Computers and Geotechnics 15 (1993) 189-220

~-~.q~ ~,~

ANALYSIS OF PILE-SOIL INTERACTION UNDER LATERAL LOADING USING

INFINITE AND FINITE ELEMENTS

L. Chen and H.G. Poulos

School of Civil & Mining Engineering
The University of Sydney
NSW 2006
Australia

ABSTRACT

In order to gain a better understanding of pile-soil interaction under lateral loading,

this paper presents a numerical analysis which combines the infinite and finite dement
method. Interest is focused on the group effect on ultimate lateral soil resistance. Firstly,
a single isolated pile is analysed and reasonably good agreement is found between existing
analytical solutions and results obtained by the present method. A limited parametric
study is also presented and some parameters influencing the ultimate lateral soil resistance
are identified. The analysis of pile groups is then considered and it is shown that the
group effect tends to reduce pile capacity when the spacings between piles are within the
practical ranges. The extent of the reduction depends on the arrangement of piles within
the group.

INTRODUCTION

The problem of pile groups subjected to lateral loads is of particular interest in

connection with many offshore pile-supported structures. In designing such piles, an
understanding of the pile-soil interaction is desirable, since as compared with single
isolated piles, piles within a group may suffer some reduction in capacity due to
interaction effects. Much research has been done on the problem of lateral response of
piles and pile groups, and three analytical approaches have been developed, the subgrade-
189
Computers and Geotechnics 0266-352X/93/$06.00 © 1993 Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd,
England. Printed in Great Britain
 190

reaction approach, the elastic approach, and the finite element approach. The main
disadvantage of the subgrade reaction approach is that the continuum nature of the soil is
ignored, whereas the elastic approach assumes the soil to be an ideal elastic continuum
[1,2]. A modification to the elastic approach has also been made to consider the local
yield of the soil [2], and this approach requires a knowledge of the ultimate soil resistance
(p~). p. can be obtained either empirically [3,4] or analytically [2,5] for the case of single
isolated piles, but there is little information on p~ for the case of pile groups. A full three-
dimensional finite element analysis is generally not feasible, but a more practical
approach is to use the finite element analysis to derive "p-y" curves, and the ultimate soil
pressure can be obtained [6] for both single isolated piles and pile groups.

The ultimate soil resistance developed in the soil by the pile was treated by Broms
[3], who suggested that for soft undrained clay the value could be taken as 9c~ (where c.
is the undrained shear strength of the clay). Based on plasticity theory using limit
analysis, Poulos and Davis [2] presented solutions for piles of different cross-sectional
shapes and materials. For a square rigid pile, the value was found to be vary between
about 8.28c, for a smooth pile to 11.14c, for a rough pile. Randolph and Houlsby [5]
used classical plasticity theory to derive exact solutions for the ultimate lateral resistance
of a circular pile in cohesive soil, and found a value of 9.14c~ for a perfectly smooth pile,
and 11.94c~ for a perfectly rough pile. Though some discrepancies exist between different
methods, a value of between 8co to 12c~ may be accepted for practical purposes.

The above solutions, either empirical or analytical, are strictly for single isolated
piles. In practice these solutions have also been used for pile groups due to the lack of
satisfactory solutions, although the group effect has been found to reduce capacities of
piles in a group [6,7]. Since in practice piles are frequently used in groups, it is desirable
to obtain a better understanding of pile-soil-pile interaction among a group of piles. For
this purpose, the finite element analysis presented by Yegian & Wright [6] has some
advantages. However, although the finite element method has an advantage in its ability
to deal with complicated configurations of structures and soil media, the proper location
of the finite outer boundary is often crucial for obtaining an accurate solution and the
selection of the minimum distance from the region of interest is often a question of
experience and intuition. The conventional finite element method may in some cases
 1 91

require a great number of elements to properly simulate the far-field behaviour although
the main interest lies within the near-field.

One way of solving this problem is by using a combination of infinite and finite
element methods, which has been used by some researchers in treating various problems
involving unbounded domains [8,9,10,11]. The infinite element is used to simulate the
far-field behaviour of the soil medium, while standard finite elements are used to model
the pile and the soil immediately surrounding it. The incorporation of the infinite element
into a standard finite element program can not only approximate the stress distribution in
the far field, but can also save much computational effort and time.

The purpose of this paper is to combine the finite element approach, based on the
technique developed by Yegian & Wright [6], with the infinite element approach proposed
by Damjanie and Owen [10], to study the mechanisms of pile-soil interaction and the
effects of group action on the ultimate lateral soil resistance. The ultimate aim is to
develop solutions for the ultimate soil resistance for piles within a group which can be
used as input data for non-linear boundary element analyses of the type described by
Poulos and Davis [2].

