The 12

th
International Conference of
International Association for Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics (IACMAG)
1-6 October, 2008
Goa, India


Method of Initial Parameters for Laterally Loaded Piles
D. Basu
1
, R. Salgado
2

1
Postdoctoral Researcher,
2
Professor, School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, U.S.A.
Keywords: pile, lateral load, analytical solution, elastic analysis, foundation
ABSTRACT: The method of initial parameters (MIP), originally developed for solving the problem of beams on
elastic foundations with discontinuities along the beam span caused by applied concentrated forces and
moments, is modified in this paper for solving the problem of laterally loaded pile with discontinuities due to
soil layering. In this paper, the use of MIP to find the deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force of
laterally loaded piles is illustrated.
1 Introduction
The problem of laterally loaded pile is a soil-structure interaction problem and it is often analyzed by treating
the pile as an Euler-Bernoulli beam and the soil as mechanical springs (McClelland and Focht 1958, Matlock
and Reese 1960, Reese et al. 1974, Georgiadis and Butterfield 1982). The fourth-order linear differential
equation governing this static problem resembles that of a beam on an elastic foundation (Hetnyi 1946,
Vlasov and Leontev 1966), and closed form solutions have been obtained for piles in homogeneous soils
(Sun 1994). However, when a pile is embedded into a multi -layered deposit, symbolic solution of the
differential equation becomes difficult because the number of integration constants (four per soil layer) of the
general solution increases, and the symbolic solution of the algebraic equations (obtained from the boundary
conditions of the problem), from which the expressions of the integration constants are obtained, becomes
tedious.

An alternative way, by which the expression of pile deflection can be obtained for problems with at least four
soil layers, is to use the method of initial parameters (MIP). The MIP was originally developed for solving
problems of beams on elastic foundations (Hetnyi 1946, Vlasov and Leontev 1966, Harr et al. 1969, Rao et
al. 1971), particularly those in which discontinuities are present within the span of a beam due to the
application of concentrated forces. In this paper, we modify the MIP to account for discontinuities along a
laterally loaded pile caused by abrupt change in soil properties due to soil layering and obtain analytical
solution for pile deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force.

2 Differential equation and boundary conditions
The governing differential equation for pile deflection w
i
within any layer i for a pile of length L
p
embedded in a
multi -layered elastic medium with n layers (Figure 1) was recently developed using energy principles (Basu
and Salgado 2007a), and is given by:
4 2
4 2
2 0
i i
i i i
d w d w
t k w
dz dz
+
% %
%
%
%
% %
(1)
where w?
i
(z?) is the normalized pile deflection in the i
th
layer (w?
i
= w
i
/L
p
), z?is the normalized depth (z?= z/L
p
), and
k?
i
and t?
i
are the normalized compressive and shear resistances of soil, respectively. The boundary conditions
required to solve equation (1) are: (1) at the pile head (i.e., at z = z?= 0),
1
0 w % or
3 3
1 1 1
2
a
d w dz t dw dz F
% %
% % % %
and
1
0 dw dz % % or
2 2
1 a
d w dz M
%
% % ; (2) at the interface between any two layers (i.e., at z = H
i
or z?= H?
i
),
1 i i
w w
+
% % ,
1 i i
dw dz dw dz
+
% % % % ,
3 3 3 3
1 1 1
2 2
i i i i i i
d w dz t dw dz d w dz t dw dz
+ + +

% %
% % % % % % % % and
2 2 2 2
1 i i
d w dz d w dz
+
% % % % ;
and (3) at the pile base (i.e., at z = L
p
or z?= 1), 0
n
w % or
3 3
1
2 2
n n n n n n
d w dz t dw dz k t w
+

%
% % % % % % % and 0
n
dw dz % %
or
2 2
0
n
d w dz % % . ) "
a
(= F
a
L
p
2
/E
p
I
p
) and 0 "
a
(= M
a
L
p
/E
p
I
p
) are the normalized applied force and moment (E
p
I
p
is the
3335

flexural rigidity of the pile).
The above boundary conditions can be interpreted physically by drawing analogy with the Euler-Bernoulli beam
theory. Given that w is the pile deflection, the slope , bending moment M and shear force S at any cross
section of the pile (or any Euler-Bernoulli beam resting on an elastic foundation) can be expressed, in their
normalized form, as: dw dz
%
% % ,
2 2
p p p
M ML E I d w dz
%
% % and
2 3 3
2
p p p
S SL E I d w dz t d wd z
%
% % % % % . The
shear force S at any cross section is the sum of the shear forces arising due to pile (beam) flexure and soil
deformation.


