soil lateral bearing capacity paper

© All Rights Reserved

45 views

soil lateral bearing capacity paper

© All Rights Reserved

- geotechnical design of buildings
- Tutorial 5
- Combined & Strap Footing - Geotechnical Engineering Questions and Answers - Sanfoundry
- Strength Reduction
- Ground Improvement Techniques
- ad de Taludes by SteveYaeger
- GEO5 2015 Leaflet en Source Texts
- Syllabus Copy
- GDR for ERS_April 2013.pdf
- 1_145_NIT
- ufc_3_220_01n
- 11 Geological, Seismic and Geotechnical Aspects
- A Simulation Study of Slope Stability Affected by Construction of New Buildings at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai.
- Micropile Manual FINAL July 2006 PDF - Copy
- Bnbc Part 6_chapter 3_170612geotecnia
- VanAsch Et Al BSGF 07
- 10.1007_s11204-007-0039-5
- Simple Slope Stability Problems
- Jurnal Testing of Rock Filled
- 2014bc Excavation

You are on page 1of 11

www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/sandf

K. Georgiadisn, M. Georgiadis, C. Anagnostopoulos

Department of Civil Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 541 24 Thessaloniki, Greece

Received 7 May 2012; received in revised form 31 July 2012; accepted 1 September 2012

Available online 4 February 2013

Abstract

Analytical equations were derived to determine the undrained lateral bearing capacity of rigid piles in cohesive soil. Piles in level

ground and piles placed at a distance from the crest of a slope were examined, taking account of the effect of the adhesion at the pilesoil

interface. The derived analytical solutions were used to develop charts relating the lateral pile capacity to the pile length/diameter ratio,

the pilesoil adhesion, the distance of the point of load application from the ground to the pile diameter ratio, the inclination of the

slope and the distance of the pile from the crest of the slope to the pile diameter ratio. They were also used to derive a reduction factor

which, when multiplied by the lateral bearing capacity for level ground, gives the bearing capacity of the same pile near a slope.

In addition, a critical non-dimensional distance between the pile and the crest of the slope, at which the bearing capacity approaches that

for a level ground, was determined. The bearing capacity charts obtained for level ground were compared to the classic Broms charts

and to others derived using several different lateral earth pressure distributions along the pile. Comparisons were also made between the

results of the proposed method for piles near slopes and those obtained from charts based on upper bound calculations. Finally, the

proposed new method was validated through a comparison with the results of a large number of pile load tests, in which a remarkable

agreement was observed between the analytical results and the measurements.

& 2013 The Japanese Geotechnical Society. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Piles; Lateral loads; Bearing capacity; Clay; Soilpile interactions; Slopes

1. Introduction

Short rigid piles or drilled shafts are often used to

transfer horizontal loads to the ground from structures

such as highway signs, trafc signals, sound barriers,

transmission towers, wind turbines, etc., placed near the

edge of a slope. In contrast to conventional long exible

piles, the design of these low length/diameter (L/D) piles is

n

fax: 30 2310 995 619.

E-mail address: kgeorg@civil.auth.gr (K. Georgiadis).

Peer review under responsibility of The Japanese Geotechnical Society.

yielding of the pile material.

The method most commonly used, at least in the

preliminary stage, to determine the ultimate lateral load

Hu that can be applied at the head of a short rigid pile

in level cohesive soil, is the method by Broms (1964). This

method was developed using static analyses and assuming

a simplied distribution of the limit soil reaction along the

pile length. Results were presented in the form of Hu/cuD2

versus L/D graphs, which directly give the ultimate lateral

load for piles in clay of undrained shear strength cu.

Similar methods to determine Hu for short piles in a level

ground have been proposed by Hansen (1961) and

Meyerhof et al. (1981), considering a foundation material

having both friction and cohesion and assuming different

distributions of soil reaction along the pile.

0038-0806 & 2013 The Japanese Geotechnical Society. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2012.12.010

level cohesive soil can also be obtained using pile statics

and the ultimate lateral soil reaction per unit length (pu)

distributions with depth adopted in the various py curve

equations commonly used in lateral pile analyses. In such

analyses, the ultimate lateral soil reaction per unit pile

length is determined as

pu N p c u D

depth to diameter ratio (z/D).

Several Np versus z/D relationships obtained experimentally, analytically or numerically (Stevens and Audibert,

1980; Murff and Hamilton, 1993; Matlock, 1970; Reese

and Welch, 1975; Bhushan et al., 1979; Reese et al., 1975;

Broms, 1964; Hansen, 1961; Jeanjean, 2009; Georgiadis

and Georgiadis, 2010) are presented in Fig. 1, demonstrating a remarkable scatter. As pointed out by Georgiadis

and Georgiadis (2010), among the various causes contributing to this scatter, the dependence of pu on the pilesoil

adhesion is very signicant. Based on the results of 3D

nite element analyses and comparisons to pile load test

results, they proposed the following Np versus z/D relationship which takes into account the pilesoil adhesion:

2

Np Npu Npu Npo elz=D

where l is a non-dimensional factor equal to l 0.55 0.15a,

a is the adhesion factor which is dened as the adhesion to

undrained shear strength ratio and ranges from 0 (smooth

pile) to 1 (rough pile), Npo is the bearing capacity factor at the

Np

0

10

12

14

16

z/ D

Eq. 2 ( = 1)

Eq. 2 ( = 0.5)

Eq. 2 ( = 0)

Broms

10

Broms simpified

Hansen

Stevens & Audibert

12

Murff & Hamilton ( = 0)

Matlock (J = 0.25)

14

Bhushan et al (J = 2)

Reese et al

16

lateral bearing capacity factor for deep failure, derived using

the following lower bound plasticity analytical relationship

by Randolph and Houlsby (1984):

D

D

Npu p 2D 2cosD 4 cos sin

3

2

2

where D sin1 a.

