Accepted Manuscript

Investigation of the influence of vertical loads on the lateral response of pile

foundations in sands and clays

Lassaad Hazzar, Mahmoud N. Hussien, Mourad Karray

PII: S1674-7755(16)30043-9
DOI: 10.1016/j.jrmge.2016.09.002
Reference: JRMGE 274

To appear in: Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering

Received Date: 5 July 2016

Revised Date: 1 September 2016
Accepted Date: 4 September 2016

Please cite this article as: Hazzar L, Hussien MN, Karray M, Investigation of the influence of vertical
loads on the lateral response of pile foundations in sands and clays, Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering (2016), doi: 10.1016/j.jrmge.2016.09.002.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Investigation of the influence of vertical loads on the lateral

2 response of pile foundations in sands and clays
3
4 Lassaad Hazzara,*, Mahmoud N. Hussiena, b, Mourad Karraya
5
a
6 Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Sherbrooke University, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada

PT
b
7 Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt
8
9

RI
10
*
11 Corresponding author. Tel: + 1 819 821-8000 (63922)
12 E-mail adresses: Lassaed.Hazzar@USherbrooke.ca (L. Hazzar),
13 Mahmoud.Nasser.Ahmed@USherbrooke.ca (M.N. Hussien),

SC
14 Mourad.Karray.Benhassen@USherbrooke.ca (M. Karray).
15
16

U
17
18 Abstract
AN
19 Although the load applied to pile foundations is usually a combination of vertical and lateral components,
20 there have been few investigations on the behavior of piles subjected to combined loadings. Those few studies
21 led to inconsistent results with regard to the effects of vertical loads on the lateral response of piles. A series
M

22 of three-dimensional finite differences analyses is conducted to evaluate the influence of vertical loads on the
23 lateral performance of pile foundations. Three idealized sandy and clayey soil profiles are considered: a
D

24 homogeneous soil layer, a layer with modulus proportional to depth, and a two-layered stratum. The pile
25 material is modelled as linearly elastic, while the soil is idealized using the Mohr-Coulomb constitutive model
TE

26 with a non-associated flow rule. In order to confirm the findings of this study, soils in some cases are further
27 modelled using more sophisticated models (i.e., CYsoil for sandy soils and MCC for clayey soils). Numerical
EP

28 results showed that the lateral resistance of the piles does not appear to vary considerably with the vertical
29 load in sandy soil especially at the loosest state. However, the presence of a vertical load on a pile embedded
30 in homogeneous or inhomogeneous clay is detrimental to its lateral capacity, and it is unconservative to
C

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

32 current results indicate that the effect of vertical loads on the lateral response of piles embedded in multi-
33 layered stratum depends on the characteristics of soil not only surrounding the piles but also those located
34 beneath their tips.
35

36 Keywords: Pile foundations, Vertical loads, Lateral loads, Finite differences, Mohr circle.
37

38

39

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

40 1. Introduction

41 Pile foundations are extensively used in many civil structures to support vertical and lateral loads.
42 In conventional design methods, the vertical and lateral responses of piles are often evaluated
43 separately neglecting their possible interaction. This would lead to an erroneous design, as pile

PT
44 foundations for several types of structures are often subjected to simultaneous vertical and lateral
45 loading. The separate consideration of the vertical and lateral loading therefore cannot be expected to

RI
46 account properly for the pile behavior (Georgiadis and Saflekou, 1990; Zhang et al., 2002; Hussien et al.,
47 2014a, 2014b).

SC
48 The behavior of pile foundations under either vertical or lateral loads has been investigated for
49 more than a century through full-scale tests (e.g., Brown et al., 1987, 1988; Rollins et al., 1998,
50 2005), centrifuge model tests (e.g., McVay et al., 1995, 1998; Tobita et al., 2004), and analytical

U
51 (e.g., Matlock and Reese, 1960; Randolph and Wroth, 1978; Zhu and Chang, 2002) as well as numerical
AN
52 solutions (e.g., Ottaviani, 1975; Hussien et al., 2010, 2012; Hazzar et al., 2013) among others. The
53 procedures used for modelling soil range from rigorous soil continuum discretization such as finite
54 element (FE) or finite differences (FD) formulation to simplified interaction models such as the
M

55 subgrade reaction approach. In the conventional subgrade reaction approach, soil is modelled by
56 spring elements attached to the pile at different depths. These springs generally have nonlinear load-
D

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

58 respectively. These two types of springs are generally uncoupled and therefore soil reactions along
59 the corresponding degrees of freedom are also uncoupled. In other words, the influence of load
60 acting in one direction on the characteristics of the spring in the other direction is neglected (Hussien
EP

61 et al., 2014a). Anagnostopoulos and Georgiadis (1993) have reported through model tests supported
62 by two-dimensional (2D) FE analysis that the modified status of soil stresses and local plastic
C

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

64 for in general by the subgrade reaction and elastic half space methods of analysis. Therefore, they
65 suggested using a nonlinear three-dimensional (3D) FE or FD technique for analyzing the problem.
66 Achmus and Thieken (2010) used the 3D FE to investigate the behavior of piles in non-cohesive soil
67 under combined lateral and vertical loading, and they reported that the combined loading on piles
68 induces interaction effects due to simultaneous mobilization of passive earth pressure due to lateral
69 loads and pile skin friction due to vertical loads. Karthigeyan et al. (2006 and 2007) showed through
70 a series of 3D FE analyses on piles that the presence of vertical loads increases the lateral load

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

71 capacity of piles in sandy soils and decreases it in clayey soil. Hussien et al. (2012, 2014a and
72 2014b), using simplified soil-pile interaction FE models, reported a little increase in the lateral
73 capacity of free-head piles installed in sandy soil due to the presence of vertical loads and attributed
74 this increase to the increase in the confining pressures in the sand deposit surrounding the upper part
75 of the pile. In fact, the scopes of the previous attempts examining this problem using 3D FE models

PT
76 have been limited to the behavior of piles installed in homogeneous sandy or clayey soils. Little
77 work has been devoted to the behavior of piles subjected to combined effects of vertical and lateral

RI
78 loads in inhomogeneous and/or layered soils which is often encountered in geotechnical projects.
79 Moreover, the mechanisms regarding the influence of vertical loads on the lateral response of pile

SC
80 foundations in inhomogeneous and/or layered soils may be quite different from those of piles in
81 ideal homogeneous situations.