2rp
r
r
0
F
a
Ma
Pile

H
1
H
n-2
H
i
H
i-1
H
2
r0
M
a

H
n-1
Layer 1

Layer 2
Layer i

Layer n1

Layer n

z

F
a
Pile
Lp

Figure 1. Laterally loaded pile in layered soil medium.
According to the above definitions, the boundary conditions sati sfy the continuity of deflection, slope, bending
moment and shear force across the interfaces of adjacent layers. At the pile head, the shear force must be
equal to the applied horizontal force and either the slope must equal zero (if a pile cap is present that
completely restrains pile head rotation) or the bending moment must equal the applied moment. At the pile
base, either the deflection is equal to zero (if the pile is socketed into a very firm layer like rock) or the shear
force just above the base of the pile is equal to the shear force just below the base (the normalized shear force
just below the pile base is equal to
1
1
2
n n n
z
k t w
+
%
%
% % ). The other boundary condition active at the pile base is that
either the slope is zero (valid for a rigidly socketed base) or the bending moment is zero (valid for a floating
base).

3 General solutions
The general solution for equation (1) is given by:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4
( )
i i i i
i
w z C C C C + + + % % (2)
where
( )
1
i
C ,
( )
2
i
C ,
( )
3
i
C and
( )
4
i
C are integration constants for the i
th
layer; and
?
,
2
,
3
and
4
are functions of
z?that are individual solutions of the differential equation (1) given in Table 1. The functions
?
,
2
,
3
and
4

can be hyperbolic and/or trigonometric functions depending on the relative magnitudes of N"
i
and W"
i
2
(see Basu
and Salgado 2007b for a detailed discussion). The constants
( )
1
i
C ,
( )
2
i
C ,
( )
3
i
C and
( )
4
i
C must be determined
for different boundary conditions. We avoid direct calculation of the constants and obtain solutions using the
method of initial parameters.
4 Method of initial parameters
We first outline the conceptual basis for MIP and then illustrate how it works for laterally loaded piles
embedded in a layered soil. We illustrate the method for k?
i
> t?
i
2
. The method is also applicable for k?
i
t?
i
2
, but it
is sufficient to demonstrate the method for the more common case of k?
i
> t?
i
2
.
For the case of k?
i
> t?
i
2
, the functions
1
,
2
,
3
and
4
are combinations of trigonometric and hyperbolic
3336

functions, as shown in Table 1. Successive differentiations of these functions with respect to z?are also given
in Table 1; these derivatives are required for obtaining the final solution for the laterally loaded pile problem.
Table 1. Functions appearing in equation (2) for piles crossing multiple soil layers.
C
o
n
s
t
a
n
t
s

a

a
n
d

b


Individual solutions of equation (1)


R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

m
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e
s

o
f

k
?
a
n
d

t
?



a



b
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s

a
n
d

t
h
e
i
r

d
e
r
i
v
a
t
i
v
e
s

(
p
r
i
m
e

(

)

i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
s

d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
)

1

2

3

4

sinh cos az bz % % cosh cos az bz % % cosh sin az bz % % sinh sin az bz % %

2 4
a b
1 3
a b
4 2
a b +
3 1
a b +

( )
2 2
1
a b
3
2ab
( )
2 2
2
a b
4
2ab
( )
2 2
3
a b
1
2ab +
( )
2 2
4
a b
2
2ab +
k
?
>

t
?
2

k
?

+

t
?)
}

k
?

t
?)
}



( )
2 2
2
3 a a b +
( )
2 2
4
3 b b a
( )
2 2
1
3 a a b +
( )
2 2
3
3 b b a
( )
2 2
4
3 a a b
( )
2 2
2
3 b b a
( )
2 2
3
3 a a b
( )
2 2
1
3 b b a
sinhaz% cosh az% sinhbz% cosh bz%

2
a
1
a
4
b
3
b

2
1
a
2
2
a
2
3
b
2
4
b k
?
<

t
?
2

{
t
?
+

(
t
?
2

k
?)
}

{
t
?

