Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Editors:
Paulus P. Rahardjo
Bigman M. Hutapea
TABLE OF CONTENT
VOLUME 1
KEYNOTE SPEAKER
SOME ASPECTS OF RESEARCH AND PRACTICE FOR PILE DESIGN IN FRANCE A1-1
Roger Frank
DESIGN OF SINGLE PILES, SMALL PILE GROUPS, AND WIDE PILED FOUNDATIONS A2-1
Bengt H. Fellenius
ADVANTAGES OF PILED RAFTS OVER PILE GROUPS OBSERVED IN MODEL LOAD TESTS IN DRY
AND SATURATED SAND GROUNDS A5-1
Tatsunori Matsumoto, Yesim Sema Unsever, Anh-Tuan Vu
THE ANALYSIS OF FIELD TESTS OF SOILS BY JOINT PILES ON THE CONSTRUCTION SITE OF THE
CASPIAN SEA AREA IN KAZAKHSTAN A7-1
Askar Zhussupbekov, Abdulla Omarov
THE DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL SEISMIC HAZARD MAPS 2017 FOR DESIGN OF BUILDINGS
AND INFRASTRUCTURES IN INDONESIA A11-1
Masyhur Irsyam, Sri Widiyantoro, Irwan Meilano, Wahyu Triyoso, M. Asrurifak,
Danny Hilman Natawijaya, Arif Sabaruddin, Ariska Rudiyanto, Sri Hidayati, Lutfi Faisal
AXIAL BEARING CAPACITY OF LARGE OPEN ENDED PIPE PILES – A CASE STUDY ON PILE
FOUNDATIONS FOR WINDFARMS OFF THE GERMAN COAST B2-1
Mussie Kidane, Martin Pohl
KINGDOM TOWER, JEDDAH, SAUDI ARABIA: WORLD’S TALLEST BUILDING AT 3307 FT, WITH
360 FT DEEP FOUNDATIONS B11-1
Karsten Beckhaus, Harald Heinzelmann
iv
VOLUME 2
SOIL CONDITIONS, METHODS OF PILE INSTALLATION, AND THEIR EFFECTS ON
SURROUNDING SOILS AND STRUCTURES
INITIAL DRIVING PILE MECHANISM FOR PILE TIP USING BINGHAM MODEL IN CLAY SOIL C2-1
Budijanto Widjaja, Krisna Sanjaya Utomo
THE LATERAL DISPLACEMENT OF SOFT SOIL DUE TO PILE INSTALLATION AT THE OIL TANK OF
TNU PROJECT AT SURABAYA C4-1
Indarto, Arik Triarso
PILE BEARING CAPACITY FOLLOWING JACKING PILE METHOD COMPARISON OF MEYERHOFF &
SCHMERTMANN METHOD, STUDY CASE IN TANJUNG JABUNG TIMUR, JAMBI D2-1
Deny Wibisana
v
CONCRETE BLEEDING IN BORED PILE CONSTRUCTION IN BANGKOK SOIL E2-1
Narong Thasnanipan, Zaw Zaw Aye, Thayanan Boonyarak
EFFECTS OF PILE LATERAL MOVEMENT, PILE SPACING AND PILE NUMBERS ON LATERALLY
LOADED GROUP PILES F1-1
GOUW Tjie-Liong
BEHAVIOUR OF SOIL MODELS FOR PILED EMBANKMENT AND SURCHARGED VERTICAL DRAIN
ON KLANG CLAY F3-1
Ramli Nazir, Khairul Anuar Kassim, S. Puspanathan, Ismail Abd Rahman
CONTINUUM NUMERICAL MODELLING OF DYNAMIC LOAD TEST FOR STEEL PIPE PILES F4-1
Mehdi Aghayarzadeh, Hadi Khabbaz, Behzad Fatahi, Sergei Terzaghi
A CASE STUDY ON GROUTED DRIVEN STEEL PILES USED AS TIE-BACK TENSION PILES FOR A
QUAY WALL CONSTRUCTION IN WILHELMSHAVEN, GERMANY G1-1
U. Matthiesen, M. Pohl
vi
AXIAL LOAD VARIATIONS IN A PILE GROUP UNDER CYCLIC OVERTURNING MOMENT AND
HORIZONTAL LOAD G3-1
Shuji Tamura, Daisuke Ishikawa, Keita Shibata, Hideki Funahara
CHALLENGES AND RELIABILITY OF RAPID LOAD TEST - A CASE HISTORY IN SINGAPORE G5-1
P.Y. Ng, P.Y. NgC.C. Ng, K.E. Chua, Jerry Lim, C.W. Ong, S.H. Chew, Ricky Nagatie
COMPARISON BETWEEN BIDIRECTIONAL STATIC LOAD TEST RESULT AND FINITE ELEMENT
METHOD ON LARGE DIAMETER AND LONG BORED PILE - A CASE STUDY OF KUNINGAN
PROJECT, JAKARTA G6-1
Anthony, Angel Refanie, Freddy Gunawan, Budijanto Widjaja
DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND PERFORMANCE OF LONG DEEP BORED PILES FOR TALL
BUILDING COMPLEX IN JAKARTA G8-1
Budihartono Wijanto, I. Wayan Sengara, Bakhtiar Cahyandi, Widjojo A. Prakoso, Winda Jusmelia
THE USE OF CONCRETE MAT ON MINI PILES TO STABILIZE SLOPE AND REDUCE SETTLEMENT
IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF AIRPORT RUNWAY G11-1
Andy Sugianto, Asep Gunawan, Paulus Pramono Rahardjo
vii
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON STATIC AND DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR OF STEEL BATTER PILE
FOUNDATION H2-1
Koichi Tomisawa, Koichi Isobe, Tadatomo Watanabe
INSTRUMENTED PILE LOAD TESTS ON ROCK SOCKETED PILES WITH DISTRIBUTED FIBRE OPTIC
SENSOR H3-1
B. P. Tee, M. F. Chong, K. A. Ang, H. Mohamad, R. A. Abdullah, A. S. A. Rashid
EVALUATION OF OSTERBERG CELL TEST USING LINEAR AND NONLINEAR APPROACH FOR
APARTMENT PROJECT IN PONDOK INDAH H4-1
Andrew Arnaldi, Ferdinand Eka Putra, Budihartono Wijanto
PILE BEHAVIOR
STUDY ON THE EFFECT OF COMPACTED FILL ON THE BEHAVIOR OF LATERALLY LOADED PILES
ON SOFT SOILS I2-1
Stefanus Diaz Alvi, Paulus Pramono Rahardjo
viii
PILE FOUNDATIONS IN CHALLENGING SOFT SOIL CONDITIONS THE IMPORTANCE OF
GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE J2-1
Linda de Vries
THE USE OF DIFFERENT SHEARING RATE IN DIRECT SHEAR TEST TO DETERMINE DAMPING IN
SOILS AND SOIL-CONCRETE INTERFACE FOR INPUT IN PILE DRIVING ANALYSIS J5-1
Rudy Febrijanto, Paulus Pramono Rahardjo, Aflizal Arafianto
USE OF BORED PILES AND GROUND ANCHOR TO STABILIZE HIGHWAY SLOPE FAILURES K3-1
Aris Handoko, Paulus Pramono Rahardjo
ix
Proceeding of PILE 2017, ISBN 978-979-15020-4-7
Bali - Indonesia, September 26 – 27, 2017
GOUW Tjie-Liong
Geotechnical Consultant
Former faculty at Civil Eng. Department,
Binus University, Jakarta
gtloffice@gmail.com
ABSTRACT: Based on 3D finite element numerical analysis on 3x3 pile group Gouw and Hidayat (2015)
suggested that that when base friction of the pile cap and the passive pressure acting against the pile cap are
neglected, the effects of the pile cap thickness against group lateral efficiency is marginal and can be safely
neglected. They also briefly mentioned that the center to center pile spacing and the lateral movement of the
piles also affect the capacity of the laterally loaded group piles. To investigate the eff ect of the magnitude of
pile lateral movement and pile spacing to larger pile groups, the study was continued by carrying further analysis
on 5x5 and 9x9 pile groups, taking the same modelling assumption where base friction and passive resistance
induced by pile cap were neglected. The study revealed that pile group lateral efficiencies were found to be
larger when the center to center pile spacing were wider. It was also found the greater the number of piles in
the group the lower the pile lateral efficiency. However, pile head lateral (horizontal) movement only have
marginal effect on the lateral efficiency of group piles.