Information concerning the behaviour of rigid piles near

the crest of a slope is rather limited. The results of

experimental and numerical analyses of rigid piles, placed

at locations of various distances from the crest of a sand

slope (Chae et al., 2004), have shown that the lateral

bearing capacity is reduced even at distances greater than

four pile diameters from the crest. Similarly, the results of

centrifuge pile tests in sand, presented by Mezazigh and

Levacher (1998), have shown that the pile behaviour is

affected by the slope even at a distance of eight pile

diameters from the crest. The lateral bearing capacity

of a rigid pile near the crest of a clay slope has been

investigated by Stewart (1999). Based on an upper bound

plasticity analysis, which assumed weightless soil and zero

adhesion at the pilesoil interface, he provided graphs of

the reduction factors on Hu versus the distance from the

crest for free-head piles. According to these graphs, the

effect of the slope diminishes at a distance not exceeding

four pile diameters.

To study the effect of the distance between the pile and

the crest of a clay slope, on the lateral pile behaviour,

Georgiadis and Georgiadis (2012) performed a detailed 3D

nite element study which led to the modication of

Eq. (2). The resulting variation in Np with z/D is shown

in Fig. 2. As seen in this gure, bearing capacity factor Np

is equal to the bearing capacity factor for horizontal

ground, given by Eq. (2), up to critical depth zc. Below

this critical depth, Np is determined from the following

equation:

Np Npu Npu Npc elay zzc =D

4

where ay is a factor depending on the inclination of the

slope (y).

145

Jeanjean

Fig. 1. Variation in lateral bearing capacity factor with depth for level

ground.

ay 1

siny1 siny

2

between the pile and the crest of the slope (b).

zc =D 8:510 log10 8b=D

6

Npc is the bearing capacity factor at the critical depth,

obtained from Eq. (2) for z zc. Typical diagrams obtained

through the above equations are presented in Fig. 3,

demonstrating the effect of y and b/D on the Np versus

z/D relationship. It is noted that nite element analyses

have shown that unless the slope is close to failure, with a

safety factor well below those used in the slope design, the

pile lateral earth pressure can be accurately approximated

by the above equations.

146

bearing capacity Hu of piles in level ground and piles

placed at a distance b from the crest of a clay slope and

loaded towards the slope, based on the lateral earth

resistance distributions with depth determined through

obtain charts for Hu/cuD2 versus L/D for various adhesion

factors a, slope inclinations y and normalized pile distances

from the crest of the slope b/D. Finally, the proposed

method is validated through comparisons with eld test

results.

Np

Npo

Npc

Npu

zc /D

been obtained based on Eq. (2). For free-head piles, the

horizontal force equilibrium and the bending moment

equilibrium provide the two unknown quantities, i.e., the

depth of rotation zo and lateral bearing capacity Hu.

The two equilibrium equations are

Z

zo

z/D

Hu

Z

eHu

zo

zpu dz

zo

pu dz

zo

pu dz

zpu dz

2

a1 zo =D a2 zo =D a3 elzo =D a4 zo =D elzo =D a5 0

9

where

Fig. 2. Schematic variation in bearing capacity factor with depth for

sloping ground.

a1 Npu ; a2 Npu e=D ; a3 2 Npu Npo 1=l e=D ;

a4 2 Npu Npo =l

Np

0

10

12

14

16

Npu = 11.94

b/D = 0.5

b/D =

z/D

b/D = 1.5

b/D = 4.5

b/D = 2.5

b/D = 5.5

b/D = 3.5

b/D = 6.5

10

Equation 2

Equation 4

12

Fig. 3. Typical effect of b/D, y and a on Np: (a) a1, y451 and (b) a 0.3, b/D 1.5.

Hu

Hu

60

Eq. 10 ( = 0, 0.5, 1)

147

pu = NpcuD

Broms

zo

Stewart

50

Meyerhof

H1

Hansen

=1

Jeanjean

H2

= 0.5

Matlock/Bhushan et al/

Reese and Welch

40

zr / D =2.5

=0

and

Hu/cuD2

zr / D = 5

30

zr / D =10

zr / D =15

20

L2

eL

2

2

D

2D

Npu Npo e 1

L 1 e lL=D

e

D l

D l D

l

a5 Npu

ultimate lateral bearing capacity Hu, can be easily computed using statics. It develops at depth zm at which the

shear force, derived for the known Hu, is zero. At this

depth,

2

zm Npu D zm Npo

D

max M e zm

Hu cu D

l

2

l

11

Eq. (10) was used to derive the non-dimensional charts

for Hu/cuD2 versus L/D, shown in Figs. 5 and 6, for e/D=0

and 16, respectively, and pilesoil adhesion factors of a=0,

0.5 and 1. These are compared in the same gures to the

Hu/cuD2 versus L/D relationships obtained using the lateral

earth pressure distributions considered by Broms (1964),

Hansen (1961), Matlock (1970), Reese and Welch (1975),

Bhushan et al. (1979), Stewart (1999) and Jeanjean (2009),

as well as the relationship obtained using the empirical

equation by Meyerhof et al. (1981).

