INSTRUMENTATION AND FULL-SCALE LATERAL LOAD TEST-

ING OF A BATTER PILE GROUP AT INTERSTATE 10 TWIN SPAN

BRIDGE

Murad Abu-Farsakh
Louisiana Transportation Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Xinbao Yu, PhD
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA
Binay Pathak
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA

Abstract
A new Interstate 10 (I-10) Twin Span Bridge over Lake Pontchartrain was recently constructed to replace the
old bridge that was heavily damaged by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. A large portion of the bridge is supported
by batter pile group foundations. To evaluate the performance of batter pile foundations under lateral loading,
a selected pier (M19 eastbound) of the new bridge was instrumented and used to monitor the pier during a
unique full-scale lateral load testing. The M19 pier foundation consists of 24 precast prestressed concrete
(PPC) 33.53m (110ft) long batter piles, among which 8 piles were instrumented with microelectromechanical
sensor (MEMS) in-place inclinometers (IPI), and 12 piles were instrumented with strain gauges. The test was
conducted by pulling the M19 eastbound and westbound piers toward each other by using high-strength steel
tendons. A maximum of 8320kN (1870 kips) lateral load was applied in increments. A high-order polynomial
curve fitting method was applied to fit the measured rotation profiles from the IPIs. The fitted rotation curves
were then used to deduce the bending moment, shear force and soil reaction profiles. The calculated moments
from curve fitting were compared with the moments calculated from strain gauges, and the results showed
good agreements. The p-y curves of the soils at different depths were back-calculated, and the results showed
little evidence of group effect.

1. Introduction et al., 2009) performed full-scale lateral load tests to

Pile foundations are usually designed to support
highway bridges and other structures, primarily to
safely carry superstructure axial loads deep into the
ground. However, in many cases structures (such as
bridges, quays and harbours) are subjected to lateral
loads caused by high winds, wave action, water pres-
sure, earthquakes and ship impacts. Therefore, it be-
comes essential to understand the resistance behav-
iour of piles and pile groups to lateral loads. The
problem of laterally loaded single piles and pile
groups has been under investigation for more than
three decades. However, the non-linear behaviour of
soil and soil-pile interaction, group interaction effect
and uncertainties make analyses of lateral behaviour
of piles complex. So far, the full-scale lateral load
tests are considered to be the most effective method
for understanding the behaviour of laterally loaded
piles. Several researchers (e.g. Matlock et al., 1980;
Brown et al., 1987; Rollins et al., 2005; and McVay
study the lateral resistance of vertical single piles
and pile groups. Their findings indicated that piles in
group usually undergo larger displacement than that
of single piles for the same given load per pile. The
lateral resistance is expected to increase when using
batter piles instead of vertical piles because of the
effect of pile inclination. Part of the applied lateral
load will be transferred to axial loads on batter piles.
In addition, the bending moments caused by super-
structure vertical loads can partly negate the lateral
load effect (Zhang et al., 2001, Rajashree and
Sitharam, 2001).
Several methods, such as elastic method (Poulos,
1971), strain wedge model (Ashour et al., 2002) and
p-y curves (e.g. Matlock, 1970; Reese, 1974), have
been developed for the analysis of lateral loaded
piles. Among these methods, the p-y curves is con-
sidered the most satisfactory and popular method.
The most important task of interpreting the results of

