Computers and Geotechnics 32 (2005) 545–554

www.elsevier.com/locate/compgeo

Analysis of pile groups under vertical harmonic vibration

R. Cairo *, E. Conte, G. Dente
Dipartimento di Difesa del Suolo, Università della Calabria, 87036 Rende, Cosenza, Italy

Received 12 October 2004; received in revised form 7 October 2005; accepted 14 October 2005
Available online 2 December 2005

Abstract

In this paper, a simple method is proposed for the analysis of vertically loaded pile groups under dynamic conditions. The method
makes use of the closed-form stiffness matrices derived by Kausel and Roësset [Kausel E, Roësset JM. Stiffness matrices for layered soils.
Bull Seismol Soc Am 1981;71(6):1743–61] to simulate the response of layered soils. These matrices are incorporated in a calculation pro-
cedure that is essentially analytical. Further computational advantages of the procedure derive from the fact that, under the simplified
assumptions of free-field soil displacements and symmetry of the pile–soil interaction forces, the analysis of a pile group may be achieved
simply using the solution for the single pile. Moreover, the soil layering effect is reliably accounted for. The accuracy of the method is
assessed by comparing the results with those deduced from other existing theoretical solutions. The method is also used to predict the
experimental measurements from dynamic tests on pile groups documented in literature.

2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Pile group; Vertical loading; Dynamic analysis

1. Introduction loading is always smaller than unity if the pile installation

Many structures exposed to dynamic loading such as
machine foundations, offshore structures or nuclear power
plants are supported by piles arranged in a group, one of
the primary purposes of which is to limit deformations to
an acceptable level. Under usual loading conditions, the
dynamic external forces are applied to the cap connecting
the head of the piles, and distributed among them. If the
spacing between the piles is very wide, the group stiffness
may be evaluated simply by summing the contributions
from the single piles. On the contrary, when the piles are
closely spaced, which most often is the case, pile–soil–pile
interaction occurs and has to be accounted for in the anal-
yses. Due to this interaction, the load acting on a pile con-
tributes to the motion of the other piles and wave
propagation phenomena generally occur. As a result, the
group efficiency (i.e., the ratio of the group stiffness to
the sum of the individual pile stiffness), which for static
*
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: cairo@dds.unical.it (R. Cairo).
effects are ignored, under dynamic excitation generally
exhibits a strong oscillatory behaviour when it is plotted
versus the excitation frequency, and may even exceed unity
depending on pile spacing, group size, frequency, subsoil
condition and soil properties [2–8].
Many methods were developed to achieve a direct and
complete analysis of pile groups under dynamic conditions
[2,4,9–12]. These methods are essentially of a numerical
nature and involve discretization of the domain (FEM)
or its boundary (BEM). Generally, significant computa-
tional efforts are required and large systems of equations
have to be solved, especially when the group consists of a
great number of piles. As an alternative and more practical
approach, approximate procedures were proposed that
allow the solution to be achieved much more simply
[6,8,13–18]. Most of these procedures are based on the con-
cept of the interaction factor originally introduced by Pou-
los [19] for static loading, and later extended to the
dynamic case by Kaynia and Kausel [4]. As known, accord-
ing to this approach, the analysis of a pile group is con-
ducted by superimposing the effect of two piles at a time

0266-352X/$ - see front matter
2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compgeo.2005.10.001
546 R. Cairo et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 32 (2005) 545–554

