Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1166
Abstract: Pile foundations are often subjected to lateral dynamic loading due to forces on the supported structure. In
this study, a simple two-dimensional analysis was developed to accurately model the pile response to dynamic loads.
The proposed model incorporates the static py curve approach (where p is the static soil reaction and y is the pile deflection) and the plane strain assumptions to represent the soil reactions within the frame of a Winkler model. The py
curves are used to relate pile deflections to the nonlinear soil reactions. Wave propagation and energy dissipation are
also accounted for along with discontinuity conditions at the pilesoil interface. The inclusion of damping with the
static unit transfer curves results in increased soil resistance, thus producing dynamic py curves. The dynamic py
curves are a function of the static py curve and velocity of the soil particles at a given depth and frequency of loading. The proposed model was used to analyze the pile response to the lateral Statnamic load test, and the predicted response compared well with the measured response. Closed-form solutions for dynamic py curves were established by
curve fitting the dynamic soil reactions for a range of soil types and loading frequencies. These solutions can be used
to model soil reactions for pile vibration problems in readily available finite element analysis (FEA) and dynamic
structural analysis packages. A simple spring and dashpot model was also proposed to be used in equivalent linear
analyses of transient pile response. The proposed models were incorporated into an FEA program (ANSYS) which was
used to compute the response of a laterally loaded pile. The computed responses compared well with the predictions of
the two-dimensional analysis.
Key words: dynamic, transient, lateral, piles, py curves, inertial interaction.
Rsum : Les fondations sur pieux sont souvent soumises un chargement dynamique latral d des forces
appliques sur la structure porte. Dans cette tude, une analyse unidimensionnelle simple a t dveloppe pour
modliser avec prcision la raction du pieu aux charges dynamiques. Le modle propos incorpore lapproche de la
courbe statique py et les hypothses de dformation plane pour reprsenter les ractions du sol dans le cadre dun
modle de Winkler. Les courbes py sont utilises pour faire une corrlation entre les dflexions du pieu et les
ractions non linaires du sol. La propagation dondes et la dissipation dnergie sont galement prises en compte en
mme temps que les conditions de discontinuit linterface pieu-sol. Linclusion de lamortissement avec les courbes
de transfert dunit statique rsulte en un accroissement de la rsistance du sol, produisant ainsi des courbes py
dynamiques . Les courbes py dynamiques sont une fonction de la courbe statique py et de la vlocit des particules
de sol une profondeur et une frquence de chargement donnes. Le modle propos a t utilis pour analyser la
rponse du pieu lessai de chargement statnamique, et la rponse prdite se comparat bien la rponse mesure. Les
solutions exactes pour les courbes py dynamiques ont t tablies par lissage des courbes des ractions dynamiques
du sol pour une plage de types de sol et de frquences de chargement. Ces solutions peuvent tre utilises pour
modliser les ractions du sol pour les problmes de vibration de pieux dans les progiciels FEA et danalyse
structurale dynamique couramment disponibles. Un modle comprenant un simple ressort avec pot amortisseur a aussi
t propos pour tre utilis dans des analyses linaires quivalentes de la rponse transitoire dun pieu. Les modles
proposs ont t incorpors dans un programme FEA (ANSYS) qui a t utilis pour valuer la rponse dun pieu
charg latralement. Les rponses calcules se comparaent bien avec les prdictions de lanalyse bidimensionnelle.
Mots cls : dynamique, transitoire, latral, pieux, courbes py, interaction inertielle.
[Traduit par la Rdaction]
Introduction
Pile foundations are often subjected to lateral loading due
to forces on the supported structure. The horizontal loads at
the pile head can be the governing design constraint for sinReceived May 5, 1999. Accepted April 28, 2000. Published
on the NRC Research Press website on December 5, 2000.
M.H. El Naggar and K.J. Bentley. Geotechnical Research
Centre, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON
N6A 5B9, Canada.
Can. Geotech. J. 37: 11661183 (2000)
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:48:21 AM
1183
gle piles and pile groups supporting different types of structures in many situations including environmental loading
(wind, water, and earthquakes) and machine loading on
structures such as buildings, bridges, and offshore platforms.
