3D, six parameters are required to

115

effectively define the soil behavior. These parameters are: the elastic bulk modulus, K; the elastic

116

shear modulus, G; the mass density, ρ; the friction angle, φ; dilatancy angle, ψ; and the cohesion, c.

118

TE D

117

2.3. Pile model

The pile is modelled as linear-elastic material. Three parameters are required to define the pile

120

material behavior. These parameters are: the elastic bulk modulus, Kp; the elastic shear modulus, Gp;

121

and the mass density, ρp.

123

AC C

122

EP

119

2.4. Soil-pile interface model

124

The constitutive model of the soil-pile interface is defined in FLAC3D by a linear Coulomb shear-

125

strength criterion that limits the shear force acting at an interface node. The shear-strength criterion

126

is given by (Itasca, 2009):

127

Fs max = ci A + tan φi ( Fn − pA )

(1)

4

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Where Fsmax is the limiting shear force at the soil-pile interface, Fn is the normal force, ci is the

129

cohesion along the interface, φi is the friction angle of the interface surface, p is the pore pressure

130

(interpolated from the target face), and A is the area associated with an interface node. The shear

131

strength was defined with zero cohesive strength and 2/3 of the friction angle for sandy soils. In the

132

case of clayey soils, the interfaces were assumed to have a zero friction angle and the same cohesive

133

strength of the surrounding soil. Separation would cause a significant increase in displacements and

134

therefore the interface elements are allowed to separate if tension develops across the interface and

135

exceeds the tension limit of the interface. Once gap is formed between the soil-pile interfaces, the

136

shear and normal forces are automatically set to zero (Itasca, 2009). The normal and shear forces at

137

the interface nodes are determined by:

139

Fsi( t +∆t ) = Fsi(t ) + ks ∆ u (sit + 0.5 ∆t ) A + σ si A

SC

Fn( t +∆t ) = k n u n A + σ n A

M AN U

138

RI PT

128

(2)

(3)

Where Fn and Fsi are the normal and shear force, respectively, kn and ks are the normal and shear

141

stiffness, respectively, ∆usi is the incremental relative shear displacement vector, un is the absolute

142

normal penetration of the interface node into the target face, σn is the additional normal stress added

143

due to interface stress initialization, and σsi is the additional shear stress vector due to interface stress

144

initialization (Itasca, 2009).

TE D

140

In the current study involving nonlinear analysis; high soil-pile interface stiffness is assigned to

146

minimize the contribution of soil-pile interface elements to the accumulated pile displacements.

147

According to the results of trial numerical analyses conducted to identify an appropriate stiffness

148

value, a value of 105 kPa/m for both kn and ks was found to be sufficient to ensure that no additional

149

deflections were attributed to the pile due to the deformation of the springs representing the

150

interface. The use of such considerably higher values is tempting as it could be considered as more

151

appropriate, but in that case the solution convergence would be very slow. In that way, the interface

152

elements behave practically as a slider with a rigid/plastic behavior.

AC C

EP

145

153 154

2.5. Analysis scheme

5

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

The model is brought to an equilibrium stress-state under gravitational loading before the

156

installation of the pile. In the next stage of analysis, the model is brought into equilibrium after the

157

installation of the pile. The installation is modeled by changing the properties of the pile zones from

158

the properties representing the soil material to those representing the pile material. The pile is then

159

loaded vertically. The ultimate vertical capacity (Vult) of the pile is evaluated by applying a vertical

160

velocity at the pile head while the pile load and settlement are monitored. According to CGS (2013),

161

the value of Vult is defined as the vertical load corresponding to the point with maximum curvature

162

on the vertical load-vertical displacement curve. After the pile is loaded vertically, the pile top is

163

then displaced laterally for a deflection of 0.1B, a value that was fixed in all studied cases to

164

minimize the number of parameters involved. The vertical load is kept constant while applying the

165

lateral displacement. It is fair to mention that the pile is assumed to be in a stress-free state at the

166

beginning of the analysis, and thus the effect of the pile installation is ignored in the analysis.

167 168

3. Validation of the FD model

M AN U

SC

RI PT

155

Before describing the numerical results on the influence of vertical loads on the lateral response of

170

pile foundations, the applicability of the adopted model was verified by predicting the pile response

171

in three published pile loading tests. The first case corresponds to a full scale pile loading test under

172

pure lateral load; the second case corresponds to a full scale test on a pile installed in sandy soil and

173

subjected to the combined action of vertical and lateral loads; and the third case corresponds to a

174

laboratory test on a model pile embedded in clay under combined vertical and lateral loadings.

175

Details of these three cases will be discussed next.

EP

TE D

169

177

AC C

176

3.1. Case study 1

178

Comodromos (2003) has reported the response of a 52 m long and 1.0 m diameter bored pile

179

under pure lateral loads installed at a bridge site in Greece. The subsoil at the site consists of a thick

180

soft silty clay layer extending to a depth of 36.0 m, overlying a medium stiff clay layer of 12.0 m

181

thickness and followed by a very dense sandy gravel layer. Geotechnical properties of soil layers in

182

the test site are summarized in Table 1. In the current analysis, the behavior of the test pile is

183

analyzed by FLAC3D as well as the p-y method according to Matlock (1970). Properties of various

184

soil layers and the pile adopted in the 3D FD analyses are identical to those reported by

6

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Comodromos (2003). The same sequence of load application used in the field test was followed in

186

the current FD analysis. The lateral load-lateral deflection curve obtained using the current FD

187

analysis is compared to both the measured and the estimated p-y responses in Fig. 2a. The present

188

numerical results overestimate the lateral capacity of the pile at all deflection levels compared to the

189

p-y results, and the difference reaches to 15 % at the maximum lateral deflection of 100 mm. In spite

190

of this, the 3D numerical result is fully consistent with the experimental result reported by

191

Comodromos (2003).