under the assumption that the presence of the other piles

does not affect the motion of the piles under consideration.
El-Marsafawi et al. [20] pointed out that the superposition
approach may be employed with confidence to determine
the vertical response of pile groups with the exception of
the case of end-bearing piles, and that of floating piles
embedded in non-homogeneous soils and subjected to high
frequency loading.
In this paper, a simple method is presented to carry out
a direct small-strain analysis of pile groups under vertical
harmonic vibration. The method makes use of the closed-
form stiffness matrices derived by Kausel and Roësset [1]
for the study of wave propagation problems in layered
media. These matrices are incorporated in a calculation
procedure that is essentially analytical and easy to use. In
addition, using this procedure the soil layering effect is reli-
ably accounted for. Limitations of the proposed solution
could derive from the assumptions of soil linearity, perfect
bonding between soil and pile, free-field soil displacements
to simulate pile–soil–pile interaction, and lack of a require-
ment for lateral displacement compatibility at the soil–pile
interface. It should be said, however, that many of these Fig. 1. Axially loaded pile in a layered soil.
assumptions are common to many existing methods, and
some of them could be overcome using simplified proce-
dures available in literature [5,8,21]. Moreover, an approx- counterpart with bs and bp indicating the damping ratio
imate simplification is suggested to construct the soil of the soil and pile, respectively [21]. Moreover, it is
flexibility matrix, which is part of the equation governing assumed that the soil–pile system is under steady-state con-
the dynamic response of a pile group. Taking advantage ditions, therefore any time-dependent variable is in general
of this simplification, the proposed method allows the expressed as a p complex
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffi quantity multiplied by the factor
response of a pile group to be achieved using essentially eixt, where i ¼
1 and x is the vibration frequency. In
the solution for the single pile. This leads to a significant the following, this factor will be omitted for the sake of
reduction in the computational load, and therefore facili- brevity, since it is shared by all time-dependent variables.
tates the analysis of groups consisting of a great number The physical problem can be broken down into two sys-
of piles. The accuracy of the method is assessed by compar- tems (Fig. 2): (a) the pile that is subjected to the external
ing the results with those provided by existing theoretical axial load and soil–pile interaction forces; (b) the soil
solutions. Comparisons are also shown with experimental deposit that is acted on by the interaction forces at the
measurements from dynamic load tests on pile groups doc- pile–soil interface. The pile is subdivided into a finite num-
umented in literature. ber of one-dimensional elements, and the soil is replaced by
a horizontally layered continuum. The nodes are the mid-
2. Method of analysis dle points of the elements and the central points at the
tip and head of the pile. These two systems are first consid-
For the sake of clarity, the method is illustrated consid- ered separately and then reassembled enforcing equilibrium
ering first the case of the single pile and then is extended to and compatibility at the pile–soil interface. Under the
pile groups. This is because, as will be explained below, the above assumptions, the equilibrium equation for the pile
solution for the single pile constitutes the basis for solving can be expressed in matrix form as
the pile group problem.
ðKp
x2 Mp Þwp ¼ P þ Pp ; ð1Þ
2.1. Single pile where wp is the vector containing the nodal vertical
displacements of the pile; Pp, the vector containing the
Fig. 1 shows a pile embedded in a layered soil and sub- pile–soil interaction forces acting on the pile, and P is
jected to harmonic axial loading. Each soil layer is mod- the external load vector. In the case under consideration,
elled as an elastic material of YoungÕs modulus Es, the first term of P is the axial load applied at the pile head
PoissonÕs ratio ms, and mass density qs; the pile is consid- and the other terms are null. Moreover, Kp and Mp indi-
ered to be an elastic cylinder of length L, diameter d, cate, respectively, the stiffness matrix and mass matrix of
cross-sectional area Ap, YoungÕs modulus Ep and mass the pile, the terms of which may be determined using stan-
density qp. In order to account for the effect of the material dard procedures of the structural analysis [22]. For the soil,
damping, YoungÕs modulus is replaced by its complex the following equation can be written:
 R. Cairo et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 32 (2005) 545–554
Fig. 2. Single pile analysis: (a) loads acting on the pile; (b) loads acting on
the soil at the soil–pile interface.
ws ¼ Fs Ps ; ð2Þ
where Fs is the soil flexibility matrix; Ps, the vector contain-
ing the pile–soil interaction forces acting on the soil, and ws
is the soil vertical displacement vector. Owing to the equi-
librium of the interaction forces and compatibility of the
vertical displacements at the soil–pile interface, Eq. (1)
becomes
ðKp þ F
1 2
s
x Mp Þwp ¼ P; ð3Þ
in which F
1s denotes the inverse of Fs, and the unknown
variables are the nodal vertical displacements contained
in the vector wp. Once this vector is determined, the dy-
namic vertical impedance for the frequency considered is
provided by the ratio of the axial load to the vertical dis-
placement at the pile head. As is known, the real part of
the impedance function is the dynamic stiffness of the
pile–soil system, and the imaginary part accounts for both
the radiation and material damping generated in the sys-
tem, as a function of the frequency x.
In order to determine the terms of the matrix Fs, a
procedure based on the stiffness matrices proposed by
Kausel and Roësset [1] is employed. These authors
derived a closed-form equation relating tractions and dis-
placements at the interfaces of an elastic layer of infinite
extent in the horizontal direction, through a stiffness
matrix whose terms are complex and depend on the soil
elastic properties, layer thickness, vibration frequency,
and wave number j describing the variation of displace-
ments and tractions in the horizontal or radial direction.
In other words, this equation is valid under the assump-
tion that the above field variables are harmonic functions
of the spatial variable in the horizontal direction and
547
time. The stiffness matrices for a soil layer and for an
elastic half-space can be found in Kausel and Roësset
[1]. For the sake of completeness, these matrices are also
reported in Appendix A of the present paper. For a hor-
izontally layered soil system, assembling the matrices of
all the layers in the usual way leads to a set of equations
that may be written in compact form as
KU ¼ S; ð4Þ
where K is the global stiffness matrix of the soil; U, the vec-
tor of the corresponding transformed displacements, and S
is the vector containing the transformed external loads ap-
plied at the interfaces of the layers (Fig. 2). Solving Eq. (4)
yields the transformed displacements at the interfaces of
the layered soil system. The method works in the wave
number domain, consequently it first requires that the
