Computers and Geotechnics 69 (2015) 199–209

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Geotechnics

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

Research Paper

Behaviour of flexible piles subjected to inclined loads

E. Conte, A. Troncone ⇑, M. Vena
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Calabria, 87036 Rende, Cosenza, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The behaviour of the piles under inclined loads is a topic not fully investigated in the literature. No exper-
Received 22 January 2015 imental results from full-scale pile tests are available so that numerical analysis can be an interesting tool
Received in revised form 25 April 2015 to provide useful results about the pile behaviour under this loading condition. In this study, a
Accepted 16 May 2015
three-dimensional finite element approach is used to analyse the response of reinforced concrete flexible
piles to inclined loads. Appropriate constitutive models are adopted to account for the nonlinear beha-
viour of the pile and the soil. In particular, the occurrence of plastic strains in the soil, concrete cracking
Keywords:
and steel yielding in the pile as well as the occurrence of slip and gap at the pile–soil interface are ade-
Flexible pile
Inclined load
quately modelled. To assess the reliability of the method, some loading tests documented in the literature
Three-dimensional nonlinear analysis concerning axially or laterally loaded piles are first simulated. A fairly good agreement is found between
Finite element method numerical and experimental results. The geotechnical model and the pile from the above-mentioned tests
Reinforced concrete pile are considered to highlight some characteristic aspects of the response of flexible piles to inclined loads.
In particular, the analysis results show that a flexible pile can experience a flexural or an axial behaviour
depending on the load inclination. Load inclination also influences significantly both the stiffness and the
bearing capacity of the soil–pile system. Comparisons with the results from some empirical solutions
proposed in the literature to evaluate the bearing capacity of the piles under inclined loads are also
shown.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction The behaviour of the rigid piles embedded in homogeneous as

well as layered soils and subjected to inclined loads was exten-
Pile foundations of engineering works such as bridges, retaining sively studied by Meyerhof and his co-workers on the basis of
walls or offshore structures are frequently subjected to the com- the experimental results from a great number of loading tests
bined action of horizontal and vertical loads. Considering the diffi- performed on small-scale piles. These studies have laid firmly the
culty in accounting for the effects of the simultaneous presence of concepts for the design of the rigid piles [1–8]. In particular, the
these loads for a prediction of the pile response, in the current ultimate load Qu at an inclination angle a (measured from the hor-
applications the case of the pile under vertical load is often anal- izontal direction) can be evaluated using the following equation
ysed separately from that of the pile subjected to horizontal load. [3]:
An additional reason for using this uncoupled approach is that  2  2
the resulting value of the pile bearing capacity generally is on
V H
þ ¼1 ð1Þ
the safety side. Specifically, the ultimate load of a horizontally Qa Qh
loaded pile should increase when a vertical load is also applied where V and H denote the vertical and horizontal components of Q u
at the pile head. Similarly, the presence of a horizontal load should (i.e., V = Q u sin a and H = Q u cos a), Q a and Q h are the ultimate loads
improve the axial bearing capacity of the pile [1]. However, in the under pure vertical and horizontal loading respectively. More
light of the modern design regulations, the simultaneous presence recently, Cho and Kulhawy [9] proposed the alternative equations
of vertical and horizontal loads (i.e., of inclined loads) applied at (with a expressed in degree):
the pile head should be considered for a more rational design of    7:3
the pile foundations [2]. 90  a 90  a
V ¼ QL þ 1 þ QP þ1 ð2aÞ
90 90