U
82 In view of the above mentioned issues, this paper presents and discusses the results of a series of
83 3D FD analyses carried out using FLAC3D (Itasca, 2009) in order to recapitulate and to evaluate the
AN
84 influences of vertical loads on the lateral response as well as internal forces of piles installed in four
85 idealized sandy and clayey soil profiles: a homogeneous sandy layer; a clayey layer with constant
M

86 undrained shear strength; a clayey layer with undrained shear strength proportional to depth, and a
87 two-layered stratum. Numerical models are validated and then analyses were carried out to
D

88 investigate the influences of vertical loads on the lateral capacity and bending moment of piles as
89 affected by typical soil characteristics such as relative density of sandy soil and undrained shear
TE

90 strength as well as over-consolidation ratio (OCR) of clayey soils. Combined load analyses were
91 performed for vertical loads equal to 25 %, 50 %, 75 %, and 100 % of the ultimate vertical load
EP

92 capacity of the pile, Vult.

93
C

94 2. Finite differences modeling and parameters identification

AC

95 2.1. Finite differences

96 The 3D FD program FLAC3D (Itasca, 2009) was employed to study the behavior of piles under
97 lateral and vertical loading. Full 3D geometric models were used to represent the coupled soil-pile
98 system. Taking advantage of symmetry, only half of the actual model was built, thus significantly
99 reducing the computational effort. Fig. 1 shows the general layout and meshing of the FD half model
100 used for the analysis of the soil-pile system. A floating pile with a diameter, B was embedded in the

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

101 soil to a depth of L while the total thickness of the soil stratum was selected at L+6B. The soil-pile
102 system was meshed with 8-node brick elements, and the soil elements are fairly small adjacent to the
103 pile and gradually increase in size as they move away from it. The soil element size was kept
104 uniform at 0.5 m in the vertical direction. The total mesh size was extended to a horizontal distance
105 of 16B from the center of the pile. This distance was decided after performing a number of initial

PT
106 trial analyses with several horizontal distances until the displacements and stresses of the pile did not
107 change significantly with further increasing of the distance. All displacements were restrained at the

RI
108 bottom of the meshes while those at the vertical “external faces” were fully fixed in the x- and y-
109 directions. The symmetry face (indicated in red in Fig. 1) were fixed against displacement normal to

SC
110 the symmetry plane, but were free to move on the surface of the plane.
111

U
112 2.2. Soil model
AN
113 The Mohr-Coulomb model, extensively used in geotechnical engineering practice, was adopted in
114 this study to simulate the nonlinear behavior of soil. In FLAC3D, six parameters are required to
115 effectively define the soil behavior. These parameters are: the elastic bulk modulus, K; the elastic
M

116 shear modulus, G; the mass density, ρ; the friction angle, φ; dilatancy angle, ψ; and the cohesion, c.
117
D

118 2.3. Pile model

TE

119 The pile is modelled as linear-elastic material. Three parameters are required to define the pile
120 material behavior. These parameters are: the elastic bulk modulus, Kp; the elastic shear modulus, Gp;
EP

121 and the mass density, ρp.

122
C

123 2.4. Soil-pile interface model

AC

124 The constitutive model of the soil-pile interface is defined in FLAC3D by a linear Coulomb shear-
125 strength criterion that limits the shear force acting at an interface node. The shear-strength criterion
126 is given by (Itasca, 2009):

127 Fs max = ci A + tan φi ( Fn − pA )

(1)

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

128 Where Fsmax is the limiting shear force at the soil-pile interface, Fn is the normal force, ci is the
129 cohesion along the interface, φi is the friction angle of the interface surface, p is the pore pressure
130 (interpolated from the target face), and A is the area associated with an interface node. The shear
131 strength was defined with zero cohesive strength and 2/3 of the friction angle for sandy soils. In the
132 case of clayey soils, the interfaces were assumed to have a zero friction angle and the same cohesive

PT
133 strength of the surrounding soil. Separation would cause a significant increase in displacements and
134 therefore the interface elements are allowed to separate if tension develops across the interface and

RI
135 exceeds the tension limit of the interface. Once gap is formed between the soil-pile interfaces, the
136 shear and normal forces are automatically set to zero (Itasca, 2009). The normal and shear forces at

SC
137 the interface nodes are determined by:

138 Fn( t +∆t ) = k n u n A + σ n A (2)

U
AN
139 Fsi( t +∆t ) = Fsi(t ) + ks ∆ u (sit + 0.5 ∆t ) A + σ si A (3)

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

141 stiffness, respectively, ∆usi is the incremental relative shear displacement vector, un is the absolute
142 normal penetration of the interface node into the target face, σn is the additional normal stress added
D

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

144 initialization (Itasca, 2009).

145 In the current study involving nonlinear analysis; high soil-pile interface stiffness is assigned to
146 minimize the contribution of soil-pile interface elements to the accumulated pile displacements.
EP

147 According to the results of trial numerical analyses conducted to identify an appropriate stiffness
148 value, a value of 105 kPa/m for both kn and ks was found to be sufficient to ensure that no additional
C

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

150 interface. The use of such considerably higher values is tempting as it could be considered as more
151 appropriate, but in that case the solution convergence would be very slow. In that way, the interface
152 elements behave practically as a slider with a rigid/plastic behavior.
153

154 2.5. Analysis scheme

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

155 The model is brought to an equilibrium stress-state under gravitational loading before the
156 installation of the pile. In the next stage of analysis, the model is brought into equilibrium after the
157 installation of the pile. The installation is modeled by changing the properties of the pile zones from
158 the properties representing the soil material to those representing the pile material. The pile is then
159 loaded vertically. The ultimate vertical capacity (Vult) of the pile is evaluated by applying a vertical

PT
160 velocity at the pile head while the pile load and settlement are monitored. According to CGS (2013),
161 the value of Vult is defined as the vertical load corresponding to the point with maximum curvature