loads are expanded spatially in harmonic components
using the Hankel transform, and then the transformed dis-
placements are obtained as a discrete function of the wave
number j solving Eq. (4). From a computational point of
view, this makes the calculation procedure quite simple,
since the actual problem that is in general three-dimen-
sional, is reduced to a one-dimensional problem. Finally,
once the transformed displacements are derived for all
the harmonic components considered, the actual displace-
ment function at a given depth, u(r), can be calculated
using the inverse Hankel transform expressed by the
equation:
Z 1
uðrÞ ¼ jU ðjÞJ 0 ðjrÞ dj; ð5Þ
0
where r is the abscissa in the radial direction measured
from the pile axis; U(j), the transformed displacements
at the depth considered, and J0(jr) is the Bessel function
of the first kind and zero order. It should be observed
that the present procedure, which is similar to that pre-
sented by Kaynia and Kausel [4] and Lee and Small
[23] for piles subject to dynamic and static loading,
respectively, is essentially analytical since only closed-
form equations are involved, except for the inversion of
the Hankel transform that has to be carried out numeri-
cally. In the present work, this integration is performed
using a routine based on Gaussian quadrature. Moreover,
using the present approach the soil layering effect is reli-
ably accounted for.
The soil flexibility matrix Fs in Eq. (2) can be advan-
tageously obtained using the described procedure, with
the vector S (see Eq. (4)) containing the Hankel trans-
form of a unit ring load applied to each pile–soil inter-
face element, or that of a unit total load assumed
uniformly distributed on the pile base. These unit loads
are considered one at a time, and the corresponding
transformed vertical displacements deduced from Eq.
(4) for all the values of j considered, are inserted in
Eq. (5) to provide the actual vertical displacements at
the soil–pile interface that form the columns of the soil
flexibility matrix.
548 R. Cairo et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 32 (2005) 545–554
2.2. Pile group
As an extension of the solution for the single pile, the
following dynamic equilibrium equation can be obtained
for a pile group, by enforcing the equilibrium of the inter-
action forces and compatibility of the vertical displace-
ments at the interface of any pile of the group:
ðKpG þ F
1 2
sG
x MpG ÞwpG ¼ PG ; ð6Þ
where KpG and MpG indicate, respectively, the global stiff-
ness matrix and mass matrix of the pile group, wpG is the
vector containing the nodal vertical displacements of the
piles, PG is the vector of the loads applied to the head of
the piles, and F
1
sG denotes the inverse of the global flexibil-
ity matrix of the soil FsG, whose columns may be deter-
mined using the procedure previously described for the
single pile, under the assumption that pile–soil–pile interac-
tion is described by the free-field soil displacements. There-
fore, owing to this assumption, Eq. (4) has to be just solved
once in order to determine FsG. The assumption of free-
field displacements is usually accepted to calculate the dy-
namic response of piles under axial loading [4,9–12,21].
In order to overcome this assumption, Mylonakis and Gaz-
etas [8] developed an analytical formulation to evaluate the
dynamic interaction factors of a pair of piles embedded in
layered soils. This formulation is based on a Winkler-type
model to account for the effect of the wave diffraction due
to the pile stiffness on pile–soil–pile interaction. However,
the results presented by Mylonakis and Gazetas [8] do
not seem to be very different from those obtained by them
using other theoretical solutions in which the above effect is
ignored. Assuming for simplicity that the piles are identi-
cal, which usually is the case, Eq. (6) forms a system of
m · n equations, where m indicates the number of piles in
the group and n is the number of nodes for each pile.
The resulting matrix of such a system is complex and fully
populated. The unknown variables, which are m · (n + 1)
in number, are the nodal displacements and the loads at
the head of each pile. Consequently, the solution has to
be achieved accounting for the presence of the pile cap.
In this work, only the case of a rigid or fully flexible pile
cap which is not in active contact with the soil, is consid-
ered. Specifically, when the cap is fully flexible the loads ap-
plied to the head of the piles are known, and therefore Eq.
(6) can be used directly to calculate the vector of the nodal
displacement wpG. In the case of piles connected by a rigid
cap, on the contrary, the compatibility of the vertical dis-
placements due to the perfect connection of the cap with
the pile heads, and the equilibrium requirement for the pile
cap have to be considered together with Eq. (6).
As can be realized, when the group consists of a great
number of piles this complete approach is not very attrac-
tive from a computational point of view. A more practical
and computationally convenient solution, although
affected by a simplification, is proposed in the present
work. To this purpose, extending Eq. (2) to the case of a
pile in a pile group, we may write the following expression:
X
m
wsi ¼ Fs Psi þ DFsij Psj ; ð7Þ
j¼1
j6¼i
where wsi is the vector of the soil vertical displacements at
the interface of pile i; Psi and Psj, the vectors containing the
pile–soil interaction forces acting on the soil at the interface
of pile i and j, respectively; Fs, the soil flexibility matrix for
a single pile, and DFsij is the additional flexibility matrix,
whose columns are the soil vertical displacements at the
nodes of pile i due to the unit loads applied at the interface
of pile j. It should be noted that the matrices DFsij can be
directly obtained using the solution for the single pile in
terms of transformed displacements, and calculating the
actual soil displacements at any node of pile i by Eq. (5)
as a function of the radial distance from the axis of the
loaded pile j. If it is assumed, as a simplification, that the
interaction forces are essentially the same for all piles of
the group (i.e., Psi = Psj) the soil flexibility matrix for the
generic pile i can be deduced from Eq. (7) as
X
m
Fsi ¼ Fs þ DFsij . ð8Þ
j¼1
j6¼i
A similar simplified assumption was recently introduced
for a static analysis of pile groups by Lee and Xiao [24]
who also justified it on the basis of both experimental
and theoretical results. As can be realized, Eq. (8) is strictly
valid for pile groups axisymmetrically arranged in a ring as
well as for symmetrical groups consisting of a small num-
ber of piles (2–4 piles), which are centrally loaded. In other
situations, it should in principle be considered as an
approximation. This occurs, for example, when the pile
diameters are different or the piles are very closely spaced.
Nevertheless, in comparison with both more rigorous solu-
tions and field measurements, the authors have found that
the assumption under consideration may be accepted with
confidence, especially for relatively low values of the vibra-
tion frequency. Some examples will be presented after-
wards. In any case, the use of Eq. (8) makes the solution
very easily achieved because the governing equation for
the generic pile i in the group is provided by the same equa-
tion for the single pile (Eq. (3)), in which, however, F
1 si is