⇑ Corresponding author.
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
H ¼ Q h cos a ð2bÞ
E-mail address: antonello.troncone@unical.it (A. Troncone).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2015.05.009
0266-352X/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
200 E. Conte et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 69 (2015) 199–209
Fig. 1. Deformation pattern of a flexible pile and the equivalent rigid pile.
where QL is the shaft capacity and QP is the base capacity of the axi-
ally loaded pile. The values of Qa, Qh, QL and QP in the above equa-
tions can be evaluated using some conventional methods
available in the literature [10,11].
However, most field piles behave as flexible structures which
bend under the action of inclined loads. In these circumstances,
the assumption of rigid pile cannot be in principle accepted.
Meyerhof et al. [7] suggested to analyse the behaviour of a flexible
pile using the model of the equivalent rigid pile which is charac-
terised by an ‘‘effective embedment depth’’ [12,13]. The concept
of effective embedment depth is schematically shown in Fig. 1.
However, as it can be seen from this figure, the behaviour of the
equivalent rigid pile is rather different from that of the flexible pile.
The equivalent pile rigidly rotates with the rotation centre located
at a certain depth from the pile top, whereas the flexible pile bends
with the maximum deflection confined in the upper portion of the
pile. Moreover, the structural properties of the pile, which are
partly considered in the equivalent rigid pile model, should be ade-
quately taken into account for a realistic prediction of the pile
behaviour. Therefore, using the solutions for rigid pile should in
principle lead to an approximate evaluation of the response of flex-
ible piles to inclined loads.
A more comprehensive approach is presented in this paper, in
which a numerical solution based on the finite element method
is used to perform a three-dimensional (3D) analysis of the beha-
viour of reinforced concrete (r.c.) piles subjected to inclined loads.
In this approach, the nonlinear behaviour of the soil and pile is
accounted for using suitable constitutive models which allow the
occurrence of plastic strains in the soil, concrete cracking and rein-
forcement yielding in the pile to be reliably simulated. In addition,
slip and gap can occur at the soil–pile interface. After predicting
successfully the response experienced by some piles during hori-
zontal and vertical loading tests documented in the literature,
the proposed approach is applied to investigate the influence of
the load inclination on the behaviour of flexible piles.
2. Constitutive models
The choice of a constitutive model to analyse the behaviour of
structures interacting with the soil, is often conditioned by the
material parameters that are available for the case study under
consideration. When routine parameters are only available or there
is a lack of specific experimental data, the use of sophisticated
models is not completely justified to predict the mechanical beha-
viour of the materials involved. Considering that in the current
applications this is often the case, the constitutive models
employed in the present study are relatively simple and require
few material parameters as input data. In addition, these parame-
ters can be in principle obtained from conventional geotechnical
and structural tests.
Specifically, an elastic perfectly plastic model with Mohr–
Coulomb failure criterion and flow rule of non-associated type is
considered for modelling the soil behaviour. The Mohr–Coulomb
criterion is replaced by the Tresca criterion under undrained condi-
tions. Therefore, the soil parameters required by this constitutive
model for performing an analysis under drained conditions are
the shear modulus G (or the Young modulus E0 ) Poisson’s ratio v 0 ,
shearing resistance angle u0 , effective cohesion c0 and angle of dila-
tancy w. The shear modulus G, Poisson’s ratio v u and the undrained
shear strength Su are on the contrary required for an analysis under
undrained conditions.
The constitutive model for the concrete is based on the plastic-
ity theory for compressive stresses and the fracture mechanics for
tensile stresses [14–17]. This model is suitable for structures that
are subjected to monotonic loading. For compressive stresses, the
concrete behaves as an elastic plastic material with isotropic hard-
ening/softening and associated flow rule. For tensile stresses, a dif-
ferent model is used to simulate the occurrence and development
of cracking. Specifically, cracking occurs when the stress state
reaches a ‘‘crack detection’’ surface which is described by a rela-
tionship of Mohr–Coulomb type [17]. This surface also allows the
orientation of the crack to be defined. It is assumed in fact that,
at a given stress state, the crack direction is normal to the
above-mentioned surface. Once the occurrence and orientation of
crack are detected, the damaged elasticity theory is used to
describe the post-failure behaviour of the concrete with open
cracks [15]. Specifically, it is assumed that the material loses
strength through a softening mechanism which is dominantly a
damage effect with the open cracks that provoke a reduction of
the concrete stiffness. The cracks close again when the stress
across them turns out to be compressive. No permanent strain
associated with cracking occurs. In addition, it is assumed that
the cracks are smeared on the concrete zones affected by this
process.
A stress–strain relationship under uniaxial conditions has to be
defined to use the described constitutive model. The relationship
assumed in the present study is shown in Fig. 2. For the sake of
Fig. 2. The stress–strain relationship assumed for the concrete and that recom-
mended by the EC2 design regulation [16].
 E. Conte et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 69 (2015) 199–209
comparison, the stress–strain curve recommended by the EC2
design regulation [16] is also plotted in Fig. 2. As it can be observed,
the proposed relationship consists of a piecewise linear function
which is completely defined by the following constitutive parame-
ters: Young’s modulus Ec (which together with Poisson’s ratio vc
describe the elastic behaviour of concrete), compressive strength