Keywords : Group piles, finite element, pile group lateral efficiency, pile lateral movement
INTRODUCTION
Many methods have been developed in estimating single pile lateral capacity, starting from
Broms method (Broms, 1964a, 1964b), Reese and Matlock method (Reese and Matlock, 1956),
Poulos and Davis method (Poulos and Davis, 1980), to many other researches, e.g. Kim and Kim,
1999; Kumar et al, 2000. For pile group lateral capacity, it is generally calculated by reducing the
modulus of horizontal subgrade reaction of the soil, k h (Prakash, 1962). Prakash method does not
consider the effect of the thickness of the group pile cap, the number of piles in the group and the
lateral movement of the piles. By employing 3D geotechnical finite element computer software, e.g.
PLAXIS 3D, Gouw and Hidayat (2015) concluded that that when base friction of the pile cap and the
passive pressure acting against the pile cap are neglected, the effects of the pile cap thickness
against group lateral efficiency is marginal and can be neglected. They also briefly mentioned that
the center to center pile spacing and the lateral movement of the piles also have effects on the
capacity of laterally loaded single pile and group piles. Taking the same modelling assumption
where base friction and passive resistance induced by pile cap are neglected, Gouw carried out
further research by analyzing larger pile groups of 5x5 and 9x9 to investigate the effect of
magnitude of pile head lateral movement, pile spacing and number of piles in the group on the
pile group lateral efficiency in resisting lateral load. Effect of the moment induced by pile lateral
load is not considered. This paper presented the results of the study.
F1-1
F1-2
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
As presented in previous paper (Gouw and Hidayat, 2015), the research is carried out by
employing PLAXIS 3D geotechnical finite element software (Brinkgreeve et al, 2015) with the
following methodology:
(1) The piles are circular bored piles with 1m or 1000mm diameter.
(2) The subsoil is clay with an undrained shear strength, Su, of 50 kPa and soil stiffness, E, of 500
times undrained shear strength, E = 25.000 kPa. The soil is assumed to be in undrained
condition under the basis that the lateral load on building piles are normally induced by wind
or earthquake loads which generally take place for a short duration.
(3) Mohr Coulomb soil model is used.
(4) Model and carry out single pile analysis subjected to lateral load. The lateral load carrying
capacity of the single pile is determined at 6mm, 9mm, 12mm, 25mm, 40mm and 100mm
lateral movement of the pile head. Named the single pile capacity at certain lateral movement
as Q1h = x mm. Note that the chosen magnitudes of lateral movements are based on the
following criteria:
6 mm is normally adopted as allowable lateral movement under static condition.
9 mm is allowable lateral movement under small earthquake shaking.
12 mm is allowable lateral movement under medium earthquake shaking.
25 mm is allowable lateral movement under strong earthquake shaking.
40 mm is based on the local practice (Jakarta, Indonesia) that the pile ultimate load is
determined at pile head movement of 4% pile diameter, i.e. 4% x 1000mm = 40mm.
100mm is the original Terzaghi's 10% pile diameter failure criteria for lateral
movement, i.e. 10% x 1000mm = 100mm.
(5) The piles are modelled as embedded beam with unit weight of 24 kN/m3 and structural
stiffness of 3x107 kN/m2.
(6) Model 3x3, 5x5 and 9x9 piles group subjected to lateral load.
(7) Lateral load is applied at the side the of the pile cap. Magnitude of the load is adjusted until
all piles in the group move laterally by 100mm or more.
(8) The center to center pile spacing is varied from 3D, 4D, 5D, 6D, 8D to 10D (D=pile diameter).
(9) Since it has been found that the effect of pile cap thickness is marginal, on this further study
the pile cap thickness for all pile groups are taken as 2D. The pile caps are modelled as soil
cluster with non-porous, linear elastic material model, with the unit weight of 24 kN/m3,
stiffness of 3x107 kN/m2, and Poisson’s ratio of 0.15.
(10) To eliminate the effect of soil friction between the base of the piles cap and the underlying
soil, a 10-cm thin layer of dummy soil with nearly zero strength and zero stiffness is placed
under the pile cap.
(11) To eliminate the effect of soil passive resistance acting on the pile cap, the pile cap is placed
on the ground surface.
(12) The lateral movement of each pile in the group is then generated by Plaxis 3D. Then, load
carrying capacity of each pile is derived at the corresponding pile head lateral movement of
6mm, 9mm, 12mm, 25mm, 40mm and 100mm.