1
replaced by Fsi which is the inverse of the soil flexibility
matrix Fsi provided by Eq. (8), i.e.,
 

1
Kp þ Fsi
x2 Mp wpi ¼ Pi ; ð9Þ
where wpi and Pi are, respectively, the vector of the vertical
displacements and that of the external loads at the nodes of
the pile under consideration. Writing this equation for all
the piles of the group, a system of equations with a banded
matrix is obtained, which is much simpler than that result-
ing when the general approach based on Eq. (6) is used. As
previously explained, the solution of such a system with the
additional conditions accounting for the presence of a
massless pile cap, allows the dynamic vertical impedance
 R. Cairo et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 32 (2005) 545–554 549

(force–displacement ratio) for a pile group to be deter-
mined as a function of the vibration frequency. Once this
function has been achieved, the vertical displacement of
the cap of total mass Mc may be evaluated by the following
equation:
Fz
uz ¼ ; ð10Þ
ðK z
x2 M c Þ
where uz indicates the vertical displacement of the cap that
is subjected to the vertical force Fz, and Kz denotes the ver-
tical impedance for the frequency of interest.
The use of Eq. (9) leads to a considerable reduction in
computer storage and time, especially when the group con-
sists of a great number of piles. As an example, for the pile
groups examined in the present study, the use of Eq. (9)
instead of Eq. (6) reduced the computation time on a Pen-
tium IV computer up to about 60% depending on the num-
ber of piles and the discretization adopted. Overall, the
simplified procedure is as computationally advantageous
as the interaction factor approach, and therefore facilitates
the computer analysis of large groups of piles embedded in
layered soils.
For the sake of clarity, in the present paper the calcula-
tion procedure based on Eq. (6) and that based on Eq. (9)
are defined as complete solution and approximate solution,
respectively. In order to assess the accuracy of these solu-
tions, several comparisons with other theoretical methods
are carried out. Some of these comparisons are presented
in Figs. 3 and 4, as examples. In the former figure, the real
part, Kr, and the imaginary part, Im, of the impedance
function for a 3 · 3 pile group are plotted as a function
of the dimensionless frequency a0 = xd/Vs, where Vs is
the soil shear wave velocity. Both Kr and Im are normalized
with respect to the static stiffness of the single pile, Kst, mul-
tiplied by the number of piles in the group. The piles are
embedded in a homogeneous half-space and spaced at 2d.
It is assumed that the cap connecting the head of the piles
is rigid and is not in contact with the soil. The other data
used in the analysis are: Ep/Es = 1000, L/d = 15,
bs = 0.05, vs = 0.4 and qs/qp = 0.7. The solution to this
example was achieved by Mamoon et al. [11] using a
numerical procedure based on the boundary element
method.
As another example, the comparison with the results
obtained by Kaynia and Kausel [12], who developed a gen-
eral formulation for the dynamic analysis of piles, is pre-
sented in Fig. 4. This case concerns a 3 · 3 group of piles
embedded in a non-homogeneous medium whose stiffness
increases linearly with depth from zero at the ground sur-
face to Es = Ep/100 at the pile tip, and then remains con-
stant throughout the underlying half-space. The piles of
L = 20d are spaced at 5d and are connected by a rigid
cap. Moreover, it is assumed that qs/qp = 0.7, bs = 0.05
and vs = 0.4. The stiffness, Kr, and the damping coefficient,
C = Im/a0, of the piled foundation, both normalized with
respect to nine times the static stiffness of the single pile,