RI
162 on the vertical load-vertical displacement curve. After the pile is loaded vertically, the pile top is
163 then displaced laterally for a deflection of 0.1B, a value that was fixed in all studied cases to

SC
164 minimize the number of parameters involved. The vertical load is kept constant while applying the
165 lateral displacement. It is fair to mention that the pile is assumed to be in a stress-free state at the

U
166 beginning of the analysis, and thus the effect of the pile installation is ignored in the analysis.
167
AN
168 3. Validation of the FD model
M

169 Before describing the numerical results on the influence of vertical loads on the lateral response of
170 pile foundations, the applicability of the adopted model was verified by predicting the pile response
D

171 in three published pile loading tests. The first case corresponds to a full scale pile loading test under
172 pure lateral load; the second case corresponds to a full scale test on a pile installed in sandy soil and
TE

173 subjected to the combined action of vertical and lateral loads; and the third case corresponds to a
174 laboratory test on a model pile embedded in clay under combined vertical and lateral loadings.
EP

175 Details of these three cases will be discussed next.

176
C

177 3.1. Case study 1

AC

178 Comodromos (2003) has reported the response of a 52 m long and 1.0 m diameter bored pile
179 under pure lateral loads installed at a bridge site in Greece. The subsoil at the site consists of a thick
180 soft silty clay layer extending to a depth of 36.0 m, overlying a medium stiff clay layer of 12.0 m
181 thickness and followed by a very dense sandy gravel layer. Geotechnical properties of soil layers in
182 the test site are summarized in Table 1. In the current analysis, the behavior of the test pile is
183 analyzed by FLAC3D as well as the p-y method according to Matlock (1970). Properties of various
184 soil layers and the pile adopted in the 3D FD analyses are identical to those reported by

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

185 Comodromos (2003). The same sequence of load application used in the field test was followed in
186 the current FD analysis. The lateral load-lateral deflection curve obtained using the current FD
187 analysis is compared to both the measured and the estimated p-y responses in Fig. 2a. The present
188 numerical results overestimate the lateral capacity of the pile at all deflection levels compared to the
189 p-y results, and the difference reaches to 15 % at the maximum lateral deflection of 100 mm. In spite

PT
190 of this, the 3D numerical result is fully consistent with the experimental result reported by
191 Comodromos (2003).

RI
192

193 3.2. Case study 2

SC
194 The validity of the FD model to the analysis of pile in sandy soil and subjected to both vertical and
195 lateral loads was verified by back predicting the pile response from a test data reported by Karasev et

U
196 al. (1977). The length and diameter of the test pile were 3.0 m and 0.6 m, respectively. The pile was
AN
197 embedded in a soil strata consisting of very stiff sandy loam with shear strength parameters of c = 18
198 kPa and φ = 18°. The soil shear modulus considered by Karasev et al. (1977) (9295 kPa) was used in
the current analysis. The Poisson’s ratio of the soil was assumed of 0.35. The field tests were
M

199

200 conducted by loading the pile in the vertical direction and then the lateral loads were applied while
201 the vertical load was kept constant. The sequence of the load application used in the current FD
D

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

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

204
EP

205 3.3. Case study 3

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

207 and lateral loads was verified by back predicting the pile response from a test data reported by
Anagnostopoulos and Georgiadis (1993). This case study pertains to laboratory model tests on
AC

208

209 aluminium closed-ended piles of 19 mm outside diameter and 1.5 mm wall thickness, jacked 500
210 mm into a prepared soft clay bed (cu = 28 kPa). The laboratory test was performed on a single pile
211 under both vertical and lateral loads applied to the pile head at ground elevation through dead
212 weights. The combined vertical and lateral loads were applied in two stages, in the first stage a
213 vertical load of 160 N was applied and in the second stage the lateral load of 130 N was applied
214 incrementally while the vertical load was kept constant. In the current analysis, the Young’s modulus

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

215 (Es) of the soil was selected at 7500 kPa following the empirical relation Es ≈ 250-400×cu, (Poulos
216 and Davis, 1980). The Poisson’s ratio of the clayey soil was selected at 0.49 assuming an undrained
217 response during the load test. The comparison between the test data and the predicted results of piles
218 under pure vertical load and combined vertical and lateral loads are shown in Fig. 2c and 2d. The FD
219 prediction in both the cases matched well with the test data.

PT
220 Based on the comparative results shown in Fig. 2, it could be concluded that the numerical scheme
221 adopted in the present investigation is capable of modeling the soil-pile interaction under vertical,

RI
222 lateral, and a combination of vertical and lateral loads.
223

SC
224 4. Parametric studies

225 FLAC3D was employed to study the behavior of piles under combined vertical and lateral loading
226

U
in different soil profiles. Four idealized sandy and clayey soil profiles were considered: a
AN
227 homogeneous sandy layer, a clayey layer with constant shear strength, a clayey layer with shear
228 strength proportional to depth, and a two-layered medium. Due to the abundant number of
M

229 parameters involved, this study focuses on a selected number of parameters. These parameters
230 include relative density of sandy soil, shear strength and shear stiffness as well as over-consolidated
D

231 ratio (OCR) of clayey soil. A floating concrete pile, conformed to a grade M25, with a diameter, B of
232 1.0 m was embedded in the soil to a depth, L of 10.0 m while the total thickness of the soil stratum
TE

233 was selected at 16.0 m. The elastic modulus (Ep) and Possion’s ratio (υp) of the pile were set to be
234 25.00 GPa and 0.15, respectively. Soil parameters considered in the analyses are summarized in
EP

235 Tables 2 and 3 for sandy and clayey soils, respectively. For each sand density, the adopted friction
236 angle and the corresponding relative density (Dr) were chosen referring to Skempton (1986) and
237 A.P.I. (1993). Elastic shear modulus (G), was taken as 300cu; within the typical range for a clay
C