fcm, and tensile strength fctm. The behaviour of the concrete at com-
pression is elastic when the stress is less than 0.3fcm. For higher
levels of stress, plastic deformations occur owing to the hardening
behaviour of the material. The peak is attained at a strain given by
1:81f cm =Ec , after which the material response is strain-softening.
For tensile stresses, the behaviour is linear elastic until the stress
reaches the tensile strength. After this condition, the material is
characterised by a strain-softening behaviour with strength that
progressively reduces with increasing strain. Summarising, the
constitutive parameters required for the concrete are Ec, vc, fcm
and fctm.
The reinforcement consists of steel bars the behaviour of which
is assumed to be elastic perfectly plastic for both tensile and com-
pressive stresses (Fig. 3). The material parameters required by this
latter constitutive model are Young’s modulus Es, Poisson’s ratio ms,
and the yield stress fy. The reinforcement is assumed to be smeared
on a cylindrical surface which is embedded in the concrete and is
perfectly bonded to it.
Finally, a shear-strength criterion of the Mohr–Coulomb type is
imposed at the soil–pile interface. This criterion is expressed by the
following equation:
F lim ¼ F n tan d
where Flim is the limiting shear force, Fn is the normal force and d is
the friction angle at the soil–pile interface. For cohesive soils under
undrained conditions, Eq. (3) is replaced by:
F lim ¼ ca A
in which ca is the adhesion at the interface and A is the contact area.
In addition, separation between pile and soil occurs when a tensile
force develops at the soil–pile interface. In other words, slip and gap
can occur at the soil–pile interface.
The described constitutive models are implemented in the finite
element code Abaqus [17], which is used in the present study to
perform the analyses presented in the subsequent sections. A more
detailed description of these models can be found in the Abaqus
manual and in a previous paper by Conte et al. [18].
Fig. 3. The stress–strain relationship assumed for the steel reinforcement.
201
3. Analysis of field load tests
In view of the difficulties in performing full-scale load tests on
piles subjected to inclined loads (the authors are not aware of
existing tests of this type), some axial and lateral load tests docu-
mented in the literature are considered in the present study. The
experimental results from these tests are compared with those
obtained numerically with the objective of validating the material
parameters required by the constitutive models and assessing the
reliability of the numerical approach adopted. The tests described
in Comodromos et al. [19,20] are suitable for this purpose. These
tests were performed to optimise the design of the pile foundation
planned for the construction of an important bridge located near
the city of Thessaloniki in northern Greek.
Fig. 4a and b shows a scheme of the apparatus used for the axial
load test and the lateral load test, respectively. The piles are
arranged in a row with the tested pile located at an equal distance
from the reaction piles. In the axial load test, the reaction piles are
connected to a high steel beam, so that the central pile is com-
pressed and the reaction piles are in tension (Fig. 4a). In the lateral
load test, the reaction force is provided by one reaction pile
whereas the second pile is not loaded (Fig. 4b). The piles were
bored r.c. piles with a diameter of 0.8 m and length of 38 m. The
reinforcement consisted of 16 steel bars with a diameter of
18 mm. The structural properties of the concrete and reinforce-
ment are indicated in Table 1. The load was applied at the pile head
using four hydraulic jacks placed between the tested pile and the
reaction structure with a small eccentricity (estimated 0.2 m) with
ð3Þ respect to the ground surface. Displacement at the pile head was
measured by some electronic transducers with a resolution of
0.001 mm. In addition, the pile was instrumented with thirteen
fibre-optic sensors to measure the variation in axial strain with
depth. In the upper portion of the pile, these sensors were installed
in pair to infer the pile curvature during the tests (Fig. 4).
ð4Þ A site investigation consisting of boreholes and penetration
tests (SPT and CPT) were performed before installing the pile. In
addition, laboratory tests were carried out on the soil samples
taken from the boreholes. On the basis of the available data, the
subsoil can be subdivided into five layers as shown in Fig. 5. The
upper two layers consist of silty sand. The thickness of both these
layers is 6 m. The third layer consists of soft clay with sand and
high organic content. This layer is 13 m thick and overlies a forma-
tion of sandy clay that extends down to the end of the boreholes. At
depths greater than 35 m, the sandy clay is characterised by
mechanical properties better than those of the soil above that
depth. Groundwater was found at approximately 1 m from the
ground surface.
Table 2 shows the values of the soil parameters (c is the unit
weight of the soil) derived from the available results of the tests
performed by Comodromos et al. [19,20]. These values differ from
those presented in the original papers by Comodromos et al.
[19,20] essentially for the value of G assigned to the upper two lay-
ers. In addition, it is assumed that v 0 = 0.3 (for the cohesionless
soils) and v u = 0.495 (for the purely cohesive soils). The influence
of the dilatancy angle on the analysis results should not be signif-
icant for the pile tests considered. In particular, in the lateral load
test the cohesionless soil in front of the upper portion of the pile
(Fig. 5) that is affected by a high level of deformation, is free to
move in a practically unconfined way. In view of this consideration,
it is assumed w = 0°. Referring to the axial load test where the dila-
tion effect could be actually important [21], it is worthy to note
that the soil surrounding the deeper portion of the pile is purely
cohesive (Fig. 5). Finally, at the soil–pile interface it is assumed that
d = u0 for the cohesionless soil layers (Eq. (3)), and ca = 0.5Su for the
cohesive soil layers (Eq. (4)). A validation of the values indicated in
202 E. Conte et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 69 (2015) 199–209