2
4

1
3
0
Kr
Kr
9K St 2
-1 9K St

-2 1

-3
0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
a0 a0
4 12
Mamoon et al. [11] Kaynia & Kausel [12]
complete solution complete solution
3
approximate solution 8 approximate solution
Im C
2
9K St 9K St
4
1

0 0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
a0 a0

Fig. 3. Vertical impedance function of 3 · 3 piles spaced at 2d; compar- Fig. 4. Vertical impedance function of 3 · 3 piles spaced at 5d; compar-
ison with the results presented by Mamoon et al. [11]. ison with the results presented by Kaynia and Kausel [12].
550 R. Cairo et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 32 (2005) 545–554

are shown in Fig. 4 as a function of the dimensionless fre-

quency a0, with Vs calculated at the depth of the pile tip.
Although some differences among the results can be
observed for both the examples considered, the agreement
among the methods may be thought satisfactory. The com-
parison is good enough also when the approximate solu-
tion previously described is used. Moreover, this latter
solution provides results in good agreement with those
obtained using the complete solution, in spite of the simpli-
fied assumption affecting the soil flexibility matrix in
Eq. (9).

3. Prediction of experimental measurements

In this section, the theoretical results obtained using the

proposed approach are compared with experimental mea-
surements of documented load tests on pile groups. For
the sake of thoroughness, both the complete and approxi-
mate solutions have been employed.

3.1. Test on a 2 · 2 full-scale pile group in a layered soil

Mizuno and Iiba [25] presented the results of dynamic

tests carried out on a 2 · 2 group of driven steel piles con-
nected by a reinforced concrete cap (Fig. 5(a)). The piles
had a diameter of 0.40 m, pile wall thickness of 9 mm,
length of 6 m and were spaced at 2.5d and 3.75d in two
orthogonal horizontal directions. The cap was embedded
in the soil, but a trench was dug around the cap to separate
it from the soil. The dynamic load was provided by an
oscillator installed on the cap, and the displacements were
measured using several transducers. At the test site, the
subsoil consists of an alternation of fine sand and clay lay-
ers whose shear wave velocity, provided by Mizuno and
Iiba [25], is indicated in Fig. 5(b). Real and imaginary parts
of the vertical impedance function deduced from the field
measurements, are plotted in Fig. 6 for different vibration
frequencies. The theoretical prediction achieved using both
Fig. 6. Comparison of the predicted and observed impedance function for
a 2 · 2 pile group (adapted from [25]).
the complete and approximate solutions are presented in
the same figure, for comparison with the experimental
results. In the calculations, the soil profile shown in
Fig. 5(b) has been considered, and a value of bs = 0.05
has been assumed. Moreover, it has also been assumed that
ms = 0.2 and qs = 1700 kg/m3 for the sand layers, and
ms = 0.495 and qs = 1900 kg/m3 for the clay layers. In any
case, the authors have found that the results are not very
sensitive to the values of these parameters chosen in a real-