RI PT

185

192

3.2. Case study 2

SC

193

The validity of the FD model to the analysis of pile in sandy soil and subjected to both vertical and

195

lateral loads was verified by back predicting the pile response from a test data reported by Karasev et

196

al. (1977). The length and diameter of the test pile were 3.0 m and 0.6 m, respectively. The pile was

197

embedded in a soil strata consisting of very stiff sandy loam with shear strength parameters of c = 18

198

kPa and φ = 18°. The soil shear modulus considered by Karasev et al. (1977) (9295 kPa) was used in

199

the current analysis. The Poisson’s ratio of the soil was assumed of 0.35. The field tests were

200

conducted by loading the pile in the vertical direction and then the lateral loads were applied while

201

the vertical load was kept constant. The sequence of the load application used in the current FD

202

analysis is the same as that followed during the pile test. The FLAC3D results are in accordance with

203

and the reported test as shown in Fig. 2b.

204 205

3.3. Case study 3

EP

TE D

M AN U

194

The validity of the FD model to the analysis of pile in clayey soil and subjected to both vertical

207

and lateral loads was verified by back predicting the pile response from a test data reported by

208

Anagnostopoulos and Georgiadis (1993). This case study pertains to laboratory model tests on

209

aluminium closed-ended piles of 19 mm outside diameter and 1.5 mm wall thickness, jacked 500

210

mm into a prepared soft clay bed (cu = 28 kPa). The laboratory test was performed on a single pile

211

under both vertical and lateral loads applied to the pile head at ground elevation through dead

212

weights. The combined vertical and lateral loads were applied in two stages, in the first stage a

213

vertical load of 160 N was applied and in the second stage the lateral load of 130 N was applied

214

incrementally while the vertical load was kept constant. In the current analysis, the Young’s modulus

AC C

206

7

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(Es) of the soil was selected at 7500 kPa following the empirical relation Es ≈ 250-400×cu, (Poulos

216

and Davis, 1980). The Poisson’s ratio of the clayey soil was selected at 0.49 assuming an undrained

217

response during the load test. The comparison between the test data and the predicted results of piles

218

under pure vertical load and combined vertical and lateral loads are shown in Fig. 2c and 2d. The FD

219

prediction in both the cases matched well with the test data.

RI PT

215

220

Based on the comparative results shown in Fig. 2, it could be concluded that the numerical scheme

221

adopted in the present investigation is capable of modeling the soil-pile interaction under vertical,

222

lateral, and a combination of vertical and lateral loads.

224

SC

223

4. Parametric studies

FLAC3D was employed to study the behavior of piles under combined vertical and lateral loading

226

in different soil profiles. Four idealized sandy and clayey soil profiles were considered: a

227

homogeneous sandy layer, a clayey layer with constant shear strength, a clayey layer with shear

228

strength proportional to depth, and a two-layered medium. Due to the abundant number of

229

parameters involved, this study focuses on a selected number of parameters. These parameters

230

include relative density of sandy soil, shear strength and shear stiffness as well as over-consolidated

231

ratio (OCR) of clayey soil. A floating concrete pile, conformed to a grade M25, with a diameter, B of

232

1.0 m was embedded in the soil to a depth, L of 10.0 m while the total thickness of the soil stratum

233

was selected at 16.0 m. The elastic modulus (Ep) and Possion’s ratio (υp) of the pile were set to be

234

25.00 GPa and 0.15, respectively. Soil parameters considered in the analyses are summarized in

235

Tables 2 and 3 for sandy and clayey soils, respectively. For each sand density, the adopted friction

236

angle and the corresponding relative density (Dr) were chosen referring to Skempton (1986) and

237

A.P.I. (1993). Elastic shear modulus (G), was taken as 300cu; within the typical range for a clay

238

(CGS, 2013). A gravitational acceleration vector (g) of 10 m/s2 was applied in the negative z-

239

direction. Stresses within the model were initialized with an in situ earth pressure coefficient, K0 = 1.

240

The response of piles to pure lateral loads was first evaluated for each case considered. Then, the

241

response of piles to combined vertical and lateral loads is examined for different values of vertical

242

loads ranging from 25 to 100 % of Vult. The combined loads are applied in two stages. In the first

243

stage, vertical loads were applied and then in the second stage, lateral loads were applied while the

244

vertical load was kept constant. The numerical results under pure lateral loads and combined lateral

AC C

EP

TE D

M AN U

225

8

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

245

and vertical loads on piles are presented and discussed separately for sandy layer, clayey layer, and

246

two-layered stratums. In order to confirm the finding of this study, soils in some cases (dense sand and medium clay) is

248

further modelled using more sophisticated models: namely a friction hardening/softening elasto-

249

plastic constitutive model (CYsoil) for sandy soils and the modified Cam-Clay model (MCC) for

250

clayey soils. Details of these soil models are given next:

RI PT

247

The CYsoil model is characterized by a frictional Mohr-Coulomb shear envelope (zero cohesion)

252

and an elliptic volumetric cap in the (p´, q) plane. The input parameters are: elastic tangent shear

253

modulus, Geref, at reference effective pressure pref (100 kPa), failure ratio, Rf, which is a constant and

254

smaller than 1 (0.9 in most cases), ultimate friction angle, φf, and calibration factor, β. The material

255

properties adopted in the analyses for dense sand case are presented in Table 4.