Fig. 4. Scheme of the apparatus used for (a) the axial load test; (b) the lateral load test (modified from Comodromos et al. [19,20]).

Table 1 Table 2
Structural parameters of the pile considered in the analysis. Soil parameters considered in the analysis.

Concrete Steel Soil c G c0 u0 Su

(kN/m3) (MPa) (kPa) (°) (kPa)
Ec (MPa) mc f cm (MPa) f ctm (MPa) Es (MPa) ms f y (MPa)
Silty sand 20 23.1 3 33 –
29,962 0.2 28 2.82 210,000 0.3 500
Silty sand 20 30.8 5 33 –
Clay 17 11.5 25 5 –
Sandy clay 21 26.7 – – 110
Sandy clay 21 30.0 – – 140

type of analysis, the tested pile is assumed to be isolated

Fig. 5. Subsoil model considered for simulating the load tests documented in
Comodromos et al. [19,20].
Table 2 is carried out in this study by matching the results from the
loading tests with those predicted by the present method. Three
types of analysis are conducted to investigate also the influence
of the reaction piles on the response of the tested pile. In the first
(Fig. 6a and d for the case of the axial load test and the lateral load
test, respectively). The second type of analysis accounts for the
presence of the reaction piles which however are assumed to be
not loaded (Fig. 6b and e). Finally, in the third type of analysis
the tested pile is loaded by a force applied at its head and the reac-
tion piles are loaded in the opposite direction by the reaction forces
(Fig. 6c and f). Following Comodromos et al. [19], the elastic plastic
Mohr–Coulomb model is used to model the soil behaviour of the
upper three layers, whereas the elastic plastic Tresca model is used
for the underlying layers of sandy clay.
The finite element mesh adopted for the case of the isolated sin-
gle pile and that of the piles in a row is shown in Figs. 7 and 8, respec-
tively. Fig. 7 also shows some details of the reinforcement. The soil
and pile are discretized using 8 node linear brick reduced integra-
tion solid elements with hourglass control [17]. A mesh refinement
is performed in the zones where high levels of strain are expected to
occur. Reinforcement is discretized by 4 node linear surface ele-
ments with reduced integration. The bottom and the sides of the
domain are located far enough from the piles to avoid any significant
boundary effect on the response of the pile–soil system. After a pre-
liminary study about the boundary effects, the lateral boundaries
were located at a distance of approximately 20B (where B is the pile
diameter) from the axis of the tested pile. A distance of 40B sepa-
rates the pile tip from the bottom of the domain. The base of the
mesh is fully fixed and the lateral boundaries are constrained by ver-
tical rollers. An initial stress state under isotropic conditions is
 E. Conte et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 69 (2015) 199–209 203

Fig. 8. The finite element mesh adopted for the piles in a row.

Fig. 6. Types of analysis performed for simulating the load tests by Comodromos
et al. [19,20]: (a) single pile under axial loading; (b) tested pile under axial loading
with the reaction piles not loaded; (c) tested pile under axial loading with the
reaction piles in tension; (d) single pile under lateral loading; (e) tested pile under
lateral loading with the reaction piles not loaded; (f) tested pile under lateral
loading with the reaction pile loaded in the opposite direction.

Fig. 9. Axial loading test: comparison of measured and predicted load–displace-

ment curves.

Fig. 7. The finite element mesh adopted for the single pile with an enlargement of Fig. 10. Lateral loading test: comparison of measured and predicted load–
the reinforcement. displacement curves.
204 E. Conte et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 69 (2015) 199–209

Fig. 11. Lateral loading test: comparison of the measured and predicted relation-
ships between the axial strain induced in the pile at a given depth and the
horizontal displacement at the pile head. Fig. 13. Inclined load versus total displacement at the pile head for values of the
inclination angle a from 0° (horizontal load) to 90° (vertical load).