(
t
?
2

k
?)
}


3
2
a
3
1
a
3
4
b
3
3
b

Let us first consider the top layer (i = 1). The following equations express the normalized deflection, slope,
bending moment and shear force for the top layer in terms of
1
,
2
,
3
and
4
as (see Table 1 under k?> t?
2

for the differentiations of
1
,
2
,
3
and
4
):
1 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4
w C C C C + + + % (3)
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
1 1 2 4 2 1 3 3 4 2 4 3 1
C a b C a b C a b C a b + + + + +
%
(4)

( ) { } ( ) { }
2 2 2 2
1 1 1 3 2 2 4
2 2 M C a b ab C a b ab +
%

( ) { } ( ) { }
2 2 2 2
3 3 1 4 4 2
2 2 C a b ab C a b ab + + + + (5)
( ) ( ) { } ( ) ( ) { }
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
1 1 2 4 2 1 3
3 3 3 3 S C a a b b b a C a a b b b a + + +
%


( ) ( ) { } ( ) ( ) { }
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3 4 2 4 3 1
3 3 3 3 C a a b b b a C a a b b b a + +
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) { }
1 1 2 4 2 1 3 3 4 2 4 3 1
2 t C a b C a b C a b C a b + + + + +
%
(6)
where the constants C
1
, C
2
, C
3
and C
4
, the functions
1
,
2
,
3
and
4
, and the parameters a
( ) 1 1
0.5 k t
1
+
1
]
%
%
and b
( ) 1 1
0.5 k t
1

1
]
%
%
are valid for layer 1 (0 = z?= H?
1
). Let the normalized pile
deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force at the pile head (i.e., at z?= 0) be
(1)
0
w% ,
(1)
0

%
,
(1)
0
M
%
and
(1)
0
S
%
,
respectively. If we substitute z?= 0 in equations (3) through (6) (noting that t?
1
= a
2
b
2
; and that
1
=
3
=
4
=
0 and
2
= 1 for z?= 0), we can express
(1)
0
w% ,
(1)
0

%
,
(1)
0
M
%
and
(1)
0
S
%
as:
3337


(1)
0 2
w C % (7)
( )
(1)
0 1 1 3
0 z
dw dz C a C b

+
%
%
% % (8)

( ) ( ) ( )
(1) 2 2 2 2
0 1 2 4
0
2
z
M d w dz C a b C ab

+
%
%
% % (9)

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( )
(1) 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 1 1 3 1 3
0
2 3 3 2
z
S d w dz t dw dz C a a b C b b a a b C a C b

+
%
%
%
% % % % (10)
Solving equations (7) through (10) simultaneously for C
1
, C
2
, C
3
and C
4
and subsequently replacing them in
equations (3) through (6) yields:
( )
( )
2 2
4
(1) (1) (1) (1) 3 1 3 1 4
1 2 0 0 0 0
2 2
( )
2 2 2 2
a b
a b a b
w z w M S
ab ab ab ab a b

1

+
1 + + +
+ 1
]
% % %
% % (11)
( )
( ) ( ) ( )
2 3 2 3 2 2
1 3 4 2
(1) (1) (1) (1) 3 1 4
1 0 0 0 0
- 2
2 2 2 2
a b b ab a a b ab
a b
z w M S
ab ab ab ab

1
+ + +
+
1 + + +
1
]
% % % %
% (12)
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
4 2 2 4 2 3 2 3
4 1 3
(1) (1)
1 0 0
2 2
4 2
(1) (1) 3 1
0 0
2 3 3
( )
2 2
2

2 2
a a b b a b b ab a
M z w
ab ab
a b ab
a b
M S
ab ab

1 1
+ +
1 1 +
1 1
] ]
+
+
+ +
% %
%
% %
(13)
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
4 2 3 5 4 3 2 5 4 2 2 4
1 3 4
(1) (1)
1 0 0
2 3 2 3 2 2
1 3 4
(1) (1)
0 2 0
3 2 3 2 2
( )
2 2