Broms (1964) assumed that lateral earth pressure pu

increases linearly, from 2cuD at the ground surface to 9cuD

at z/D 3, and remains constant below that depth.

To develop his Hu/cuD2 versus L/D graphs, this distribution was further simplied to pu 0 from the ground

surface to z/D 1.5 and pu 9cuD below z/D 1.5

(Fig. 1). As seen in Figs. 5 and 6, this simplication leads

to a general underestimation of the calculated ultimate

lateral loads compared to Eq. (10). This underestimation is

particularly evident for low L/D ratios, while as L/D

0

0

10

12

14

L/D

Fig. 5. Lateral bearing capacity of piles in level ground for e/D0.

16

Eq. 10 ( = 0, 0.5, 1)

=1

Broms

14

= 0.5

Stewart

Meyerhof

zr / D =2.5

Hansen

12

10

Hu/cu D2

into the lateral force equilibrium equation (Eq. 7) to obtain

the non-dimensional lateral bearing capacity, Hu/cuD2.

Npu Npo lzo =D lL=D

Hu

zo L

2e

N

2

e

1

pu

2

cu D

D D

l

10

10

Jeanjean

=0

Matlock/Bhushan et al/

Reese and Welch

zr / D = 5

zr / D =10

zr / D =15

0

0

10

12

14

L/D

Fig. 6. Lateral bearing capacity of piles in level ground for e/D16.

Eq. (10) for smooth piles (a 0). Lower Hu values are also

calculated using the methods by Hansen (1961) and

Meyerhof et al. (1981).

Based on test results, Matlock (1970), Reese and Welch

(1975) and Bhushan et al. (1979) proposed that the lateral

earth pressure increases from 3cuD at the ground surface

to 9cuD at critical depth zr and remains constant below

that depth (Fig. 1). The value of zr depends on the pile

diameter, the soil properties and an empirical factor J,

which ranges from 0.25 to 2.0 (Matlock suggests values of

148

0.25 and 0.5, Reese and Welch suggest 0.5 and Bhushan

et al. suggest 2), and is given by the following equation:

zr

6D

gD=cu J

12

obtained for zr/D ratios of 2.5, 5, 10 and 15 with the low

value corresponding to the Bhushan et al. recommendations and the high value to those of Matlock, respectively.

As seen, the curves obtained using the low values of

zr/D=2.5 and 5 are in good agreement with Eq. (10), with

a 0, while higher zr values yield lower ultimate loads.

The Hu/cuD2 versus L/D graphs for xed-head and

free-head piles presented by Stewart (1999) were based

on the variation in lateral earth pressure with depth,

derived through an upper bound solution for perfectly

smooth piles (Murff and Hamilton, 1993). As can be seen

in Figs. 5 and 6, the graphs are in excellent agreement with

the values obtained using Eq. (10) for a 0.

More recently, Jeanjean (2009) proposed the Np versus

z/D relationship, shown in Fig. 1, based on the results

of centrifuge tests on a laterally loaded conductor. The

relationship produces considerably larger lateral earth

pressure. As expected, Figs. 5 and 6 demonstrate that this

relationship results in large Hu/cuD2 values.

4. Piles near slopes

Eqs. (1) to (6) were used to develop the lateral earth

pressure diagram, which is schematically shown in Fig. 7(a),

for piles placed at a distance b from the crest of a slope.

The horizontal force and bending moment equilibrium

provide unknown quantities zo and Hu. The two equilibrium equations are

Z zc

Z zo

Z L

pu dz

pu dz

pu dz

13

Hu

zc

zo

b

Hu

Hu

H11

zc

L

H12

zo

pu = NpcuD

(Np from Eq. 2)

(Np from Eq. 6)

H2

b

Hu

Hu

pu = NpcuD

(Np from Eq. 2)

zo

zc

H2

H1

zpu dz

eHu

zo

zo

zc

zpu dz

zc

zpu dz

14

2

a1 zo =D a2 zo =D a3 elzo =D a4 zo =D elzo =D

15

a5 elay zo =D a6 zo =D elay zo =D a7 0

where

a1 Npu ; a2 2Npu e=D ; a3 Npu Npo 1=l e=D =l;

Npu Npc 1

e lay zc =D

a4 Npu Npo =l; a5

;

e

lay D

lay

Npu Npc lay zc =D

;

a6

e

lay

2

Npu Npo 1 e

L

Le

a7 Npu

l D

2D2 D2

l

Npu Npo L 1 e -lL=D

e

D l D

l

Npu Npc zc

1

e

lay

D lay D

Npu Npo zc 1 e lzc =D

e

l

D l D

The horizontal force equilibrium equation (Eq. 13), for

the zo/D value derived from Eq. (15), yields non-dimensional

lateral bearing capacity Hu/cuD2.

2

Hu

c1 zo =D c2 c3 zo =D el zo =D

2

cu D

c4 c5 zo =D elay zo =D c6

16

where

c1 Npu D=e ; c2 Npu Npo D=e =l2 ;

c3 Npu Npo D=e =l;

Npu Npc

c4

D=e elay zc =D ;

2 2

l ay

Npu Npc

c5

D=e elay zc =D ;

" lay

c6

D Npu L 2 Npu Npo Npu Npo

L

1

elL=D

2 D

e

D

l2

l2

Npu Npo zc

Npu Npc zc Npu Npc

lzc =D

1

e

D

lay

D

l2

l2 a2y

lateral bearing capacity of the pile when the depth of

rotation zo, derived from Eq. (15), is less than critical

depth zc. Therefore, Eqs. (15) and (16) are applied for

zo 4 zc, while for zo r zc, the computation of zo and Hu is

performed though Eqs. (9) and (10).