INFINITE AND FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING

The formulation of a mapped infinite element proposed by Damjanie and Owen [10]
is adopted in this paper and is outlined briefly below. Consider the one-dimensional
situation shown in Fig.1. The element extending from node 1, through node 2, to the
point 3 at infinity is mapped onto the parent element defined by the local coordinate
system,-1 </~>1. The location of node 2 is defined by the location of node 1 and the
position of the pole x, through

x2=2xI - x o ( 1)

The relationship between the local coordinate and the global coordinate can be
expressed as
 192

x2

x1
--i
Xo r
i z

-I
X--~I o c ~ ¢o
0 1 2 3

Infinite element in
global coordinates

1 2 3 Mapped element in
o o a local coordinates
~=-1 ~j=O ~i1

FIGURE 1 Global to local mapping of a one-dimensional infinite element

oo

o
A~ Y
/--fJ
,-F

l
/I"~ 1/ . 7
c

r X

Mapped element in Infinite clement in

local coordinate global coordinate

FIGURE 2 Two-dimensional mapped infinite element

 193

i=1

where summation extends over the finite nodes only and the mapping functions fli are
given by

~7a(¢) = -2UO - 0
~'2(~)=(1 +~)I(1-0 (3)

From the above expressions it can be seen that G---I, O, 1 correspond respectively to
the global positions x = x 1, x2, oo.

The basic unknown function, q, (in this paper the displacement), can be interpolated
using standard shape functions and may be expressed in polynomial form as

O(~)=¢CO+~I~ +0~2~2+a3~3... (4)

Solving (2) for + yields

=1-2d/r (5)

in which r denotes the distance from the pole, O, to a general point within the element
and d = x 2 - x i as shown in Fig. I. Substituting (5) into (4) gives the unknown function
in terms of the global coordinate, r, as follows

/. 1.2 /.3

where 30 = 0 is implied if the variable 4, vanishes at infinity which is the case for pile-
soil interaction problem. Suitable decay rates, 1/m, of the basic variable can be
accommodated by the appropriate choice of the shape functions in (4).

The procedure can be extended to a two-dimensional situation by taking shape

function products. A typical biquadratic infinite element is shown in Fig.2. Nodes 7, 8
and 9 are placed at infinity. The transformation from local coordinates to global
 194

coordinates in this case can be written as

I*l
6
(7)

i-1

and the mapping functions arc expressed as

M~(~,,~)=~'I(~)N~(,0, (8)

where Ni are given in (3) and Ni are standard quadratic interpolation functions, i.e.

tc,(n) =n(n -D/2

N~(~)=I-z (9)
N3(~)=~(~ +1)/2

It can be seen that the numerical procedure by which the element matrices are formed
is very similar for both finite and infinite elements. Thus the implementation of the
infinite element can be easily incorporated into an existing conventional finite element
program. A computer program caUed AVPULL (Analysis of Vertical i~iles ~nder lateral
_Loading) has been developed by the present authors to implement this approach. In the
program 3 x3 and 3 x 1 integration schemes were used for solid elements and interface
elements, respectively.

In order to verify the program and illustrate the advantage of the combined infinite
and finite element method over the conventional finite element method, the problem of a
hollow cylinder subjected to internal pressure in an isotropic elastic mass has been
analysed by using both methods. Due to symmetry, only a quarter of the cylinder has
been analysed. For the case of combined infinite and finite elements, only 16 finite
elements and 4 infinite elements have been used, and the mesh used is shown in Fig.3.
For the ease of finite elements only, 32 elements have been used. The computed radial
 195

displacement (dr) and stress components (a o, a,) are compared with the analytical
solutions [12] in Fig.4. It can be seen that for the case of finite and infinite elements,
displacements in both near- and far-field agree very well with the analytical solution,
while reasonable agreement is found for stresses. For the ease of finite elements only,
considerable differences can be seen for both stress-free and fixed boundary conditions.
Adequate accuracy in this case would require the boundary to be extended to a
considerable distance from the cavity. The above simple example clearly demonstrates the
efficiency of the combined infinite and finite element method when dealing with
unbounded domain problems.