2 2
a b a b b ab a b a a a b b
S z w
ab ab
a b b ab a a b
M S
ab ab

1 1
+ + + + +
1 1 +
1 1
] ]
1 1
+ +
1 1 + +
1 1
] ]
% %
%
% %
(14)
Thus, the normalized pile deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force can be expressed in terms of
(1)
0
w% ,
(1)
0

%
,
(1)
0
M
%
and
(1)
0
S
%
along with known functions of
1
,
2
,
3
and
4
. If
(1)
0
w% ,
(1)
0

%
,
(1)
0
M
%
and
(1)
0
S
%
are
known, then we can determine the deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force at any point within the
first layer. This is the basic idea behind the method of initial parameters. The quantities
(1)
0
w% ,
(1)
0

%
,
(1)
0
M
%
and
(1)
0
S
%
are called the initial parameters for the first layer; the corresponding section of the pile (z?= 0 in this case)
is called the initial section. The expressions in square brackets in equations (11) through (14), containing
1
,

2
,
3
and
4
, associated with the initial parameters are called the influence functi ons or influence
coefficients.

Although the ground surface is a natural choice for the initial section of the top layer, any section within the top
layer can be chosen as the initial section. The expressions for the influence coefficients will change if a
different initial section is chosen, but equations similar to equations (11) through (14) can be obtained.
Extending the method to account for multi -layered soil, we can state that the normalized deflection
i
w% , the
slope
i

%
, the bending moment
i
M
%
and the shear force
i
S
%
within any layer i can be expressed as:
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
0 0 0 0
( )
i i i i i i i i
i ww w wM wS
w z w K K M K S K

+ + +
% % %
% % % (15)
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
0 0 0 0
( )
i i i i i i i i
i w M S
z w K K M K S K

+ + +
% % % %
% % (16)
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
0 0 0 0
( )
i i i i i i i i
i Mw M MM MS
M z w K K M K S K

+ + +
% % % %
% % (17)

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
0 0 0 0
( )
i i i i i i i i
i Sw S SM SS
S z w K K M K S K

+ + +
% % % %
% % (18)
where
( )
0
i
w% ,
( )
0
i

%
,
( )
0
i
M
%
and
( )
0
i
S
%
are the initial parameters, and the Ks are the influence coefficients of the i
th

layer. The influence coefficients express the influence of one variable on the other; e.g., K
wM
denotes the
influence of bending moment in the pile on pile deflection. Note that, although there are sixteen influence
coefficients in equations (15) through (18), only ten of them are actually unknown because, from the theorem of
reciprocal deflection by Maxwell and Betti, we get K
MM
= K

, K
S
= K
wM
, K
MS
= K
w
, K
SS
= K
ww
, K
S
= K
Mw
and K
SM

= K
w
. If the initial parameters and the influence coefficients are known for a layer, then the deflection, slope,
bending moment, and shear force can be obtained as a function of depth.

We now illustrate how MIP can be used for layered soil with the help of an example. We consider, for our
3338

example, a pile embedded in a three-layer soil medium with k?
i
> t?
i
2
for all the layers (Figure 2). There is no
restraint at the pile head (i.e., it is free to translate and rotate). The same is true for the pile base.


Ma
Lp
H1
H2
Layer 1
2rp
Fa
Pile


Layer 2
Layer 3

Figure 2. Laterally loaded pile in a three-layer soil medium.
The first step is to choose an appropriate initial section for each layer. We choose the pile head and base as
the initial sections for the top and the bottom layers, respectively. For the middle layer, we choose the upper
interface as the initial section. Thus, the initial section for the top layer (layer 1) is at z?= 0. The four initial
parameters are
(1)
0
w% ,
(1)
0

%
,
(1)
0
M
%
and
(1)
0
S
%
, which are the normalized deflection, slope, bending moment and
shear force at z?= 0. The initial section for the bottom layer (layer 3) is at z?= 1. The corresponding initial
parameters are
(3)
0
w% ,
(3)
0

%
,
(3)
0
M
%
and
(3)
0
S
%
(these are the normalized deflection, slope, bending moment and
shear force at z?= 1). The initial section for the middle layer (layer 2) is at z?= H?
1
with the initial parameters
(2)
0
w% ,
(2)
0

%
,
(2)
0
M
%
and
(2)
0
S
%
(the normalized deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force at z?= H?
1
).