Fig. 5. Test described by Mizuno and Iiba [25]: (a) test scheme; (b) soil profile at the test site (adapted from [25]).
 R. Cairo et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 32 (2005) 545–554
istic range for the soils under consideration. As can be seen
from Fig. 6, the theoretical prediction, on the whole, agrees
reasonably well with the observed results. Nevertheless,
some peaks of the theoretical curves are slightly shifted
with respect to those recorded during the experiments,
and the simulation results, especially those concerning the
imaginary part of the foundation impedance, generally
overestimate the observed values. As expected for this case
study, the two theoretical solutions described in the previ-
ous section provide the same results.
3.2. Field experiments with a small-scale group of 102 piles
in sand
In order to achieve the response of a very large group of
piles in a simple manner, it is often assumed that the loads
are carried equally by the piles, and the solution is achieved
from that for a single pile taken as reference for the group
[14]. Following this suggestion, the approximate solution
has been used in this section to predict the experimental
measurements from the dynamic tests conducted by El
Sharnouby and Novak [26] on a small-scale group consist-
ing of 102 tubular steel piles. Consequently, the response of
the reference pile has been achieved directly using Eq. (9).
As can be realized, the use of the complete solution would
have required a considerable computational effort for the
analysis of this case study. The layout of the pile group is
Fig. 7. Layout of the pile group used in the experiments conducted by El
Sharnouby and Novak [26], where the pile taken as reference is indicated
(adapted from [26]).
551
shown in Fig. 7, where the reference pile considered in
the calculation is also indicated. The piles had an outer
diameter of 26.7 mm, a wall thickness of 2.9 mm, a length
of 1060 mm and were spaced at 3d. Moreover, the piles
were rigidly connected to a reinforced concrete cap,
11 cm thick, whose bottom was 6 cm above the ground
level. The excitation in the vertical direction was provided
by a harmonic oscillator installed on the cap. The total
mass of the test body including the cap, the oscillator
and a series of steel plates rigidly bolted to the pile cap,
was 1532 kg. The subsoil at the test site consists of a thick
layer of medium sand with traces of silt. The values of the
soil density and shear wave velocity deduced by El Shar-
nouby and Novak [26] at different depths from laboratory
and site tests, are reported in the scheme of Fig. 8. Specif-
ically, the soil shear wave velocity profile was established
using both steady-state vibration tests and the cross-hole
technique. Moreover, as suggested by Novak and El Shar-
nouby [14], damping ratio for the soil and pile has been
taken as 5% and 0.5%, respectively. Finally, a value of
0.2 has been reasonably assumed for the soil PoissonÕs
ratio.
The measured vertical displacement amplitude,
expressed in a dimensionless form, is shown in Fig. 9 as a
function of the vibration frequency, for two values of the
oscillator intensity (9.8 and 19.7 kg mm) which were kept
Fig. 8. Values of the density and shear wave velocity of the soil at the test
site [26].
2.0
present solution 9.8 kgmm
Dimensionless amplitude
Novak method [14] 19.7 kgmm
1.5
Waas method [14]
1.0
0.5
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 9. Comparison of the experimental results and theoretical response
curves obtained using different methods (adapted from [14]).
552 R. Cairo et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 32 (2005) 545–554
small to avoid significant non-linearity effects, as docu-
mented in the figure where the measured normalized curves
corresponding to the employed excitation intensities essen-
tially collapse onto one curve. The theoretical prediction
achieved using Eq. (9) in conjunction with the soil and pile
data previously specified, are also presented in Fig. 9. In
the calculations, the mass of the reference pile has been
increased by an addition amount given by the total cap
mass divided by the number of piles. This additional mass
has been concentrated at the pile head. Two other theoret-
ical response curves are plotted in Fig. 9. These curves were
obtained by Novak and El Sharnouby [14] using, respec-
tively, a simplified approach proposed by them and the
numerical method developed by Waas and Hartmann [9].
As can be seen, the results obtained using the present solu-
tion are in reasonable agreement with the experimental
measurements. In addition, comparison with the other the-
oretical methods is very satisfactory.
3.3. Tests on model steel piles in a non-homogeneous soil
El-Marsafawi et al. [27] conducted field experiments on
a model group consisting of six steel piles. The piles were
made of hollow pipes with outside diameter of 101.6 mm
and wall thickness of 6.35 mm. They were driven to a depth
of 2.75 m and connected by a reinforced concrete cap,
20 cm thick, whose bottom was about 15 cm above the
ground surface. Pile damping ratio was assumed by El-
Fig. 10. Layout of the pile group used in the experiments conducted by El-
Marsafawi et al. [27] (adapted from [27]).
Marsafawi et al. [27] to be bp = 0.25%. The layout of the
foundation is shown in Fig. 10. The test site was on
the campus of the University of Western Ontario, where
the subsoil consists of a layered cohesionless stratum rest-
ing on dense silty till at a depth of 2.9 m from the ground
surface. The soil profile is shown in Fig. 11 together with
the shear wave velocity values deduced by El-Marsafawi
et al. [27] from cross-hole and steady state vibration tests.
The density of the cohesionless soil and that of the under-
lying till are 1780 and 1860 kg/m3, respectively. As sug-
gested by the above authors, PoissonÕs ratio and material
damping ratio are assumed to be 0.3 and 0.025, respec-
tively, for all the soil layers. The excitation was provided
by a harmonic exciter installed on the foundation top.
The dynamic force was applied either in the vertical direc-
tion or in the horizontal direction and the tests were carried
out in the frequency range from 6 to 62 Hz. The total cap
mass was 1874 kg.
Fig. 12 shows the observed normalized response curve
of the pile group under vertical vibration, for three different
intensities of the harmonic excitation (19.7, 39.2 and
78.3 kg mm). For comparison with the experimental data,
the authors also reported the theoretical response curves
obtained using a simplified procedure based on the interac-
tion factor approach, which is implemented in the com-
puter program DYNA3 [28], and a more rigorous
method developed by Kaynia and Kausel [4]. The theoret-
ical results obtained using both the complete and approxi-
mate procedures proposed in the present paper are also
shown in Fig. 12. As can be observed, the agreement
among the calculation methods is very good for all the fre-
quencies considered. The comparison of the theoretical
Fig. 11. Soil profile and values of the shear wave velocity at the test site
(adapted from [27]).
 R. Cairo et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 32 (2005) 545–554 553