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

239 direction. Stresses within the model were initialized with an in situ earth pressure coefficient, K0 = 1.
240 The response of piles to pure lateral loads was first evaluated for each case considered. Then, the
241 response of piles to combined vertical and lateral loads is examined for different values of vertical
242 loads ranging from 25 to 100 % of Vult. The combined loads are applied in two stages. In the first
243 stage, vertical loads were applied and then in the second stage, lateral loads were applied while the
244 vertical load was kept constant. The numerical results under pure lateral loads and combined lateral

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

245 and vertical loads on piles are presented and discussed separately for sandy layer, clayey layer, and
246 two-layered stratums.
247 In order to confirm the finding of this study, soils in some cases (dense sand and medium clay) is
248 further modelled using more sophisticated models: namely a friction hardening/softening elasto-
249 plastic constitutive model (CYsoil) for sandy soils and the modified Cam-Clay model (MCC) for

PT
250 clayey soils. Details of these soil models are given next:
251 The CYsoil model is characterized by a frictional Mohr-Coulomb shear envelope (zero cohesion)

RI
252 and an elliptic volumetric cap in the (p´, q) plane. The input parameters are: elastic tangent shear
253 modulus, Geref, at reference effective pressure pref (100 kPa), failure ratio, Rf, which is a constant and

SC
254 smaller than 1 (0.9 in most cases), ultimate friction angle, φf, and calibration factor, β. The material
255 properties adopted in the analyses for dense sand case are presented in Table 4.

U
256 The Modified Cam-Clay model (MCC) (Roscoe and Burland, 1968) was adopted as quite
257 appropriate, particularly for materials whose behavior is influenced by volume variation. In fact, the
AN
258 MCC may be used to represent materials when the influence of volume change on bulk property and
259 resistance up to failure should be taken into consideration. In this study, The MCC is used to model
M

260 the case of medium clay (cu = 39 kPa). Eight material parameters were required to specify the soil
261 model, including either the elastic bulk modulus, K, or elastic shear modulus, G, the mass density, ρ,
D

262 the Poisson’s ratio, υ, the slope of the normal consolidation line, λ, the slope of the elastic swelling
line, κ, the frictional constant, M, the pressure of reference, p1, and the specific volume at pressure of
TE

263

264 reference, p1, on the normal consolidation line, υλ. The material properties adopted in the analyses
265 for medium clay case are presented in Table 4.
EP

266

267 5. Results and discussions

C

268 5.1. Sandy soils

AC

269 The ultimate vertical capacities of piles installed in sandy soils with different states of density are
270 evaluated by applying vertical velocities at the piles heads and monitoring the piles loads variation
271 with their settlements as plotted in Fig. 3. The value of Vult is selected as the vertical load
272 corresponding to the point with maximum curvature on the vertical load-vertical displacement curve
273 as defined by CGS (2013). Fig. 3 indicates that the ultimate bearing capacity of the pile is

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

274 approximately 162 kN, 180 kN, 200 kN, and 246 kN for very loose, loose, dense, and very dense
275 sand, respectively.
276 Figs. 4a-d show the influence of a vertical load of Vult on the lateral response of piles installed in
277 sandy soils. Each graph in Fig. 4 corresponds to a different state of sand density including very
278 loose, loose, dense, and very dense. It is appeared from Fig. 4 that the lateral capacity of the pile is

PT
279 slightly affected by the presence of the vertical load in all states of density considered. At lateral
280 deflection of 0.1B (100 mm), the presence of a vertical load of Vult is slightly increase the lateral

RI
281 capacities of piles by 0.1 %, 3.7 %, 4.6 % and 4.8 % in very loose, loose, dense, and very dense
282 sand, respectively. This result is full consistent with those reported earlier by Hussien et al. (2012

SC
283 and 2014b).
284 The influence of Vult on the lateral response of a pile installed in dense sand layer (Fig. 4c) is

U
285 further investigated using the CYsoil model and the results are shown in Fig. 5. Although there are
286 some differences in the initial slopes of the lateral load-deflection curves as well as the values of the
AN
287 pile ultimate capacities between Fig. 4c and Fig. 5, both figures indicate a slight increase in the pile
288 lateral capacity due to the presence of vertical loads.
M

289 An attempt to identify the mechanism of the little increase in the lateral capacities of piles
290 installed in sandy soil due to the vertical load application was made by plotting the stress state (Mohr
D

291 circle) of a soil element adjacent to the pile and at a depth of 3 m. The major (σ1) and the minor (σ3)
292 principal stresses corresponding to the stress state of the soil element after 0.1B lateral deflection of
TE

293 a pile installed in dense sand are plotted in Fig. 6a for both the cases with (V = Vult) and without (V =
294 0) vertical loads. As expected, Fig. 6a shows that the inclusion of a vertical load increases the major
EP

295 principle stress relative to that corresponds to the case of a pile under pure lateral load. On the other
296 hand, the corresponding σ3 slightly increases. The increase in the major stress then increases the
mobilized shear strength, τfm of the soil according to:
C

297

σ1 − σ 3
AC

298 τ fm = sin(90 + φ ) (4)

2
299
300 Fig. 6a also confirms that the soil shear strength is reached in the case of V = Vult, while more
301 lateral pile deflection is needed in the other case (V = 0) for the soil to reach its shear strength. A
302 little increase in the confining pressure of the soil in the vicinity of the pile installed in very dense
303 sand is also shown in Fig. 6b. This little increase in the confining stress of soil, then, slightly
304 increases the resistance of the soil-pile system to lateral loading. Fig. 6d shows the stress paths of

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

305 soil elements attached to the pile installed in dense sand and at different depths for both the cases
306 with (V = Vult) and without (V = 0) vertical loads. For all considered depths, Fig. 6d confirms that the
307 soil element in the case of (V = Vult) reached the failure surface earlier than that in the case of (V =
308 0). Moreover, the soil element located at 1.0 m reached the failure surface before the other soil
309 elements at deeper depths due to the load transfer from the pile to the adjacent soil. It could be also

PT
310 noted a little curvature in stress paths of soil elements at different depths due to the interaction with
311 other soil elements. The variation of stresses (major, minor, vertical, horizontal) of a soil element