Elastic medium

~ ~ ~modulus
S h Ge a r
g

FIGURE 3 A hollow cylinder subjected to internal pressure and finite and infinite element discretization

APPLI(~ATION TO ANALYSIS OF PILES

Pile-soil interaction is a three-dimensional problem and a full investigation would

require resort to a three-dimensional finite element analysis which is time consuming.
However, when piles are subjected to lateral loading, the vertical displacement is very
small as compared with horizontal displacement, and as a first approximation, a plane
 196

1.2 1.5
analytical solution .... analytical solution
$. Infinite/finite element method
od

O.S ~- 0.5

~
L

0.6 0

0.4

0.2 - I /analytical solution

x infinite/finite element method
i i i i i i i -1.5 . . . . . . .
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 0.5 1 1.5 2 2,5 3 3.5 4 4.5
R/r R/r

(a) Infinite/finite element (b) Infinite/finite element

1.2 1.5
analytical solution analytlcal solution
finite element method finite element method
~... stress-free boundsry
fixed boundary
0.8 c,. 0.5
CD
t_
t3

~0.6

0.4 -0.5
t3
// ~ite el~_~en~ method
0.2
-! ~/ ~- stress-free boundary
0 fixed boundary
i i i J i J
0 i i J h i i ~ ~",,%-- -1.5
0.5 I 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
R/r R/r

(c) Finite element (d) Finite element

FIGURE 4 Comparisons between analytical solutions and numerical results

 ~197

strain analysis can be appli&! to a horizontal plane within the soil mass. Moreover, since
the ultimate lateral pile-soil contact pressure is the primary concern in this paper, a plane
strain analysis should provide an adequate solution.

Eight-node isoparametrie finite elements have been used to model piles and the soil
immediately surrounding piles (near-field), while mapped infinite elements have been used
to model the soil in the far-field region. The pile has been assumed to be rigid and square
in shape, unless otherwise specified. The soil has been assumed to be purely cohesive
undrained clay. In order to represent the characteristics of the soil as realistically as
possible, the soil has been modelled as an elasta-plastie material [13,14], obeying the
Tresca failure criterion. A Goodman type interface element [15] has been used to model
the separation and slip between the soil and the pile. The similar stress-strain model as
used for the soil has also been applied to the interface element, as has been described by
Small & Chung [16]. The properties of the interface element are determined by its
maximum shear resistance (rf) and two stiffnesses, i.e., normal stiffness lq and shear
stiffness k,. The maximum shear resistance rf is determined by the pile adhesion c. which
is usually related to the undrained shear strength c., and may be expressed as r,=e.=f.c,,
of which fo is a coefficient whose value depends on the type and condition of the pile
material. As little information is known about the values of k, and lq for clays, a direct
shear test may be required to determine these two stiffnesses for practical use. However,
in the present study, values were assumed based on the data reported by Yegian & Wright
[6].

The finite element technique developed by Yegian & Wright [6] has been adopted in
this paper. When a pile is subjected to a lateral load, as illustrated in Fig.5, it will
displace laterally until equilibrium is established with respect to the stress and
displacements of both the soil and the pile at each point along the pile. As the pile is
displaced a distance y, the stress acting on the perimeter of the pile at each level will
change from its initial uniform state to a non-uniform state. The average stress (p) (per
unit length of pile), over the pile width perpendicular to the direction of pile movement,
is calculated from the sum of the stresses acting in the direction of pile movement. Thus a
"p-y" curve of the pile at a particular depth can be constructed and consequently, at
failure, the ultimate soil pressure can be obtained.
 198

I
]1 I
! ,~ Typical horizontal section

I,, I',1 II
'///

• ~ P

_1
-- i

(b) Initial stress (c) Equilibrium stress

(a) Typical laterally loaded pile distribution distribution

FIGURE 5 Stress distribution around laterally displaced pile cross-section

)h,._i

f
//////////// f
I////////I/I \
I
/
\
/
\
/
I
O0 ..._1
"-I

\ I
/
A A \
/
\

Pile "

A-A

FIGURE 6 A single isolated pile loaded laterally in extended soil medium

 199

A SINGLE ISOLATED PILE

A single isolated pile was first analysed. Fig.6 illustrates a horizontal section of a
single isolated pile loaded laterally in an extended soil medium. For purpose of analysis,
a 0.5-m wide pile was assumed and initial stress conditions representing a depth of six
times the pile width were selected. Fig.7 shows the infinite and finite element mesh used
for this analysis. Only half of the problem was analysed due to symmetry, and rollers
were used to represent this symmetry. Since the mapped infinite element was used for
modelling the fax-field behaviour of the soil, the boundary conditions for the other three
boundaries were satisfied automatically.