1.5 Appendix A
complete solution 19.7 kgmm
Dimensionless amplitude

approximate solution 39.2 kgmm

The terms of the stiffness matrices proposed by Kausel
Novak method [27] 78.3 kgmm and Roësset [1] are written below. The following notation
1.0 Kaynia method [27] is used: x is the vibration frequency; j, the wave number;
h = soil layer thickness; Gs, the soil shear modulus; ms, the
soil PoissonÕs ratio; qs, the soil mass density; bs is the soil
0.5 damping ratio; c = jh; V 2s ¼ Gs =qs ; V 2P ¼ 2Gs ð1
ms Þ=
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 2
½qs ð1
2vs Þ; v ¼ V s =V P ; r ¼ 1
1þ2b si
ðx=jV P Þ ; s ¼
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 2
0.0
1
1þ2b si
ðx=jV s Þ ; g ¼ xh=ðV s 1 þ 2bs iÞ and i ¼
1.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Frequency (Hz)
For j ¼ 0
Fig. 12. Comparison of the experimental results and theoretical response
curves obtained using different methods (adapted from [27]).
the stiffness matrix for a soil layer, Kl, is
 
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi K11 K12
Kl ¼ qs xV s 1 þ 2bs i ;
K21 K22
results and measurements is fairly satisfactory for values of
where
the excitation frequency less than 50 Hz. For higher fre- " #
quencies, however, all the theoretical solutions provide cot g 0
response curves that are significantly damped with respect K11 ¼ 1 ;
0 v
cot vg
to the experimental data.
K22 ¼ K11 ;
" #
4. Conclusions
sin1 g 0
K12 ¼ ;
0
v sin1 vg
A simple method has been proposed for a direct anal-
K21 ¼ K12
ysis of pile groups subjected to vertical dynamic loading
in the serviceability state. The method makes use of the the stiffness matrix for a half-space, Ks, is
closed-form stiffness matrices derived by Kausel and " #
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1 0
Roësset [1] to simulate the soil response. Specifically, Ks ¼ ixqs V s 1 þ 2bs i .
an approximate solution procedure has been developed 0 1v
that proves to be computationally very efficient, and For j > 0
facilitates a fast and inexpensive computer analysis of
large groups of piles embedded in layered soils. In spite the stiffness matrix for a soil layer is
of the simplified assumptions on which this procedure is  
K11 K12
based, a good agreement was found between the results Kl ¼ 2jGs ð1 þ 2bs iÞ ;
K21 K22
obtained using it and those derived from more rigorous
theoretical solutions. Moreover, comparison with field where

" 2
#
1
1
s2 s
ðC r S s
rsC s S r Þ
ð1
C r C s þ rsS r S s Þ
D 1þs
1
s2
K11 ¼ 2
;
2D
ð1
C r C s þ rsS r S s Þ
D 1þs 1
ðC s S r
rsC r S s Þ
1
s2 r
K22 ¼ same K11 ; with off-diagonal signs changed;
" #
1
s2 1s ðrsS r
S s Þ
ðC r
C s Þ
K12 ¼ 1
;
2D Cr
Cs r
ðrsS s
S r Þ
K21 ¼ KT12

measurements from well-documented dynamic tests in which Cr = cosh rc; Cs = cosh sc; Sr = sinh rc; Ss =
shows that the present solution, combined with the soil sinh sc;
 
properties derived from shear wave measurements, is 1
generally capable of providing a reasonable prediction D ¼ 2ð1
C r C s Þ þ þ rs S r S s ;
rs
of the small-strain response of pile groups under vertical
vibration, especially for relatively low values of the exci- the stiffness matrix for the half-space is
tation frequency. Ks ¼ 2jGs ð1 þ 2bs iÞK11 ;
554 R. Cairo et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 32 (2005) 545–554
where
" ð1
s2 Þr ð1
s2 Þ
# soil media. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 1991;10(8):386–401.
2ð1
rsÞ 2ð1
rsÞ