Most building and bridge codes use factored static loads
to account for the dynamic effects of pile foundations. Although very low frequency vibrations may be accurately
modeled using factored loads, the introduction of nonlinearity, damping, and pilesoil interaction during transient
loading may significantly alter the response. The typical frequency ranges of interest are 010 Hz for earthquakes,
2000 NRC Canada
1167
Fig. 1. Element representation of the proposed model. m1, m2
represent the mass of the inner field lumped at two nodes; half
(m1) at the node adjacent to the pile, and the other half (m2) at
the node adjacent to the outer field.
[1]
Model description
Pile model
The pile is assumed to be vertical and flexible with circular cross section. Noncylindrical piles are represented by cylindrical piles with equivalent radius to accommodate any
pierpile configurations. The pile and surrounding soil are
subdivided into n segments, with pile nodes corresponding
to soil nodes at the same elevation. The standard bending
stiffness matrix of beam elements models the structural stiffness matrix for each pile element. The pile global stiffness
matrix is then assembled from the element stiffness matrices
and is condensed to give horizontal translations at each layer
and the rotational degree of freedom at the pile head.
Soil model: hyperbolic stressstrain relationship
The soil is divided into n layers with different soil properties assigned to each layer according to the soil profile considered. Within each layer, the soil medium is divided into
two annular regions as shown in Fig. 1. The first region is an
inner zone adjacent to the pile and accounts for the soil
nonlinearity. The second region is the outer zone that allows
for wave propagation away from the pile and provides for
kNL
r
8 Gm (1 v)(3 4v) o + 1
r1
=
2
2
r o + (3 4v) 2 r o + 1 ln r 1 1
r
r1
r o
1
1
G m = Gmax
1 +
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:48:27 AM
1168
Fig. 2. Envelope of variations of horizontal stiffness and damping stiffness parameters between = 0.25 and = 0.4 (after Novak et
al. 1978).
[3]
Gmax =
3230(2.97 e) 2 0.5
o
1+ e
where e is the void ratio, and o is the mean principal effective stress (in kN/m2) at the soil layer. The parameter =
P/Pu is the ratio of the horizontal soil reaction in the soil
spring, P, to the ultimate resistance of the soil element, Pu.
The ultimate resistance of the soil element is calculated using standard relations given by the American Petroleum Institute (1991). For clay, the ultimate resistance is given as a
force per unit length of soil by
[4]
Pu = 3cud + Xd + JcuX
[5]
Pu = 9cud
tan
K X tan sin
Pu1 = A X 0
+
tan( )
tan( ) cos
[7]
Far-field element
The outer field is modeled with a linear spring in parallel
with a dashpot to represent the linear stiffness and damping
(mainly radiation damping). The outer zone allows for the
propagation of waves to infinity. Novak et al. (1978) developed explicit solutions for the soil reactions expressed in
terms of complex stiffness, K, of a unit length of a cylinder
embedded in a linear viscoelastic medium given by
[8]
tan ) Ka d
K = kL + iaocL
kL = GmaxSu1()
[11]
cL =
2Gmaxr1
Vs
Su2 (a o = 0.5, v)
2000 NRC Canada
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:48:29 AM
1169
[12]
1
1
1
=
+
k py
kL
k NL
Pilesoil interface
The pilesoil interface is modeled separately on each side
of the pile, thus allowing gapping and slippage to occur on
each side independently. The soil and pile nodes in each
layer are connected using a no-tension spring, that is, the
pile and soil will remain connected and will have equal displacement for compressive stresses. The spring is disconnected if tensile stress is detected in the soil spring to allow
a gap to develop. This separation or gapping results in permanent displacement of the soil node dependent on the magnitude of the load. The development of such gaps is often
observed in experiments, during offshore loading, and after
earthquake excitation in clays. These gaps eventually fill in
again over time until the next episode of lateral dynamic
loading. The pilesoil interface for sands does not allow for
gap formation, but instead the sand caves in, resulting in the
virtual backfilling of sand particles around the pile during
repeated dynamic loading. When the pile is unloaded, the
sand on the tension side of the pile follows the pile with zero
stiffness instead of remaining permanently displaced as in
the clay model. In the unloading phase, the stiffness of the
inner field spring is assumed to be linear in both the clay
and sand models.
Soil model: py curve approach
The soil reaction to transient loading comprises stiffness
and damping. The stiffness is established using the py
curve approach and the damping is established from analytical solutions that account for wave propagation. A similar
approach was suggested by Nogami et al. (1992) using py
curves.