Fig. 12. Lateral loading test: pile curvature resulting from the numerical analysis
and that obtained by Comodromos et al. [20] using the axial strain measurements
by the fiber-optic sensors.

imposed in the soil domain. The test is simulated by applying a ver-

tical or horizontal load at the pile head. The magnitude of this load is
progressively increased up to the maximum value for which no solu-
tion convergence problem occurs [17].
A comparison in terms of the load–displacement curve at the pile
head is presented in Figs. 9 and 10 for the axial load test and for the
lateral one, respectively. The numerical results concerning the axial
load test slightly underestimate both the axial stiffness and the
bearing capacity of the soil–pile system, especially when the tensile
forces by the reaction piles are ignored. Taking into account these
forces leads to an improvement in the prediction (Fig. 9). On the con- Fig. 14. Influence of the load inclination angle on (a) displacement field of the pile;
trary, the effects of the interaction between the tested pile and the (b) displacement vectors of the pile.
 E. Conte et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 69 (2015) 199–209
reaction piles can be completely disregarded in the lateral load test
(Fig. 10). Another comparison between experimental and numerical
results concerning the lateral load test is documented in Fig. 11,
where the axial strain at a given depth is related to the horizontal
displacement at the pile head. It is worthy to note that in the present
study tensile stresses and the associated strains are considered pos-
itive according to the sign convention usually adopted in mechanics
of solids. The strains plotted in Fig. 11 were measured by the
fibre-optic sensors SA-2 (tensile side) and SB-2 (compression side).
Considering that these strains were associated by Comodromos
et al. [20] at a depth of approximately 3 m from the ground surface
(see their Fig. 13), the strains are calculated in the present study at
this depth. As discussed by Comodromos et al. [20], the high
increase in the tensile strain at large displacements should be
ascribed to the occurrence of concrete cracking in the pile
cross-section considered. Lastly, Fig. 12 compares the pile curvature
profile calculated for different applied loads with the values
obtained by Comodromos et al. [20] at some depths using the axial
strains measured at the steel bars during the load test. These results
account for the pile portion affected by high values of the curvature
and consequently of the bending moment.
In conclusion, the agreement between simulation and observa-
tion can be considered satisfactory in all the comparisons carried
Fig. 15. Influence of the load inclination angle on (a) displacement field of the soil; (b) displacement vectors of the soil.
205
out, although some significant differences in the tensile strain
and pile curvature can be observed at high level of loading
(Figs. 11 and 12). In this connection, it is however relevant to note
that in the present study the strains are calculated at a prescribed
point whereas those measured refer to a finite length the value of
which is not specified in the above-cited papers [19,20]. These
comparisons also corroborate the assumptions made and proves
the reliability of the proposed numerical approach to simulate
the field tests considered.
4. Behaviour of flexible piles under inclined loads
The geotechnical model and the pile of the tests described in
the previous section are considered to analyse the behaviour of
flexible piles under inclined loads. To this end, a vertical force
and a horizontal force are applied simultaneously at the head of
the pile. These forces are progressively increased in such a way
that their ratio remains constant in accordance with the pre-
scribed value of the inclination angle a. The finite element mesh
used in the calculations is shown in Fig. 7. The analyses are car-
ried out for values of a ranging from 0° (horizontal load) to 90°
(vertical load).
206 E. Conte et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 69 (2015) 199–209
Fig. 16. Profile of pile deflection, ux, for different values of the load inclination
angle.
Fig. 17. Profile of the net contact force in the horizontal direction, p, for different
values of the load inclination angle. The sign convention adopted for p is also
indicated.
Fig. 13 presents the total displacement-load curve calculated at
the pile head for several values of a. It is evident from this figure
that the stiffness and bearing capacity of the soil–pile system
increase with an increase of the inclination angle, although the
Fig. 18. Profile of the bending moment, M, for different values of the load
inclination angle.
Fig. 19. Moment–curvature relationship of the pile for different values of the axial
force N.
ultimate load for a = 85° is slightly greater than that of the verti-