505
lateral load tests is to back-calculate p-y curves. The
development of p-y curves from full-scale lateral
load tests depends on interpretation of instruments,
such as inclinometer or strain gauge.
Several interpretation approaches have been devel-
oped for back-calculating the p-y curves. Examples
include piecewise polynomial curve fitting (e.g.
Dunnavant, 1986), high order polynomial curve fit-
ting method (e.g. Wilson, 1998) and weighted resid-
ual method (e.g. Wilson, 1998). However, all these
methods are only applied to the bending moment da-
ta obtained from strain gauge measurements. For in-
terpretation data from the inclinometer, Brown et al.
(1994) applied the best-fit curve method using least
square technique. In addition, Liao and Lin (2003)
derived the deflection function of lateral loaded piles
based on the conservation of energy concepts. Nip
and Ng (2005) assumed a fourth order polynomial to
represent the shape of soil reaction profile and de-
rived the function of the deflection profile to the
match measured profile from inclinometers.
To study the lateral response of batter pile groups, a
unique full-scale lateral load test was conducted at
M19 eastbound pier (consisting of 24 batter piles) of
the Interstate 10 (I-10) Twin Span Bridge over Lake
Pontchartrain, Louisiana. This paper presents analy-
sis of the lateral load tests and the derivation of p-y
curves using the high-order polynomial curve fitting
method. Full details of instrumentation and the de-
sign of lateral load test can be found in Abu-Farsakh
et al. (2011).
2. Description of M19 Pier
An 8.64km (5.4-mile) long, new I-10 Twin Span
Bridge over Lake Pontchartrain between New Orle-
ans and Slidell, Louisiana, was recently built. It re-
placed the old bridge that was heavily damaged from
the storm surge and water waves associated with
Hurricane Katrina. The M19 pier is the second pier
south of the marine traffic underpass. It supports
60.96m (200ft) long steel girders on the north side
and 41.15m (135ft) long concrete girders on the
south side. The foundations of M19 piers consist of
24 precast prestressed concrete (PPC) 33.53m
(110ft) long battered piles (batter angle of 1:6) with
an outer dimension of 0.91m (36-inch) and a circular
void of 0.572m (22.5-inch). The average embedded
length of the piles is 26.52m (87ft). The size of M19
pile cap (or footing) is 13.41m (44ft) long, 12.92m
(42.5ft) wide and 2.13m (7ft) deep. The water depth
is 3.66m (12ft) below pile cap. Figure 1 presents the
M19 eastbound and westbound piers site.
506
3. Subsurface Soil Condition at M19 Pier
Comprehensive subsurface exploration was carried
out at the M19 pier as part of the wider subsurface
soil exploration along I-10 Twin Span Bridge. One
soil boring was performed close to the M19 pier
down to 60.8m (200ft), and Shelby tube samples
were extracted for laboratory testing, such as uncon-
solidated-undrained (UU) triaxial tests. Standard
penetration tests (SPT) were also conducted in sandy
layers. In addition, five cone penetration tests (CPT),
four at corners and one at centre of foundation, were
conducted at the site to define soil profile and to find
any variation of soil properties across the foundation
site.
West- East-
Bar
Figure 1: Photo of M19 eastbound and westbound piers site
The site exploration at M19 pier revealed the subsur-
face soil stratigraphy to consist of medium to stiff
silty clay, to clay soil with silt. It also found sand
pockets and seams down to 33.53m (110ft) depth
(undrained shear strength ranging from
26.8–193.4kPa (0.28–2.02tsf)) with a layer of medi-
um dense sand between 10.67m (35ft) and 14.33m
(47ft). (SPT N values range from 16 to 22.) Medium
dense to very dense sand with inter-layers of silty
sand, clayey sand, and silty clay soil was found be-
tween 33.53m (110ft) and 48.77m (160ft). (SPT N
values ranging from 3 for loose clayey sand to 86 for
very dense sand.)
4. Instrumentation and Lateral Load Test
The Louisiana Department of Transportation and
Development (LADOTD) decided to install a struc-
tural health monitoring system (SHM) at the M19
eastbound pier for short-term and long-term moni-
toring of the bridge. Its purpose was to validate the
analysis method used in the design of batter pile
group foundations, and to monitor the structural
health of the new I-10 Twin Span Bridge. The SHM
includes both substructure and superstructure in-
strumentations (see Abu-Farsakh et al. (2011) for
details). As part of substructure instrumentation of
the M19 pier, 8 selected piles were equipped with
microelectromechanical sensor (MEMS) in-place in-
clinometers (IPI), and 12 selected piles were
equipped with resistance-type sister bar strain gaug-
es. The locations of these piles are shown in
Figure 2.
ŶIPI, ƑSister Bars
Figure 2: Plan view of M19 pier footing with layout of sub-
structure instrumentation
An IPI consists of a string of tilt sensors connected
together and placed permanently in the pile through
a PVC casing. The IPIs measure the rotation in each
string in a direction perpendicular to the axis of the
string. Six MEM sensors were placed at elevations
of 1.52m (5ft), 4.57m (15ft), 7.62m (25ft), 10.67m
(35ft), 13.72m (45ft), and 19.81m (65ft) from the
bottom level of the pile cap. The lowest one was tied
to an anchor point at the bottom of PVC casing at
25.91m (85ft) from the bottom of the pile cap. Two
pairs of strain gauges were installed in each of the
12 piles at locations of –4.88m (–16ft) and –6.4m
(–21ft) from the pile top before pile cut-off to meas-
ure the strain distribution, and hence the bending
moments in the piles.
A unique lateral load test was designed and conduct-
ed at M19 eastbound pier to assess the validity of
current design methodology for batter pile group
foundations in Louisiana. Two hydraulic jacks were
used to provide lateral loads by pulling M19 east-
bound and westbound piers toward each other. High-
strength steel tendons were run through pile caps via
the pre-installed 10.16cm (4-inch) diameter PVC
pipes. Figure 3 presents a photo of lateral load test
setup at M19 pier. The designed sequence of this test
includes:
507
x preloading each tendon to 1334.5kN (300
kips);
x increasing the load incrementally to
2668.9kN/tendon (600 kips/tendon);
x unloading to 1334.5kN (300 kips);
x reloading incrementally to 4448.2kN/tendon
(1000 kips/tendon);
x unloading again to 1334.5kN/tendon (300
kips/tendon); and
x finally cutting the strands.
The estimated total time of testing was 6hr. The test
was unloaded earlier at a maximum applied load of
8320kN (1870 kips) when the stroke in one 600-ton
jack reached its maximum.
Figure 3: Setup of lateral load test at M19 pier
Survey station prisms were installed at M19 east-
bound and westbound, M17 eastbound, and M20
eastbound to monitor the movements of footings and
bent caps of the M19 piers using automated laser
survey system. Direct measurements from IPIs give
inclinations or rotation angles of the installed sen-
sors. For convenient visualisation of the pile deflec-
tions, the IPI measurements were converted to lat-
eral deflection profiles using trigonometry. Figure 4
presents the deflection profiles for selected piles 11
and 8.
The charts indicate that most of the lateral defor-
mation occurred within the upper 15.2m (50ft) of
the piles. The maximum lateral deformation meas-
ure at 1.52m (5ft) from the bottom level of the pile
cap ranged from 1.5cm (0.59 inch) to 1.7cm (0.67
inch). This is in agreement with the measured lat-
eral deformations of the pile cap using the auto-
mated laser survey, which are 1.68cm (0.66 inch)
and 1.47cm (0.58 inch) for north-west and south-
west corners of the M19 eastbound pier, respec-
tively.
 (a) unit length; and EI is the flexural stiffness of the
Displacement (cm)
pile.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
0