Based on model tests, py curves relate pile deflections to
the corresponding soil reaction at any depth (element) below
the ground surface. The py curve represents the total soil
reaction to the pile motion (i.e., the reactions of the inner
and outer zones combined). The total stiffness, kpy, derived
from the py curve is equivalent to the true stiffness (real
part of the complex stiffness) of the soil medium. Thus, referring to the hyperbolic law model, the combined inner
zone stiffness (kNL) and outer zone stiffness (kL) can be replaced by a unified equivalent stiffness zone (kpy) as shown
in Fig. 3a. Hence, to ensure that the true stiffness is the
same for the two soil models, the flexibility of the two models is equated, i.e.,
k NL =
k py k L
k L k py
y
p
= 0.5
Pu
y 50
where p is the soil resistance, y is the deflection corresponding to p, Pu is the ultimate soil resistance from eqs. [4] and
[5], n is a constant relating soil resistance to pierpile deflection, and y50 is the corrected deflection at one-half the
ultimate soil reaction determined from laboratory tests. The
tangent stiffness constant, kpy, of any soil element at time
step t + t is given by the slope of the tangent to the py
curve at the specific load level as shown in Fig. 4. This slope
is established from the soil deflections at time steps t and t
t and the corresponding soil reactions calculated from
eq. [14], i.e.,
2000 NRC Canada
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:48:31 AM
1170
Fig. 4. Determination of stiffness (kpy) from an internally generated static py curve to produce a dynamic py curve (including damping).
[15]
k py ( t + t) =
p t p t t
yt yt t
p = (k)(x)(y)(F1)(F2)
GN = Gmax
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:48:35 AM
1171
Fig. 5. Soil modulus variation for profiles considered in the analysis. d, pile diameter; L, pile depth; z, depth below the surface.
Fig. 6. Calculated dynamic soil reactions at 1.0 m depth (for a prescribed harmonic displacement at the pile head with amplitude
0.03d = 0.015 m, L/d = 30).
[18]
where [M], [C], and [K] are the global mass, damping, and
stiffness matrices, respectively; and {u&&}, {u&}, {u}, and F(t) are
acceleration, velocity, displacement, and external load vectors, respectively. Referring to Fig. 1, the equations of motion at node 1 (adjacent to the inner field) and node 2
(adjacent to the outer field) are
[19]
[20]
where u1 and u2 are displacements of nodes 1 and 2, respectively; F1 is the force in the nonlinear spring including the
confining pressure; and F2 is the soil resistance at node 2.
The equation of motion for the outer field is written as
[21]
cu&& 2 + k Lu 2 = F2
[22]
F1
=
0
kNL BcNL
k
k
Am
B
c
c
)
+
+
+
(
+
k
Bc
NL
2
L
NL
L
NL
NL
u1 F i 1
+ 1i 1
u 2 F 2
where F 1i 1 and F i21 are the sums of inertia forces and soil
reactions at nodes 1 and 2, respectively; and A and B are
constants of numerical integration for inertia and damping,
respectively.
The linear acceleration assumption was used and the
Newmark method was implemented for direct time integration of the equations of motion. The modified NewtonRaphson iteration scheme was used to solve the nonlinear
equilibrium equations.
2000 NRC Canada
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:48:45 AM
1172
Fig. 7. Pile head response under applied harmonic load with single amplitude equal to 10 kN (L/d = 30, Ep /Es(L) = 1000, linear profile).
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:48:50 AM
1173
Fig. 8. Calculated dynamic py curves at 1.5 m depth (for a prescribed harmonic displacement at the pile head with amplitude of
0.05d) using (a) hyperbolic model, and (b) py curve model. p , pile mass density; s , soil mass density; Pult , lateral ultimate load of
the pile.
Fig. 9. Calculated dynamic py curves at 3.0 m depth (for a prescribed harmonic displacement at the pile head with an amplitude of
0.05d) using (a) hyperbolic model, and (b) py curve model.
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:49:09 AM
1174
Fig. 10. Calculated dynamic soil reactions at 1.0 m depth (for a prescribed harmonic displacement at the pile head with an amplitude
of 0.038d, L/d = 25, Ep /Es(L) = 1000).
Fig. 11. Pile head response to applied harmonic load with single amplitude of 15 kN of the pile lateral capacity (L/d = 25, Ep /Es(L) =
1000, linear profile).
Statnamic load test, and the computed response was compared with measured values.