Figs. 8 and 9 present Hu/cuD2 versus L/D graphs derived

through Eq. (16) for rigid free-head piles with a 0 and

a 1, respectively, placed in level ground (b/D N), at the

crest (b/D 0.5) of a 1:1 slope and at a distance of

b/D 2 from the same slope. Three normalized heights of

load application are considered, namely, e/D 0, 4 and 16.

placed near a slope with an inclination of 1:2.

It is noted that a similar procedure can be followed to

derive the lateral bearing capacity of a pile loaded in the

opposite direction (Fig. 7(b)). For very short piles placed

some distance from the crest of a slope, this inward loading

can yield lower Hu as the lateral earth pressure is reduced

in the lower part of the pile, while it remains unaffected by

the slope in the upper part.

40

b/D =

b/D = 2

b/D = 0.5

e/D = 0

Hu/cu D2

30

e/D = 4

20

e/D = 16

10

10

12

14

L/D

Fig. 8. Lateral bearing capacity of smooth piles (a 0) near 1:1 slope.

50

b/D =

b/D = 2

b/D = 0.5

Hu/cu D2

40

e/D = 0

30

e/D = 4

20

e/D = 16

10

0

0

10

149

12

14

L/D

Fig. 9. Lateral bearing capacity of rough piles (a 1) near 1:1 slope.

a rigid pile can be expressed through a reduction factor

(rH) dened as the ratio of the bearing capacity of a pile

near a slope to that of the same pile in level ground,

namely, rH Hu/Huo. The variations in rH with L/D, for

smooth (a 0) and rough (a 1) piles located near a 1:1

slope, are shown in Figs. 11 and 12 for e/D=0 and

e/D=16, respectively. Similar graphs are presented in

Fig. 13 for piles placed near a slope with an inclination

of 1:2 for e/D 0. Figs. 11 to 13 illustrate some signicant

features regarding the bearing capacity reduction. It is

demonstrated that reduction factor rH is affected by the

slope inclination, the pile distance from the slope (b/D), the

length to diameter ratio (L/D), the normalised height of

load application (e/D) and the pilesoil adhesion factor (a). As

seen in the gures, the reduction in bearing capacity for piles

at the crest of a slope can reach about 40% for 1:1 slopes and

20% for 1:2 slopes when a=0. This reduction is a little lower

for rough piles (a=1), namely, in the order of 30% and 15%,

respectively.

As seen in Figs. 11 to 13, reduction factor rH for piles

placed close to the crest of a slope (small b/D) increases

with an increase in L/D, while for piles placed far from the

crest (large b/D), rH decreases with an increase in L/D. This

behaviour can be explained through Fig. 2, which shows

1.0

40

b/D = 4

b/D =

b/D = 2

e/D = 0

b/D = 0.5

0.9

Hu/cu D2

30

b/D = 2

e/D = 4

rH 0.8

b/D = 1

20

b/D = 0.5

e/D = 16

10

0.7

=0

=1

0.6

0

0

10

12

14

L/D

Fig. 10. Lateral bearing capacity of smooth piles (a 0) near 1:2 slope.

10

12

14

L/D

Fig. 11. Bearing capacity reduction factor for piles near 1:1 slope

(e/D 0).

150

1.0

b/D = 4

b/D = 2

0.9

b/D = 1

rH 0.8

b/D = 0.5

0.7

=0

=1

0.6

0

10

12

14

L/D

Fig. 12. Bearing capacity reduction factor for piles near 1:1 slope

(e/D16).

1.0

b/D = 4

method, for smooth piles (a 0) near 1:1 and 1:2 slopes,

are compared in Figs. 14 and 15 to those derived by

Stewart (1999) through upper bound plasticity calculations

for smooth piles in weightless soil. As seen in these gures,

the proposed method gives a greater reduction in bearing

capacity for both slope inclinations and for all b/D and

L/D ratios. It is also seen that, according to the proposed

method, the lateral bearing capacity of a pile is reduced

even at a distance ratio of b/D 4, while according to

Stewarts reduction factors, the piles bearing capacity is

unaffected by the slope at that distance. It is noted that the

observed behaviour is in agreement with the results of the

eld lateral pile load tests reported by Nimityongskul and

Ashford (2010), according to which the effect of the slope

on the lateral pile response disappears at some distance

between b/D 4 and b/D 8.

1.0

b/D = 4

b/D = 2

0.9

b/D = 2

b/D = 1

b/D = 0.5

0.9

b/D = 1

rH 0.8

b/D = 0.5

rH 0.8

0.7

proposed

Stewart (1999)

0.7

0.6

0

=0

=1

0.6

10

12

10

12

14

L/D

14

L/D

Fig. 13. Bearing capacity reduction factor for piles near 1:2 slope

(e/ D 0).

Fig. 14. Comparison of reduction factors for smooth piles near 1:1 slope

(e/D 0).

1.0

b/D = 4

b/D = 2

For piles at the crest of the slope, Np increases with depth

and progressively approaches the values for horizontal

ground. As a result, the value of rH increases with an

increase in L/D. On the other hand, for piles far from the

crest, the increase in critical depth zc, i.e., the depth above

which the lateral earth pressure is equal to that for

horizontal ground, with the increase in b/D, results in a

reduction in rH with an increase in L/D.