2
Several methods have been proposed to interpret the
inclinometer data from lateral load tests of piles to
4
deduce the bending moment, shear force and soil re-
action profiles (e.g. Brown et al., 1994; Nip and Ng,
Depth below pile cap (m)

8
2005). In this study, the back-analysis method for
1st row / Pile 11
p-y curves, which assumes the shape of soil reaction
10
Load profile with depth (Pz) follows a fourth order poly-
12
2535 kN nomial, was used as given in Equation 2:
3425 kN
14 4315 kN ܲ௭ ൌ ܽ‫ ݖ‬൅ ܾ‫ ݖ‬ଶ ൅ ܿ‫ ݖ‬ଷ ൅ ݀‫ ݖ‬ସ (2)
5250 kN
16 7030 kN Integrating Equation 2 three times, the rotation pro-
7760 kN
18 8320 kN
file can be obtained as a seventh order polynomial
function, as follows:
20
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
ߠ௭ ൌ ܽ ൅ ܾ‫ ݖ‬൅ ܿ‫ ݖ‬ଶ ൅ ݀‫ ݖ‬ସ ൅ ݁‫ ݖ‬ହ ൅ ݂‫ ଺ ݖ‬൅  ݃‫( ଻ ݖ‬3)
(b) Equation 3 was used in this study to fit the measured
Displacement (cm)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
rotation profiles obtained from IPIs using least re-
0 sidual error regression analysis. Since the pile cap is
2
2.13m (7ft) thick reinforced concrete, the pile-cap
connection was considered here as a fixed end with
4
rotation (ߠ௭ୀ଴ ൌ Ͳ). In addition, the IPI measure-
ments showed that the rotations at 19.81m (65ft) are
Depth below pile cap (m)