The test site was located north of the New River at the
Kiwi maneuvers area of Camp Johnson in Jacksonville,
North Carolina. The soil profile is shown in Fig. 14 and consists of medium dense sand extending to the water table, underlain by a very weak, gray, silty clay. There was a layer of
2000 NRC Canada
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:49:29 AM
1175
Fig. 12. Calculated dynamic py curves at 3.0 m depth (for a prescribed harmonic displacement at the pile head with an amplitude of
0.05d) using (a) hyperbolic model, and (b) py curve model.
Fig. 13. Calculated dynamic py curves at 4.0 m depth (for a prescribed harmonic displacement at the pile head with an amplitude of
0.05d) using (a) hyperbolic model, and (b) py curve model.
gray sand at a depth of 7 m and a calcified sand stratum below the gray sand. The pile tested at this site was a cast-inplace reinforced concrete shaft with a steel casing having an
outer diameter of 0.61 m and a casing wall thickness of
13 mm. More details on the soil and pile properties and the
loading procedure can be found in El Naggar (1998).
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:49:43 AM
1176
Soil type
cu
(kPa)
Soft clay
Medium clay
Stiff clay
<50
80
>100
Dr
(%)
35
50
50
90
90
()
32
34
34
38
38
d
(m)
L/d
Ep /Es
Gmax
(kPa)
Vs
(m/s)
0.45
0.45
0.45
0.25
0.25
0.25
40
40
40
10 000
4 500
1 600
6.6106
1.6107
8.3107
70
150
200
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.25
0.25
0.50
0.25
0.25
40
40
20
40
40
6 300
3 800
3 800
1 580
790
1.2107
2.0107
2.0107
4.7107
9.7107
70
100
100
150
220
Table 2. Dynamic py curve parameter constants for a range of soil types (d = 0.25; L/d = 40; 0.015 < ao < 0.225, where ao = ro /Vs).
Soil type
Description
ao < 0.025
ao > 0.025
Soft clay
Medium clay
Stiff clay
Medium dense sand, saturated
Medium dense sand, unsaturated
Dense sand, saturated
1
1
1
1
1
1
180
120
2900
3320
1960
6000
200
360
828
1640
960
1876
80
84
100
100
20
100
0.18
0.19
0.19
0.1
0.1
0.15
tests with peak load amplitudes of 350 and 470 kN. The
agreement between the measured and computed values was
excellent, especially for the first load test. The initial displacement was slightly adjusted for the computer-generated
model to accommodate initial gapping that occurred due to
the previous static test performed on the pile. The static py
curve for the top soil layer was reduced significantly to
model the loss of resistance due to the permanent gap developed near the surface.
Fig. 14. Soil profile and Statnamic pile test setup at Camp Johnson, Jacksonville. SPT, standard penetration test.
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:49:46 AM
1177
Fig. 15. Pile head displacement for Statnamic test with peak load of (a) 350 kN, and (b) 470 kN.
y
Pd = Ps + a 2o + a o
,
d
Pd Pu at depth x
2000 NRC Canada
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:49:52 AM
1178
Fig. 16. Description of soil and pile properties for cases I and II.
Pd = Ky = (K1 + iK2)y
Pd = (k + i c) y = ky + cy&
in which both k and c are real and represent the spring and
dashpot constants, respectively; and y& = dy/dt is the velocity.
2000 NRC Canada
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:49:55 AM
1179
Fig. 17. Dynamic py curves and static py curve for test case C1 (depth = 1.0 m).
Pd = (K 1 + iK 2 ) y =
n
Ps a 2o + a o
d
Ps
y
+i
y
y
[27]
k = K1 =
Ps
y
y
Ps a 2o + a o
d
c= 2 =
(S1)py =
k py
Gmax
2000 NRC Canada
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:49:57 AM
1180
Fig. 18. Dynamic py curves and static py curve for test case S5 (depth = 1.5 m).
(S2)py =
cV s
Gmaxro
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:49:59 AM
1181
Fig. 19. True stiffness parameter for test case C1 (soft clay).
Fig. 20. Equivalent damping parameter for test case C1 (soft clay) with dimensionless frequency, ao.
Conclusions
A simple 2D analysis was developed to model the response of piles to dynamic loads. The time domain was
2000 NRC Canada
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:50:05 AM
1182
Fig. 21. Calculated pile head response using 2D analytical model compared with ANSYS using (a) static py curves, and (b) dynamic
py curves.
Fig. 22. Calculated pile head response using 2D analytical model compared with ANSYS using (a) complex stiffness, and (b) modified
complex stiffness.