RI
312 adjacent to the pile, installed in dense sand and at a depth of 3 m, with lateral deflections are plotted
313 for both the cases with (V = Vult) and without (V = 0) vertical loads in Fig. 6c. Fig. 6c indicates that

SC
314 the presence of vertical load slightly increases the soil stresses compared to the corresponding
315 stresses in the case of pure lateral loading. Fig. 6c shows also that the orientation of the minor
principle stress σ3 and the major principle stress σ1 in both analyses with and without vertical loads

U
316

317 are similar up to the maximum lateral deflection of 100 mm. In addition, Fig. 6c illustrates a
AN
318 principle stress rotation after 8 mm lateral deflection since the horizontal stress σx becomes larger
319 than the vertical stress σz.
M

320 The little increase in lateral soil stresses σxx is further examined through the contours of normal
321 stresses around the pile under pure lateral load and in the presence of a vertical load corresponding
D

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

323 a depth of 3.0 m from the ground surface (i.e., the depth where maximum difference in lateral soil
324 stresses occurs, Fig. 6b). Similarly, the little increase in shear stresses, σxy over the pile’s frictional
325 face is also examined through the contours of shear stresses around the pile under pure lateral load
EP

326 and in the presence of a vertical load corresponding to V = Vult in Figs. 7c and 7d. These contours are
327 plotted at a lateral deflection of 0.1B and at a depth of 3.0 m from the ground surface. It is clear that
C

328 the lateral soil stress and the mobilized shear stresses of soil around the pile are almost the same in
the presence of vertical load as compared to the pure lateral load case.
AC

329

330 5.2. Clayey soils with constant cu

331 In the analyses of piles installed in clayey soils, two main cases have been considered. In the first
332 case (S1), the shear modulus of the soil was evaluated according to the value of cu (G = 300cu). In
333 the second case (S2), the shear modulus was assumed to be constant (G = 38.5 MPa) for all clayey
334 soils considered in Table 3.

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

335 Similar to sandy soil cases, the ultimate vertical capacities of piles installed in clayey soils with
336 different cu are evaluated by applying vertical velocities at the piles heads and monitoring the piles
337 loads variation with their settlements as plotted in Fig. 8. Fig. 8 shows that Vult of the pile installed in
338 clayey soil (S1) is approximately 255 kN, 410 kN, 550 kN and 1000 kN in soft (cu = 20 kPa),
339 medium1 (cu = 30 kPa), medium2 (cu = 39 kPa) and stiff (cu = 64 kPa) clay, respectively.

PT
340 Fig. 9 shows the variation of the lateral load as a function of lateral deflection of piles in clayey soils
341 (S1). A different trend is observed than that in the case of sandy soils. In the presence of vertical

RI
342 loads, the lateral capacities developed at all deflections are less than the corresponding load
343 developed under pure lateral load. Karthigeyan et al. (2007) have reported similar findings for piles

SC
344 in clayey soils through 3D FE analysis of single pile under combined loads and attributed the
345 reduction in the pile capacity to the early failure of soil-pile interfaces in the presence of vertical

U
346 loads.
347 Similar to the sand case, the influence of Vult on the lateral response of a pile installed in medium
AN
348 clay (cu = 39 kPa; S1) (Fig. 9c) is further investigated using the MCC model as shown in Fig. 10.
349 Both the lateral load-lateral deflection curves presented in Fig. 10 and the corresponding curves
M

350 presented in Fig. 9c show a decrease in the pile lateral capacity due to the application of vertical
351 loads with percentages of decrease at 0.1B lateral deflection of 16.21 % and 13.92 %, respectively.
D

352 The differences in the initial slopes of the lateral load-deflection curves as well as in the values of
353 the pile ultimate capacities may attributed to the differences in soil modelling.
TE

354 The bending moment (M) developed in each pile section was calculated by the summation of the
355 product of the vertical stress (σzz,i) at each element, the plan area of that element (Ai) and the x-
EP

356 distance from the center of the pile to the centroid of the element (xci).
n
357 M = ∑σ zz ,i × Ai × xci (5)
i =1
C

358 Similar decreases were induced in the maximum bending moment in the pile for both studied
AC

359 cases considered (S1 and S2).

360 The percentage of decrease in lateral capacity (DLC) has been defined to measure the influence of
361 vertical loads on the lateral capacity of the piles:
PV =0 − PV =v (6)
362 DLC =100 ×
PV =0

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

363 where PV=v is the lateral capacity with vertical loads and PV=0 is the lateral capacity under pure
364 lateral loads. In the same context, the percentage of decrease in maximum moment (DMM) has been
365 also defined:
M maxV = 0 − M maxV =v (7)
366 DMM = 100 ×
M maxV = 0

PT
367 where MmaxV=v is the maximum bending moment with vertical load and MmaxV=0 is the maximum
368 bending moment under pure lateral load. The variation of the DLC and DMM values with cu for V =

RI
369 0.5Vult, V = 0.75Vult and V = Vult at 0.1B lateral deflection is presented in Fig. 11 for the two cases (S1
370 and S2).

SC
371 Figs. 11a and c (S1) show that up to cu of 16 kPa, the DLC and DMM values is equal to 0 (the
372 vertical load has no effect below this value). With the increase in soil cohesion (cu > 16 kPa), the

U
373 DLC and DMM values increase with the increase in cu as well as with the increase in vertical loads.
374 Figs. 11b and d (S2) show that the increase in DLC and DMM is more affected by Vult than cu. The
AN
375 comparative results shown in Fig. 11 confirm that the estimation of the soil shear modulus, G based
376 on the undrained shear strength, cu is as important as the value of the undrained soil shear strength in
M

377 the design of pile foundation under the combined action of vertical and lateral loading.
378 The mechanism of the decrease in both lateral capacity and bending moment of a pile installed in
D

379 clayey soil under the action of vertical loads has been also examined by plotting the stress state
380 (Mohr circle) of a soil element adjacent to the pile and at a depth of 3 m. The ultimate shear stress
TE

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

σ1 − σ 3
τ ult = = cu
EP

382 (8)
2

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

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

385 without (V = 0) and for all cu values considered in the (S1) case. When Vult is applied to the pile, it is
386 clear that the Mohr circles will have larger radii than those corresponding to (V = 0). Thus, the
387 presence of the vertical load decreases the lateral resistance of soil and subsequently leads to the
388 development of lower resistance to the lateral pile deformation. Fig. 13a shows the stress paths of
389 soil elements attached to the pile in medium clay (cu = 39 kPa; S1) at different depths for both the
390 cases with (V = Vult) and without (V = 0) vertical loads. For all considered depths, the soil element in
391 the case of (V = Vult) reached the surface failure earlier than the soil element in the case of (V = 0).