A comparison of Figs. 11 and 12 reveals that reduction

factor rH increases with an increase in the e/D ratio, i.e., an

increase in the moment applied at the pile head. The

increased applied moment causes a reduction in rotation

depth zo (Fig. 7(a)), and therefore, a larger pile section is

left below zo, where the lateral earth pressure for horizontal ground is applied.

b/D = 1

0.9

b/D = 0.5

rH 0.8

0.7

proposed

Stewart (1999)

0.6

10

12

14

L/D

Fig. 15. Comparison of reduction factors for smooth piles near 1:2 slope

(e/D 0).

6

1:1,e/D = 0

In order to validate the proposed method, the results

of 25 lateral load eld tests on short piles (drilled shafts),

reported by McDonald (1999), Bhushan et al. (1979),

40

=1

= 0.5

=0

L/D = 10

Hu/cu D2

30

L/D = 8

20

L/D = 6

1:1,e/D = 16

1:1,e/D = 0

1:1,e/D = 16

1:2,e/D = 0

1:2,e/D = 16

1:2,e/D = 0

1:2,e/D = 16

bc /D

free-head pile near a 1:1 slope is illustrated in Fig. 16 for

different values of adhesion factor a. As seen, the distance

at which bearing capacity Hu, derived by Eq. (16), becomes

equal to the bearing capacity Huo of the same pile in a level

ground, derived by Eq. (10), is signicantly affected by

L/D. As expected, longer piles are affected by the slope at a

much greater distance from the crest than shorter ones.

It is also seen that, although signicant to lateral bearing

capacity Hu, the effect of adhesion on the maximum

distance at which the pile is affected by the slope is rather

limited. Rough piles (a 1) are affected by the slope up

to slightly greater distances from the crest than smooth

piles (a 0).

The effect of L/D, slope inclination, adhesion factor a

and the e/D ratio on a critical distance bc between the pile

and the slope, at which Hu becomes equal to 99% of Huo,

is shown in Fig. 17. As seen in this gure, bc/D is primarily

affected by the L/D ratio and secondarily by e/D, a and the

slope inclination. Critical distance ratio bc/D increases with

L/D and can reach a value of 4 to 6 for large L/D values,

starting from a value of about 2 for very short piles

(L/D 2). It is also seen that bc/D increases with an

increase in slope inclination from 1:2 to 1:1 and an increase

in pilesoil adhesion from a 0 to a 1. On the other

hand, an increase in e/D, from 0 to 16, results in a decrease

in bc/D.

2

=1

=0

1

0

L/D = 4

10

L/D = 2

b/D

Fig. 16. Effect of distance from crest on lateral bearing capacity for 1:1

slope (e/D 0).

10

15

20

25

L/D

Fig. 17. Effect of inclination, adhesion, L/D and e/D on critical distance.

Puppala et al. (2011), are compared to the lateral bearing

capacities computed with Eq. (10) for piles in level ground

and Eq. (16) for piles in slopes. As seen in Table 1, the eld

tests were performed on short piles (drilled shafts) with

diameters ranging from 0.3 to 1.22 m, L/D ratios from 2 to

10 and e/D ratios from 0.05 to 4, in cohesive soil with levels

of undrained shear strength ranging from 28 to 480 kPa.

From the total number of 25 tests, 17 tests were conducted

in level ground with horizontal loading, 6 in level ground

with oblique loading at 16.11 to the ground level and the

remaining 2 at the edge of slopes with inclinations of 201

and 551 and horizontal loading. It is noted that in order to

obtain ultimate eld bearing capacity Hum, given in

Table 1, McDonald (1999) extrapolated the measured

load-displacement curves to failure using the method by

Chin (1970), in which the last part of the curve is

approximated by a hyperbola. The same method was

adopted in this paper to obtain the eld bearing capacity

Hum of Bhushan et al. (1979), Nusairat et al. (2004) and

Bierschwale et al. (1981) tests of Table 1, while Puppala

et al. (2011) test piles were loaded to failure, and therefore,

no extrapolation was required.

For comparison, three lateral pile capacities were calculated

for each test. The rst was computed with proposed Eqs. (10)

and (16) for adhesion factor a obtained using the following

equation proposed by Kulhawy (1991) for drilled shafts:

a 0:21

151

26

r 1 cu in kPa

cu

17

tests in Table 1, the values of a, calculated with the above

equation, vary from 0.26 to 1. The second calculated

bearing capacity was also obtained with Eqs. (10) and

(16), but assuming smooth pile behaviour with a=0. It is

noted that the computed bearing capacities for the tests

reported by Puppala et al. (2011), in which the load was

152

Table 1

Comparison to pile test results.