1
K11 ¼ ð1
s2 Þ ð1
s2 Þs
. Geotech Eng ASCE 1983;109(2):228–43.
2ð1
rsÞ

1 2ð1
rsÞ
Acknowledgement
The authors thank the reviewers for their valuable and
constructive comments.
References
[1] Kausel E, Roësset JM. Stiffness matrices for layered soils. Bull
Seismol Soc Am 1981;71(6):1743–61.
[2] Wolf JP, von Arx GA. Impedance function of a group of vertical
piles. In: ASCE specialty conference on earthquake engineering and
soil dynamics, Pasadena, CA, 1978. p. 1024–41.
[3] Nogami T. Dynamic group effect of multiple piles under vertical
vibration. In: ASCE engineering mechanics division specialty
conference, Austin, Texas, 1979. p. 750–4.
[4] Kaynia AM, Kausel E. Dynamic behaviour of pile groups. In: 2nd
International conference on numerical methods of offshore piling,
Austin, Texas, 1982. p. 509–32.
[5] Sheta M, Novak M. Vertical vibration of pile groups. J Geotech Eng
Div ASCE 1982;108(GT4):570–90.
[6] Novak M. Piles under dynamic loads: state of the art. In: 2nd
International conference on recent advances in geotechnical earthquake
engineering and soil dynamics, St. Louis, Missouri, 1991. p. 2433–56.
[7] Makris N, Gazetas G. Displacement phase differences in a
harmonically oscillating pile. Géotechnique 1993;43(1):135–50.
[8] Mylonakis G, Gazetas G. Vertical vibration and additional distress of
grouped piles in layered soil. Soils Found 1998;38(1):1–14.
[9] Waas G, Hartmann HG. Pile foundations subjected to dynamic
horizontal loads. In: Proceedings of the European simulation meeting
on modelling and simulating of large scale structural systems, Capri,
Italy, 1981.
[10] Sen R, Kausel E, Banerjee PK. Dynamic analysis of piles and pile
groups embedded in non-homogeneous soils. Int J Numer Anal Meth
Geomech 1985;9:507–24.
[11] Mamoon SM, Kaynia AM, Banerjee PK. Frequency-domain
dynamic analysis of piles and pile groups. J Eng Mech ASCE
1990;116(10):2237–57.
[12] Kaynia AM, Kausel E. Dynamics of piles and pile group in layered
[13] Nogami T. Dynamic group effect in axial response of grouped piles. J
[14] Novak M, El Sharnouby B. Evaluation of dynamic experiments on
pile group. J Geotech Eng ASCE 1984;110(6):738–56.
[15] Dobry R, Gazetas G. Simple method for dynamic stiffness and
damping of floating pile groups. Géotechnique 1988;38(4):
557–74.
[16] Gazetas G, Makris N. Dynamic pile–soil–pile interaction. Part I:
analysis of axial vibration. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn
1991;20:115–32.
[17] Gazetas G, Fan K, Kaynia A. Dynamic response of pile groups
with different configurations. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng
1993;12:239–57.
[18] Cairo R, Conte E, Dente G. Interaction factors for the analysis of pile
groups in layered soils. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE
2005;131(4):525–8.
[19] Poulos HG. Analysis of the settlement of pile groups. Géotechnique
1968;18(4):449–71.
[20] El-Marsafawi H, Kaynia AM, Novak M. The superposition
approach to pile group dynamics. In: ASCE geotechnical
special publication No. 34, Piles under dynamic loads, 1992.
p. 114–35.
[21] Wolf JP. Foundation vibration analysis using simple physical models.
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1994.
[22] Smith IM, Griffiths DV. Programming the finite element method.
New York: J. Wiley and Sons; 1988.
[23] Lee CY, Small JC. Finite-layer analysis of axially loaded piles. J
Geotech Eng ASCE 1991;117(11):1706–22.
[24] Lee KM, Xiao ZR. A simplified nonlinear approach for pile group
settlement analysis in multilayered soils. Can Geotech J
2001;38(5):1063–80.
[25] Mizuno H, Iiba M. Dynamic effects of backfill and piles on
foundation impedance. In: Proceedings of the 10th world conference
of earthquake engineering, Madrid, Spain, 1992. p. 1823–8.
[26] El Sharnouby B, Novak M. Dynamic experiments with group of piles.
J Geotech Eng ASCE 1984;110(6):719–37.
[27] El-Marsafawi H, Han YC, Novak M. Dynamic experiments on two
pile groups. J Geotech Eng ASCE 1992;118(4):576–92.
[28] Novak M, Sheta M, El Hifnawy L, El-Marsafawi H,
Ramadan O. DYNA3—a computer program for calculation
of foundation response to dynamic loads. Report No. GEOP
90-92, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario,
Canada, 1990.