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

392 The variation of stresses (major, minor, vertical, horizontal) of a soil element adjacent to the pile,
393 installed in medium clay (cu = 39 kPa; S1) at a depth of 3 m, with lateral deflections are plotted for
394 both the cases with (V = Vult) and without (V = 0) vertical loads in Fig. 13b. Fig. 13b indicates that
395 the inclusion of vertical load decreases the soil stresses compared to the corresponding stresses in the
396 case of pure lateral loading. Fig. 13b shows also that the orientation of the minor principle stress σ3

PT
397 and the major principle stress σ1 in both analyses with and without vertical loads are similar up to
398 the maximum lateral deflection of 100 mm. Also, Fig. 13b shows a principle stress rotation after 8

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

5.3. Clayey soils with cu proportional to depth

SC
400

401 According to Mesri (1993), cu can be defined as a function of OCR and effective overburden
stress, σ v' :

U
402

cu = α ⋅ σ p' = α ⋅ OCR ⋅ σ v' (9)

AN
403

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

405 (Quebec, Canada). In the analyses, different values of OCR are considered. For each value of OCR
406 (1.5, 2.5 and 4.0), cu is assumed to be proportional to depth and the pile responses under combined
D

407 load obtained are compared to the corresponding responses for constant cu.
408 The lateral load-lateral deflection curves at constant cu of 16 and 20 kPa are compared to those
TE

409 obtained from the case of cu proportional to depth with an OCR of 1.5 in Fig. 14 for both the
410 analyses with and without vertical loads. In particular, Figs. 14a and b correspond to (S1) case while
EP

411 Figs. 14c and d correspond to (S2) case. For piles subjected to pure lateral loads presented in Figs.
412 14a and c, the curve corresponding to OCR of 1.5 (denoted C1) is located between the two other
413 curves corresponding to cu of 16 kPa (denoted C2) and cu of 20 kPa (denoted C3). For piles subjected
C

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

415 curve (C1) is located between the two other curves (C2) and (C3) for (S1) case only.
416 Based on the above comparisons, it is clear that the percentage decrease in lateral capacity, DLC,
417 of pile subjected to combined loads in clayey soil with constant cu is different from those
418 corresponding to analyses of piles with cu proportional to depth. This difference depends basically
419 on: (1) the choice between the case (S1) and the case (S2), (2) the ratio of vertical load relative to
420 ultimate vertical load of the pile as portrayed in Fig. 15.

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

421 It is interesting to compare the results obtained from the case of cu proportional to depth to that of
422 a constant cu. For example, it is possible to compare the results corresponding to OCR of 1.5 with an
423 average value of 30 kPa (when OCR = 1.5, cu varies from 14.4 kPa at ground surface to 43.2 kPa
424 with average value of 30 kPa) to that of a constant cu of 30 kPa (Fig. 15). At lateral deflection of
425 0.1B and for the (S1) case, Fig. 15a shows that the maximum DLC is of the order of 8.3 % at

PT
426 constant cu of 30 kPa and 5.7 % at OCR of 1.5. At the same lateral deflection and for the (S2) case,
427 Fig. 15b shows that the maximum DLC is of the order of 9.1 % for cu of 30 kPa and 17.4 % for OCR

RI
428 of 1.5. For OCR = 2.5, cu varies from 20.0 kPa at ground surface to 52.8 kPa with an average value
429 of 39 kPa. At lateral deflection of 0.1B and for the (S1) case, Fig. 15a shows that the maximum DLC

SC
430 is of the order of 16.2 % at uniform cu of 39 kPa and 9.2 % at OCR of 2.5. At the same lateral
431 deflection and for the (S2) case, Fig. 15b shows that the maximum DLC is of the order of 14.4 % for

U
432 cu of 39 kPa and 7.5 % for OCR of 1.5. These results indicate that the behavior of piles in clayey soil
433 under combined action of vertical and lateral loads when cu assumed to vary with depth significantly
AN
434 differs from the pile behavior when cu is assumed constant.
435
M

436 5.4. Two-layered stratum

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

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

439 (Table 2) is studied. Different thicknesses (H) of the sand and clay layers are considered. The results
440 of the study case (S1) with and without vertical loads are presented and compared for two different
configurations of the two-layered stratum in Figs. 16a and 16b.
EP

441

442 Under pure lateral loads, Fig. 16a shows that the increase of the clay thickness from 2B to 10B
443 leads to a significant decrease in the lateral capacity of the pile. With further increase in the clay
C

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

445 increase of the sand thickness from 2B to 10B leads to a significant increase in the lateral capacity of
446 the pile and with further increase in the sand thickness, the lateral capacity of the pile is slightly
447 affected. These results support the earlier recommendation of Reese and Van Impe (2001) who
448 suggest that the shallower depth up to 10B is of predominant importance in soil-pile interaction due
449 to lateral loading. On the other hand, Fig. 16a shows that the effect of vertical loads on the lateral
450 capacity of the pile embedded in two-layer stratum with a clay layer thickness (H) ranges from 2B to
451 10B is not significant and almost similar to that observed in dense sand (i.e., the end bearing

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

452 stratum). When the clay thickness increases (H = L+6B), the effect of vertical loads becomes
453 pronounced and leads to a significant reduction in the lateral capacity of the pile. This difference in
454 vertical loads effects on the lateral capacities of piles (e.g., the dependence of vertical load effect on
455 the characteristics of the soil layer under pile tip) may be attributed to the difference in pile function
456 in term of load transfer. For (H) ranges from 2B to 10B, the pile serves as an end-bearing pile with

PT
457 higher end-bearing capacity (reaction) as shown in Fig. 17a. This high end-bearing capacity is
458 associated with smaller settlement as well as smaller transfer of stress from pile to adjacent soil (Fig.