M AN U

SC

251

The Modified Cam-Clay model (MCC) (Roscoe and Burland, 1968) was adopted as quite

257

appropriate, particularly for materials whose behavior is influenced by volume variation. In fact, the

258

MCC may be used to represent materials when the influence of volume change on bulk property and

259

resistance up to failure should be taken into consideration. In this study, The MCC is used to model

260

the case of medium clay (cu = 39 kPa). Eight material parameters were required to specify the soil

261

model, including either the elastic bulk modulus, K, or elastic shear modulus, G, the mass density, ρ,

262

the Poisson’s ratio, υ, the slope of the normal consolidation line, λ, the slope of the elastic swelling

263

line, κ, the frictional constant, M, the pressure of reference, p1, and the specific volume at pressure of

264

reference, p1, on the normal consolidation line, υλ. The material properties adopted in the analyses

265

for medium clay case are presented in Table 4.

EP

TE D

256

266

5. Results and discussions

268

5.1. Sandy soils

AC C

267

269

The ultimate vertical capacities of piles installed in sandy soils with different states of density are

270

evaluated by applying vertical velocities at the piles heads and monitoring the piles loads variation

271

with their settlements as plotted in Fig. 3. The value of Vult is selected as the vertical load

272

corresponding to the point with maximum curvature on the vertical load-vertical displacement curve

273

as defined by CGS (2013). Fig. 3 indicates that the ultimate bearing capacity of the pile is

9

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

274

approximately 162 kN, 180 kN, 200 kN, and 246 kN for very loose, loose, dense, and very dense

275

sand, respectively. Figs. 4a-d show the influence of a vertical load of Vult on the lateral response of piles installed in

277

sandy soils. Each graph in Fig. 4 corresponds to a different state of sand density including very

278

loose, loose, dense, and very dense. It is appeared from Fig. 4 that the lateral capacity of the pile is

279

slightly affected by the presence of the vertical load in all states of density considered. At lateral

280

deflection of 0.1B (100 mm), the presence of a vertical load of Vult is slightly increase the lateral

281

capacities of piles by 0.1 %, 3.7 %, 4.6 % and 4.8 % in very loose, loose, dense, and very dense

282

sand, respectively. This result is full consistent with those reported earlier by Hussien et al. (2012

283

and 2014b).

SC

RI PT

276

The influence of Vult on the lateral response of a pile installed in dense sand layer (Fig. 4c) is

285

further investigated using the CYsoil model and the results are shown in Fig. 5. Although there are

286

some differences in the initial slopes of the lateral load-deflection curves as well as the values of the

287

pile ultimate capacities between Fig. 4c and Fig. 5, both figures indicate a slight increase in the pile

288

lateral capacity due to the presence of vertical loads.

M AN U

284

An attempt to identify the mechanism of the little increase in the lateral capacities of piles

290

installed in sandy soil due to the vertical load application was made by plotting the stress state (Mohr

291

circle) of a soil element adjacent to the pile and at a depth of 3 m. The major (σ1) and the minor (σ3)

292

principal stresses corresponding to the stress state of the soil element after 0.1B lateral deflection of

293

a pile installed in dense sand are plotted in Fig. 6a for both the cases with (V = Vult) and without (V =

294

0) vertical loads. As expected, Fig. 6a shows that the inclusion of a vertical load increases the major

295

principle stress relative to that corresponds to the case of a pile under pure lateral load. On the other

296

hand, the corresponding σ3 slightly increases. The increase in the major stress then increases the

297

mobilized shear strength, τfm of the soil according to:

298

τ fm =

AC C

EP

TE D

289

σ1 − σ 3 2

sin(90 + φ )

(4)

299 300

Fig. 6a also confirms that the soil shear strength is reached in the case of V = Vult, while more

301

lateral pile deflection is needed in the other case (V = 0) for the soil to reach its shear strength. A

302

little increase in the confining pressure of the soil in the vicinity of the pile installed in very dense

303

sand is also shown in Fig. 6b. This little increase in the confining stress of soil, then, slightly

304

increases the resistance of the soil-pile system to lateral loading. Fig. 6d shows the stress paths of

10

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

soil elements attached to the pile installed in dense sand and at different depths for both the cases

306

with (V = Vult) and without (V = 0) vertical loads. For all considered depths, Fig. 6d confirms that the

307

soil element in the case of (V = Vult) reached the failure surface earlier than that in the case of (V =

308

0). Moreover, the soil element located at 1.0 m reached the failure surface before the other soil

309

elements at deeper depths due to the load transfer from the pile to the adjacent soil. It could be also

310

noted a little curvature in stress paths of soil elements at different depths due to the interaction with

311

other soil elements. The variation of stresses (major, minor, vertical, horizontal) of a soil element

312

adjacent to the pile, installed in dense sand and at a depth of 3 m, with lateral deflections are plotted

313

for both the cases with (V = Vult) and without (V = 0) vertical loads in Fig. 6c. Fig. 6c indicates that

314

the presence of vertical load slightly increases the soil stresses compared to the corresponding

315

stresses in the case of pure lateral loading. Fig. 6c shows also that the orientation of the minor

316

principle stress σ3 and the major principle stress σ1 in both analyses with and without vertical loads

317

are similar up to the maximum lateral deflection of 100 mm. In addition, Fig. 6c illustrates a

318

principle stress rotation after 8 mm lateral deflection since the horizontal stress σx becomes larger

319

than the vertical stress σz.