Infinite element

Symmetry
boundary

Finite
element

¢J
t~

Pile
~a
o~
0.,

.o

FIGURE 7 Infinite and finite element mesh for a single isolated pile
loaded laterally in extended soil medium
 200

A uniform displacement (y) was applied incrementally to the pile in the direction of
pile movement. The shear and normal stresses at the interface were computed in the
infinite and finite element analysis and resolved into an average pressure p, over the
width of the pile, so that for each increment a single point on the p-y curve for the pile
could be established.

Because soil has limited ability to take tension, separation between the pile and the
soil may occur. In the present analysis, the soil was assumed to have zero tensile strength
and was allowed to separate from the pile once it was required to transmit tensile stress.

Table 1 shows the parameters chosen for an analysis, in which

Eo = soil Young's modulus;
Cu undrained shear strength of the soil;
/.t, Possion's ratio;
ko= coefficient of earth pressure at rest
k . = shear stiffness of the interface element;
k~= normal stiffness of the interface dement;
fo= c./c., pile adhesion ratio;
CI pile adhesion and
W = pile width.

TABLE 1 Parameters chosen for a single isolated pile analysis

E. E/c. ~. k. k.=k~ fo w
kN/m 2 kN/m2/m (=c./c9 (m)

"2667.0 350.0 0.495 1.0 1570.0 1.0 0.5

Fig.8 shows the relationship between the normalized soil resistance p/c,, and the
normalized pile displacement y/w. The "p-y" curve obtained by the present method is of
similar form to those presented by some other researchers, for example Matlock [17] and
Yegian & Wright [6]. However, no attempt has been made here to utilize the computed
 201

"p-y" curve; rather, attention has been concentrated on the ultimate lateral resistance.
Although separation is not allowed in the analytical analysis, nevertheless, for the single
pile the normalized ultimate soil resistance pdc, of 11.7 still agrees quite well with the
analytical predictions discussed previously and this agreement serves to verify the present
method and leads to confidence in the solutions presented for group piles later in this
paper.

14

.•12
0 f l _._._..---

+m
o~

h,d

O
~ 6
N
o~

O
" 2
/
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
normalized pile displacement y/w

FIGURE 8 " p - y " relationship for a single isolated pile loaded

laterally in extended soil medium

The deformed mesh at failure is illustrated in Fig.9(a). Because initial stresses in the
soil are taken into account, no initial separation between the soil and the pile occurs.
However since the soil is assumed to have no tensile strength, a gap between the soil and
the back side of the pile starts to develop when the stress becomes tensile. This figure
also clearly shows the development of slip between the soil and the sides of the pile.

Fig.9Co) shows the cumulative displacement vectors at failure. While the pile
displaces forward, the soil immediately surrounding it moves around the pile from the
front towards the back. The displacement of the soil decreases with increasing distance
away from the pile.
Deflections magnified by 1.0

Symmetry Symmetry /
boundary ~ ' ~ boundary - - ~
/ . . . . o., .

, t l t , , ~ o °

Dr1 0 t i"
IA"sltl 0 " O
l'O

0
kL~ .-
0

\
(a) Deformed mesh (b) Cumulativedisplacement vectors

FIGURE 9 The deformed mesh and displacemerrtvectors for the single isolated
pile loaded laterally in extended soil medium
 203

PARAMETER STUDY

To examine the influences of the properties of the pile, the soil and the interface
element on the computed "p-y" curve and the ultimate soil resistance Pu, three eases were
studied, as shown in Table 2.

TABLE 2 Parameters Chosen For Parametric Study

Case c~ tg k. F,. k.=k. fo w Parameters

kN/m" kN/m ~ kN/m'/m m studied

Case 1 1900.0 E.
2667.0 1570.0 1.0 (E,/c, =250,
3800.0 350,500)

Case 2 157.0 k, & lq

2667.0 1570.0 1.0
7.6 0.495 1.0 15700.0 0.5

Case 3 0.0 f~
0.1
0.2
0.3
2667.0 1570.0 0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
1.0

Case 1 represents the effect of the soil Young's modulus; Case 2, the elastic stiffness
of the interface element, and Case 3, the pile adhesion (which also determines the
maximum shear resistance of the interface element).
 204

Fig. 10 shows the effect of soil Young's modulus on the "p-y" curve and the ultimate
soil resistance p,. The results show that, as would be expected, the soil Young's modulus
influences the initial slope of the "p-y" curve, but has little effect on the value of p~,
although there is a tendency for p, to be slightly greater for stiffer soils.