Next, we impose the boundary conditions for the pile head and base on the initial parameters for the two end
layers. For a free pile head, the shear force and bending moment boundary conditions are valid; this yields:
(1)
0 a
S F
% %
(19)
(1)
0 a
M M
% %
(20)
For a free pile base again the shear force and bending moment boundary conditions are valid, and we get:
(3) (3)
0 3 4 0
2 S k t w
% %
% % (21)
(3)
0
0 M
%
(22)
Thus, the initial parameters
(1)
0
S
%
,
(1)
0
M
%
,
(3)
0
S
%
and
(3)
0
M
%
are now known. The equations for the normalized
deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force for layers 1 and 3 can now be rewritten by substituting the
known initial parameters into equation (29) through (32) (for i = 1 and 3) as:
(1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1)
1 0 0 ww w a wM a wS
w w K K M K F K

+ + +
% % %
% % (23)
(1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1)
1 0 0 w a M a S
w K K M K F K

+ + +
% % % %
% (24)
(1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1)
1 0 0 Mw M a MM a MS
M w K K M K F K

+ + +
% % % %
% (25)
(1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1)
1 0 0 Sw S a SM a SS
S w K K M K F K

+ + +
% % % %
% (26)
(3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3)
3 0 0 3 4 0 0 0
2
ww w wS ww w
w w K K k t w K w K K

+ + +
% % %
% % % % % (27)
(3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) ( 3)
3 0 0 3 4 0 0 0
2
w S w
w K K k t w K w K K

+ + +
% % % %
% % % % (28)
(3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3)
3 0 0 3 4 0 0 0
2
Mw M MS Mw M
M w K K k t w K w K K

+ + +
% % % %
% % % % (29)
(3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3)
3 0 0 3 4 0 0 0
2
Sw S SS Sw S
S w K K k t w K w K K

+ + +
% % % %
% % % % (30)
where
(3) (3) (3)
* * 3 4 *
2
w w S
K K k t K +
%
%
. Equations (23) through (26) are valid for layer 1 (i.e., for 0 = z?= H?
1
) while
equations (27) through (30) are valid for layer 3 (i.e., for H?
2
= z?= 1).

3339

Now we impose the interface boundary conditions on the initial parameters. This leads to a set of algebraic
equations consisting of the unknown influence coefficients and initial parameters. In our example problem,
there are two interfaces (z?= H?
1
and z?= H?
2
). There are four equations per interface, resulting in eight
simultaneous equations, which can be written in matrix form as:

(1) (1)
(1) (1)
(1) (1)
(1) (1)
(2) (2) (2) (2)
(2) (2) (2) (2)
(2) (2) (2) (2) (3) (3)
(2) (2) (2) (2
1 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1
0 0
0 0
ww w
w
Mw M
Sw S
ww w wM wS
w M S
Mw M MM MS Mw M
Sw S SM SS
K K
K K
K K
K K
K K K K
K K K K
K K K K K K
K K K K

(1) (1) (1)
0
(1) (1) (1)
0
(2) (1) (1)
0
(2) (1) (1)
0
(2)
0
(2)
0
(3)
0
) (3) (3) (3)
0
0
0
0
a wM a wS
a M a S
a MM a MS
a SM a SS
Sw S
w M K F K
M K F K
w M K F K
M K F K
M
S
w
K K

1 1
1 1

1 1
1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
] ]
% %
%
% % %
% %
%
% % %
%
%
%
%
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
]
(31)

We refer to equation (31) as the matrix equation of the problem. In the matrix equation, the first four rows are
valid at z?= H?
1
while the rest four are valid at z?= H?
2
. If, in equation (31), we assume that the influence
coefficients Ks are known, then all the unknown initial parameters for the different layers can be obtained.