M AN U

SC

RI PT

305

The little increase in lateral soil stresses σxx is further examined through the contours of normal

321

stresses around the pile under pure lateral load and in the presence of a vertical load corresponding

322

to V = Vult in Figs. 7a and 7b. These contours are plotted for a lateral deflection equal to 0.1B and at

323

a depth of 3.0 m from the ground surface (i.e., the depth where maximum difference in lateral soil

324

stresses occurs, Fig. 6b). Similarly, the little increase in shear stresses, σxy over the pile’s frictional

325

face is also examined through the contours of shear stresses around the pile under pure lateral load

326

and in the presence of a vertical load corresponding to V = Vult in Figs. 7c and 7d. These contours are

327

plotted at a lateral deflection of 0.1B and at a depth of 3.0 m from the ground surface. It is clear that

328

the lateral soil stress and the mobilized shear stresses of soil around the pile are almost the same in

329

the presence of vertical load as compared to the pure lateral load case.

330

5.2. Clayey soils with constant cu

AC C

EP

TE D

320

331

In the analyses of piles installed in clayey soils, two main cases have been considered. In the first

332

case (S1), the shear modulus of the soil was evaluated according to the value of cu (G = 300cu). In

333

the second case (S2), the shear modulus was assumed to be constant (G = 38.5 MPa) for all clayey

334

soils considered in Table 3.

11

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Similar to sandy soil cases, the ultimate vertical capacities of piles installed in clayey soils with

336

different cu are evaluated by applying vertical velocities at the piles heads and monitoring the piles

337

loads variation with their settlements as plotted in Fig. 8. Fig. 8 shows that Vult of the pile installed in

338

clayey soil (S1) is approximately 255 kN, 410 kN, 550 kN and 1000 kN in soft (cu = 20 kPa),

339

medium1 (cu = 30 kPa), medium2 (cu = 39 kPa) and stiff (cu = 64 kPa) clay, respectively.

340

Fig. 9 shows the variation of the lateral load as a function of lateral deflection of piles in clayey soils

341

(S1). A different trend is observed than that in the case of sandy soils. In the presence of vertical

342

loads, the lateral capacities developed at all deflections are less than the corresponding load

343

developed under pure lateral load. Karthigeyan et al. (2007) have reported similar findings for piles

344

in clayey soils through 3D FE analysis of single pile under combined loads and attributed the

345

reduction in the pile capacity to the early failure of soil-pile interfaces in the presence of vertical

346

loads.

347

Similar to the sand case, the influence of Vult on the lateral response of a pile installed in medium

348

clay (cu = 39 kPa; S1) (Fig. 9c) is further investigated using the MCC model as shown in Fig. 10.

349

Both the lateral load-lateral deflection curves presented in Fig. 10 and the corresponding curves

350

presented in Fig. 9c show a decrease in the pile lateral capacity due to the application of vertical

351

loads with percentages of decrease at 0.1B lateral deflection of 16.21 % and 13.92 %, respectively.

352

The differences in the initial slopes of the lateral load-deflection curves as well as in the values of

353

the pile ultimate capacities may attributed to the differences in soil modelling.

TE D

M AN U

SC

RI PT

335

The bending moment (M) developed in each pile section was calculated by the summation of the

355

product of the vertical stress (σzz,i) at each element, the plan area of that element (Ai) and the x-

356

distance from the center of the pile to the centroid of the element (xci).

357

M = ∑σ

n

359 360 361 362

zz ,i

× Ai × xci

(5)

AC C

358

i =1

EP

354

Similar decreases were induced in the maximum bending moment in the pile for both studied cases considered (S1 and S2). The percentage of decrease in lateral capacity (DLC) has been defined to measure the influence of vertical loads on the lateral capacity of the piles: DLC =100 ×

PV =0 − PV =v PV =0

(6)

12

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

363

where PV=v is the lateral capacity with vertical loads and PV=0 is the lateral capacity under pure

364

lateral loads. In the same context, the percentage of decrease in maximum moment (DMM) has been

365

also defined:

366

DMM = 100 ×

367

where MmaxV=v is the maximum bending moment with vertical load and MmaxV=0 is the maximum

368

bending moment under pure lateral load. The variation of the DLC and DMM values with cu for V =

369

0.5Vult, V = 0.75Vult and V = Vult at 0.1B lateral deflection is presented in Fig. 11 for the two cases (S1

370

and S2).

M maxV = 0 − M maxV =v M maxV = 0

SC

RI PT

(7)

Figs. 11a and c (S1) show that up to cu of 16 kPa, the DLC and DMM values is equal to 0 (the

372

vertical load has no effect below this value). With the increase in soil cohesion (cu > 16 kPa), the

373

DLC and DMM values increase with the increase in cu as well as with the increase in vertical loads.

374

Figs. 11b and d (S2) show that the increase in DLC and DMM is more affected by Vult than cu. The

375

comparative results shown in Fig. 11 confirm that the estimation of the soil shear modulus, G based

376

on the undrained shear strength, cu is as important as the value of the undrained soil shear strength in

377

the design of pile foundation under the combined action of vertical and lateral loading.