cally loaded pile (a = 90°). To understand this behaviour and to
highlight some characteristic aspects of the pile response to
inclined loading, the displacement field of the pile and the soil is
shown in Figs. 14a and 15a, respectively, for different values of a.
In all the cases considered, the displacement at the pile head is
equal to 30 mm. For the sake of completeness, Figs. 14b and 15b
show the associated displacement vectors for the pile (Fig. 14b)
and soil (Fig. 15b). As it can be seen, with the exception of the case
in which the load direction is very close to the vertical one (i.e.,
a P85°), the pile essentially exhibits a flexural behaviour
(Fig. 14a and b) with a passive wedge that develops in the soil
(Fig. 15a and b) following a failure mechanism of long pile type
[10]. The depth of the soil wedge increases with an increase of
the inclination angle. Only for values of a greater than 80°, the axial
 E. Conte et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 69 (2015) 199–209
Fig. 20. N–M limit domains and load paths calculated in the cross-section of the
pile where the maximum bending moment occurs, for different values of the load
inclination angle.
behaviour of the pile prevails over the flexural one with displace-
ments of the pile and soil that essentially occur in the vertical
direction, although the upper portion of the pile also bends when
a = 85°. These results show that the load inclination significantly
influences the kinematics of the pile and more generally its
response to the applied load.
The subsequent figures (Figs. 16–18) show the profile with
depth of the pile deflection ux (Fig. 16), the net contact force p
(per unit length of pile) in the horizontal direction (Fig. 17) and
the bending moment M (Fig. 18), for values of a ranging from 0°
to 80° (i.e. when the pile behaviour is essentially flexural). In all
these cases, it is assumed that the horizontal component of the
load is 450 kN. The associated vertical component can be conse-
quently calculated as a function of a. It is worthy to note that the
horizontal displacement of the pile decreases with increasing the
load inclination (Fig. 16). Moreover, in the upper portion of the pile
the net contact force p is practically independent on the value of a
and it can be successfully evaluated using the equation proposed
by Broms [10] for laterally loaded piles in cohesionless soils
(Fig. 17), i.e.
p ¼ 3 kP r0vo B
where r0vo is the effective vertical stress and kp is the coefficient of
passive earth pressure which is calculated in the present study
using the expression proposed by Lancellotta [22] with d = u0 . At
Fig. 21. Pile subjected to an inclined load with a = 60°: strain–stress relationship calculated (a) in the elements 1 and 2 of the concrete; (b) in the elements A and B of the
reinforcement.
207
Fig. 22. Portion of the pile affected by cracking (in black) for different values of the
load inclination angle, when the horizontal component of the external load is
450 kN.
the same time, in the upper portion of the pile, the profile of the
bending moment (Fig. 18) is essentially the same for any value of
a. The maximum value of the bending moment and the depth at
which this value occurs, slightly increase with a. Obviously, an
increase in a also determines an increase in the (compressive) axial
force, N, which in turn provokes a reduction in the pile deflection as
it is documented in Fig. 16. To support this assertion, the moment–
curvature (M–v) relationship of the pile cross-section is plotted in
Fig. 19 for different values of N. Considering that the ratio M/v pro-
vides the secant value of the pile bending stiffness, it can be inferred
that an increase in the axial force leads to an increase in the bending
stiffness and consequently to a reduction in the pile deflection
(Fig. 16). An increase in N also determines an increase in the bearing
capacity of the pile (Fig. 13). In this connection, Fig. 20 relates the
load path calculated for values of a from 0° to 80° in the
ð5Þ
cross-section of the pile where the maximum bending moment
occurs, to the limit domain of the pile cross-section obtained using
the procedure suggested by the EC2 design regulation [16] along
with the concrete stress–strain relationship shown in Fig. 2 (curve
208 E. Conte et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 69 (2015) 199–209
Fig. 23. Pile subjected to an inclined load with a = 85°: strain–stress relationships calculated (a) in the elements 1 and 2 of the concrete; (b) in the elements A and B of the
reinforcement.
Fig. 24. Pile bearing capacity as a function of the load inclination angle.
Fig. 25. Comparison of the values of H and V obtained in the present study with
those calculated using some empirical solutions published in the literature.
in red1) in which the limit compressive strain is 0.35%. The domain