Fig. 11 shows the effect of the elastic stiffness of the interface element. Both the "p-y"
curve and the p, value are significantly affected by the stiffness, with the lowest stiffness
corresponding to lowest p, value, and the highest stiffness corresponding to highest Pu
value. The stiffness of "p-y" curve also increases with increasing k. and lq values.

In Case 3, fo=0.0 represents a perfectly smooth pile while fo=l.0 represents a

perfectly rough pile. Several different fo values were chosen and the results are shown in
Fig.12. Fig.12(a) presents "p-y" curves for typical values of fo=0.5 and 1.0, while
Fig. 12(b) shows the relationship between pJcu, and fo for a range of f, values, p, reduces
significantly as fo decreases towards zero (a perfectly smooth pile), but little reduction is
observed for piles of intermediate roughness.

From the above parametric study it may be concluded that, for a rigid pile in a purely
cohesive soil, the ultimate soil resistance for single isolated piles is mainly governed by
the pile adhesion (especially for piles with very smooth surfaces) and the properties of the
interface between the soil and the pile. It is worth noting that Pu values for a single
isolated pile obtained from this limited parametric study are all within the range of
previous analytical solutions [2,5].

PILE GROUP

Analyses were performed for the four different group configurations shown
diagrammatically in Fig.13. In each case, it was assumed that the piles were connected by
a rigid cap, and were sufficiently rigid to displace equally at all levels. A similar
technique for developing "p-y" curves to that for a single isolated pile was adopted for the
pile group. The parameters chosen were those shown in Table 1.
 205

14
/-- a//-- b
= 12
k__ c
8 10

unit: kN/m=
a: E s=500
b: E s =350
c: Es=250

e~

0 J , , t i

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

normalized pile displacement y/w

FIGURE 10 The effect of E s on " p - y " relationship for a single isolated

pile loaded laterally in extended soil medium

15

8
~ I0 b
.~
c

• 5 unit: kN/m=/m
a: ks=kn=15700
o b: ks=kn=1570
c: ks=kn=157

0 i i i i

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

normalized pile displacement y/w

FIGURE 11 The effect of k s and k n on " p . y " relationship for a single

isolated pile loaded laterally in extended soil medium
 206

14
f¢ = 1.0
= 12 /
fc =0.5
8 1o
m
._~

I i i L i

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 l 1.2

normalized pile displacement y/w

(a) "p-y' curve

15

Z
¢)
• ='
e-

L.,

~J
o=
E
.,..~

"5 5

E
e-

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

pile adhesion ratio fc

(b) Pu/CuVS fc

FIGURE 12 The effect of pile adhesion ratio fc on "p-y" relationsilip for a

single isolated pile loaded laterally in extended soil medium
 207

I I

Pile

cap~ /Hlll S0

IO--O o - - O l
Front pile
1--11--I Sh
00A---O
~ H P - - o OB--O
t
Case a An infinitely long
Back pile
Case b Two infinitely long
row of piles rows of piles

Front pile Sb Sh
Sh Sh I -I
i- -i -i
B F'IA BI-I
r'IB rIA BO 1
H ~]D E]C DO
Back pile /

Case c 3-pile group Case d 6-pile group

FIGURE 13 Four cases for analysis of pile group

For Case a (an infinitely long row of piles), several different spacings were analysed.
Fig.14 shows the mesh used and Fig.15 shows the predicted "p-y" curves, together with
that for a single isolated pile for the sake of comparison. When Sh is greater than 2w,
there is a trend for Pu to decrease as spacing between the piles decreases, but the
reduction is fairly small. When the spacing is very small, i.e. Sh=2w, Pu becomes
slightly greater than that for a single isolated pile. However, since in practice the spacing
between piles is rarely less than 2.5w, and from a practical point of view, it may be
 208

concluded that, for a single row of piles, group interaction has a relatively small influence
on ultimate lateral resistance p., and this was also found by Yegian & Wright [6].

Infinite element

Symmetry _ _
boundary

Finite
element
8

e,s

Pile
e..
O

D
°~
I

I.
1,1111:Sh .1

FIGURE 14 Infinite and finite element mesh used for case a

Three different spacings were chosen arid analysed for Case b (two infinitely long
rows of piles), i.e. Case(b-l): Sh/W--Sv/W--3; Case(b-2): Sh/Wffi6 , Sv/W----3 and Case(b-
3): Sh/w--3, S~/w--6 (see Fig. 16).

Fig.17 shows the dimensionless "p-y" curves for these three cases. Profound
reductions of p. from the value for a single isolated pile are found for Case(b-l) for both
 209

front and back piles, with the reductions being about 43% and 24% respectively. The
back pile develops a higher p, value than the front pile.