F1-3
(13) The group total lateral capacity at a certain magnitude of lateral movement, Qgh= x mm, is
determined by summing up the load acting in each individual pile at the corresponding
magnitude of the lateral movement.
The lateral pile group efficiency, then computed as,
As mentioned in the research methodology, the analysis was first carried out to derive single
pile movement, followed by carrying out analysis for 3x3 piles, 5x5 piles and 9x9 piles. Figure 1
shows the typical finite element modelling of 3x3 piles group. Figure 2 shows the pile head lateral
(horizontal) movements of a single pile, 3x3 piles, 5x5 piles and 9x9 piles with pile spacing of 3D (3
times pile diameter) and pile cap thickness of 2D. Horizontal movements of the same pile group
arrangement with pile spacings of 4D, 5D, 6D, 8D to 10D were analyzed and the results are
presented in Figures 3 to 7. The graphs show that for the same spacing of piles, the larger the pile
group, i.e. bigger number of piles, the lower the carrying capacity of each pile in the group. The
load carried by each pile in the group was determined at the lateral movement of 6, 9, 12, 25, 40,
and 100mm. It was then compared with the single pile capacity to derive the group efficiency as
per equation (1).
Figure 1. Typical Finite Element Model of the Pile Group (Gouw and Hidayat, 2015)
F1-4
4000
3000
Lateral Load, Hx (kN)
2500
2000
3 x 3 y = -0.0751x2 + 26.031x
Group
1500
5x5 y = -0.053x2 + 18.977x
500
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Pile Spacing:
Pile Head Lateral Movement, ux (mm) 3 Pile Diameter
Single Pile Capacity One Pile Capacity in 3x3 group S = 3D
One Pile Capacity in 5x5 group One Pile Capacity in 9x9 group
Figure 2. Pile Head Lateral Movement for Pile Spacing of 3 Pile Diameter
4000
3000
Lateral Load, Hx (kN)
2500
3x3
y = -0.084x2 + 30.973x
Group
2000
1000
500
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Pile Spacing:
Pile Head Lateral Movement, ux (mm) 4 Pile Diameter
Single Pile Capacity One Pile Capacity in 3x3 group S = 4D
One Pile Capacity in 5x5 group One Pile Capacity in 9x9 group
Figure 3. Pile Head Lateral Movement for Pile Spacing of 4 Pile Diameter
F1-5
4000
3000
2500
Group
1000
500
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Pile Spacing:
Pile Head Lateral Movement, u x (mm) 5 Pile Diameter
Single Pile Capacity One Pile Capacity in 3x3 group S = 5D
One Pile Capacity in 5x5 group One Pile Capacity in 9x9 group
Figure 4. Pile Head Lateral Movement for Pile Spacing of 5 Pile Diameter
4000
3000 3x3
y = -0.0937x2 + 37.338x
Group
Lateral Load, Hx (kN)
2500
5x5 y = -0.0809x2 + 31.92x
1500
1000
500
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Pile Spacing:
Pile Head Lateral Movement, u x (mm) 6 Pile Diameter
Single Pile Capacity One Pile Capacity in 3x3 group S = 6D
One Pile Capacity in 5x5 group One Pile Capacity in 9x9 group
Figure 5. Pile Head Lateral Movement for Pile Spacing of 6 Pile Diameter
F1-6
4000
Single
Pile y = -0.1242x2 + 48.838x
3500
Group
y = -0.1048x2 + 42.32x
3x3
3000 5x5 y = -0.1037x2 + 41.378x
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Pile Spacing:
Pile Head Lateral Movement, u x (mm) 8 Pile Diameter
Single Pile Capacity One Pile Capacity in 3x3 group S = 8D
One Pile Capacity in 5x5 group One Pile Capacity in 9x9 group
Figure 6. Pile Head Lateral Movement for Pile Spacing of 8 Pile Diameter
4000
Single
y = -0.1242x2 + 48.838x
Pile
3500
Group
y = -0.1142x2 + 47.496x
3x3
3000
5x5 y = -0.1145x2 + 46.584x
Lateral Load, Hx (kN)
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Pile Spacing:
Pile Head Lateral Movement, ux (mm) 10 Pile Diameter
Single Pile Capacity One Pile Capacity in 3x3 group S = 10D
One Pile Capacity in 5x5 group One Pile Capacity in 9x9 group
Figure 7. Pile Head Lateral Movement for Pile Spacing of 10 Pile Diameter
The pile group lateral efficiencies are then plotted against lateral movement of pile head as
presented in Figures 8 to 10, for 3x3, 5x5 and 9x9 piles, respectively. The results show that in term
of pile center to center spacing, S, for all group piles the larger the pile spacing the higher the pile
lateral efficiency, .
