PygmyManual v2 - 31

The University of Western Australia
Department of Civil and Resource Engineering
User Manual
Program PYGMY
p-y analysis of laterally loaded piles under general loading
p-y springs
pressure, p
displacement, y
version 2.31
October 2000
User Manual i Program PYGMY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 SUMMARY OF FEATURES 1
2 LICENCE 2
3 SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS 2
4 DISCLAIMER 2
5 BACKGROUND THEORY 3
5.1 SIGN CONVENTION ........................................................................................................... 5
6 P-Y CURVE FORMULATIONS 6
6.1 SAND: API CRITERION ..................................................................................................... 6

6.2 SOFT CLAY: API CRITERION .......................................................................................... 9
6.3 STIFF CLAY: DUNNAVANT AND O'NEILL CRITERION .................................................. 12
6.4 CLAY: SIMPLE LINEAR ELASTIC-PERFECTLY PLASTIC MODEL................................... 14
6.5 CALCAREOUS SOIL: WESSELINK ET AL. CRITERION ................................................... 16
6.6 CALCAREOUS SOIL: DYSON CRITERION ....................................................................... 18
6.7 WEAK ROCK: REESE CRITERION .................................................................................. 20
6.8 STRAIN-SOFTENING MODEL........................................................................................... 22
6.9 SAND: SIMPLE MODEL .................................................................................................... 23
6.10 STIFF CLAY: REESE ET AL. MODEL .............................................................................. 25
6.11 WEAK CARBONATE ROCK: ABBS MODEL .................................................................... 28
6.12 WEAK ROCK: FRAGIO ET AL. MODEL.......................................................................... 30
6.13 MULTIPLYING FACTORS FOR GROUP EFFECTS ........................................................... 32
7 PROGRAM OPERATION 34
7.1 DATA INPUT .................................................................................................................... 34

7.1.1 MENUS ...................................................................................................................... 34
7.1.2 PILE PROPERTIES ....................................................................................................... 35
7.1.3 ANALYSIS VARIABLES ............................................................................................... 37
7.1.3.1 Control parameters.............................................................................................. 37
7.1.3.2 Loading and boundary conditions ...................................................................... 37
7.1.4 SOIL STRATIGRAPHY ................................................................................................. 39
7.1.4.1 Sand: API recommendation................................................................................ 40
7.1.4.2 Soft Clay: API recommendation......................................................................... 41
7.1.4.3 Stiff Clay: Dunnavant and O'Neill criterion ....................................................... 41
7.1.4.4 Clay: simple linear elastic-perfectly plastic model............................................. 41
7.1.4.5 Calcareous soil: Wesselink et al. criterion.......................................................... 42

Department of Civil & Resource Engineering
User Manual ii Program PYGMY
7.1.4.6 Calcareous soil: Dyson criterion......................................................................... 42

7.1.4.7 Weak rock: Reese criterion................................................................................. 42
7.1.4.8 Strain softening model ........................................................................................ 43
7.1.4.9 Sand: simple model............................................................................................. 43
7.1.4.10 Stiff clay: Reese et al. model .............................................................................. 43
7.1.4.11 Weak carbonate rock: Abbs model..................................................................... 43
7.1.4.12 Weak rock: Fragio et al. model........................................................................... 44
7.1.4.13 User defined........................................................................................................ 44
7.1.4.14 Free standing length............................................................................................ 45
7.2 ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................ 45
7.3 PLOTTING RESULTS ....................................................................................................... 45
7.3.1 CALCULATED P-Y CURVES ........................................................................................ 45
7.3.2 CALCULATION RESULTS ............................................................................................ 46
7.4 PRINTING ........................................................................................................................ 48
7.5 DISK FILES ...................................................................................................................... 48
8 EXAMPLE ANALYSES 49
8.1 STRUCTURAL LOAD APPLIED TO HEAD OF PILE – DISPLACEMENT CONTROL ............ 49

8.2 STRUCTURAL LOAD APPLIED TO HEAD OF PILE – LOAD CONTROL ............................. 54
8.3 LATERAL SOIL MOVEMENT IMPOSED ON PILE ............................................................. 56
9 VERIFICATION 60
10 TECHNICAL SUPPORT 62
11 REFERENCES 62

User Manual 1 Program PYGMY
1 Summary of Features
The program PYGMY analyses the behaviour of single piles under lateral loading. It
uses the subgrade reaction, or p-y method, and allows general forms of loading to be
applied. This program was originally developed for research purposes, with the clear
need to be able to easily alter parameters and view the effects on the results of the
analysis. The graphical input and output parts of the program were developed with
Microsoft Visual Basic, while the calculations are performed within a Dynamic Link
Library developed with Lahey Fortran 90.
In summary, the program has the following features:
• Finite element based analysis of pile bending including the effect of axial load.
• Soil resistance represented by non-linear p-y "springs", defined in the following
way:
− soft clay, generated automatically using the API (1993) recommended practice,
− sand, generated automatically using the API (1993) recommended practice,
− stiff clay, generated automatically using the Dunnavant and O'Neill (1987)
model,
− stiff clay, generated automatically using the Reese et al. (1975) model,
− a simple linear elastic-perfectly plastic model for clay,
− a simple model for sand,
− a simple strain-softening model,
− calcareous soil, generated automatically using the Wesselink et al. (1988) model,
− calcareous soil, generated automatically using the Dyson and Randolph (2000)
model,
− weak carbonate rock generated automatically using the Abbs (1983) model,
− weak rock, generated automatically using the Fragio et al. (1985) model,
− weak rock, generated automatically using the Reese (1998) model,
− a user-defined series of points, and
− zero resistance over a free standing length above ground level.
• Automatic generation of p-y curves covers both static and cyclic criteria where
relevant.
• p multipliers can be input to account for group effects.
• The soil data are input in layers representing the stratigraphy, to simplify data input.
• Yielding of the pile is accounted for by the inclusion of a plastic moment for the pile
section.
• Loading can be in the form of any combination of applied moments, lateral forces,
rotations, lateral displacements or lateral soil displacements to any node.
• Any node on the pile can be fixed from rotating or displacing.
• Experimental data in the form of pile head load-displacement and/or moment-depth
data can be read in for comparison with the results of the analysis.
• Fully Windows based input via forms and text boxes and selectable options.
• On-screen plotting of pile deflection, rotation, bending moment, shear force and
"spring" force distributions with depth.

• On-screen plotting of pile head load versus head deflection and pile head load
versus maximum bending moment.
• On-screen plotting of p-y curves.
• Output data is written to disk in ASCII format.
2 Licence
The terms of the licence agreement are detailed in a separate document End-user licence
agreement for "PYGMY" software product. Please read this licence document carefully
before installing the software.
3 System Requirements
The program requires a Pentium microcomputer running Microsoft Windows 95 or
above or Windows NT.
4 Disclaimer
This program was developed by the author partly at The University of Western
Australia. Although considerable care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of this
software and its manual, the author and The University of Western Australia accept no
responsibility for the accuracy of the results obtained from their use. The user is
responsible for checking the accuracy and applicability of the results and the theory and
methodology. In no event shall the author or The University of Western Australia be
responsible for any direct or indirect damages arising from the use of this software.

5 Background Theory
This program analyses laterally loaded piles by the subgrade reaction method, where the
pile is idealised as a beam that is restrained from deflection by a series of distributed
springs along its length, Figure 5.1. The basic governing equation for this situation is
listed below, including the effect of axial load on bending response.
d4y d2y
EI 4 + F 2 − ky = 0 (1)
dx dx
where:
E = Young's modulus of the pile
I = Second moment of area of pile
y = lateral deflection of pile
x = distance along the pile
k = modulus of subgrade reaction (spring stiffness)
F = axial load
The solution of equation 1 can be achieved using finite difference techniques, or with a
finite element formulation of the beam bending equation. The program PYGMY uses a
finite element formulation.
p-y springs
pressure, p
displacement, y
Figure 5.1. Idealisation of laterally loaded pile as a beam supported by springs.
If the stiffness of the spring is constant, then solution of equation 1 is relatively

straightforward. However, it is typical that k will vary with the amount of displacement
at any point. Thus the springs are non-linear and are commonly called p-y curves, where
p = pressure and y = displacement. In this case an iterative solution procedure is
required, using the secant spring stiffness.