L (m)

e (m)

y (1)

cu (kPa)

Hum (kN)

Huc (kN)

Huc (kN) (a 0)

Reference

1.22

1.22

1.22

1.22

1.22

1.22

0.61

0.61

1.22

1.22

0.45

0.45

0.45

0.45

0.76

0.76

0.76

0.91

0.91

0.305

0.305

0.61

0.61

0.61

0.915

4.58

4.58

3.81

3.81

4.73

4.73

2.71

4.73

5.18

6.71

1.48

0.93

1.40

1.0

4.78

2.65

2.56

6.1

4.57

1.83

3.05

1.83

3.05

4.27

1.83

0.23

0.23

0.23

0.23

0.23

0.23

0.23

0.23

0.23

0.23

1.50

1.05

1.50

1.05

1.32

3.05

3.08

0.79

0.79

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

20

55

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

263.5

263.5

227.5

227.5

227.5

227.5

227.5

227.5

220

479

60

60

60

60

81

153

152

100

100

36

32

36

32

28

36

3631

3004

2094

2373

2657

3156

989

1891

2180

5347

45

16

33

20

601

316

311

1165

741

67

82.5

88.5

182

185

124

3161

3161

2109

2109

2861

2841

839

1792

2835

5361

39

19.5

35

22.6

606

268

247

1362

886

59

102

94

168

227

125

2839

2839

1882

1882

2567

2567

752

1611

2518

4677

32.5

16

29

18.5

523

236

218

1183

768

47

81.5

73.5

133

182.8

94.5

1533

1533

783

783

1435

1435

471

1366

15

2.1

12.5

3.4

416

119

105

953

536

36

73

28.5

92.5

150

9.5

Bhushan et al. (1979)

Bhushan et al. (1979)

Bhushan et al. (1979)

Bhushan et al. (1979)

Bhushan et al. (1979)

Bhushan et al. (1979)

Bhushan et al. (1979)

Bhushan et al. (1979)

Bhushan et al. (1979)

McDonald (1999)

McDonald (1999)

McDonald (1999)

McDonald (1999)

Nusairat et al. (2004)

Nusairat et al. (2004)

Nusairat et al. (2004)

Bierschwale et al. (1981)

Bierschwale et al. (1981)

Puppala et al. (2011)

Puppala et al. (2011)

Puppala et al. (2011)

Puppala et al. (2011)

Puppala et al. (2011)

Puppala et al. (2011)

D (m)

25

20

15

10

5

for = 0.21 + 26/cu[kPa]

for = 0

Broms' method

0

0

10

15

20

25

load tests.

horizontal ground and horizontal loading. Finally, the

third bearing capacity in Table 1 was calculated with the

classic Broms method.

A comparison is made between the computed bearing

capacities and those derived from the eld tests in

non-dimensional terms (Hu/cuD2) in Fig. 18. As seen, the

agreement between the eld test pile capacities and those

computed with the proposed new method is remarkable.

It is also observed that the assumption of smooth piles,

with a 0, instead of a 0.26 to 1, yields slightly conservative results. More conservative bearing capacities are

obtained with Broms method, especially for low L/D (and

therefore, Hu/cuD2) values.

153

excellent agreement with Stewarts approach which is based

on the analytical upper bound solution of Murff and

Hamilton.

The bearing capacity charts derived with the proposed

method for piles near slopes demonstrate that the lateral

bearing capacity is signicantly affected by the nondimensional distance (b/D) of the pile from the crest of

the slope. Similar to piles in level ground, the bearing

capacity is also affected by the non-dimensional load

eccentricity (e/D), adhesion factor a and the L/D ratio.

The effect of the slope was investigated through the

introduction of a bearing capacity reduction factor, rH,

dened as the ratio of the lateral bearing capacity of a pile

near a slope to that of the same pile in level ground. It was

found that the bearing capacity reduction for smooth piles

at the crest of a slope can reach 40 and 20 percent for 1:1

and 1:2 slopes, respectively. The reduction is somewhat

lower for rough piles, especially for low L/D values.

The study also showed that the non-dimensional critical

distance of the pile from the crest (bc/D), at which the

bearing capacity becomes equal to that of piles in level

ground, depends on the slope inclination, the L/D and e/D

ratios and pilesoil adhesion factor a. As seen in Fig. 17,

the maximum value for bc/D is found for longer piles and

ranges between 4 (for 1:2 slope) and 6 (for 1:1 slope).

The proposed method was validated through a comparison to 25 full-scale pile load test results. It was shown that

the ultimate lateral loads calculated using the new method

were in excellent agreement with the experimental results

for piles in both level and sloping ground. It is noted that

the proposed method for piles near clay slopes is valid for

undrained conditions, provided that the slope height is

such that the slope is not close to stability failure due to its

self-weight.

References

8. Conclusions

A method for the analytical computation of the ultimate

bearing capacity of free-head piles in level ground and near

the crest of clay slopes was developed. The derived

equations consider the effect of pilesoil adhesion on the

lateral earth pressure along the pile and the bearing

capacity reduction caused by the pile proximity to the

slope. The method was used to develop Hu/cuD2 versus

L/D charts.

For piles in level ground, the lateral bearing capacity

increased signicantly with an increase in adhesion factor a.

The bearing capacities computed with the new method for

different values of a fall well within the range of values

obtained using the lateral load distributions adopted by

several other researchers. For smooth piles (a 0), the new

method is in good agreement with Broms method (except

for low L/D values) and the bearing capacities calculated

Bhushan, K., Haley, S.C., Fong, P.T., 1979. Lateral load tests on drilled

piers in stiff clays. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division 105

(8), 969985 ASCE.

Bierschwale, M.W., Coyle, H.M., Bartoskewitz, R.E., 1981. Lateral load

test on drilled shafts founded in clay. Drilled piers and caissons, Proc.

of a Session at the ASCE National Convention, St. Louis, Missouri,

pp. 98112.

Broms, B.B., 1964. Lateral resistance of piles in cohesive soils. Journal of

Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division 90 (2), 2763 ASCE.

Chae, K.S., Ugai, K., Wakai, A., 2004. Lateral resistance of short single

piles and pile groups located near slopes. International Journal of

Geomechanics 4 (2), 93103 ASCE.