We can determine the influence coefficients for use in equation (31) by referring back to equations (11) through
(14). In these equations
(1)
0
M
%
and
(1)
0
S
%
are now replaced by
a
M
%
and
a
F
%
, respectively, because of the boundary
conditions of the example problem. Hence, by comparing the coefficients of
(1)
0
w% ,
(1)
0

%
,
a
M
%
and
a
F
%
in
equations (11) through (14) with those in equations (23) through (26), we obtain the influence coefficients for
layer 1 as:

( ) ( )
(1) (1) 2 2
2 4
2
ww SS
K K a b ab (32)
( ) ( )
(1) (1)
3 1
2
w MS
K K a b ab

+ (33)
( )
(1) (1)
4
2
wM S
K K ab

(34)
( ) ( ) ( )
(1) 2 2
3 1
2
wS
K a b ab a b + (35)

( ) ( ) ( )
( )
(1) (1) 2 3 2 3
1 3
2
w SM
K K a b b ab a ab

+ + (36)

( ) ( )
( )
(1) (1) 2 2
4 2
2 2
MM
K K a b ab ab

+ (37)
( ) ( )
(1)
3 1
2
M
K a b ab

+ (38)

( ) ( )
( )
(1) (1) 4 2 2 4
4
2 2
Mw S
K K a a b b ab

+ + (39)

( ) ( ) ( )
( )
(1) 2 3 2 3
1 3
3 3 2
M
K a b b ab a ab

(40)

( ) ( ) ( )
( )
(1) 4 2 3 5 4 3 2 5
1 3
3 2 3 2 2
Sw
K a b a b b ab a b a ab + + + (41)
For the second (middle) layer, the following equations need to be solved simultaneously in terms of C
1
, C
2
, C
3

and C
4
(note that these constants are different from the constants of layer 1):
(2)
0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4
w C C C C + + + % (42)
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(2)
0 1 2 4 2 1 3 3 4 2 4 3 1
C a b C a b C a b C a b + + + + +
%
(43)

( ) { } ( ) { }
( 2) 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 3 2 2 4
2 2 M C a b ab C a b ab +
%


( ) { } ( ) { }
2 2 2 2
3 3 1 4 4 2
2 2 C a b ab C a b ab + + + + (44)
( ) ( ) { } ( ) ( ) { }
(2) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 2 4 2 1 3
3 3 3 3 S C a a b b b a C a a b b b a + + +
%


( ) ( ) { } ( ) ( ) { }
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3 4 2 4 3 1
3 3 3 3 C a a b b b a C a a b b b a + +
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) { }
2 1 2 4 2 1 3 3 4 2 4 3 1
2 t C a b C a b C a b C a b + + + + +
%
(45)
where
1
,
2
,
3
and
4
are the values of
1
,
2
,
3
and
4
, respectively, at the initial section of the second layer
(i.e., at z?= H?
1
). Note that the parameters a
( ) 2 2
0.5 k t
1
+
1
]
%
%
and b
( ) 2 2
0.5 k t
1

1
]
%
%
in the above
3340

equations are different from those of layer 1. After obtaining the expressions of C
1
, C
2
, C
3
and C
4
from
equations (42) through (45), the same procedure as for layer 1 (i.e., substitution of the constants C
1
, C
2
, C
3
and
C
4
in the equations of
2
w% ,
2

%
,
2
M
%
and
2
S
%
obtained from equation (2) with i = 2 and its successive
differentiations, and subsequent comparison of the equations with equations (15) through (18) with i = 2)
needs to be followed to obtain the influence coefficients of layer 2. Similarly, the influence coefficients of layer
3 can be obtained by solving the following equations for C
1
, C
2
, C
3
and C
4
:
(3)
0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4
w C C C C + + + % (46)
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(3)
0 1 2 4 2 1 3 3 4 2 4 3 1
C a b C a b C a b C a b + + + + +
%
(47)
( ) { } ( ) { }
2 2 2 2
1 1 3 2 2 4
0 2 2 C a b ab C a b ab +

( ) { } ( ) { }
2 2 2 2
3 3 1 4 4 2
2 2 C a b ab C a b ab + + + + (48)

( ) ( ) { } ( ) ( ) { }
( 3) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3 4 0 1 2 4 2 1 3
2 3 3 3 3 k t w C a a b b b a C a a b b b a + + +
%
% %

( ) ( ) { } ( ) ( ) { }
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3 4 2 4 3 1
3 3 3 3 C a a b b b a C a a b b b a + +
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) { }
3 1 2 4 2 1 3 3 4 2 4 3 1
2 t C a b C a b C a b C a b + + + + +
%
(49)
where
1
,
2
,
3
and
4
are the values of
1
,
2
,
3
and
4
, respectively at z?=1; and
( ) 3 3
0.5 a k t +
% %
and
( ) 3 3
0.5 b k t
% %
.
Once the influence coefficients are known, the unknown initial parameters are determined by solving the matrix
equation (equation (31)). The initial parameters and influence coefficients are then used to find the normalized
pile deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force at any pile section by using equations (23) through
(26) for layer 1, (15) through (18) for layer 2 (with i = 2), and (27) through (30) for layer 3.