14
~ " Sh/W=2 / single pile
12

"LSh/W= 8
Sh/W=4

0 i I I t i

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

normalized pile displacement y/w

FIGURE 15 "p-y" relationship for piles in an infinitely long row

In the Case(b-2), Sv was kept constant while Sh was increased to 6 times the pile
width. It can be seen from Fig. 17(b) that the results are similar to those in Case(b-I),
except that more displacement is required to reach the ultimate level, and p, is slightly
smaller than that of Case(b-l).

In Case(b-3), Sh was kept constant while Sv was increased to 6 times pile width.
Fig. 17(c) shows that p. for the front pile is higher than for the back pile. Compared with
a single isolated pile, the front pile has almost the same "p-y" curve although the p~ value
is slightly smaller; the back pile has a different "p-y" curve and p~ is reduced by about
24%. It is interesting to note that the "p-y" curve and p~ value for the back pile is almost
identical to that in Case (b-l). This result implies that the increase of Sv changes the
behaviour of the front pile, but has less effect on the back pile.

For piles in two infinitely long rows, it appears therefore that the spacing in the
direction perpendicular to the direction of loading has little effect on the p= value, while
the spacing in the direction parallel to the direction of loading has a great effect on the p=
 210

value, especially for the piles in the front row.

Infinite element

Symmetry
f
boundary

Finite
element
Case b-1 : Sh/W = 3 Sv/w = 3
Case b-2 : S h / W = 6 Sv/w = 3
U
Pile Case b-3 : Sh/w = 3 Sv/w = 6

[]
e~
q-a
0 []
.o
"5

I. Sh ,I

FIGURE 16 Infinite and finite element mesh used for case b

The mesh used for Case e (a 3-pile group) is illustrated in Fig. 18. Several different
spacings were analysed, and Fig. 19 shows the dimensionless "p-y" curve for a spacing of
four times the pile width. It can be seen that both centre and outer piles have quite similar
"p-y" curves to that for a single isolated pile, although p. is higher for the centre pile
than for the outer piles. There is very little reduction in p. for the centre pile, whereas a
reduction of about 9% is observed for the outer piles. Results for other spacings also
show that both the centre and outer piles have similar "p-y" curves and quite similar p.
values. The relationship between the average value of p./c., and the spacing Sh/w is
 211
14

-- single pile
12

__/ back pile (B)

,/- front pile (A)

i l i *

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2

normalized pile displacement y/w
(a) Sh=3W, S v=3w
14
/-- single pile
= 12

.~ 8
/-- back pile (B)

/-- front pile (A)

i i i 1

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2

normalized pile displacement yAv
(b) S h =6w, S v =3w
14
/ front pile~(A) / single pile
= 12

8 10
back pile (B)

I i i i

0.2 .0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2

normalized pile displacement y/w
(C) Sh=3W, Sv=6W

FIGURE 17 "p-y" relationship for piles in two infinitely long rows

 212

shown in Fig.20. It should be noted that when the spacing S,, equals one pile width, the
solution for a single isolated pile of width 3w is obtained.

Symmetry
boundary

Finite
element
¢1
E
O

e',

"O
wh=3Wv=3W
.m
Pile
e,
-i" wv
C

.£ I wh I

A single isolated
pile (S h/w = 1)

{_ Sh _{

FIGURE 18 Infinite and finite element mesh used for case c

Fig.20 shows that there is a critical spacing Sc (about 3w for the present analysis), for
which Pu is a minimum. When the spacing is greater than So, p= decreases with decreasing
spacing from that for a single isolated pile, but this reduction is fairly small; when the
spacing is less than S=, Pu increases with decreasing spacing. The highest value is
obtained when spacing equals one pile width and three piles become a single isolated pile.
The tendency for closely-spaced piles to behave like a single isolated pile is also evident
from the soil displacement vectors shown in Fig.21(a), Co). The soil movement patterns
are different for Sn=3w and Sn=2w; in the latter case, the soil between the piles moves
together with piles, and the group acts like a single isolated wider pile (Fig.21(a)).
 213

14

/ singlepile
= 12
centTe pile (A)
8 10
back pile (B)

E 4

0 J r i

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

normalized pile displacement y/w

FIGURE 19 " p - y" relationship for 3 - pile group of S h/w= 4

15
I.=
0

•u, 10
P.