Solution of equation 1, with the applied loads and boundary conditions will yield the
full response of the pile in bending. However, in some situations it may be necessary to
analyse the response of piles to lateral soil movements, with or without applied
structural loads as well. In this case, the governing equation becomes:
d4y d2y
EI + F − k(y − w) = 0 (2)
dx 4 dx 2
where w = lateral soil displacement.
The program completely reforms the stiffness and load matrices at each loading
increment, before iterating to find a solution. This is inefficient computationally, but is
unlikely to be of concern to the user, since the analysis proceeds quickly.

5.1 Sign Convention

The sign convention used in this program is shown in Figure 5.2. Applied loads and
displacements are positive acting to the right and applied moments and rotations are
positive acting clockwise. The length of the pile and depth of layers are measured from
the head of the pile. However, in some p-y models soil properties are allowed to vary
linearly with depth such that they have a gradient with depth and an intercept value at
the ground surface (not the pile head). For axial load, compression is positive.
Displacement Rotation
Moment Shear force Soil resistance
Figure 5.2. Sign convention used in this program, positive directions shown.

6 p-y Curve Formulations

The springs that represent load transfer between the pile and the soil are commonly
termed p-y curves. A number of alternative formulations have been proposed for the
shape of these curves for a range of different materials. PYGMY enables automatic
generation of p-y curves using a number of published p-y criteria, as described below.
The automatic generation involves determination of 16 co-ordinate points (forming 15
linear segments) that describe each curve, and the program then interpolates linearly
between these points as required. Points are generated for displacement of up to one pile
diameter. If the pile is displaced further than one pile diameter at any point, then the p-y
curve is projected using the last two coordinate points. To represent interaction of piles
in a group, a p multiplier (value ≤ 1.0) can be entered for each p-y curve type to shrink
the pressure coordinates. As well as the automatically generated p-y curves, it is also
possible for the user to manually input points that describe the curves.
6.1 Sand: API criterion

For sand, the criterion recommended by the American Petroleum Institute (1993) is
used in PYGMY. The curve is given by:
 kxy 
p = Ap u tanh  (3)
 u 
Ap D
where:
p = lateral pressure
A = a factor to account for static or cyclic loading
A = 0.9 where equilibrium has been reached under cyclic loading
A = (3.0 – 0.8x/D) ≥ 0.9 for static loading
pu = ultimate bearing pressure at the current depth, x
k = gradient of initial modulus of subgrade reaction with depth (kPa/m)
Curves are presented by API (1993) relating k to relative density, and are
reproduced in Figure 6.1.
y = lateral displacement
x = depth below surface
D = pile diameter
The ultimate bearing pressure, pu, at a particular depth is given by the lesser of:
(C1 x + C 2 D)σ' v
p u (shallow ) = (4)
D
p u ( deep ) = C 3 σ' v (5)

where σ'v = vertical effective stress at depth x (kPa), and C1, C2 and C3 are coefficients
determined as functions of φ. The curves presented by API (1993) have been fitted by
the following expressions, shown in Figure 6.2:
C1 = 0.115 × 10 0.0405 φ
C2 = 0.571 × 10 0.022 φ
C3 = 0.646 × 10 0.0555 φ
φ
28° 29° 30° 36° 40° 45°
80000
V. LOOSE LOOSE MEDIUM DENSE DENSE V. DENSE
70000
60000 ABOVE THE

WATER TABLE
50000
k (kPa/m)
40000
30000
BELOW THE
WATER TABLE
20000
10000
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Relative density (%)
Figure 6.1. Suggested variation of k with relative density and friction angle,
API(1993).

6 120
C3
5 100
C1
4 80
C1 and C2
C3
3 C2 60
2 40
1 20
0 0
25 30 35 40 45
Angle of internal friction, φ (degrees)
Figure 6.2. Factors for limit pressure used in PYGMY.
An example of the curve shape for this model is given in Figure 6.3.
120
depth = 2D, static

100
80
depth = 2D, cyclic
Pressure (kPa)
depth = 1D, static

60
40
depth = 1D, cyclic

20
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
Normalised displacement, y/D
Figure 6.3. Typical p-y curve shapes for the API sand model,
D = 0.6 m, φ = 35°, γ' = 7 kN/m3, k = 22000 kPa/m.


6.2 Soft Clay: API criterion

For submerged soft clay, the criterion recommended by the American Petroleum
Institute (1993) is used in PYGMY. The curve for static loading is generated from the
following co-ordinate points:
Table 6.1. Coordinate points for API soft clay static loading criterion.
p/pu y/yc
0 0
0.5 1.0
0.72 3.0
1.0 8.0
1.0 ∞
The ultimate soil resistance increases from 3su to 9su as x increases from 0 to XR
according to:
su x
p u = 3s u + σ' v + J (6)
D
and
p u = 9s u for x ≥ XR (7)
where:
su = undrained shear strength
J = dimensionless empirical constant
J has generally been found to vary from 0.25 to 0.5 in field tests. Higher
values of J will lead to a more rapid increase in pu with depth near the
surface, as shown in Figure 6.4.
XR = depth from soil surface to the bottom of a zone of reduced resistance
6D
XR = where the undrained strength is constant with depth
γD / s u + J
XR must be found by the intersection of equations 6 and 7 where the

undrained strength is not constant with depth. Generally XR should not be
less than 2.5D.
yc = 2.5ε50D
ε50 = strain which occurs at 50% of the failure stress in a laboratory undrained
compression test, ie 1% is input as 0.01. Typical values for ε50 are shown
in Figure 6.5.

Limiting resistance, pu/su

0 2 4 6 8 10
0
J = 1.0
4
J = 0.5
x/D
6
J = 0.25
8
D = 1.0 m
10 su = 20 kPa
γ' = 6 kN/m
3
12
Figure 6.4. Typical variation of limiting resistance with parameter J.
1000
suggested range,
Jamiolkowski and Garassino (1977)
100
s u (kPa)
10
suggested range, Ashour et al. (1998)
1
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02
ε 50
Figure 6.5. Typical values of ε50.
For the case where equilibrium has been reached under cyclic loading, the p-y curves
are generated from the following table:

Table 6.2. Coordinate points for API soft clay cyclic loading criterion.
x > XR x < XR
p/pu y/yc p/pu y/yc
0 0 0 0
0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0
0.72 3.0 0.72 3.0
0.72 ∞ 0.72 (x/XR) 15.0
0.72 (x/XR) ∞
100
depth = 2D, static
90
80 depth = 1D, static
70
Pressure (kPa)
60
50
40
30
20 depth = 2D, cyclic

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Figure 6.6. Typical p-y curve shapes for the API soft clay model,
D = 0.6 m, su = 20 kPa, γ' = 6 kN/m3, J = 0.5, ε50 = 0.007.


6.3 Stiff Clay: Dunnavant and O'Neill criterion

For submerged stiff clay, the experimental criterion developed by Dunnavant and
O'Neill (1989) is used in PYGMY. The curve for static loading is given by:
  y  
0.7
p = 1.02p u tanh 0.537   for y ≤ 8 y50 (8)

  y 50  
p = pu for y > 8 y50

where:
pu = NpsuD
σ' v x
Np = 2+ + 0.4 ≤9
s u .av D
σ'v = vertical effective stress at the current depth, x

su.av = average undrained shear strength from the surface to the current depth
y50 = 0.0063 ε50 D(KR)-0.875
0.286
EI  EI 
KR = with L ≤ 3D 
4 
E s L4  s 
E D
Es = strength-correlated soil modulus

L = pile length
The envelope for cyclic loading is shown in Figure 6.7 and is described as follows:
  y 
0.7

p cm = 1.02p u tanh 0.537   (9)
  y 50  
pr  x 
= 1 −  0.25 − 0.07  log N ≤1 (10)
p cm  xo 
for 100 load cycles this reduces to:

pr x
= 0.5 + 0.14 ≤1
p cm xo
where:
pcm = NcmsuD
xo = a constant length for non-dimensional purposes, taken as 1 metre
 x 
Ncm = 1 −  0.45 − 0.18  log N ≤ 1 – 0.12 log N
 xo 

for 100 load cycles this reduces to:

x
Ncm = 0.1 + 0.36 ≤ 0.76
xo
static curve
1
Normalised
resistance cyclic curve
p/pu
pcm/pu
pr/pu
12
Normalised displacement, y/y50
Figure 6.7. Dunnavant and O'Neill's cyclic p-y criterion for stiff clay.
160
100
Pressure (kPa)
80
40
depth = 1D, cyclic
20
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Figure 6.8. Typical p-y curve shapes for the Dunnavant and O'Neill stiff clay
model, D = 0.6 m, su = 50 kPa, γ' = 6 kN/m3, ε50 = 0.005, KR = 10-3, 100 cycles.