8
minimal and therefore were treated as 0 (ߠ௭ୀ଺ହ ൌ Ͳ).
4th row / Pile 8
An example of curve fitting of rotation for pile 11 at
10
Load 7760kN (1745 kips) load is shown in Figure 5. The
12
2535 kN charts also compare the calculated lateral defections
3425 kN
14 4315 kN derived from fitted rotation curve (by integrating
5250 kN Equation 3) with the measured deflections. Figure 5
7030 kN
16
7760 kN
demonstrated that the seventh order polynomial fit-
18 8320 kN ted function was able to capture the measured rota-
tion profile. Once the rotation profile is fitted into a
20
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 function, the moment, shear force and soil reaction
profiles can be deduced by differentiating the rota-
Figure 4: Deflection profile for pile 11 and 8 at different load tion in Equation 1 and multiplying it by the flexural
increments
stiffness of the PPC pile (EI). The elastic modulus
5. Interpretation of Inclinometer Data (E) was assumed to be a constant (E = 35 094MPa
(5.09 × 106psi)) since the pile deformation was with-
If piles are considered as flexible elastic beams, and in the elastic range. The E value was estimated here
beam on elastic foundation theory is used, the lateral from the results of 28 days of compression strength
response of the pile can be calculated by solving the tests on cylindrical specimens. The p-y curves at dif-
differential equations of deflection curve (or rota- ferent depths can also be developed from the calcu-
tion), as follow: lated soil reactions and corresponding deflections
obtained at different load increments.
ௗమ௬ ௗఏ
‫ ܯ‬ൌ ‫ܫܧ‬ ൌ ‫ܫܧ‬ (1a)
ௗ௭ మ ௗ௭
6. Results and Analyses
ௗయ௬ ௗమఏ
ܸ ൌ ‫ܫܧ‬ ൌ ‫ܫܧ‬ (1b)
ௗ௭ య ௗమ௭
6.1 Bending moment profile
ௗర௬ ௗయఏ The profiles of bending moment at different loads
ܲ ൌ ‫ܫܧ‬ ൌ ‫ܫܧ‬ (1c)
ௗ௭ ర ௗయ௭
were calculated using Equation 1a. The calculated
where y is the lateral deflection; z is the depth below moment profiles for selected piles 8 and 11 are
the pile top; ș is the rotation; M is the bending mo- shown in Figure 6, where the zero depth in the graph
ment; V is the shear force; P is the soil reaction per corresponds to the pile-cap head.

508
 (a) (a)
Rotation (radian) Moment (kN-m)
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000
0 0

2 2
1st row / pile 11
4 4

6
6

Depth below pile cap (m)

Depth below pile cap (m)

8
8 1st row/ Pile 11
10
10

12
12

14
14

16
16
18
18
20
20

(b)
Displacement (cm)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 (b)
0
Moment (kN-m)
2 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000
0
4
2
6
4
Depth below pile cap (m)

8 1st row / pile 11

6

Depth below pile cap (m)

10 Load 7760 kN
8 4th row/ Pile 8
measured displacement
calculated displacement
12 10 Load
2535 kN
14 12 5250 kN
8320 kN
16 14