RI
459 17b). In other words the vertical loads have little effects on the soil surrounding the pile. With
460 further increase in the clay thickness (H = L+6B), the pile no longer serve as an end-bearing type. It

SC
461 serves primarily as a friction pile that has lower end-bearing reaction (Fig. 17a) and a significant
462 stress transfer a long its shaft (Fig. 17b).

U
463 Fig. 16b shows that the effect of vertical loads on the lateral capacity of the pile embedded in two-
464 layer stratum with a sand layer thickness of 2B is similar to that observed in medium clay. With the
AN
465 increase of the sand thickness, the effect of vertical loads becomes similar to that observed in dense
466 sand (i.e., the end bearing stratum). These results imply that although the above recommendation of
M

467 Van Impe (2001) works well in situations where pile foundations are subjected to pure lateral loads;
468 it cannot be applied if the piles are under the action of both vertical and lateral loadings. More
D

469 specifically, the current results indicate that the effect of vertical loads on the lateral response of
470 piles embedded in multi-layered stratum depends on the characteristics of soil not only surrounding
TE

471 the piles but also those beneath located their tips.
472
EP

473 6. Conclusions

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

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

476 computer program FLAC3D and the models were verified using full-scale load and laboratory model
477 testing data. The verified numerical model was then used to perform a parametric study considering
478 different soil configurations and parameters to evaluate the lateral capacities and bending moments
479 of concrete piles subjected to both lateral and vertical loads. The results of the lateral capacities and
480 the bending moments of piles were determined and compared for piles subjected to pure lateral loads
481 and to combined vertical and lateral loads for several values of vertical loads corresponding to 25 %,

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

482 50 %, 75 % and 100 % of the pile ultimate vertical capacity. Based on this comparison, the
483 following conclusions can be made.
484 1. The response of the piles in sandy soils under lateral loads is not influenced by the presence
485 of vertical loads. Indeed, the lateral load capacities is not changed for very loose sand and
486 slightly increased for loose, dense, and very dense sand.

PT
487 2. The presence of vertical loads decreases the lateral load capacity by as much as 20 % and
488 maximum bending moment by as much as 30 % of piles in clayey soil depending on the level

RI
489 of vertical load and the value of the lateral deflection.
490 3. The dependence of the lateral response of piles under combined loading on the clay shear

SC
491 strength, cu is also investigated, and the shear modulus, G, is evaluated in two different ways.
492 In the first (S1), G is considered dependent on cu while in the second (S2), G is assumed

U
493 constant irrespective of the adopted cu value. The maximum percentage decreases in lateral
494 capacity reach 20.3 % and 13.6 % for S1 and S2, respectively.
AN
495 4. The effect of vertical loads on the lateral capacity of a pile embedded in two-layer stratum
496 with a clay layer thickness (H) ranges from 2B to 10B is not significant and almost similar to
M

497 that observed in the sandy soil. When the clay thickness increases (H = L+6B), the effect of
498 vertical loads become pronounced and leads to a significant reduction in the lateral capacity
D

499 of the pile. The dependence of vertical load effect on the characteristics of the soil layer
500 under the pile tip may be attributed to the difference in pile function in term of load transfer.
TE

501

502 References
EP

503
504 Anagnostopoulos, C., Georgiadis, M., 1993. Interaction of axial and lateral pile responses. J. Geotech. Eng.:
505 ASCE 119 (4), 793–798.
C

506 A.P.I. American Petroleum Institute, 1993. Planning, designing and constructing fixed offshore platforms.
AC

507 RP2A-LRFD, Section G, pp 64–77.

508 Achmus, M., Thieken, K., 2010. On the behavior of piles in non-cohesive soil under combined horizontal and
509 vertical loading. Acta Geotechnica 5 (3), 199–210.
510 Brown, D.A., Reese, L.C., O’Neill, M.W., 1987. Cyclic lateral loading of a large scale pile group. J. Geotech.
511 Eng. Div.: ASCE 113 (11), 1326–1343.
512 Brown, D.A., Morrison, C., Reese, L.C., 1988. Lateral load behavior of pile group in sand. J. Geotech. Eng.
513 Div.: ASCE 114 (11), 1261–1276.

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

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

PT
519 Hussien. M.N., Tobita, T., Iai, S., Rollins, K.M., 2010. Soil-pile separation effect on the performance of a pile
520 group under static and dynamic lateral load. Can. Geotech. J. 47 (11), 1234–1246.
521 Hussien, M.N., Tobita, T., Iai, S., Rollins, K.M., 2012. Vertical load effect on the lateral pile group resistance

RI
522 in sand response. Inter. J. Geomech. Geoengin. 7 (4), 263–282.
523 Hussien, M.N., Tobita, T., Iai, S., Karray, M., 2014a. Influence of pullout loads on the lateral response of pile

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

U
526 of pile foundation. Comput. Geotech. 55, 392–403.
527 Hazzar, L., Karray, M., Hussien, M.N., Bouassida, M., 2013. Three dimensional modeling of a pile group
AN
528 under static lateral loading using finite differences method. GeoMontreal2013, Montréal, Québec-Canada,
529 September 29 - October 3, paper 201.
530 Itasca, 2009. User’s and theory manuals of FLAC3D: Fast Lagrangian analysis of continua in 3D, version 4.
M

531 Minneapolis, Itasca Consulting Group Inc.

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

533 different load combinations. J. Soil Mech. Found. Eng.: ASCE 14 (3), 173–177.
TE

534 Karthigeyan, S., Ramakrishna, V.V.G.S.T., Rajagopal, K., 2006. Influence of vertical load on the lateral
535 response of piles in sand. Comput. Geotech. 33 (2), 121–131.
536 Karthigeyan, S., Ramakrishna, V.V.G.S.T., Rajagopal, K., 2007. Numerical investigation of the effect of
EP

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

540 Matlock, H., 1970. Correlations for design of laterally loaded piles in soft clay. 2nd Offshore Technology
AC

541 Conference, Houston, Texas, pp. 577–594.

542 Mesri, G., 1993. Initial investigation of the soft clay test site at Bothkennar. Discussion, Géotechnique 43 (3),
543 503–504.
544 McVay, M., Casper, R., Shang, T-I., 1995. Lateral response of three-row groups in loose to dense sands at 3D
545 and 5D pile spacing. J. Geotech. Eng.: ASCE 121 (5), 436–441.
546 McVay, M., Shang, L., Molnit, T., Lai, P., 1998. Centrifuge testing of large laterally loaded pile groups in
547 sands. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.: ASCE 124 (10), 1016–1026.