6.4 Clay: simple linear elastic-perfectly plastic model

This model is a simple linear elastic-perfectly plastic criterion for clay. The model
assumes that the elastic stiffness, k is related to the shear strength by a simple
multiplier:
y
i.e. p=k (11)
D
where k = C su and C is a constant.
The limiting lateral pressure at any depth is also related simply to the undrained shear
strength, as follows. At the ground surface, pult = 2su. The ratio of pult to su then
increases linearly with depth, reaching: pult = 9su at a depth of 3 pile diameters. The
value of pult then remains at a constant ratio of 9su below this depth.
Lateral pressure, pult/su
2 9
pult
3
Lateral
pressure
k = Csu
Normalised
depth, z/D
Figure 6.9. Simple clay model.
Analytical expressions presented by Baguelin et al. (1977) can be used to derive a

theoretical relationship between k and the shear modulus of the soil. Numerical values
of the k/G ratio for various values of Poisson's ratio, ν are shown in Table 6.3 below.
Randolph et al. (1991) presented the following expression:
−0.14
k  Ep 
≈ 10  (12)
G G 
where Ep is the Young's modulus of a solid pile of equivalent bending rigidity to the
actual pile {Ep = (EI)p/(πD4/64)}. This was derived by comparing solutions from
subgrade reaction theory (Hetenyi, 1946) with results from an elastic continuum
analysis (Randolph, 1981). For typical values of Ep/G of 500 to 2000, this gives k/G in
the range 3.5 to 4.2. Note that the ratios from this latter approach give equivalence

between subgrade reaction and elastic methods of analysis, while the ratios from
Baguelin et al's (1977) work are from a more fundamental study of load transfer
between a pile and an elastic soil. However, it appears that typically k/G should be
about 3 to 4.
Table 6.3. Ratio of k/G derived from Baguelin et al. (1977)
ν k/G
0.2 2.9
0.3 3.2
0.4 3.7
0.5 5.2
To relate shear modulus to undrained shear strength, a number of factors such as strain
level and pile installation method should be considered. For laterally loaded piles, G/su
between about 50 and 200 may be appropriate.
As an example, with k/G = 4 and G/su = 100, a value of C = k/su = 400 is derived.

6.5 Calcareous soil: Wesselink et al. criterion

The first criterion for calcareous soil is that described by Wesselink et al. (1988) and
Williams et al. (1988). The curve is given by:
N γ
 x  y
p = R     (13)
 x0  D
where:
R = control variable for curve stiffness (kN/m2)
N = constant controlling the rate of increase in p with depth
γ = constant controlling the amount of curvature in the p-y relation
x0 = a constant length for non-dimensional purposes, taken as 1 m
Equation 13 exhibits infinite stiffness at the origin, and thus it is necessary to specify an
initial stiffness for the curve, expressed in kPa (slope of the pressure versus y/D curve).
In this program, the initial stiffness is assumed to increase linearly with depth, and thus
is input as a gradient with depth in kPa/m.
Typical values for the above parameters are shown in Table 6.4 below. Normally a
value of N less than unity would be expected.
Table 6.4. Reported parameters for the Wesselink et al. model.

Reference Soil and test type R N γ
(kN/m2)
Wesselink et al. (1988) Bass Strait, Kingfish B, 650 0.7 0.65
centrifuge tests
Wesselink et al. (1988) Bass Strait, Halibut, 850 0.7 0.65
centrifuge tests
Williams et al. (1988) Bass Strait, Kingfish B, 500 0.5 0.5
onshore pit test
Dyson and Randolph North West Shelf, Goodwyn A, 210 to 1.5 0.85
(1997) centrifuge tests 270

300
250
depth = 2D
200
Pressure (kPa)
150
depth = 1D
100
50
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Figure 6.10. Typical p-y curve shapes for the Wesselink et al. calcareous soil
model, D = 0.6 m, R = 650 kN/m2, N =0.7, γ = 0.65.

6.6 Calcareous soil: Dyson criterion

The second criterion for calcareous soil is that described by Dyson and Randolph (2000)
and originally developed in a slightly different form by Dyson (1999). The curve is
given by:
n
 q  y
m
p = γ ' DR  c    (14)
 γ' D   D 
where:
γ' = submerged density of the soil
R = constant for curve stiffness
qc = cone penetration resistance at that depth (consistent units with pa)
pa = atmospheric pressure = 100 kPa = 0.1 MPa (consistent units with qc)
n = constant
m = constant controlling the amount of curvature in the p-y relation
Equation 14 exhibits infinite stiffness at the origin, and thus it is necessary to specify an
initial stiffness for the curve, expressed in kPa (slope of the pressure versus y/D curve).
In this program, the initial stiffness is assumed to increase linearly with depth, and thus
is input as a gradient with depth in kPa/m.
For a calcareous soil from near the Goodwyn A platform on the North West Shelf,
Dyson and Randolph (2000) found R between 2.56 and 2.84, n = 0.72 and m between
0.52 and 0.64. Rounded values of R = 2.7 and m = 0.6 were found to give an adequate
fit to all experimental data.

600
500 depth = 2D
400
Pressure (kPa)
depth = 1D
300
200
100
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Figure 6.11. Typical p-y curve shapes for the Wesselink et al. calcareous soil
model, D = 0.6 m, R = 2.7, n = 0.72, m = 0.6, qc = 2 + 1x MPa.

6.7 Weak rock: Reese criterion

For weak rock, the model presented by Reese (1997) is used. The curve is given by:
p = Kir y for y ≤ yA (15)
0.25
p  y 
p = ur   ≤ p ur for y ≥ yA (16)
2  y rm 
where:
Kir ≈ kir Eir
Eir = initial Young's modulus of rock
 400 x r 
kir = 100 +  for 0 ≤ xr ≤ 3D;
 3D 
= 500 for xr ≥ 3D
xr = depth below rock surface
yrm = krm D
krm = constant between 5 x 10-4 and 5 x 10-5
1.333
 p ur 
yA =  
 2(y )0.25 K 
 rm ir 
 x 
pur = α r q ur 1 + 1.4 r  for 0 ≤ xr ≤ 3D;
 D
= 5.2α r q ur for xr ≥ 3D
αr = reduction factor to account for fracturing, varying linearly between

1/3 for RQD = 100 and 1.0 for RQD = 0.
qur = unconfined compressive strength of the intact rock
The program requires the depth to the rock surface to be input so that xr can be
calculated correctly. If several rock layers are specified so that the insitu strength profile
can be represented, the depth to the uppermost layer should be used. In other words, the
depth to the rock surface should be the same for each layer.

10000
9000 depth = 2D
8000
7000
Pressure (kPa)
6000
depth = 1D
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025
Figure 6.12. Typical p-y curve shapes for the Reese weak rock model, D = 0.6 m,
UCS = 5 MPa, α = 0.5, E = 500 MPa, krm = 5 x 10-4.

6.8 Strain-softening model

For materials that may exhibit strain softening, perhaps by fracturing, a simple model is
included. The p-y response is linear up to a peak, then softens linearly to a residual
pressure. The response is defined by the peak and residual pressures and the initial
(loading) and post-peak (unloading) stiffnesses. The stiffnesses have units of pressure as
normalised displacement is used as shown in the diagram below. The peak and residual
pressures and the loading stiffness may vary linearly with depth.
pult
Lateral ku
pressure
pres
ki
Figure 6.13. Simple strain-softening model.