Chin, F.K., 1970. Estimation of the ultimate load on piles not carried to

failure. In: Proceedings of the second Southeast Asia Conference on

Soil Engineering, 8190.

Georgiadis, K., Georgiadis, M., 2010. Undrained lateral pile response in

sloping ground. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental

Engineering 136 (11), 14891500 ASCE.

Georgiadis, K., Georgiadis, M., 2012. Development of py curves for

undrained response of piles near slopes. Computers and Geotechnics

40, 5361.

154

Hansen, B.J., 1961. The ultimate resistance of rigid piles against transversal

forces. The Danish Geotechnical Institute, Bulletin 12, 516.

Jeanjean, P., 2009. Re-Assessment of PY curves for soft clays from

centrifuge testing and nite element modeling. Offshore Technology

Conference, Houston, OTC 20158, 123.

Kulhawy, F.H., 1991. Drilled shaft foundations. In: Fang, H.Y. (Ed.),

Foundation Engineering Handbook. Chapman and Hall, New York,

pp. 537552.

Matlock, H., 1970. Correlations for design of laterally loaded piles in soft

clay. In: Proceedings of the Second Offshore Technology Conference,

Houston, OTC 1204, 577594.

McDonald, P., 1999. Laterelly loaded pile capacity re-visited. In:

Proceedings of the Eighth Australia-New Zealand Conference on

Geomechanics, Hobart, vol. 1, 421427.

Meyerhof, G.G., Mathur, S.K., Valsangkar, A.J., 1981. Lateral resistance

and deection of rigid walls and piles in layered soils. Canadian

Geotechnical Journal 18 (1), 159170.

Mezazigh, S., Levacher, D., 1998. Laterally loaded piles in sand: slope effect

on py reaction curves. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 35 (3), 433441.

Murff, J.D., Hamilton, J.M., 1993. P-Ultimate for undrained analysis of

laterally loaded piles. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 119 (1),

91107 ASCE.

Nimityongskul, N., Ashford, S., 2010. Effect of soil slope on lateral

capacity of piles in cohesive soils. In: Proceedings Ninth US National

and Tenth Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Toronto, Paper no. 366.

Nusairat, J., Liang, R.Y., Engel, R., Hanneman, D., Abu-Hajleh, N.,

Yang, K., 2004. Drilled Shaft Design for Sound Barrier Walls, Signs

and Signals, Colorado Department of Transportation, Report no.

CDOT-DTD-R-2004-8.

Puppala, A.J., Wejrungsikul, T., Williammee, R.S., Witherspoon, T.,

Hoyos, L. 2011. Design of Inclined Loaded Drilled Shafts in HighPlasticity Clay Environment. Technical Report FHWA/TX - 11/0

6146 - 1, Univ. of Texas at Arlington/ Texas Dept. of Transportation.

Randolph, M.F., Houlsby, G.T., 1984. The limiting pressure on a circular

pile loaded laterally in cohesive soil. Geotechnique 34 (4), 613623.

Reese, L.C., Cox, W.R., Koop, F.D., 1975. Field testing and analysis of

laterally loaded piles in stiff clay. In: Proceedings of the Seventh

Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, OTC 2312, pp. 671690.

Reese, L.C., Welch, R.C., 1975. Lateral loading of deep foundations in

stiff clay. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division 101 (7),

633649 ASCE.

Stevens, J.B., Audibert, J.M.E., 1980. Re-examination of py curve

formulation, Proceedings of Eleventh Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, OTC 3402, pp. 397403.

Stewart, D.P., 1999. Reduction of undrained lateral pile capacity in clay

due to an adjacent slope. Australian Geomechanics 34 (4), 1723.

- geotechnical design of buildingsUploaded byJamie Moore
- Tutorial 5Uploaded byAnonymous Vx9KTkM8n
- Combined & Strap Footing - Geotechnical Engineering Questions and Answers - SanfoundryUploaded bygokulcivilions
- Strength ReductionUploaded byssheafi
- Ground Improvement TechniquesUploaded byAkshay Singh Rathore
- GEO5 2015 Leaflet en Source TextsUploaded byMilan Stojanovic
- ad de Taludes by SteveYaegerUploaded byctorres_88
- Syllabus CopyUploaded bydilip22sk
- 1_145_NITUploaded byPothugunta Naga Gopinath Nagas
- GDR for ERS_April 2013.pdfUploaded byJamie Moore
- ufc_3_220_01nUploaded byOvidiu Pruteanu
- 11 Geological, Seismic and Geotechnical AspectsUploaded byMoniruzzaman Moni
- A Simulation Study of Slope Stability Affected by Construction of New Buildings at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai.Uploaded bytimbalai
- Micropile Manual FINAL July 2006 PDF - CopyUploaded byroy anant
- Bnbc Part 6_chapter 3_170612geotecniaUploaded byPaslapola Pas Lapola
- VanAsch Et Al BSGF 07Uploaded byCatalin Veghiu
- 10.1007_s11204-007-0039-5Uploaded bySeif Eddine
- Simple Slope Stability ProblemsUploaded byRopan Efendi
- Jurnal Testing of Rock FilledUploaded byAmbarr Sutanti
- 2014bc ExcavationUploaded byrjsquebrar
- c-4.pdfUploaded byCarlos Silva Castillo
- Professor Matthew Gilbert - Application of Computational Limit Analysis & Design in the Middle East.pdfUploaded byMasnun Rahman
- Ax Bretea Centura2Uploaded bynanescul
- AcharyyaandDeyINAELetters2017Preprintcopy.pdfUploaded byAnonymous ohCQvF
- 1-12Uploaded byAsneidys Pozo
- 2011 Geological Engineering.pdfUploaded bypaolodgr
- Geotechnical Foresinc EngineeringUploaded byRuben Dominguez Alfaro
- Wiley Duncan Wright FlyerUploaded byRAJIT KUMAR YADAV
- SECCION 2Uploaded byKevin Diaz Cabrera
- digital twinUploaded byAnonymous zwnFXURJ