Evidently, MIP can be used for solving problems with any number of layers and for different boundary
conditions. It is important to note that the matrix equations for the different cases (arising due to soil layering
and pile boundary conditions) are different. However, for a given pile head boundary condition, the influence
coefficients for the top layer are the same irrespective of the number of soil layers and of the boundary
conditions at the pile base. Similarly, for the bottom layer, the influence coefficients are independent of the
number of soil layers and of the pile head boundary conditions. Likewise, for any intermediate layer, the
expressions of the influence coefficients are the same irrespective of the pile head and base boundary
conditions and of the number of layers present. This makes the determination of the influence coefficient
expressions and subsequent programming easy because the expressions for the top and bottom layers do
not vary from problem to problem if the boundary conditions remain the same, and the expressions for
intermediate layers are always the same, being also independent of the head and base boundary conditions.
This means that the equations, once obtained, can be repeatedly used for any laterally loaded pile problem.

The expressions for the influence coefficients and the matrix equations for one-, two-, three- and four-layer soil
deposits have been obtained for all possible boundary conditions (i.e., free or restrained pile head with free or
restrained pile base) and are given in Basu (2006). The matrix equations for up to four layers have been
solved symbolically using Maple.

The advantage of using MIP over direct determination of the integration constants lies in the fact that complete
symbolic solutions can be obtained using MIP for problems with up to four soil layers. Moreover, pile slope,
bending moment and shear force are determined without any post processing of the pile deflection data (post
processing becomes necessary for numerical solution or for analytical solution through direct determination of
the integration constants). However, if the number of soil layers exceeds four, then symbolic solutions of the
matrix equations are difficult to obtain.
5 Solution algorithm and numerical example
In order to obtain pile response, the soil resistances k and t need to be known. Expressions for N"
i
and W"
i
have
been obtained using the principle of minimum potential energy (Basu and Salgado 2007a):
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( )
2 2
2 4
1 0 1
2
0
1 9 1 0.75
; 1,2,...,
4
si si p
i
p p
K K K G L
k i n
E I
K

+ + 1 1 +
] ]

1
]
%
(50)
3341

( ) ( ) ( )
( )
( ) ( )
( )
2 2
2 2
1 0
2
0
2
2 2
1
2
0
3 1 0.75
; 1,2,...
8
3 1 0.75
; 1
8
p si si p
p p
i
p sn sn p
p p
K K r G L
i n
E I
K
t
K r G L
i n
E I
K

1 1 +
] ]

1
]

'
1 +
]
+

1
]
%
(51)

where G
si
and
si
are the shear modulus and Poissons ratio of the i
th
soil layer; r
p
is the radius of the pile cross
section, K
0
() and K
1
() are the zero-order and first-order modified Bessel function of the second kind; and is a
dimensionless parameter given by:
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
1
1
2
2
1 2
1 1
2
2
2 1
1
1
1 0.75 1 0.75
8
2
3
1 0.75 1 0.75
2
i
i
i
i
H
n
i n
si si sn sn n z
i n H p
H
n
p
n
si si i sn sn n
z
i
n H
dw k
G dz G w
dz t
r
L
t
G w dz G w
k

+
+

_
1 + + +
]
,

1 + + +
]

%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
% %
%
%
%
% % %
%
(52)

An iterative technique (Basu and Salgado 2007a) is used to solve the problem because the parameter is not
known a priori. Assuming an initial value of , pile deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force are
calculated applying MIP as the first iteration. At the end of the iteration, is calculated by performing
integrations of the square of obtained pile deflection and slope according to equation (52) and compared with
the assumed initial value of . If the difference between the two values is more than the tolerable limit, a
second iterati on is performed. Iterations are continued until the values of obtained from two consecutive
iterations fall below the prescribed limit, which we prescribe as
1
0.001
i i

+
< . An initial value of = 1 was
used in the calculations. The final solutions were obtained in seconds and took not more than six iterations.