6.9 Sand: simple model

This model uses a similar formulation to the API model for sand. The curve is given by:
 kxy 
p = p u tanh  (17)
 puD 
where:
pu = Kp2 σ'v
Kp = (1 + sinφ)/(1 - sinφ)
k = gradient of initial modulus of subgrade reaction with depth (kPa/m)
The curves presented in Figure 6.1 may be used for guidance.
The variation in ultimate resistance used in this model was reported by Barton (1982)
(Fleming et al., 1992) to give a good match with centrifuge model test data in sand. The
predicted limiting resistances are relatively similar to those from the API sand method
(including the A factor) near the ground surface. However at depths below about 4 or 5
pile diameters, this simple model generally gives limiting resistances that are lower
(depending on the friction angle chosen). This is illustrated in Figure 6.15.
140
simple sand model

120
depth = 2D
100
Pressure (kPa)
API sand model

80
60
depth = 1D
40
simple sand model
20
0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025
Figure 6.14. Typical p-y curve shapes for the simple sand model, compared to the
API sand model, D = 0.6 m, φ = 35°, γ' = 7 kN/m3, k = 22000 kPa/m.


Ultimate pressure (kPa)

0 500 1000 1500 2000
0
5
Depth/diameter
API sand model

10
15
simple sand model
20
Figure 6.15. Comparison between ultimate pressure for the simple sand model and
the API sand model, D = 0.6 m, φ = 35°, γ' = 7 kN/m3.


6.10 Stiff clay: Reese et al. model

A criterion developed for stiff clay is described by Reese et al. (1975). The criterion was
developed from pile test data at a site where the clays had secondary structure such as
joints, fissures and slickensides. This secondary structure is likely to have effectively
given rise to lower strengths and brittle soil failure, and is reflected in the strain
softening predicted by the model. Comments on the applicability of this model are
given by O'Neill et al. (1990).
The p-y curve is complex and for static loading is given by:
1. An initial linear segment defined by the initial stiffness. The initial stiffness is
assumed to vary linearly with depth, from zero at the surface. This is defined by
an initial stiffness gradient, k. Typical values for k given by Reese et al. (1975)
are listed in Table 6.5.
Table 6.5 Recommended values for initial stiffness gradient, k for stiff clays,
after Reese et al. (1975)
Average undrained shear strength (kPa)
50 – 100 100 – 200 200 – 400
Static loading, ks (kPa/m) 135,000 270,000 540,000
Cyclic loading, kc (kPa/m) 55,000 110,000 220,000
Note: Average undrained shear strength is defined from the surface to a depth of
5 pile diameters.
2. A parabolic section given by:
pu y
p= for y ≤ Ayc (18)
2 yc
where:
x
pu = 2s u.av + σ' v +2.83s u.av ≤ 11su
D
σ'v = vertical effective stress at the current depth, x
su.av = average undrained shear strength from the surface to the current
depth
yc = ε50D
ε50 = strain which occurs at 50% of the failure stress in a laboratory
undrained compression test, ie 1% is input as 0.01. In the absence
of other information, typical values for ε50 are shown in Figure
6.4. The range suggested by Jamiolkowski and Garrasino (1977)
is similar to that suggested by Reese et al. (1975).

A = an empirical adjustment factor for static loading. In PYGMY, this

is evaluated using A = -0.05(x/D)2 + 0.29 x/D + 0.2 ≤ 0.6. For
x/D ≥ 3, A = 0.6.
3. A second parabolic section given by:
1.25
p y  y − Ay c 
p= u − 0.055p u   for Ayc ≤ y ≤ 6Ayc (19)
2 yc  Ay c 
4. A linear section given by:
p u  y − 6Ay c 
p = p u 6A − 0.411p u −   for 6Ayc ≤ y ≤ 18Ayc (20)
16  yc 
5. A final linear section at constant pressure for y ≥ 18Ayc.
For cyclic loading the curve is given by:

1. An initial linear segment defined by the initial stiffness. The initial stiffness is
assumed to vary linearly with depth, from zero at the surface. This is defined by
an initial stiffness gradient, k. Typical values for k given by Reese et al. (1975)
are listed in Table 6.5.
2. A parabolic section given by:
  y − 0.45y  2.5 
p = Bp u 1 −   for y ≤ 0.6yp
p
  (21)
 
0.45 y p 

where:
yp = 4.1Ayc
B = an empirical adjustment factor for cyclic loading. In PYGMY,
this is evaluated using B = -0.055(x/D)2 + 0.15 x/D + 0.2 ≤ 0.3.
For x/D ≥ 1.5, B = 0.3.
3. A linear section given by:
 y − 0.6 y p 
p = 0.936Bp u − 0.085p u   for 0.6yp ≤ y ≤ 1.8yp (22)
 yc 
4. A final linear section at constant pressure for y ≥ 1.8yp.

220
200

160
140
Pressure (kPa)
120
depth = 1D, static
100
80 depth = 2D
60 cyclic
40
depth = 1D
20
cyclic
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
Figure 6.16. Typical p-y curve shapes for the Reese et al. stiff clay model,
D = 0.6 m, su = 50 kPa, γ' = 7 kN/m3, e50 = 0.007.

6.11 Weak carbonate rock: Abbs model

A criterion developed for weak carbonate rock is described by Abbs (1983). The
criterion was developed during work for offshore platforms in the Middle East with
carbonate rocks having unconfined compressive strengths in the range 0.5 to 5 MPa.
The method was derived using existing p-y models for other materials and considering
the brittle nature of the rocks. No pile test data were available for confirmation of the
performance of the model.
The curve is given by:
1. An initial intact rock response given by the Reese et al. (1975) model for static
loading in stiff clay up to the end of the second parabolic section, equation 19.
Unconfined compression tests are used to define the shear strength. This
response is relevant for initial loading and for subsequent load cycles provided
that the deflection does not exceed that corresponding to the peak stress.
2. Residual frictional resistance given by the p-y model for cyclic loading in sand
that is now embodied in the API design guidelines. Residual friction angles are
used to define the strength. The transition between the two curves occurs
sharply, with an additional displacement of 10% occurring from the end of the
intact rock response to the start of the residual friction response.
This model is implemented in PYGMY by a combination of the Reese et al. stiff clay
model and the API sand criterion. In some situations, if the intact rock strength is
relatively low, or the layer extends to considerable depth, the residual frictional
resistance may exceed the initial intact rock resistance. This results in an unusual and
unlikely p-y curve. The program does not modify the curve to account for frictional
resistance being higher than the intact resistance.

2500
depth = 10D
2000
Pressure (kPa)
1500 depth = 2D
1000
depth = 1D
500
0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025
Figure 6.17. Typical p-y curve shapes for the Abbs weak carbonate rock model,
D = 0.6 m, su = 400 kPa, γ' = 7 kN/m3, e50 = 0.002, k = 500000 kPa/m, φ = 30°.


6.12 Weak rock: Fragio et al. model

A criterion developed for weak calcareous claystone is described by Fragio et al.
(1985). The criterion was developed from pile load tests in calcareous claystone having
unconfined compressive strengths in the range 9 to 36 MPa. The response represents
brittle failure near the ground surface.
The curve is given by an initial linear response up to the peak stress. The initial linear
response is derived from an estimate of the rock mass stiffness. Table 6.3 may be used
as a guide. The deflection when the peak stress is reached is denoted yu.
The peak stress, pu is given by:
pu = 3s at the surface
pu = 9s at depth
where s is the rock mass shear strength. Fragio et al. (1985) found that by fitting their
test data, adopting a value for s of 10% of the unconfined compressive strength of the
intact rock gave a good match with the measured response. The peak stress, pu increases
linearly with depth, reaching the value for deep conditions at a depth of 6 pile
diameters. This is called the transition depth and is input as a variable in PYGMY.
After the initial elastic response, the curve remains at p= pu until the deflection exceeds
3yu. At the surface, the curve then drops to p = 0.5pu at y = 4yu, then to p = 0.1pu at y =
10yu. For deflections greater than 10yu, p remains constant. This is illustrated in Figure
6.18.
The above reduction represents a brittle wedge failure near the ground surface, although
at depth this will not occur. Therefore there is a transition from this brittle reduction to a
ductile response at the transition depth. Below the transition depth, p = pu after y = yu as
shown in Figure 6.18. A linear interpolation is used between the surface and the
transition depth. This interpolation is illustrated in Figure 6.19.