M AN U

371

The mechanism of the decrease in both lateral capacity and bending moment of a pile installed in

379

clayey soil under the action of vertical loads has been also examined by plotting the stress state

380

(Mohr circle) of a soil element adjacent to the pile and at a depth of 3 m. The ultimate shear stress

381

τult, corresponding to the failure, can be calculated by:

382

τ ult =

2

= cu

EP

σ1 − σ 3

TE D

378

(8)

The σ1 and σ3 corresponding to stress state of the soil element before and after the application of a

384

vertical load on a pile installed in clay are plotted in Fig. 12 for both the cases with (V = Vult) and

385

without (V = 0) and for all cu values considered in the (S1) case. When Vult is applied to the pile, it is

386

clear that the Mohr circles will have larger radii than those corresponding to (V = 0). Thus, the

387

presence of the vertical load decreases the lateral resistance of soil and subsequently leads to the

388

development of lower resistance to the lateral pile deformation. Fig. 13a shows the stress paths of

389

soil elements attached to the pile in medium clay (cu = 39 kPa; S1) at different depths for both the

390

cases with (V = Vult) and without (V = 0) vertical loads. For all considered depths, the soil element in

391

the case of (V = Vult) reached the surface failure earlier than the soil element in the case of (V = 0).

AC C

383

13

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

The variation of stresses (major, minor, vertical, horizontal) of a soil element adjacent to the pile,

393

installed in medium clay (cu = 39 kPa; S1) at a depth of 3 m, with lateral deflections are plotted for

394

both the cases with (V = Vult) and without (V = 0) vertical loads in Fig. 13b. Fig. 13b indicates that

395

the inclusion of vertical load decreases the soil stresses compared to the corresponding stresses in the

396

case of pure lateral loading. Fig. 13b shows also that the orientation of the minor principle stress σ3

397

and the major principle stress σ1 in both analyses with and without vertical loads are similar up to

398

the maximum lateral deflection of 100 mm. Also, Fig. 13b shows a principle stress rotation after 8

399

mm lateral deflection since the horizontal stress σx becomes larger than the vertical stress σz.

400

5.3. Clayey soils with cu proportional to depth

SC

According to Mesri (1993), cu can be defined as a function of OCR and effective overburden

402

stress, σ v' :

403

cu = α ⋅ σ p' = α ⋅ OCR ⋅ σ v'

M AN U

401

RI PT

392

(9)

Mesri (1993) demonstrated also that the value of the constant α is about 0.24 for Champlain clay

405

(Quebec, Canada). In the analyses, different values of OCR are considered. For each value of OCR

406

(1.5, 2.5 and 4.0), cu is assumed to be proportional to depth and the pile responses under combined

407

load obtained are compared to the corresponding responses for constant cu.

TE D

404

The lateral load-lateral deflection curves at constant cu of 16 and 20 kPa are compared to those

409

obtained from the case of cu proportional to depth with an OCR of 1.5 in Fig. 14 for both the

410

analyses with and without vertical loads. In particular, Figs. 14a and b correspond to (S1) case while

411

Figs. 14c and d correspond to (S2) case. For piles subjected to pure lateral loads presented in Figs.

412

14a and c, the curve corresponding to OCR of 1.5 (denoted C1) is located between the two other

413

curves corresponding to cu of 16 kPa (denoted C2) and cu of 20 kPa (denoted C3). For piles subjected

414

to the combined action of vertical and lateral loads with V = Vult presented in Figs. 15b and d, the

415

curve (C1) is located between the two other curves (C2) and (C3) for (S1) case only.

AC C

EP

408

416

Based on the above comparisons, it is clear that the percentage decrease in lateral capacity, DLC,

417

of pile subjected to combined loads in clayey soil with constant cu is different from those

418

corresponding to analyses of piles with cu proportional to depth. This difference depends basically

419

on: (1) the choice between the case (S1) and the case (S2), (2) the ratio of vertical load relative to

420

ultimate vertical load of the pile as portrayed in Fig. 15.

14

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

It is interesting to compare the results obtained from the case of cu proportional to depth to that of

422

a constant cu. For example, it is possible to compare the results corresponding to OCR of 1.5 with an

423

average value of 30 kPa (when OCR = 1.5, cu varies from 14.4 kPa at ground surface to 43.2 kPa

424

with average value of 30 kPa) to that of a constant cu of 30 kPa (Fig. 15). At lateral deflection of

425

0.1B and for the (S1) case, Fig. 15a shows that the maximum DLC is of the order of 8.3 % at

426

constant cu of 30 kPa and 5.7 % at OCR of 1.5. At the same lateral deflection and for the (S2) case,

427

Fig. 15b shows that the maximum DLC is of the order of 9.1 % for cu of 30 kPa and 17.4 % for OCR

428

of 1.5. For OCR = 2.5, cu varies from 20.0 kPa at ground surface to 52.8 kPa with an average value

429

of 39 kPa. At lateral deflection of 0.1B and for the (S1) case, Fig. 15a shows that the maximum DLC

430

is of the order of 16.2 % at uniform cu of 39 kPa and 9.2 % at OCR of 2.5. At the same lateral

431

deflection and for the (S2) case, Fig. 15b shows that the maximum DLC is of the order of 14.4 % for

432

cu of 39 kPa and 7.5 % for OCR of 1.5. These results indicate that the behavior of piles in clayey soil

433

under combined action of vertical and lateral loads when cu assumed to vary with depth significantly

434

differs from the pile behavior when cu is assumed constant.

M AN U

SC

RI PT

421

435 436

5.4. Two-layered stratum

In this section, the effect of vertical loads on the lateral responses of piles embedded in two-

438

layered strata consist of a combination of medium clay (cu = 39 kPa; S1) (Table 3) and dense sand

439

(Table 2) is studied. Different thicknesses (H) of the sand and clay layers are considered. The results

440

of the study case (S1) with and without vertical loads are presented and compared for two different

441

configurations of the two-layered stratum in Figs. 16a and 16b.