F1-7
In term of pile head lateral movement, for 3x3 and 5x5 group piles: up to pile center to center
spacing of 5 pile diameters (S=5D), the larger the pile movement the lower the lateral efficiency.
For spacing larger than 5 pile diameters (S>5D), the pile lateral efficiencies remain almost constant
regardless of pile head movement. For 9x9 group piles: the lateral efficiencies reduce with pile
movement for pile spacing up to 4D, remain almost constant for pile spacing of 5 to 6D, and then
start to increase for pile spacing greater than 6D.
Closer examination on the magnitude of lateral efficiencies against pile movements show that
the changes is marginal. For example: the group of 3x3 piles at pile spacing of 3D, for pile
movement of 6mm to 100mm, the lateral efficiency only reduces by 0.023. For 9x9 piles at pile
spacing of 10D, for pile movement of 6mm to 100mm, the lateral efficiency only increases by 0.076.
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 3 X 3 Piles
Pile Cap Thickness 2D
Pile Head Lateral Movement (mm)
Figure 8. Pile Head Lateral Movement vs Group Efficiency for 3x3 Group Piles
0.8 R² = 0.9957
0.2
0.1
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 5 X 5 Piles
Pile Cap Thickness 2D
Pile Head Lateral Movement (mm)
Figure 9. Pile Head Lateral Movement vs Group Efficiency for 5x5 Group Piles
F1-8
1.0
S = 10D y = 0.0008x + 0.88
R² = 0.9957
0.9
S = 8D y = 0.0004x + 0.7653
Pile Group Lateral Efficiency, h
0.8
R² = 0.9957
0.7
y = 4E-05x + 0.5958
S = 6D
0.6 R² = 0.9957
0.1
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 9 X 9 Piles
Pile Cap Thickness 2D
Pile Head Lateral Movement (mm)
Figure 10. Pile Head Lateral Movement vs Group Efficiency for 9x9 Group Piles
Figures 11, 12 and 13 show the results of analysis in term of pile spacing vs pile group lateral
efficiencies for 3x3, 5x5 and 9x9 group piles, respectively. The graphs show that for each group
piles, the wider the pile spacing the larger the pile group lateral efficiencies. However, for each pile
spacing, the magnitude of pile movement only have marginal effect on pile lateral efficiency.
Hx = 40mm
0.8 y = 0.3081x0.5039
R² = 0.9957
0.7 Hx = 25mm
y = 0.3121x0.4971
0.6 R² = 0.996
Hx = 12mm
0.5 y = 0.3152x0.4916
R² = 0.9963
Hx = 9 mm
0.4
y = 0.3159x0.4904
0.3 Hx = 6 mm R² = 0.9963
y = 0.3166x0.4892
0.2
R² = 0.9964
0.1
0.0
2D 3D 4D 5D 6D 7D 8D 9D 10 D 3 x 3 Piles
Pile Cap Thickness 2D
Pile Spacing (in term of Pile Diameter)
Figure 11. Pile Spacing vs Group Efficiency for 3x3 Group Piles
F1-9
0.1
0.0
2D 3D 4D 5D 6D 7D 8D 9D 10 D 5 x 5 Piles
Pile Cap Thickness 2D
Pile Spacing (in term of Pile Diameter)
Figure 12. Pile Spacing vs Group Efficiency for 5x5 Group Piles
1.0 Hx =100mm
y = 0.0847x1.0717
R² = 0.9969
0.9
Hx = 40mm
Pile Group Lateral Efficiency, h
0.8 y = 0.093x1.01
R² = 0.9945
Hx = 25mm
0.7 y = 0.0948x0.9975
R² = 0.9938
0.6 Hx = 12mm
y = 0.0963x0.9874
0.5
Hx = 9 mm
R² = 0.9932
0.4
y = 0.0966x0.9852
Hx = 6 mm R² = 0.9931
0.3
0.2 y = 0.0969x0.983
R² = 0.993
0.1
0.0
2D 3D 4D 5D 6D 7D 8D 9D 10 D 9 x 9 Piles
Pile Cap Thickness
Pile Spacing (in term of Pile Diameter)
Figure 13. Pile Spacing vs Group Efficiency for 9x9 Group Piles
Figure 14 shows the plot of group lateral efficiencies for all group piles. It shows that number
of piles in a group also influenced the group pile lateral efficiency. The greater the number of piles
in a group the smaller the lateral group efficiency.