Lateral pressure Lateral pressure
pu pu
pm = 0.5pu
pr = 0.1pu
1 3 4 10 1
Displacement, y/yu Displacement, y/yu
p-y curve at the surface p-y curve below the transition depth
Figure 6.18. p-y curves developed by Fragio et al. (1985).
Lateral pressure, p/su
0.3 1.5 3 9
pu
pm pr
Transition
depth
6 pile diameter
for the transition depth
Figure 6.19. Variation of pressures with depth for Fragio et al. (1985) model.

6.13 Multiplying factors for group effects

To perform analysis of pile groups it is common practice to adjust p-y curves to account
for interaction between the piles (keeping in mind that this program only analyses a
single pile). This adjustment was originally proposed as a y multiplier to stretch the
displacement axis of the p-y curves, Focht and Koch (1973). However, while this
reduces stiffness, it does not account for a reduction in the ultimate lateral capacity due
to interaction. More recently pile group effects have been taken into account by the use
of a p multiplier to shrink the pressure axis of the curves. This accounts for both a
reduction in stiffness and ultimate capacity. Typical reported values are listed in the
tables below.
A more formalised method for evaluating p multipliers is described by Dunnavant and
O'Neill (1986) and O'Neill et al. (1990). This is based on the summation of the
following factors for each pile in the group:
s
β L = 0.69 + 0.5 log10   ≤ 1 (leading in-line pile) (23)
D
s
β T = 0.46 + 0.6 log10   ≤ 1 (trailing in-line pile) (24)
D
s
β S = 0.78 + 0.36 log10   ≤ 1 (side-by-side piles) (25)
D
θ
β θ = β L + (β S − β L ) ≤1 (trailing offset pile) (26)
90
where s is the centre to centre spacing of the two piles being considered and θ is the
angle in degrees between the direction of loading and a line joining the centre of the two
piles being considered. If piles are only slightly offset (lateral spacing less than D/2)
then they are considered as being in-line. For each pile in the group, the p multiplier (f)
is calculated from:
N ( j≠ i )
f i = 0.85 ∑ β ij (27)
j=1
Equation 24 is only applied to the pile that pile i trails directly. The factor of 0.85 in
equation 27 arises to produce a better fit between this method and published data.

Table 6.6. Reported p multipliers for sand

Reference Group details, Centre to centre p multiplier
pile location pile spacing, s/D
Remaud et al. (1998) 2 x 1 group, 2, 4 & 6 1.0
leading pile
2 x 1 group, 2 0.52
trailing pile
2 x 1 group, 4 0.82
trailing pile
2 x 1 group, 6 0.93
trailing pile
Brown et al. (1988) 3 x 3 group, 3 0.8 to 1.0
leading pile
3 x 3 group, 3 0.25 to 0.4
trailing pile
Table 6.7. Reported p multipliers for clay

Reference Group details, pile location Centre to centre p multiplier
pile spacing, s/D
Brown et al. (1987) 3 x 3 group, mean value 3 0.2 to 0.7
lowest value
near surface
Cox et al. (1984) 3 x 1, 1 x 3, 5 x 1, 1 x 5 1.5 0.5 to 0.8
groups, mean value
3 x 1, 1 x 3, 5 x 1, 1 x 5 2 0.8 to 0.95
groups, mean value
3 x 1, 1 x 3 groups, mean 3 0.85 to 0.95
value

7 Program Operation
The program PYGMY allows all data input, analysis and graphical viewing of results to
be performed by one program. There are no pre- and post-processors required, although
output data is saved in ASCII format that can be readily imported into word processors
and spreadsheets.
7.1 Data Input

When the program is started, the basic data input screen is displayed, Figure 7.1. Data
can edited directly on the screen by moving the mouse to an input box and clicking it. In
some cases where tabulated data are presented it is necessary to double click the
displayed number to display a data input box.
Figure 7.1. Basic data input screen.
7.1.1 Menus
Pull- down menus are provided on the basic data input screen as follows:
• File
− Open – Open an existing input data file (filename: *.dat) from disk
− Save – Save the currently displayed data to disk (filename: *.dat)
− Exit – Exit the program

• Run – Calculate pile response using data in the input file most recently saved to
disk. The file name is displayed on the screen. If data on the screen have been
altered since last saving the file, they will not be incorporated into the analysis.
• Plot – Present the result of the analysis graphically on the screen. The analysis must
previously have been run, so that files of the same name as the current data file, but
with extensions .pyc, .out and .txt exist. The program performs no check to see if the
data in the input file (*.dat) has altered since the analysis was run.
− p-y curves – Plot the generated load transfer curves
− Results – Plot the results of the analysis
• Experimental data – Read in experimental data for comparison with the results of
the analysis.
− Include load-deflection data – toggle check mark: checked = include data on
plot, not checked = don't include data on plot
− Include moment-depth data – toggle check mark: checked = include data on plot,
not checked = don't include data on plot
− Open load-deflection data file – specify data file name containing experimental
load-deflection data
− Open moment-depth data file – specify data file name containing experimental
moment-depth data
• Print – Print the basic data input screen.
• About – Show information about the program, the serial number, and contact details
for technical support.
7.1.2 Pile properties

The program currently requires the pile to be of uniform cross-section along its length.
A plastic moment is input to allow the pile to yield and elastic-perfectly plastic
behaviour is assumed. The pile is divided up into a specified number of elements of
equal length. The user is required to input:
• Pile length in m, measured from the head of the pile, including any free-standing
length.
• Pile diameter or width in m.
• Bending rigidity of the pile, EI, in kNm2.
• Plastic moment of the pile in kNm.
• Number of elements to be used along the pile (maximum 100).
For simplicity, the pile is currently assumed to be fully elastic up to the plastic moment,
and to then form a plastic hinge and behave in a perfectly plastic manner. For guidance,
if the pile is fabricated from an elastic-perfectly plastic material that has a yield stress of

σy, the moment required for material in the pile to first reach yield (the elastic limit) is
given by:
πr 2
Me = σy for a solid circular pile of radius r, and
4
b3
Me = σy for a solid square pile of width b
6
for comparison, the moment required to cause the entire cross-section to yield (the
plastic moment) is given by:
4r 2
Mp = σy for a solid circular pile of radius r, and
3
b3
Mp = σy for a solid square pile of width b
4
Thus it can be seen that the ratio Mp/Me may be in the range of about 1.5 to 1.7 for these
cross-section shapes, so there may be significant non-linearity in the moment-curvature
relationship before Mp is reached. The current version of the program does not attempt
to represent this. For other pile cross-sections such as H piles, the ratio Mp/Me may be
closer to unity. Also, it should be noted that the value of Mp may be reduced by local
buckling of the section or by brittle failure in some steel alloys.