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

548 Ottaviani, M., 1975. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of vertically loaded pile groups. Géotechnique
549 25 (2), 159–174.
550 Poulos, H.G., Davis, E.H., 1980. Pile foundation analysis and design. Wiley: Singapore.
551 Roscoe, K.H., Burland, J.B., 1968. On the Generalized Stress-Strain Behavior of ‘Wet Clay’. Engineering
552 Plasticity, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 535–609.

PT
553 Randolph, M.F., Wroth, C.P., 1978. Analysis of deformation of vertically loaded piles. J. Geotech. Eng.:
554 ASCE 104 (12), 1465–1488.
555 Reese, L.C., Van Impe, W.F., 2001. Single piles and pile groups under lateral loading. Rotterdam,

RI
556 Netherlands: A.A. Balkema.
557 Rollins, K.M., Peterson, K.T., Weaver, T.J., 1998. Lateral load behavior of full-scale pile group in clay. J.

SC
558 Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.: ASCE 124 (6), 468–478.
559 Rollins, K.M., Lane, J.D., Gerber, T.M., 2005. Measured and computed lateral response of a pile group in

U
560 sand. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.: ASCE 131 (1), 103–114.
561 Skempton, A.W., 1986. Standard penetration test procedure and effects in sands of overburden pressure,
AN
562 relative density, particle size, ageing and over-consolidation. Géotechnique 36 (3), 425-477.
563 Tobita, T., Iai, S., Rollins, K.M., 2004. Group pile behavior under lateral loading in centrifuge model tests.
564 Inter. J. Physical Modelling in Geotech. 4 (4), 1–11.
M

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

567 Zhu, H., Chang, M.F., 2002. Load transfer curves along bored piles considering modulus degradation. J.
TE

568 Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.: ASCE 128 (9), 764–774.

569

570
EP

571

572

573
C

574
AC

575

576

577

578

579

580

581

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

582 Table 1
583 Geotechnical properties of soil layers from Comodromos (2003) study.
Soil layer Depth Unit Undrained Angle of Shear
(m) weight shear strength friction modulus
γ (kN/m3) cu (kPa) φ (°) G (MPa)
Soft silty clay 0-36 20.0 27 0 2.43
Medium stiff clay 36-48 20.0 110 0 3.35

PT
Very dense sandy gravel 48-70 22.0 0 40 24.0
584
585 Table 2

RI
586 Model parameters of sandy soil used in the parametric study.
Soil type Mass density Shear modulus Bulk modulus Undrained shear Angle of
ρ (kg/m3) G (MPa) K (MPa) strength cu (kPa) friction φ (°)

SC
Very loose 1600 4.6 10.0 26 (Dr = 0 %)
Loose 1800 7.7 16.7 30 (Dr = 40 %)
Dense 2000 19.2 41.7 0 36 (Dr = 60 %)

U
Very dense 2200 26.9 58.3 42 (Dr = 87 %)
587
AN
588 Table 3
589 Model parameters of clayey soil used in the parametric study.
Clay type Mass density Shear modulus Bulk modulus Undrained shear Angle of
ρ (kg/m3) friction φ (°)
M

G (MPa) K (MPa) strength cu (kPa)

Soft 6.00 58.0 20
1
Medium 9.00 87.0 30
D

Medium 2 1600 11.70 113.1 39 0

Stiff 19.20 185.6 64
TE

590
591 Table 4
592 Parameters of sandy and clayey soils used in CYsoil and MCC models.
CYsoil model MCC model
EP

Soil type Dense sand Soil type Medium1 clay

Geref (MPa) 19.20 G (MPa) 9.00
υ
ref
P (kPa) 100.00 0.45
C

Rf 0.90 λ 0.13
φf (degrees) 36.00 κ 0.05
AC

β 2.35 M 0.77
p1 (kPa) 1.00
υλ 5.30
593

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE

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

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE

Fig. 2. Comparison between the present 3D FD results and: (a) test data of Comodromos (2003) and
EP

p-y method, (b) test data of Karasev et al. (1977), (c) test data of vertical loaded pile of
Anagnostopoulos and Georgiadis (1993), and (d) test data of combined vertical and lateral loaded
pile of Anagnostopoulos and Georgiadis (1993).
C
AC

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D

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

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
EP

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

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D

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

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
EP

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

elements attached to the pile at different depths.

AC

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
Fig. 7. Normal and shear stress contours in xy-plane at 3.0 m depth from ground surface in dense
M

sands: (a) σxx contours for pure lateral loading case, (b) σxx contours with vertical load of Vult, (c)
σxy contours for pure lateral loading, and (d) σxy contours with vertical load of Vult.
D
TE
C EP
AC

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M

Fig. 8. Vertical load-vertical displacement of piles installed in clayey soils with deferent cu.
D
TE
C EP
AC

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D

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

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D

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

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
EP

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

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

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

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
Fig. 13. Analyses of pile installed in a medium clay (cu = 39 kPa) with and without vertical loads:
AN
(a) stress paths of soil elements attached to the pile, and (b) stresses of a soil element adjacent to the
pile at a depth of 3 m.
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE

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

= Vult (S1), (c) V = 0 (S2) and (d) V = Vult (S2).

C
AC

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

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

U
case.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

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

U
sand and lower medium clay.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
Fig. 17. Stress conditions for soil elements in (H = L): (a) end-bearing stress versus V/Vult, (b) major
principle stress with and without vertical loads adjacent to pile shaft at 3 m depth.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

17