18 16

18
20

20
.
Figure 5: (a) Curve fitting of measured rotation profile; and
(b) calculated deflection profile Figure 6: Bending moment (kN-m) profiles for each row in pile
group: (a) pile 11/1st row; and (b) pile 8/4th row
The maximum positive bending moments occurred
at the pile-cap heads for all piles and all load levels. ୉୍ሺக౪ ିகౙ ሻ
The magnitude of the moment rose with the increase ‫ܯ‬ൌ (4)
௛
of load increments from 2535kN (570 kips) to
8320kN (1870 kips). The moments developed at the where İt is tensile strain (+); İc is compressive strain
ground level (3.66m (12ft) from the pile top) is (–); and h is the horizontal distance between gauges
about 50–55% lower than that at the pile top. A spaced at equal, but opposite, distances from the
review of bending moment curves shows that the neutral axis. According to Rollins et al. (1998), this
depth to the first zero moment increases as the load approach cancels out any contribution due to axial
increases. The depth of zero moment for row 1 is strain, leaving only strains due to bending, and
less than that for row 4. Such trend is also seen for hence makes it possible to accurately compute the
the depth to maximum negative moment. This find- bending moment. Two moment locations can be
ing is consistent with previous study on the analysis calculated from the instrumented strain gauges –
of vertical pile groups loaded laterally (McVay et SG1 at 3.35m (11ft) from pile top and SG2 at
al., 1998). Measurements from strain gauges were 1.83m (6ft) lower than SG1. The measured mo-
also used to calculate the bending moment at certain ments from strain gauges at SG1 location are com-
locations along the pile length, which can be used to pared with the calculated moments from IPI for pile
validate the IPI measurements. The moment was 7, as depicted in Figure 7, which shows good
calculated from the strain gauges using the following agreement. The moments for the other piles also
equation (Rollins et al., 1998): show similar trend.

509
 10000
(a)
30
3rd row / Pile 7
Moment at 3.35m. below pile top 28 Pile Position

8000 26 1 st row / pile 11

2 nd row / pile 6
24
3 rd row / pile 7
22 4 th row / pile 8

Soil resistance force (kN/m)

6000 20
Load (KN)

18

16

14
4000
12

10

8
2000 Moment
Inclinomter Moment 6
Strain gague Moment
4

2
0
100 200 300 400 500 600 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Moment (KN-m) Displacement (cm)
(b)
Figure 7: Comparison between measured and calculated 30
moments
28
Pile Position
26 1st row / pile 11
6.2 Back-calculated p-y curves 2nd row / pile 6
24
The soil reaction profile corresponding to each load 22
3rd row / pile 7
4th row / pile 8
increment can be determined by differentiating the
Soil resistance force (kN/m)

20
rotation function (Equation 3) three times. The p-y 18
curves at selected depths can then be deduced from 16
the soil reaction profiles obtained at different load 14
levels. The comparison of p-y curves for different 12
piles (6, 7, 8 and 11) are presented in Figure 8 for 10

depths 3.05m (10ft) and 6.1m (20 ft) below ground 8

level, which can be used to analyse the pile group 6

response and their interaction. 4

The charts indicate that the leading pile 11 (row 1) 0

has the larger soil reaction compared to the other 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Displacement (cm)
1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

rows. The CPT soundings show that the soil profile
close to pile 11 has higher undrained shear strength
as compared to the soil close to other pile locations.
This could explain why pile 11 has less lateral de-
flection and higher soil resistance. Other than that,
the p-y curves for all piles are close. Taking into
consideration the pile spacing at loading direction,
which is 4.3D (D is the pile width), one can con-
clude that the group effect is negligible. Further
study is needed to verify this statement. The figures
also show that the soil becomes stiffer with depth,
and therefore has larger soil reaction.
7. Conclusions
This paper presents the analysis of lateral load tests
that was conducted at a selected pier of I-10 Twin
Span Bridge over Lake Pontchartrain to evaluate the
lateral response of batter group pile foundation. IPI
measured rotations with depth were fitted into a sev-
enth order polynomial function using the least resid-
ual error regression analysis.
Figure 8: Comparison of p-y curves of each row pile: (a) 3.05
m below GL; and (b) 6.1 m below GL
The bending moment and soil reaction profiles were
then derived using elastic beam theory. The p-y
curves at different depths were also generated from
the derived soil reaction profiles at different load in-
crements. The calculated moments deduced from
curve fitting were compared with the moments cal-
culated from measurements of strain gauge, and the
results showed good agreements between them.
Analysis of p-y curves for piles at different row loca-
tions showed no evidence of group effect.
Acknowledgments
This research project is funded by the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA), the Louisiana
Department of Transportation and Development
(State Project No. 736-99-1437), and the Louisiana
Transportation Research Center (LTRC Project No.