7.1.3 Analysis variables
7.1.3.1 Control parameters

Three parameters may be altered to control the analysis:
• The number of loading increments to be used. If more than one increment is input,
then the applied loads or displacements that are later specified are added
incrementally at each increment. For example, if a 10 kN load is specified, and five
increments are input, then five solutions are generated: for loads of 10, 20, 30, 40
and 50 kN.
• The maximum number of solution iterations per loading increment. At each loading
increment it is necessary to iterate until the solution converges. If convergence is not
reached at each loading increment before the specified maximum number of
iterations is reached, then the analysis does not proceed further. There is effectively
no limit to the number of solution iterations that can be entered.
• The convergence tolerance. At the end of each iteration within each loading
increment, the program checks whether convergence has been reached by
comparing the excess p-y spring forces (additional forces used to correct spring
forces back to the p-y curves) to the actual spring forces. The ratio of these forces
must be less than the tolerance entered. Typically 10-4 (0.01 %) has been found to
give accurate results with a reasonable number of solution iterations, although for
highly non-linear problems it may be necessary to either reduce the tolerance (to
about 10-5 to 10-6) to improve the solution, or increase the tolerance to about 10-3 to
achieve convergence with a smaller number of iterations.
7.1.3.2 Loading and boundary conditions

Loading and boundary conditions are input by clicking on the "Input load data" button.
This activates a data window, shown in Figure 7.2. The data window lists the loading
and boundary conditions in tabular form for each node on the pile. The number of nodes
is one greater than the number of elements specified on the basic data input window,
Figure 7.1. The depth of each node below the top of the pile is listed automatically. Data
on this form are entered or edited by double clicking on the relevant cell. This displays a
data input window, prompting for the information, Figure 7.3.

Figure 7.2. Data window for loading and boundary conditions.

The default condition when the program is started is that horizontal load, moment and
horizontal soil displacement are zero at all nodes on the pile. Entering a non-zero value
for any of these parameters will apply that incremental load, moment or soil
displacement at every loading increment.
Figure 7.3. Data input window
Horizontal displacement or rotation of any node can also be specified. If these cells are
left blank, then no displacement or rotation is applied. A non-zero value will apply that
incremental displacement or rotation at every loading increment. If a zero value is
entered in any cell, then that forces the displacement or rotation of that node to be zero
at all times. This can be used to approximately represent a pile in a group by specifying
zero rotation at the pile head, but allowing deflection to occur. If desired, the tip of the

pile can be restrained from translating or rotating, although it is not necessary to apply
any boundary conditions of zero displacement or rotation for the program to function.
The method of solution and data input allows any combination of applied loads to be
analysed. For example, an applied load and moment at the pile head, as well as an
imposed lateral soil displacement profile, can be used. Loading of the pile can be
achieved by either directly applying loads and moments (load control), or by prescribing
displacements and rotations (displacement control). The effects are the same, and the
output from the program is the same, although it is more efficient computationally to
use displacement control. In many situations it can be difficult to reach convergence
with load control, even with a large number of iterations. Therefore it is recommended
that displacement control be used where possible.
In cases where strain softening p-y curves are defined, then displacement control must
be used, since load control will not lead to a unique solution and in fact convergence
may not be achieved.
The axial load carried by the pile can be entered in this window. This allows the effect
of axial load on the bending behaviour of the pile to be included. The axial load is
assumed to be constant along the length of the pile. This approximation is likely to be
sufficient for most situations, since the lateral response of the pile is generally
controlled by the near surface materials. Compressive loads are positive.
7.1.4 Soil stratigraphy

The soil stratigraphy input is simplified by requiring the specification of layers. A
maximum of 20 layers can currently be used. The program assigns all nodes within each
layer with the same form of p-y curve. The total number of layers is entered in the basic
data input window, Figure 7.1. The program then displays that number of soil layers in
the list box. The type of p-y curve for each layer can be specified by first selecting the
desired soil layer in the list box on the left of the window, and then selecting one of the
curve options from the drop down list box on the right of the window. The layers must
be defined in sequential order, downwards from the top.
The program has a number of p-y criteria that can be generated automatically, or a user
defined curve can be entered. Data input for these curves are described below. Since the
p-y curves are lumped at nodes, but describe lateral resistance generated along the pile
between the centre points of the adjacent elements, the peak resistance at the end nodes
is half that at the other nodes.
When the curve type has been selected, the input data required for that layer are then
entered or viewed by clicking on the "Input p-y data" button or by double clicking on
the layer displayed in the layer list box. This displays a data window, similar to that
shown in Figure 7.4. The depth to the bottom of the layer must also be entered in this
window.

Figure 7.4. Data input window for API soft clay criterion
In cases where undrained shear strength is entered, the program allows a linear change
in strength with depth to be specified for each layer. In these cases, the strength
intercept at the ground surface must be entered, as well as the gradient with depth.
For all methods of specifying p-y curves, the effective unit weight of the layer must be
entered, even if it is not specifically required for the formulation used for that layer.
This is because if the stratigraphy is layered, then an underlying layer may require the
value of the vertical effective stress in the formulation it uses.
7.1.4.1 Sand: API recommendation

The formulation used is described in section 6.1 above. The input data required are:
• depth to the bottom of the layer in m
• whether the loading is static or cyclic
• the angle of internal friction in degrees
• gradient of initial stiffness with depth in kPa/m
• the effective unit weight of the soil in kN/m3
• p multiplier for group effects

7.1.4.2 Soft Clay: API recommendation

• the undrained shear strength intercept in kPa at the ground surface
• the gradient in undrained shear strength with depth in kPa/m
• ε50, the strain which occurs at 50% of the failure stress in a laboratory undrained
compression test
• J, the dimensionless empirical constant
7.1.4.3 Stiff Clay: Dunnavant and O'Neill criterion

compression test
• KR, the relative soil-pile stiffness
• the number of cycles of loading
7.1.4.4 Clay: simple linear elastic-perfectly plastic model

• the ratio of elastic stiffness to undrained shear strength

7.1.4.5 Calcareous soil: Wesselink et al. criterion

• R, the variable controlling the stiffness of the curve, in kN/m2
• N, a constant controlling the rate of increase in pressure with depth
• γ, a constant controlling the amount of curvature in the p-y relation
7.1.4.6 Calcareous soil: Dyson criterion

• R, the variable controlling the stiffness of the curve
• n, a constant defining the relationship between pressure and qc
• m, a constant controlling the amount of curvature in the p-y relation
• the cone resistance qc intercept in MPa at the ground surface
• the gradient in cone resistance with depth in MPa/m
7.1.4.7 Weak rock: Reese criterion

• the compressive strength intercept in kPa at the ground surface
• the gradient in compressive strength with depth in kPa/m
• the strength reduction factor αr
• the rock Young's modulus intercept in kPa at the ground surface
• the gradient in rock Young's modulus with depth in kPa/m
• the stiffness constant krm
• the effective unit weight of the rock in kN/m3
• depth to the rock surface in m (if there are several rock layers used to represent the
strength profile, this value is the depth to the top of the uppermost rock layer)

7.1.4.8 Strain softening model

• the ultimate pressure intercept in kPa at the ground surface
• the gradient in ultimate pressure with depth in kPa/m
• the residual pressure intercept in kPa at the ground surface
• the gradient in residual pressure with depth in kPa/m
• the initial stiffness intercept in kPa at the ground surface
• the gradient in initial stiffness with depth in kPa/m
• the unloading stiffness in kPa
• the effective unit weight in kN/m3
7.1.4.9 Sand: simple model

7.1.4.10 Stiff clay: Reese et al. model

compression test
7.1.4.11 Weak carbonate rock: Abbs model



compression test
7.1.4.12 Weak rock: Fragio et al. model

• the shear strength intercept in kPa at the ground surface
• the gradient in shear strength with depth in kPa/m
• the initial stiffness intercept in kPa at the ground surface
• the gradient in initial stiffness with depth in kPa/m
• the transition depth as a multiple of the pile diameter
7.1.4.13 User defined

Any arbitrary shape of p-y curve can be input using up to 16 coordinate points. The first
point is at the origin. The same curve will be used for each node within the layer. The
coordinate points must be in sequential order of increasing displacement. Strain-
softening, a reduction in pressure with increasing displacement, is allowed. The data
should normally extend out to y/D = 1, although if they do not, the program will assume
that the last entered value of pressure is also associated with y/D = 1. The input data
required are:
• tabulated pairs of pressure (kPa) and corresponding normalised displacement (y/D =
displacement/pile diameter)