- Moody's ChartUploaded bybsk109
- PEO - Review of Completed Work - 2012Uploaded byTerry Cheung
- CMHC-Canadian-Wood-Frame-House-Construction.pdfUploaded byindianteenv
- Design_Aid_for_Triangular_Bracket_Plates_Using_AISC_Specifications[1].pdfUploaded bykloic1980
- V10 - Tutorials.pdfUploaded byTerry Cheung
- CGSB 12.20-M89 Structural Design of Glass for Buildings - Withdrawn.pdfUploaded byTerry Cheung
- 2D_3D_Verification_Problems.pdfUploaded byTerry Cheung
- RISA 3D - General Reference v17.pdfUploaded byTerry Cheung
- C-C-CAN2018Uploaded byTerry Cheung
- SikaAnchorFix DesignGuide EnUploaded byTerry Cheung
- Use of Broms_ Charts for Evaluating Lateral LoadUploaded byGarima Gupta
- SikaCarboDurRods_pds.pdfUploaded byTerry Cheung
- bajar.pdfUploaded byMohammed Faisal T
- Pile Foundation Analysis and Design H. G. Poulos & E. H. Davis1980Uploaded bynizamaniza
- 21-Akpila-6069-3155-3161Uploaded byTerry Cheung
- Behaviorofpilesandpilegroupsunderlateralload 150511101841 Lva1 App6892Uploaded byTerry Cheung
- Truss Joist - TJ-9500 (18) (1)Uploaded byTerry Cheung
- STRUCTURE Magazine _ Steel Deck Diaphragm Design 101Uploaded byTerry Cheung
- SB-7-Wooden-Guards-Standards.pdfUploaded byTerry Cheung
- RTE 3960-03Uploaded byTerry Cheung
- 1 Introduction 2016Uploaded byTerry Cheung
- 265000 Light PolesUploaded byTerry Cheung
- Branded Citygreen StrataCell Specification120511-1.docxUploaded byTerry Cheung
- Canam Joist CatalogUploaded bycivil89
- a3.01 Building SectionsUploaded byTerry Cheung
- Boef --- Beam on Elastic Foundation AnalysisUploaded byDavidParedes
- 1-011_Upfitters_Guide_for_Mack_Class_8_Chassis_January_2007.pdfUploaded byJose Luis Poma M
- SB 7 Wooden Guards StandardsUploaded byTerry Cheung
- TrenchingandShoringManual2011 (1)Uploaded byTerry Cheung

- FRP tendon anchorage in post-tensioned concrete structures (2009) - Paper (6).pdfUploaded byJulio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- MA1200 Chapter 6 Limits, Continuity and DifferentiabilityUploaded byWai Ho Choi
- Bathes MethodUploaded byluisazcarate
- PolymerUploaded byVijaychandar Vijay
- Ashta LakshmiUploaded bytiadgh
- CLEANING CHEMICAL CC1-TECH SPECS-ENG-R2-PTUploaded bysgpttech
- Lab Exercise 1Uploaded byleopard9987
- Colombia Guide PDFUploaded byLeonardo Olarte
- S5Uploaded byJason Carter
- Mcq for Group ReviewUploaded byAyah Paasa
- Cambridge English Movers (YLE Movers) Picture Bank.pdfUploaded byFonsi Arc Rs
- ChemW-Ch 11 Review Worksheet-KEY.jntUploaded byLaura McCaw Smith
- Maximum Surgical Blood Ordering ScheduleUploaded bysshawash
- Form 2 - Material Matrix (002).docxUploaded bytiti tio
- Central Cascades Wilderness Strategies ProjectUploaded bySinclair Broadcast Group - Eugene
- Heat Treatment of Low-AlloyUploaded byعزت عبد المنعم
- hfe_yamaha_ax-492_592_892.pdfUploaded byRafael Cordano
- Coal AnalysisUploaded byJayandi Fitra
- G.S Kirk - Popper on Science and the ticsUploaded byHernan Camilo
- Manual ICS200Uploaded byCRISA3000000
- Tagalog_Science_Names.pdfUploaded byAlemante Molla
- Introduction Tumor Immunology 2008 SpringUploaded byEdi Uchiha Sutarmanto
- Price Monitoring Jan-March 2014.xlsxUploaded byCaare Felix
- 113.pdfUploaded byAhmad Arbi Anindito
- The Last TrumpetUploaded byn.e.nabatar
- MSc Thesis.pdfUploaded byGopi C Shrestha
- Integral Theory System Simplified Clinical ApproachUploaded byAndrei Cristea
- Water Quality Health Risk AssessmentUploaded byAizat Asyh
- Humanitarian Logistics in Disaster Relief OperationsUploaded byEmil Emmanuel Estilo
- Gekelman-3D Observations of EM Ion Cyclotron Wave Propagation in Plasma Column 8ppUploaded byj.emmett.dwyer1033

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.