.,,.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
nonnaUzed spacing Sh/W

FIGURE 20 The effect of spacing between piles on ultimate soil resistance

 l l l l l | | | l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l lr
Symmetry l l l I / t I / e / e Symmetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
boundary l|[||lllll811tlllltleel I boundary ~ ..............................
| | l l t l l t t o e • • . . . . . . ° . ° . , o ,

II|fIIIlllitellrettseo¢ • ' " ° . . . . . . . . . . . . . ° • . , , , • o ° . ° . .

[ | l l t l l e s s , • I . . o i , ° , . , . . . .

|If | Illlllllllzsss,e,,, , i o ~ i i , ~ , . i I , a e o ° , ° o . , . ° o . . . . .

I f I I I s p p , , , i i I , i a o e , ° . ° . o .

0 Ilflllllll/ppps .......... U I o o l e o l t , , l o l a l o g o . . t ° , o . . . . . .

I:I
lfl l/~ . . . . . .

G.,
It,,,Tl~t~7..._
r, I / .... -:::: . "~_~ ~ ~1 l ~ l l~ ........
!-!:! ......... ILlt~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"¢'~ I l ~. " " ' . . . . . [,O
I,i,.4 .... :.::: ¢',,'-,4
0 0 " # I ~%% 4" i s i i i i i , .......
e,,,
" • • 4 *
.o . O
N • 4 e ' . . . .
llltl~xx. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

¢::::1

• , • , • o . . . . . . . . .

• • . • • • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l l l l | l l l l l l l l l l l l l l S s l s s l • l

(a) S h/w = 2 (b) Sh / w = 3

FIGURE 21 Cumulative displacement vectors for two different spacings

 215

In practice, the spacing between piles is rarely less than 2.5w, and from a practical
point of view, it may be concluded that no significant group effect needs to be taken into
account in this case.

infinite element

Symmetry
boundary

Finite
element

Pile
t
e~

t-
O
v

! Sh . I

FIGURE 22 Infinite and finite element mesh used for case d

Fig.22 shows the mesh used for the Case d (a 3×2 group ) and Fig.23 shows the
computed "p-y" curves. Because more piles axe involved in the analysis, the mechanism
of interaction between soils and piles is more complicated than in the previous cases.
Piles at different positions exhibit different "p-y" curves and p, values. For the outer
piles, the soil resistance p increases with the displacement of the pile up to the failure,
 216

while for the centre piles, p increases up to a ultimate level and then decreases prior to
failure. The decrease of p value for the centre piles may be due to load redistribution.
When the whole group collapses, the outer piles show a higher Pu value than do the
centre piles. Generally speaking, the back piles develop higher pu values than their
leading front piles. Due to the effects of other piles, the capacity of all the piles decreases
dramatically from that of a single isolated pile, with the reduction being in the range of
about 40% - 65% (Fig.23). Shown in Fig.24 is the deformed mesh at failure. Gaps are
formed between the soil and the rear of the back piles due to the tensile stress
experienced by the soil behind the piles, whereas the soil around the front piles is always
under compression. A similar deformation pattern is also observed for Case b, where the
soil around the front piles was found to be under compression and separation occurred
only between the soil and the rear of the back piles.

14

= 12 single pile

a: front centre pile (A)

b: front outer pile (B)
c: back centre pile (C)
d ---~ d: back outer pile (D)
0

i i

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

normalized pile displacement y/w

FIGURE 23 "p-y" relationship for 6-pile group

From the four cases studied above, it can be concluded that no significant group
effect on piles within a group needs to be taken into account when piles are in one row,
be it an infinitely long one (Case a) or a row of limited length (Case c). However, there
 21 7

is a substantial group effect when piles are in parallel rows, resulting in major reductions
in ultimate lateral resistance on all piles in the group.

Symmetry
boundary

I I
Ilill ' '

i::5 I~__~1111~IIJIII

FIGURE 24 The deformed mesh for 6-pile group loaded laterally

CONCLUSIONS

The combined infinite and finite element method is found to provide an accurate and
efficient technique for solving problems involving unbounded domains. Through this
method, in conjunction with a technique developed by Yegian and Wright, it is possible
to study the behaviour of a single laterally loaded pile in an extended soil medium. The
 218

ultimate lateral soil resistance so obtained agrees well with existing analytical solutions. A
limited parametric study shows that for a single rigid pile loaded laterally in a purely
cohesive soil, the ultimate lateral soil resistance is mainly governed by the pile adhesion
(especially for piles with very smooth surfaces) and the properties of the interface
between the pile and the soil. Analyses of pile groups show that, because of pile-soil-pile
interaction, the ultimate soil resistance is generally lower for a pile in a group than that
for a single isolated pile. The extent of the reduction depends on the arrangement of piles.
For piles in one row (i.e. in a line perpendicular to the direction of the pile movement)
the reduction is not significant, whereas a substantial reduction is found for piles in two
rOWS.