7.1.4.14 Free standing length

To simplify data input a free standing length can be specified automatically by
assigning this zone as a material layer. This must be specified as layer 1 only. The input
data required is:
7.2 Analysis
Once all data has been entered it should be saved to disk. The analysis can then be
undertaken by selecting "Run" from the pull-down menus on the basic data input
window, Figure 7.1. If no data filename has previously been given, then the analysis
will not proceed, and a message will be given asking you to save the data first. Clicking
OK at this point will take you to a menu to save the data to a file before running the
analysis. If a file name has previously been entered you will be asked if you wish to
save the data to disk before running the analysis, in case you have edited the data.
Clicking Yes will prompt you for a file name before running the analysis, No will run
using the last saved data set, and Cancel will return to the basic data input screen
without running the analysis.
When the analysis has been completed, a window will pop up to indicate completion,
and display the number of load increments that were completed. The number of
completed increments may be less than that specified in the basic data input window (as
described in section 7.1.3.1). This occurs when the analysis is terminated prematurely
because the maximum number of solution iterations per increment is reached. It may be
possible to continue the analysis further by increasing the maximum number of solution
iterations and/or reducing the convergence tolerance.
Detailed results of the analysis are automatically saved to disk using a different file
name extension. The file names and their function are listed in section 7.5.
7.3 Plotting Results

When the analysis is complete, or if the results of an earlier analysis already exist on
disk, the results can be viewed graphically, by selecting "Plot" from the pull-down
menus on the basic data input screen. Either "p-y curves" or "Results" can be selected,
and a plotting window is then activated, and the output data are read in from disk and
sorted.
7.3.1 Calculated p-y curves

The plotting window is illustrated in Figure 7.5. This allows plotting of the load transfer
curves (in the form of pressure versus displacement) specified for up to four different
nodes along the pile at any time. When the window is first activated, the curve for node
1 is automatically selected. Other nodes can be selected from the pull-down list boxes,
and the different traces can be turned on or off by selecting the check box next to each

line. The default maximum value for the horizontal axis (y values) is 0.1D. The
maximum value on the horizontal scale can be entered by the user by double clicking on
the maximum scale label. The vertical axis is scaled automatically at all times.
Figure 7.5. Plotting window for p-y curves.
7.3.2 Calculation results

The plotting window is illustrated in Figure 7.6 below. This allows plotting of
displacement, rotation, bending moment, shear force and "spring pressure" versus depth
for each node along the pile. Also, for analyses with multiple loading increments, a
load-deflection curve for the pile head, a plot of pile head load versus maximum
bending moment and a graph showing the number of solution iterations versus loading
increment can be plotted. These options are selected by clicking the options at the left
side of the window. When a new option or new load increment is selected, the data are
automatically re-plotted.
When displacements are plotted, the specified lateral soil displacements are also shown
in another colour, for comparison. When the "spring pressures" are plotted, the peak
pressure specified on the p-y curve as well as the pressure at the final point on the curve
(at the greatest displacement) are also shown for each node. This gives the user some
feel for whether limiting lateral soil pressures have been reached. In many cases these
two values will be the same, and two different series of points will be seen if the p-y
curves are strain softening, with a residual pressure less than the peak.

Where multiple soil layers are used, the boundaries between the layers are shown as
horizontal lines at the appropriate depths. The plots are scaled automatically to use as
much of the plotting window as possible, but with the depth axis (vertical) located
centrally on the horizontal axis. Under the "Plot" pull-down menu it is possible to
incrementally halve or double the horizontal scale if desired and to also reset the scaling
to its original value. The current scaling factor is indicated on the screen. The depth axis
is always scaled to the pile length. The maximum and minimum values of the data
plotted on the horizontal and vertical scales are indicated in the lower left side of the
window.
Experimental data can be plotted with the results of the analysis for comparison. The
files containing pile head load-deflection and moment-depth data are specified on the
basic data input screen. When the experimental data file(s) are specified, the data will
only be plotted if the "Include load-deflection data" or "Include moment-depth data"
options are checked under the Experimental Data pull-down menu on the basic data
input screen. Up to 100 experimental data points can be read in for the load-deflection
curve, and up to 20 points for the moment-depth curve. The experimental data files
must contain two columns of numbers only, without text. The numbers on one line can
be delimited by spaces or a tab. The load-deflection data must contain load in the first
column and deflection in the second column. The moment-depth data must contain
depth in the first column and moment in the second column.
Figure 7.6. Plotting window for calculation results.

7.4 Printing
The data input windows or the plotting window can be printed as they appear on the
screen by selecting "Print" from the pull-down menus on each window. This will print
the window to the current Windows printer.
If desired, the currently active window can be copied as a bitmap to the Windows
clipboard by pressing Alt-Print Screen. This image can then be pasted into other
Windows applications.
7.5 Disk Files

The input data file must have the extension .dat. All other file names are generated
automatically from the input data filename by replacing the extension. That is, filename
must be the same for all. The files created are:
• filename.out – detailed output data: deflection, rotation, shear force, bending
moment, spring pressure, soil displacement and the ultimate and residual spring
pressures on the p-y curve are tabulated versus depth for every load increment.
• filename.txt – load-deflection data: the applied horizontal load is tabulated with the
pile head deflection, the number of solution iterations and the maximum bending
moment for each loading increment.
• filename.pyc – p-y data: the p-y curves generated for each node along the pile are
listed in terms of pressure (kPa) and displacement (m). For each node, 16 pressure
values are listed first, followed by 16 displacement values.
The above files are all saved in ASCII format, so they may be read with a text editor,
spreadsheet or word processor. The program temporarily creates and then deletes the
file pygmy.tmp during operation. This file name should not be used for saving the user's
data as it will be overwritten and then deleted when the program is run.
There are no restrictions on the name of files containing experimental data to be
compared with the results of the analysis, although the default extension is .dat. The
experimental data files must contain two columns of numbers only, without text. The
numbers on one line can be delimited by spaces or a tab. The load-deflection data must
contain 100 pairs of data or less, with load in the first column and deflection in the
second column. The moment-depth data must contain 20 pairs of data or less, with
depth in the first column and moment in the second column.

8 Example Analyses
8.1 Structural load applied to head of pile – displacement control

The data for this example are contained in the file example1.dat. The analysis involves a
single 600 mm diameter steel pipe pile with 20 mm wall thickness. The pile is 25 m
long, and is driven through a 20 m thick stratum of soft clay (su = 25 kPa) into a sand
layer. The pile is divided into thirty elements. The bending stiffness of the pile (EI) is
given by Eπ(D4-d4)/64 = 3.1 x 105 kNm2 and the plastic moment is 5,400 kNm.
In this example the pile is loaded under displacement control, by incrementally
displacing the head of the pile by 5 mm at a time. A total of forty loading increments are
used so that the head of the pile is displaced 200 mm at the end of the analysis.
The file example1.dat is shown below:
30
0.0000e+0 3.1000e+5 0.600 0.83333 5.4000e+3
40 50 1.0000e-4
2
API_CLAY
20.0
STATIC
25.00 0.000 6.00 0.0050 0.500 1.000
API_SAND
25.0
STATIC
35.0 22000.0 8.00 1.000
0
1
1 0.005
0
The calculated load-displacement curve for the pile head is shown in Figure 8.1. At
200 mm displacement, a pile head force of 468 kN was calculated. A plot of pile head
load versus maximum bending moment is shown in Figure 8.2, illustrating that the
maximum bending moment did not exceed the plastic moment of the pile. Plots of the
distribution of pile deflection, rotation, bending moment, shear force and spring
pressure are shown in Figures 8.3 to 8.7 for the final loading increment. The spring
pressure plot shows that limiting lateral pressures are developed over about the upper
5 m of the pile at this stage. A plot of the number of solution iterations for each loading
increment is shown in Figure 8.8. The number of iterations required at each loading
increment gradually increases as the analysis proceeds, as a greater level of non-
linearity is experienced. By the final loading increment, 13 solution iterations are
required.

Figure 8.1. Load-displacement curve for example 1.
Figure 8.2. Pile head load-maximum bending moment curve for example 1.

Figure 8.3. Pile deflection versus depth for the 40th load increment.
Figure 8.4. Pile rotation versus depth for the 40th load increment.

Figure 8.5. Bending moment versus depth for the 40th load increment.
Figure 8.6. Shear force versus depth for the 40th load increment.