EP

TE D

437

Under pure lateral loads, Fig. 16a shows that the increase of the clay thickness from 2B to 10B

443

leads to a significant decrease in the lateral capacity of the pile. With further increase in the clay

444

thickness, the lateral capacity of the pile is not affected. In the same context, Fig. 16b shows that the

445

increase of the sand thickness from 2B to 10B leads to a significant increase in the lateral capacity of

446

the pile and with further increase in the sand thickness, the lateral capacity of the pile is slightly

447

affected. These results support the earlier recommendation of Reese and Van Impe (2001) who

448

suggest that the shallower depth up to 10B is of predominant importance in soil-pile interaction due

449

to lateral loading. On the other hand, Fig. 16a shows that the effect of vertical loads on the lateral

450

capacity of the pile embedded in two-layer stratum with a clay layer thickness (H) ranges from 2B to

451

10B is not significant and almost similar to that observed in dense sand (i.e., the end bearing

AC C

442

15

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

stratum). When the clay thickness increases (H = L+6B), the effect of vertical loads becomes

453

pronounced and leads to a significant reduction in the lateral capacity of the pile. This difference in

454

vertical loads effects on the lateral capacities of piles (e.g., the dependence of vertical load effect on

455

the characteristics of the soil layer under pile tip) may be attributed to the difference in pile function

456

in term of load transfer. For (H) ranges from 2B to 10B, the pile serves as an end-bearing pile with

457

higher end-bearing capacity (reaction) as shown in Fig. 17a. This high end-bearing capacity is

458

associated with smaller settlement as well as smaller transfer of stress from pile to adjacent soil (Fig.

459

17b). In other words the vertical loads have little effects on the soil surrounding the pile. With

460

further increase in the clay thickness (H = L+6B), the pile no longer serve as an end-bearing type. It

461

serves primarily as a friction pile that has lower end-bearing reaction (Fig. 17a) and a significant

462

stress transfer a long its shaft (Fig. 17b).

M AN U

SC

RI PT

452

Fig. 16b shows that the effect of vertical loads on the lateral capacity of the pile embedded in two-

464

layer stratum with a sand layer thickness of 2B is similar to that observed in medium clay. With the

465

increase of the sand thickness, the effect of vertical loads becomes similar to that observed in dense

466

sand (i.e., the end bearing stratum). These results imply that although the above recommendation of

467

Van Impe (2001) works well in situations where pile foundations are subjected to pure lateral loads;

468

it cannot be applied if the piles are under the action of both vertical and lateral loadings. More

469

specifically, the current results indicate that the effect of vertical loads on the lateral response of

470

piles embedded in multi-layered stratum depends on the characteristics of soil not only surrounding

471

the piles but also those beneath located their tips.

TE D

463

473

EP

472

6. Conclusions

The influence of vertical loads on the behavior of laterally loaded pile in sand and clay was

475

investigated by means of numerical modeling. The numerical models were conducted using the

476

computer program FLAC3D and the models were verified using full-scale load and laboratory model

477

testing data. The verified numerical model was then used to perform a parametric study considering

478

different soil configurations and parameters to evaluate the lateral capacities and bending moments

479

of concrete piles subjected to both lateral and vertical loads. The results of the lateral capacities and

480

the bending moments of piles were determined and compared for piles subjected to pure lateral loads

481

and to combined vertical and lateral loads for several values of vertical loads corresponding to 25 %,

AC C

474

16

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

482

50 %, 75 % and 100 % of the pile ultimate vertical capacity. Based on this comparison, the

483

following conclusions can be made. 1. The response of the piles in sandy soils under lateral loads is not influenced by the presence

485

of vertical loads. Indeed, the lateral load capacities is not changed for very loose sand and

486

slightly increased for loose, dense, and very dense sand.

RI PT

484

487

2. The presence of vertical loads decreases the lateral load capacity by as much as 20 % and

488

maximum bending moment by as much as 30 % of piles in clayey soil depending on the level

489

of vertical load and the value of the lateral deflection.

3. The dependence of the lateral response of piles under combined loading on the clay shear

491

strength, cu is also investigated, and the shear modulus, G, is evaluated in two different ways.

492

In the first (S1), G is considered dependent on cu while in the second (S2), G is assumed

493

constant irrespective of the adopted cu value. The maximum percentage decreases in lateral

494

capacity reach 20.3 % and 13.6 % for S1 and S2, respectively.

M AN U

SC

490

4. The effect of vertical loads on the lateral capacity of a pile embedded in two-layer stratum

496

with a clay layer thickness (H) ranges from 2B to 10B is not significant and almost similar to

497

that observed in the sandy soil. When the clay thickness increases (H = L+6B), the effect of

498

vertical loads become pronounced and leads to a significant reduction in the lateral capacity

499

of the pile. The dependence of vertical load effect on the characteristics of the soil layer

500

under the pile tip may be attributed to the difference in pile function in term of load transfer.

TE D

495

505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513

References

Anagnostopoulos, C., Georgiadis, M., 1993. Interaction of axial and lateral pile responses. J. Geotech. Eng.: ASCE 119 (4), 793–798.

AC C

502 503 504

EP

501

A.P.I. American Petroleum Institute, 1993. Planning, designing and constructing fixed offshore platforms. RP2A-LRFD, Section G, pp 64–77. Achmus, M., Thieken, K., 2010. On the behavior of piles in non-cohesive soil under combined horizontal and vertical loading. Acta Geotechnica 5 (3), 199–210. Brown, D.A., Reese, L.C., O’Neill, M.W., 1987. Cyclic lateral loading of a large scale pile group. J. Geotech. Eng. Div.: ASCE 113 (11), 1326–1343. Brown, D.A., Morrison, C., Reese, L.C., 1988. Lateral load behavior of pile group in sand. J. Geotech. Eng. Div.: ASCE 114 (11), 1261–1276.