F1-10
1.0
Pile Group Lateral Efficeincy, h
0.9
0.8
0.7
3x3 Group
0.6 y = 0.3093x0.5018
R² = 0.9944
0.5
5x5 Group
0.4 y = 0.1678x0.7655
R² = 0.9964
0.3
9x9 Group
0.2 y = 0.0936x1.0058
R² = 0.993
0.1
0.0
1D 2D 3D 4D 5D 6D 7D 8D 9D 10 D
Pile Spacing (in term of Pile Diameter D)
CONCLUSIONS
The 3D numerical finite element studies reveal that when base friction of the pile cap and the
passive pressure acting against the pile cap is neglected:
The effect of the pile cap thickness against group lateral efficiency is marginal and can be
safely neglected (Gouw and Hidayat, 2015).
For pile spacing less than 5 pile diameters, the larger the lateral movement of the pile, the
lower the pile lateral efficiency. For pile spacing of 5 to 6 pile diameters the lateral efficiency
does not change with pile movement. For pile spacing larger than 6 pile diameters, the lateral
efficiency increases with pile movement. However, the changes of the lateral efficiency is
marginal and can simply be neglected.
The center to center spacing of piles have significant effect on the group pile lateral efficiency.
The lateral group efficiency increases with the pile spacing up to a maximum group efficiency
value of one at pile spacing of around 10 pile diameters.
The number of piles in a group also influenced the group pile lateral efficiency. The greater
the number of piles in a group the smaller the lateral group efficiency.
Finally, it is to be noted that other than the lateral group efficiency, the moment induces due to
lateral load also must be checked so as not to exceed the allowable moment capacity of the piles.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author greatly deeply indebted to the Directorate General of Higher Education of
Indonesian Ministry of Education for funding the research. The help and support of Binus University
in obtaining the funding is greatly acknowledged. Great gratitude is directed to Mr. Irpan Hidayat
for his great help in arranging all the research administrative procedure.
F1-11
REFERENCES
Broms, B.B, “Lateral resistance of Piles in Cohesive Soils”, Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, ASCE, 1964a, Vol. 90, SM2.
Broms, B.B, “Lateral resistance of Piles in Cohesionless Soils”, Journal of Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, ASCE, 1964b, Vol. 90, SM3.
Brinkgreeve, R.B.J., Broere W, Waterman, D., “Plaxis 3D Manual”, 2014, Plaxis BV, Delft, Netherlands.
Kim, B.T and Kim, Y.S, “Back Analysis for Prediction and Behavior of Laterally Loaded Single Piles in
Sand”, Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1999 vol. 4. Available at ejge.com as
Paper 1999.9908,
http://www.ejge.com/1999/Ppr9908/Abs9908.htm
Gouw, T.L. and Hidayat, I., 2015, “Effects of Pile Cap Thickness and Magnitudes of Lateral Movement
on Laterally Loaded Group Piles”, Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2015 Vol. 27
Bundle 27, pp. 13179-13188, Available at ejge.com as Paper 2015.1320ma,
http://www.ejge.com/2015/Ppr2015.1320ma.pdf
Kumar, S., Alizadeh, M., and Lalvani, L, “Lateral Load-Deflection Response of Single Piles in Sand”,
Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2000. Available at ejge.com as Paper 2000.0018,
http://www.ejge.com/2000/Ppr0018/Abs0018.htm
Poulos, H.G. and Davis, E.H., “Pile Foundation Analysis & Design”, 1980, John Wiley & Sons, Canada.
Prakash, S., “Behavior of Pile Groups Subjected to Lateral Loads”, 1962, PhD thesis Univ. of Illinois,
Urbana, USA.
Reese, L.C. and Matlock, H., “Non Dimensional Solutions for laterally Loaded Piles with Soil Modulus
Assumed Proportional to Depth”, Proc. 8th Texas Conference on Soil Mech. and Found. Eng.,
1956, University of Texas, Austin.