constructed assuming that the ultimate compressive strain in the
concrete is 0.2% (Fig. 2) and the ultimate tensile strain in the
1
For interpretation of color in Fig. 2, the reader is referred to the web version of
this article.
reinforcement is associated with f y (Fig. 3), is also indicated in
Fig. 20 by a dashed curve. Unfortunately, the values of N and M com-
puted using the present method do not attain the outermost domain
because of the occurrence of convergence problems of the solution at
these high levels of strain. The pile hence could still carry a load
greater than the final load considered in the present study. The final
values of N and M are however close to the dashed curve indicated in
Fig. 20. To corroborate this result, Fig. 21a and b shows the stress–
strain relationship for the concrete and the reinforcement calculated
in the elements 1 and 2 (for the concrete) and A and B (for the steel)
when a = 60°. These results prove that the maximum compressive
stress in the concrete is smaller than the peak stress and the tensile
stress is on the softening branch (Fig. 21a). As a consequence of this
latter result, a cracking process occurs in the concrete. The portion of
the pile affected by this process is indicated in black in Fig. 22 for dif-
ferent values of a (with the horizontal component of the load equal
to 450 kN). Regarding to the reinforcement, the maximum tensile
strain is greater than the strain associated with the yield stress f y ,
whereas the compressive strain is elastic (Fig. 21b). In any case,
Fig. 20 shows that for values of a from 0° to 80°, an increase in the
compressive axial force leads to an increase in the ultimate value
of the bending moment. As pointed out by Broms [10], the higher
this moment, the higher the bearing capacity of a pile with flexural
behaviour.
The loads associated with the values of N and M that lie on the
dashed curve indicated in Fig. 20, are considered in the present
study to define the bearing capacity of the pile when its behaviour
is flexural (i.e., when a 680° for the pile under consideration). For
higher values of a when the pile experiences an axial behaviour
(a P85°), the bearing capacity is evaluated from the results shown
in Fig. 13 using the double tangent method. In these latter circum-
stances, the stress in the concrete and that in the reinforcement are
much smaller than the respective ultimate values, as it is docu-
mented in Fig. 23 for the case with a = 85°. The resulting values
of the bearing capacity are plotted in Fig. 24 as a function of the
inclination angle. As it can be seen, the value of a markedly influ-
ences the bearing capacity of the pile. In addition, these results
confirm the trend found experimentally for rigid piles [1] accord-
ing to which the bearing capacity of a horizontally loaded pile
increases when a vertical load is simultaneously applied at the pile
head. The higher the value of a (with a ranging from 0° to 80°), the
higher the bearing capacity of the pile. Similarly, the presence of a
horizontal load improves the bearing capacity of a pile that expe-
riences an axial behaviour (a > 80°). This latter evidence should
be ascribed to the resistant forces generated at the soil–pile inter-
face in the upper portion of the pile when it bends owing to the
horizontal component of the load (Figs. 14b and 15a).
 E. Conte et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 69 (2015) 199–209
Finally, Fig. 25 compares the results obtained in the present
study with those calculated using some empirical solutions pro-
posed in the literature (Eqs. (1) and (2)) to evaluate the bearing
capacity of rigid piles. Following Meyerhof et al. [7], these solutions
may be also extended to flexible piles using the model of the equiv-
alent rigid pile (Fig. 1). Although the same value of the ultimate
load is assumed for pure horizontal (a = 0°) and vertical (a = 90°)
loading, the results obtained in the present study considerably dif-
fer from those derived from Eqs. (1) and (2), especially for high val-
ues of a. In particular, these latter equations provide values of the
horizontal and vertical components of the ultimate load (i.e., H and
V) which are much lower than those calculated using the present
method. This result implies that the structural properties of the
pile, which are partly considered in (1) and (2) (through the effec-
tive embedment depth [7] and the value of Qh [10]), should be
appropriately taken into account for a reliable evaluation of the
bearing capacity of flexible piles under inclined loads. Ignoring
these properties could lead to a considerable underestimation of
the bearing capacity, especially for high values of the load
inclination.
5. Concluding remarks
A 3D finite element approach has been proposed to analyse the
nonlinear response of r.c. piles to inclined loads. The occurrence of