17

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

514 515 516 517

Canadian Geotechnical Society (CGS), 2013. Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual (4thEd.). Richmond, B.C., Canadian Geotechnical Society. Comodromos, E.M., 2003. Response prediction for horizontally loaded pile groups. J. Geotech. Eng.: Southeast Asian Geotechnical Society 34 (2), 123–33. Georgiadis, M., Saflekou, S., 1990. Piles under axial and torsional loads. Comput. Geotech. 9, 29–305.

519

Hussien. M.N., Tobita, T., Iai, S., Rollins, K.M., 2010. Soil-pile separation effect on the performance of a pile

522 523 524 525 526

Hussien, M.N., Tobita, T., Iai, S., Rollins, K.M., 2012. Vertical load effect on the lateral pile group resistance in sand response. Inter. J. Geomech. Geoengin. 7 (4), 263–282.

Hussien, M.N., Tobita, T., Iai, S., Karray, M., 2014a. Influence of pullout loads on the lateral response of pile

SC

521

group under static and dynamic lateral load. Can. Geotech. J. 47 (11), 1234–1246.

foundation. GeoRegina2014, Regina, Saskatchewan-Canada, September 28 - October 1, paper 316. Hussien, M.N., Tobita, T., Iai, S., Karray, M., 2014b. On the influence of vertical loads on the lateral response

M AN U

520

RI PT

518

of pile foundation. Comput. Geotech. 55, 392–403.

527

Hazzar, L., Karray, M., Hussien, M.N., Bouassida, M., 2013. Three dimensional modeling of a pile group

528

under static lateral loading using finite differences method. GeoMontreal2013, Montréal, Québec-Canada,

529

September 29 - October 3, paper 201.

533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547

Karasev, O.V., Talanov, G.P., Benda, S.F., 1977. Investigation of the work of single situ-cast piles under

TE D

532

Minneapolis, Itasca Consulting Group Inc.

different load combinations. J. Soil Mech. Found. Eng.: ASCE 14 (3), 173–177. Karthigeyan, S., Ramakrishna, V.V.G.S.T., Rajagopal, K., 2006. Influence of vertical load on the lateral response of piles in sand. Comput. Geotech. 33 (2), 121–131. Karthigeyan, S., Ramakrishna, V.V.G.S.T., Rajagopal, K., 2007. Numerical investigation of the effect of

EP

531

Itasca, 2009. User’s and theory manuals of FLAC3D: Fast Lagrangian analysis of continua in 3D, version 4.

vertical load on the lateral response of piles. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.: ASCE 133 (5), 512–521. Matlock, H., Reese, L.C., 1960. Generalized solutions for laterally loaded piles. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div.: ASCE 86 (SM5), 63–91.

AC C

530

Matlock, H., 1970. Correlations for design of laterally loaded piles in soft clay. 2nd Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, pp. 577–594. Mesri, G., 1993. Initial investigation of the soft clay test site at Bothkennar. Discussion, Géotechnique 43 (3), 503–504.

McVay, M., Casper, R., Shang, T-I., 1995. Lateral response of three-row groups in loose to dense sands at 3D and 5D pile spacing. J. Geotech. Eng.: ASCE 121 (5), 436–441. McVay, M., Shang, L., Molnit, T., Lai, P., 1998. Centrifuge testing of large laterally loaded pile groups in sands. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.: ASCE 124 (10), 1016–1026.

18

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

548 549

Ottaviani, M., 1975. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of vertically loaded pile groups. Géotechnique 25 (2), 159–174.

550

Poulos, H.G., Davis, E.H., 1980. Pile foundation analysis and design. Wiley: Singapore.

551

Roscoe, K.H., Burland, J.B., 1968. On the Generalized Stress-Strain Behavior of ‘Wet Clay’. Engineering

558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577

RI PT

557

Netherlands: A.A. Balkema.

Rollins, K.M., Peterson, K.T., Weaver, T.J., 1998. Lateral load behavior of full-scale pile group in clay. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.: ASCE 124 (6), 468–478.

SC

556

Reese, L.C., Van Impe, W.F., 2001. Single piles and pile groups under lateral loading. Rotterdam,

Rollins, K.M., Lane, J.D., Gerber, T.M., 2005. Measured and computed lateral response of a pile group in

M AN U

555

ASCE 104 (12), 1465–1488.

sand. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.: ASCE 131 (1), 103–114.

Skempton, A.W., 1986. Standard penetration test procedure and effects in sands of overburden pressure, relative density, particle size, ageing and over-consolidation. Géotechnique 36 (3), 425-477. Tobita, T., Iai, S., Rollins, K.M., 2004. Group pile behavior under lateral loading in centrifuge model tests. Inter. J. Physical Modelling in Geotech. 4 (4), 1–11.

Zhang, L.M., McVay, M.C., Han, S.J., Lai, P.W., Gardner, R., 2002. Effects of dead loads on the lateral response of battered pile groups. Can. Geotech. J. 39 (3), 561–575.

TE D

554

Randolph, M.F., Wroth, C.P., 1978. Analysis of deformation of vertically loaded piles. J. Geotech. Eng.:

Zhu, H., Chang, M.F., 2002. Load transfer curves along bored piles considering modulus degradation. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.: ASCE 128 (9), 764–774.

EP

553

Plasticity, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 535–609.