510
07-1ST). The authors greatly appreciated the help eral load. J. Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
and support provided by Da Ha and Allen Marr from Engrg. 127: 604–612.
Geocomp Corporation, and Zhongjie Zhang and Reese LC, Cox WR and Koop FD. (1974). Analysis
Mark Morvant from LTRC. of laterally loaded piles in sand. Proc. Offshore
Technology Conference, Houston, USA.
References
Rollins KM, Lane JD and Gerber TM. (2005).
Abu-Farsakh M, Yoon S, Ha D, Marr W, Yu X and Measured and computed lateral response of a pile
Zhang Z. (2011). Development of a substructure group in sand. J. of Geotechnical and Geoenv.
instrumentation system for monitoring a smart Engrg. 121: 103–114.
pier at the new I-10 Twin Span Bridge. ASTM Rollins MK, Peterson TK and Weaver JT. (1998).
Geotechnical Testing Journal 34: 332–343. Lateral load behavior of full scale pile group in
Ashour M, Norris G and Pilling P. (2002). Strain clay. J. of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
wedge model capability of analyzing behavior of Engineering 124: 468–478.
lateral loaded isolated piles, drilled shafts, and pile Wilson D. (1998). Soil-Pile –Superstructure interac-
groups. J. of Bridge Engrg. 7: 245–254. tion in liquefying sand and soft clay. Ph.D. Dis-
Brown DA, Hidden SA and Zhang S. (1994). De- sertation, University of California at Davis.
termination of p-y curves using inclinometer data. Zhang LM, McVAy MC, Han SJ, Lai PW and
Geotechnical Testing Journal 17: 150–158. Gardner R. (2001). Effects of dead loads on the
Brown DA, Reese LC and O’Neill WM. (1987). lateral response of battered pile groups. Canadian
Cyclic lateral loading of a large-scale pile group. Geotech J. 39: 561–575.
J. of Geotechnical and Geoenv. Engrg. 114:
1261–1276.
Dunnavant TW. (1986). Experimental and analytical
investigation of the behavior of single piles in
overconsolidated clay subjected to cyclic lateral
loads. Ph.D Dissertation, University of Houston,
USA.
Liao CJ and SS Lin. (2003). An analytical model for
deflection of laterally loaded piles. J. Marine Sci-
ence and Technology 11: 149–154.
Matlock H. (1970). Correlations for design of later-
ally loaded piles in soft clay. Offshore Technolo-
gy Conference, Houston, USA.
Matlock H, Ingram WB, Kelley AE and Bogard D.
(1980). Field tests of the lateral load behavior of
pile groups in soft clay. Proc. Offshore Technolo-
gy Conference, Houston, USA.
McVay M, Zhang L, Molnit T and Lai P. (1998).
Centrifuge testing of large laterally loaded pile
groups in sands. J. of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering 124: 1016–1026.
McVay MC, Wasman SJ, Consolazio GR, Bullock
PJ, Cowan DG and Bollmann HT. (2009). Dy-
namic soil–structure interaction of bridge sub-
structure subject to vessel impact. Journal of
Bridge Engrg. 14: 7–16.
Nip DCN and Ng CWW. (2005). Back analysis of
laterally bored piles. Geotechnical Engrg. 158:
63–73.
Poulos HG. (1971). Behavior of laterally loaded piles:
II-Pile groups. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div. 97: 733–
751.
Rajashree SS and Sitharam TG. (2001). Nonlinear
finite-element modeling of batter piles under lat-

511