We consider an example problem of a four-layer soil profile with H
1
= 2 m, H
2
= 5 m, and H
3
= 8 m; E
s1
= 20
MPa, E
s2
= 35 MPa, E
s3
= 50 MPa and E
s4
= 80 MPa (E
si
is the Youngs modulus of the i
th
layer;
( ) 2 1
si si si
G E + );
s1
= 0.35,
s2
= 0.25,
s3
= 0.2 and
s4
= 0.15. We consider a 10-m long pile with 0.6 m
diameter. A force F
a
= 300 kN is applied at the head and the pile modulus assumed is E
p
= 24 10
6
kPa.
Figure 3(a), (b) and (c) show the pile deflection, bending moment and shear force, respectively. Also plotted in
Figure 3(a) is the deflection profile of a three-dimensional finite element (FE) analysis of the problem. The
results match reasonably well (the difference between the head deflection values is less than 10%).


-2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Pile Deflection (mm)
10
7.5
5
2.5
0
D
e
p
t
h
,

z

(
m
)
Anal ytical
Finite El ement Analysis

-40 0 40 80 120 160 200
Bending Moment (kNm)
10
7.5
5
2.5
0
D
e
p
t
h
,

z

(
m
)
Analytical

-100 0 100 200 300
Shear Force (kN)
20
16
12
8
4
0
D
e
p
t
h
,

z

(
m
)



Figure 3. (a) Deflection, (b) bending moment and (c) shear force of a 10-m long laterally loaded pile.
6 Conclusion
An analytical solution was presented for the problem of a laterally loaded pile embedded in a layered soil
medium. We modified the method of initial parameters, traditionally used to solve problems of beams on
elastic foundations, to obtain the pile deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force for a laterally loaded
pile embedded in a layered soil medium. The method was illustrated using an example of a laterally loaded
pile embedded in a three-layer soil deposit. One example problem was solved and compared with finite
element analysis; it is evident that this method of solution produces satisfactory results and provides useful
(a) (b) (c)
3342

insights into pile response.
7 References
Basu, D. & Salgado, R. (2007a). Elastic analysis of laterally loaded pile in multi-layered soil. Geomech. Geoengng. Int. J. 2(3),
183-196.
Basu, D. & Salgado, R. (2007b). Method of initial parameters for piles embedded in layered soils. Geomech. Geoengng. Int. J.
2(4), 281-294.
Basu, D. (2006). Analysis of laterally loaded piles in layered soil. Ph.D. Thesis, Purdue Univ.
Georgiadis, M. & Butterfield, R. (1982). Laterally loaded pile behavior. J. Geotech. Engng. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs 108, No.
GT1, 155-165.
Harr, M. E., Davidson, J. L., Ho, D.-M., Pombo, L. E., Ramaswamy, S. V. & Rosner, J. C. (1969). Euler beams on a two
parameter foundation model. J. Soil Mech. Fdn. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs 95(SM4), 933-948.
Hetnyi, M. (1946). Beams on elastic foundation. Univ. Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.
Matlock, H. & Reese, L. C. (1960). Generalized solutions for laterally loaded piles. J. Soil Mech. Fdn. Div., Am. Soc. Civ.
Engrs 86, No. SM5, 63-91.
McClelland, B. & Focht Jr., J. A. (1958). Soil modulus for laterally loaded piles. Trans. Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs. 123, 1049-1063.
Rao, N. S. V. K., Das, & Y. C., Anandakrishnan, M. (1971). Variational approach to beams on elastic foundations. J. Engng.
Mech. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs 97(EM2), 271-294.
Reese, L. C., Cox, W. R. & Koop, F. D. (1974). Analysis of laterally loaded piles in sand. Proc. 6
th
Offshore Tech. Conf.,
Houston, Texas, 2, 473-483.
Vlasov, V. Z. & Leontev, N. N. (1966). Beams, plates and shells on elastic foundations. Israel Program for Scientific
Translations, Jerusalem.




3343