AC C

552

578 579 580 581

19

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

583

Table 1 Geotechnical properties of soil layers from Comodromos (2003) study. Soil layer Depth Unit Undrained (m) weight shear strength γ (kN/m3) cu (kPa) Soft silty clay 0-36 20.0 27 Medium stiff clay 36-48 20.0 110 Very dense sandy gravel 48-70 22.0 0

584 585

Table 2 Model parameters of sandy soil used in the parametric study. Soil type Mass density Shear modulus Bulk modulus Undrained shear G (MPa) K (MPa) strength cu (kPa) ρ (kg/m3) Very loose 1600 4.6 10.0 Loose 1800 7.7 16.7 0 Dense 2000 19.2 41.7 Very dense 2200 26.9 58.3

M AN U

SC

586

Angle of friction φ (°) 0 0 40

587 589

590 591

Undrained shear strength cu (kPa) 20 30 39 64

Table 4 Parameters of sandy and clayey soils used in CYsoil and MCC models. CYsoil model MCC model Soil type Dense sand Soil type Medium1 clay Geref (MPa) 19.20 G (MPa) 9.00 ref P (kPa) 100.00 0.45 υ Rf 0.90 0.13 λ 36.00 0.05 φf (degrees) κ β 2.35 M 0.77 p1 (kPa) 1.00 5.30 υλ

AC C

EP

592

Table 3 Model parameters of clayey soil used in the parametric study. Clay type Mass density Shear modulus Bulk modulus G (MPa) K (MPa) ρ (kg/m3) Soft 6.00 58.0 1 Medium 9.00 87.0 2 1600 Medium 11.70 113.1 Stiff 19.20 185.6

TE D

588

Shear modulus G (MPa) 2.43 3.35 24.0

RI PT

582

593

20

Angle of friction φ (°) 26 (Dr = 0 %) 30 (Dr = 40 %) 36 (Dr = 60 %) 42 (Dr = 87 %)

Angle of friction φ (°)

0

TE D

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

Fig. 1. The general layout and meshing of the FD half model used for the analysis of the soil-pile system.

1

TE D

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

Fig. 2. Comparison between the present 3D FD results and: (a) test data of Comodromos (2003) and p-y method, (b) test data of Karasev et al. (1977), (c) test data of vertical loaded pile of Anagnostopoulos and Georgiadis (1993), and (d) test data of combined vertical and lateral loaded pile of Anagnostopoulos and Georgiadis (1993).

2

TE D

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

Fig. 3. Vertical load-vertical displacement of piles installed in sandy soils with deferent densities.

3

EP

TE D

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

Fig. 4. Lateral load-lateral deflection curves of piles for the analyses with and without vertical loads: (a) very loose, (b) loose, (c) dense, and (d) very dense sand.

4

TE D

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

Fig. 5. Lateral load–lateral deflection curves of pile installed in dense sand for the analyses with and without vertical loads adopting the CYsoil model.

5

EP

TE D

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

Fig. 6. Analyses of pile installed in dense sand with and without vertical loads: (a) Mohr circles of a soil element adjacent to the pile and at a depth of 3, (b) variation of the confining pressure along the pile, (c) stresses of a soil element adjacent to the pile at a depth of 3 m, and (d) stress paths of soil elements attached to the pile at different depths.

6

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

TE D

Fig. 7. Normal and shear stress contours in xy-plane at 3.0 m depth from ground surface in dense sands: (a) σxx contours for pure lateral loading case, (b) σxx contours with vertical load of Vult, (c) σxy contours for pure lateral loading, and (d) σxy contours with vertical load of Vult.

7

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

TE D

Fig. 8. Vertical load-vertical displacement of piles installed in clayey soils with deferent cu.

8

TE D

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

Fig. 9. Lateral load–lateral deflection curves of piles installed in clayey soil (S1) for (a) cu = 16 kPa, (b) cu = 30 kPa, (c) cu = 39 kPa and (d) cu = 64 kPa.

9

TE D

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

Fig. 10. Lateral load–lateral deflection curves of pile installed in medium clay for the analyses with and without vertical loads adopting the MCC model.

10

EP

TE D

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

Fig. 11. DLC and DMM versus cu at 0.1B lateral deflection: (a) DLC (S1); (b) DLC (S2); (c) DMM (S2); and (d) DMM (S2).

11

AC C

EP

TE D

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 12. Mohr circles of a soil element adjacent to the pile and at a depth of 3 m in a clayey soil (S1) for: (a) cu = 20 kPa, (b) cu = 30 kPa, (c) cu = 39 kPa, and (d) cu = 64 kPa.

12

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

TE D

Fig. 13. Analyses of pile installed in a medium clay (cu = 39 kPa) with and without vertical loads: (a) stress paths of soil elements attached to the pile, and (b) stresses of a soil element adjacent to the pile at a depth of 3 m.

13

TE D

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

Fig. 14. Lateral load-lateral deflection curves of pile installed in clayey soil for (a) V = 0 (S1), (b) V = Vult (S1), (c) V = 0 (S2) and (d) V = Vult (S2).

14

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

TE D

M AN U

Fig. 15. DLC variation with the ratio of V/Vult at lateral deflection of 0.1B: (a) (S1) case and (b) (S2) case.

15

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

TE D

M AN U

Fig. 16. Lateral load-lateral deflection curves of piles in two-layered stratum (S1) for both analyses with and without vertical loads: (a) higher medium clay and lower dense sand and (b) higher dense sand and lower medium clay.

16

M AN U

SC

RI PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC C

EP

TE D

Fig. 17. Stress conditions for soil elements in (H = L): (a) end-bearing stress versus V/Vult, (b) major principle stress with and without vertical loads adjacent to pile shaft at 3 m depth.

17