plastic strains in the soil, concrete cracking and reinforcement
yielding in the pile as well as gap and slip at the soil–pile interface
is accounted for taking advantage of some relatively simple consti-
tutive models. Moreover, these constitutive models require a lim-
ited number of parameters which can be obtained from
conventional tests, although a back-analysis of the results of a pile
test could provide more appropriate values as recommended by
some design regulations [23,24]. A good agreement has been found
between the results obtained using the present method and the
experimental results from some field load tests on a bored pile
subjected to axial or lateral loading.
Some interesting aspects of the behaviour of flexible piles under
inclined loading have been highlighted. In particular, it has been
shown that a flexible pile generally exhibits a flexural behaviour
with a failure mechanism of long pile type. Stiffness and bearing
capacity of the soil–pile system increase with increasing the load
inclination. Only when the load direction is close to the vertical
one, the axial behaviour of the pile prevails over the flexural one.
In this case, the presence of a horizontal load increases the ulti-
mate load of an axially loaded pile. The bearing capacity of a pile
under inclined loads markedly depends on the structural proper-
ties of the pile, which are not adequately considered in the empir-
ical solutions published in the literature. Therefore, these existing
209
solutions are generally unsuitable to predict the bearing capacity
of flexible piles subjected to inclined loads, especially for high val-
ues of the load inclination.
References
[1] Meyerhof GG, Sastry VVRN. Bearing capacity of rigid piles under eccentric and
inclined loads. Can Geotech J 1985;22:267–76.
[2] Randolph MF. Modelling of offshore foundations, Part 2: Anchoring systems.
EH Davis Memorial Lecture. Aust Geomech 1998;33(3):3–15.
[3] Meyerhof GG, Ranjar G. The bearing capacity of rigid piles under inclined loads
in sand. I: Vertical piles. Can Geotech J 1972;9:430–46.
[4] Meyerhof GG. The bearing capacity of rigid piles and pile groups under inclined
loads in clay. Can Geotech J 1981;18:297–300.
[5] Meyerhof GG, Mathur SK, Valsangkar AJ. The bearing capacity of rigid piles and
pile groups under inclined loads in layered sand. Can Geotech J
1981;18:514–9.
[6] Chari TR, Meyerhof GG. Ultimate capacity of rigid single piles under inclined
loads in sand. Can Geotech J 1983;20:849–54.
[7] Meyerhof GG, Yalcin AS, Mathur SK. Ultimate pile capacity for eccentric
inclined loads. J Geotech Eng, ASCE 1983;109(GT3):408–23.
[8] Sastry VVRN, Meyerhof GG, Koumoto T. Behaviour of rigid piles in layered soils
with eccentric and inclined loads. Can Geotech J 1986;23:451–7.
[9] Cho NJ, Kulhawy FH. The undrained behaviour of drilled shaft foundations
subjected to static inclined loading. J Korean Geotech Soc 1995;11(3):91–111.
[10] Broms BB. Lateral resistance of piles in cohesionless soils. J Soil Mech Found
Div, ASCE 1964;90(SM3):123–56.
[11] Meyerhof GG. Bearing capacity and settlement of pile foundations. J Geotech
Eng Div, ASCE 1976;102(GT3):195–228.
[12] Meyerhof GG, Ghosh DP. Ultimate capacity of flexible piles under eccentric and
inclined loads. Can Geotech J 1989;26:34–42.
[13] Sastry VVRN, Meyerhof GG. Behaviour of flexible piles under inclined loads.
Can Geotech J 1990;27:19–28.
[14] Jirásek M, Bažant ZP. Inelastic analysis of structures. London and New York: J.
Wiley & Sons; 2002.
[15] Hillerborg A, Modeer M, Petersson PE. Analysis of crack formation and crack
growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and finite elements. Cem
Concr Res 1976;6:773–82.
[16] European Committee for Standardization. Design of concrete structures – part
1. Eurocode 2, ENV, London; 2001.
[17] Simulia. ABAQUS theory and user’s manual. Version 6.12, Providence, RI, USA:
Dassault Systémes Simulia Corp.; 2012.
[18] Conte E, Troncone A, Vena M. Nonlinear three-dimensional analysis of
reinforced concrete piles subjected to horizontal loading. Comput Geotech
2013;49:123–33.
[19] Comodromos EM, Papadopoulou MC, Rentzeperis IK. Pile foundation analysis
and design using experimental data and 3-D numerical analysis. Comput
Geotech 2009;36:819–36.
[20] Comodromos EM, Papadopoulou MC, Rentzeperis IK. Effect of cracking on the
response of pile test under horizontal loading. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, ASCE
2009;135(9):1275–84.
[21] Potts DM, Zdravković L. Finite element analysis in geotechnical engineering:
application. London: Thomas Telford; 1999.
[22] Lancellotta R. Analytical solution of passive earth pressure. Géotechnique
2002;52(8):617–9.
[23] DIN 4014. Bored piles, construction procedure, design and bearing behaviour.
Berlin: German Code; 1990.
[24] European Committee for Standardization. Geotechnical design – part 1.
Eurocode 7, ENV, London; 2003.