LABORATORY EXPERIMENTS

A specially designed equipment for testing of laterally loaded model piles has been
made at Centre for Geotechnical Research at the University of Sydney. Some preliminary
tests on 3-pile groups have been done and results compare fairly well with that predicted
by the present study, as shown in Table 3 and also [18]. More experimental work on
different pile arrangements are currently being undertaken.

TABLE 3 Numerical And Experimental Results For 3-Pile Group

pgco
spacing
present method experimental results
Sdw
• rough" pile "smooth" pile

1.4 12.0 9.0 10.6

2.0 11.7 8.6 9.5

3.0 10.6 8.1 8.2

 219

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to express their sincere thanks to Associate Professor J.C. Small for
his great help in the development of the finite element program, to Professor J.P. Carter
for his review and constructive comments of the paper. Dr. T.S. Hull is also
acknowledged for his interest and discussions. The first author gratefully acknowledges
the scholarship provided by the Centre for Geotechnical Research of the University of
Sydney. The work described in this paper is part of a project on the effect of seafloor
instability on offshore pile foundations, which has been supported by the Australian
Research Council.

REFERENCES

. Randolph, M.F., The response of flexible piles to lateral loading, Geotechnique,

Vol. 31 (1981), No.2, pp.247-259.
2. Poulos, H.G. and Davis, E.H., Pile Foundation Analysis and Design. John Wiley
and Sons Inc., New York (1980).
3. Broms, B.B., Lateral Resistance of Piles in Cohesive Soils. J.S.M.F.D., ASCE,
Vol. 90 (1964a), SM2: 27-63.
4. Broms, B.B., Lateral Resistance of Piles in Cohesionless Soils. J.S.M.F.D.,
ASCE, Vol. 90 (1964b), SM3: 123-156.
5. Randolph, M.F. and Houlsby, G.T., The Limiting Pressure on a Circular Pile
Loaded Laterally in a Cohesive Soil. Geotechnique, Vol. 34 (1984), No.4, pp.613-
623.
. Yegian, M. and Wright, S.G., Lateral Soil Resistance-Displacement Relationships
for Pile Foundations in Soft Clays. 5th Annual Offshore Tech. conf. Houston,
Paper OTC 1893, Vol. 2 (1973), 663-676.
7. Levacher, D., Gamier, J., Bouafia, A., and Cintra, J.C., Etude Exp'aerimentale
de Pieux Sollicite's Late'ralement. Deformation of Soils and Displacements of
Structures XECSMFE Vol. 2 (1991), pp.463-466.
. Bettess, P., Infinite Elements. International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering, Vol. 11 (1977): 53-64.
9. Bettess, P. and Zienkiewicz, O.C., Diffraction and Refraction of Surface Waves
Using Finite and Infinite Elements. International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering, Vol. 11 (1977): 1271-1290.
10. Damjanic, F. and Owen, D.R.J., Mapped Infinite Elements in Transient Thermal
Analysis. Computers and Structures, Vol. 19 (1984): 673-687.
11. Liu, W. and Novak, M., Soil-Pile-Cup Static Interaction Analysis by Finite and
Infinite Elements, Can. Geot. Jnl. Vol. 28 (1991): 771-783.
12. Westergaard, H.M., Theory of Elasticity and Plasticity. Dover Publications Inc.,
New York (1952).
13. Small, J.C., Elasto-Plastic Consolidation of Soils, Ph.D Thesis, University of
 220

Sydney (1977).
14. Rowe, R.K., Soil Structure Interaction Analysis and Its Application to the
Prediction of Anchor Plate Behaviour. Ph.D Thesis, University of Sydney (1978).
15. Goodman, R.E., Taylor, R.L. and Brekke, T.L, A Model for the Mechanics of
Jointed Rock. J. Soil Mech. Fndns. Div. ASCE 94 (1968), 637-659.
16. Small, J.C. and Chung, M.O., Finite Element Analysis of Excavation in Jointed
Rock. Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics (1991), Beer, Booker &
Cater (eds), Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 6191 1893.
17. Matlock, H. (1970), Corrections for Design of Laterally Loaded Piles in Soft
Clay. Second Annual Offshore Technology Conference (1970), Houston, Texas.
18. Stitt, P.J., Lateral Loads on Pile Groups. Bachelor Degree Thesis, The University
of Sydney (1992).
Received 8 March 1993; revised version received 22 March 1993; accepted
23 March 1993