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:50:51 AM
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by a grant from the Natural
Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
(NSERC) to the first author and research contract 24-9 from
the National Cooperative Highway Research Program
(NCHRP). Both sources of support are greatly appreciated.
References
Abendroth, R.E., and Greimann, L.F. 1990. Pile behavior established from model tests. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
ASCE, 116(4): 571588.
American Petroleum Institute. 1991. Recommended practice for
planning, designing and constructing fixed offshore platforms.
API Recommended Practice 2A (RP 2A). 19th ed. American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C., pp. 4755.
ANSYS Inc. 1996. General finite element analysis program. Version 5.4. ANSYS Inc., Canonsburg, Pa.
Bhushan, K., and Askari, S. 1984. Lateral load tests on drilled pier
foundations for solar plant heliostats. In Laterally loaded piles.
Edited by J.A. Langer. American Society for Testing and Materials, Special Technical Publication STP 835, pp. 141155.
Bhushan, K., and Haley, S.C. 1980. Development of computer program using Py data from load test results for lateral load design of drilled piers. Woodward-Clyde Consultants Professional
Development Committee, San Francisco, Calif.
1183
Bhushan, K., Haley, S.C., and Fong, P.T. 1979. Lateral load tests
on drilled piers in stiff clays. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 105(GT8): 969985.
Bhushan, K., Lee, L.J., and Grime, D.B. 1981. Lateral load tests on
drilled piers in sand. In Proceedings of a Session on Drilled
Piers and Caissons, Geotechnical Engineering Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, National Convention, St. Louis,
Mo., pp. 131143.
Desai, C.S., and Wu, T.H. 1976. A general function for stress
strain curves. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Numerical Methods in Geomechanics, American Society of Civil Engineers, Blacksburg, Vol. 1, pp. 306318.
El Naggar, M.H. 1998. Interpretation of lateral statnamic load test
results. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 21(3): 169179.
El Naggar, M.H., and Novak, M. 1995. Nonlinear lateral interaction in pile dynamics. Journal of Soil Dynamics and Earthquake
Engineering, 14(3): 141157.
El Naggar, M.H., and Novak, M. 1996. Nonlinear analysis for dynamic lateral pile response. Journal of Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 15(4): 233244.
Gazetas, G., and Dobry, R. 1984. Horizontal response of piles in
layered soils. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE,
110(1): 2040.
Hardin, B.O., and Black, W.L. 1968. Vibration modulus of normally consolidated clay. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and
Foundations Division, ASCE, 94(SM2): 353369.
Idriss, I.M., Dobry, R., and Singh, R.D. 1978. Nonlinear behavior
of soft clays during cyclic loading. Journal of the Geotechnical
Engineering Division, ASCE, 104(GT12): 14271447.
Matlock, H. 1970. Correlations for design of laterally loaded piles
in soft clay. In Proceedings of the 2nd Offshore Technology
Conference, Houston, Tex., Vol. 1, pp. 577588.
Meyer, B.J., and Reese, L.C. 1979. Analysis of single piles under
lateral loading. Preliminary Review Copy, Research Report 2441, Center for Highway Research, The University of Texas at
Austin, Austin, Tex., pp. 1145.
Nogami, T., Konagai, K., Otani, J., and Chen, H.L. 1992. Nonlinear soilpile interaction model for dynamic lateral motion. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 118(1): 106116.
Novak, M., and Sheta, M. 1980. Approximate approach to contact
effects of piles. In Proceedings of a Speciality Conference on
Dynamic Response of Pile Foundations: Analytical Aspects,
American Society of Civil Engineers, Hollywood, Fla., pp. 53
79.
Novak, M., Nogami, T., and Aboul-Ella, F. 1978. Dynamic soil reactions for plane strain case. Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, 104: 953959.
Reese, L.C., and Welch, R.C. 1975. Lateral loading of deep foundations in stiff clay. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 101(GT7): 633649.
Reese, L.C., Cox, W.R., and Koop, F.D. 1974. Analysis of laterally
loaded piles in sand. In Proceedings of the 6th Annual Offshore
Technology Conference, Houston, Tex., Vol. 2, Paper OTC
2080, pp. 473483.
Reese, L.C., Cox, W.R., and Koop, F.D. 1975. Field testing and
analysis of laterally loaded piles in stiff clay. In Proceedings of
the 7th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Tex.,
Vol. 2, pp. 671690.
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj06\T00-058.vp
Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:50:51 AM