Figure 8.7. Spring force distribution for the 40th load increment.
Figure 8.8. Solution iterations required for example 1.

8.2 Structural load applied to head of pile – load control

The second example is identical to the first, except loading is applied via load control,
with 12 kN load increments applied to the head of the pile. The input data are contained
in file example2.dat, and are listed below:
30
0.0000e+0 3.1000e+5 0.600 0.83333 5.4000e+3
40 50 1.0000e-4
2
API_CLAY
20.0
STATIC
25.00 0.000 6.00 0.0050 0.500 1.000
API_SAND
25.0
STATIC
35.0 22000.0 8.00 1.000
1
1 12.0
0
0
When this analysis is run, only 34 loading increments are completed, up to a head load
of 408 kN. The 34th increment stops because the solution has not converged to the
specified tolerance after 50 solution iterations have been performed. This is illustrated
in Figure 8.9, where the solution iterations are shown. By comparison with the previous
example, it is clear that a much greater number of iterations are needed. In Figure 8.10,
the load-deflection behaviour of the pile calculated by the two approaches is compared.
No difference should exist, apart from the number of iterations required. It should be
possible to run the analysis with the full 40 loading increments by allowing a greater
number of solution iterations for convergence to be achieved.

50
40
Number of solution iterations

30
example 1: displacement control
example 2: load control
20
10
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Pile head displacement (m)
Figure 8.9. Comparison of solution iterations required for examples 1 and 2.
500
400
Pile head load (kN)
300
200
example 1: displacement control
example 2: load control
100
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Pile head displacement (m)
Figure 8.10. Comparison of load-deflection curve from examples 1 and 2.

8.3 Lateral soil movement imposed on pile

The data for this example are contained in the file example3.dat. The analysis involves a
group of 500 mm diameter piles with EI = 5.3 x 105 kNm2 and Mp = 3000 kNm. The
pile is 18 m long, and is driven through an 8 m thick stratum of soft clay (su = 20 kPa)
into a sand layer. The pile is divided into thirty six elements.
In this example the soft clay is undergoing lateral displacement. The magnitude of
lateral displacement at each node along the pile is input in the loading window. Since
the pile is within a group, and is embedded into a relatively rigid pile cap at the surface,
the pile head has been fixed against rotation, but allowed to deflect. No structural loads
are applied, and only one loading increment has been used in this case. When the
analysis is run, 59 solution increments are required to reach the specified convergence,
since the problem is highly non-linear.
The file example3.dat is shown below:
36
0.0000e+0 5.3000e+5 0.500 0.50000 3.0000e+3
1 100 1.0000e-4
2
API_CLAY
8.0
STATIC
20.00 0.000 6.00 0.0010 0.500 1.000
API_SAND
18.0
STATIC
35.0 22000.0 8.00 1.000
0
1
2 0.0
15
1 0.05
2 0.055
3 0.06
4 0.065
5 0.065
6 0.06
7 0.055
8 0.045
9 0.035
10 0.025
11 0.017
12 0.01
13 0.005
14 0.002
15 0.001
The calculated response of the pile is shown in Figures 8.11 to 8.14 below.

Figure 8.11. Deformed shape of pile in example 3.
Figure 8.12. Rotation of pile in example 3.

Figure 8.13. Bending moment distribution along pile in example 3.
Figure 8.14. Shear force distribution along pile in example 3.

Figure 8.15. Spring pressure distribution along pile in example 3.

9 Verification
Some simple verification analyses are presented here by comparing output from
PYGMY with closed form solutions. Further verification of the program operation is
available on request.
Closed form solutions may be derived for a pile embedded in a soil with constant
modulus of subgrade reaction, k, with depth (Matlock and Reese, 1960). The ground
line deflection, u, and rotation, θ, of a pile are given by (Fleming et al., 1992):
−1 −2
Hl  Ml 
u= 2  c +  c
k4 k 4
−2 −3
Hl  Ml 
θ=  c  + 2  c
k4 k 4
where:
H = pile head load
M = pile head moment
lc = 4(EI/k)¼ (the critical length)
EI = bending stiffness of the pile
A series of analyses were undertaken with varying EI and k and the resulting values of
u/H, u/M, θ/H and θ/M determined from the above relationships. These results were
compared with the results of analyses using PYGMY. For consistency, the pile length in
the PYGMY analyses was specified as 1.5 times the critical length, lc. The number of
elements used along the length of the pile was varied. The results of the analyses are
summarised in Figure 9.1 as a plot of the difference between the closed form solutions
and the PYGMY results, and typical comparisons between the two results are shown in
Table 9.1.
The results presented here show:
• some sensitivity to the number of elements used in the PYGMY analysis, with better
accuracy achieved with a greater number of elements;
• with 50 elements the maximum difference found was less than 0.25%;
• with 90 elements the maximum difference found was less than 0.1%;
• the values of u/M and θ/H from PYGMY were identical for each separate case, as
with the closed form solutions above.

1.5
Difference to closed form solution (%)

1
0.5
-0.5
-1
0 20 40 60 80 100
Number of elements
Figure 9.1. Comparison between PYGMY results and closed form solutions.
Table 9.1 Typical comparison between closed form solutions and PYGMY.
EI kNm2 1.0 x 107 1.0 x 105
k kN/m2 20000 20000
Closed form solutions
u/H m/MN 0.01495 0.04729
u/M m/MNm 0.00224 0.02236
θ/H rad/MN 0.00224 0.02236
θ/M rad/MNm 0.00067 0.02115
Results from PYGMY
number of elements 25 50 90 25 50 90
u/H m/MN 0.01483 0.01493 0.01495 0.04687 0.04721 0.04729
u/M m/MNm 0.00221 0.00223 0.00224 0.02207 0.02231 0.02236
θ/H rad/MN 0.00221 0.00223 0.00224 0.02207 0.02231 0.02236
θ/M rad/MNm 0.00066 0.00067 0.00067 0.02097 0.02113 0.02116
Difference (CF - PYGMY)/CF x 100%
u/H % 0.83 0.16 0.02 0.88 0.16 -0.01
u/M % 1.26 0.23 -0.04 1.30 0.23 0.00
θ/H % 1.26 0.23 -0.04 1.30 0.23 0.00
θ/M % 0.77 0.08 -0.08 0.84 0.08 -0.06

10 Technical Support
Technical support of reasonable quantity is provided free of charge by contacting the
author. If any problems or bugs are encountered, please also contact the author with as
full a description of the problem as possible, details of any error messages displayed,
and a copy of the data files if relevant.
Contact details:
Dr Doug Stewart
Department of Civil and Resource Engineering
NEDLANDS WA 6907
ph: +61–8–9380 2417
fax: +61–8–9347 4055 or 9380 1044
email: stewart@civil.uwa.edu.au
11 References
Abbs, A.F. (1983) Lateral pile analysis in weak carbonate rocks, Proceedings of the
Conference on Geotechnical Practice in Offshore Engineering, ASCE, Austin, 546-556.
American Petroleum Institute (1993) Recommended practice for planning, designing
and constructing fixed offshore platforms - Working stress design, API-RP-2A, 20th
edition.
Ashour, M., Norris, G. and Pilling, P. (1998) Lateral loading of a pile in layered soil
using the strain wedge method, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, 124 (4), 303-315.
Baguelin F., Frank R. and Said Y.H. (1977) Theoretical study of lateral reaction
mechanism of piles, Geotechnique, 27(3), 405-434.
Barton, Y.O. (1982) Laterally loaded model piles in sand: Centrifuge tests and finite
element analyses, PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.
Brown, D.A., Morrison, C. and Reese, L.C. (1988) Lateral load behaviour of pile
groups in sand, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 114 (11), 1261-1276.
Brown, D.A., Reese, L.C. and O'Neill, M.W. (1987) Cyclic lateral loading of a large
scale pile group, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 113 (11), 1326-1343.
Cox, W.R., Dixon, D.A. and Murphy, B.S. (1984) Lateral load tests on 25.4 mm (1 in.)
diameter piles in very soft clay in side-by-side and in-line groups, ASTM STP 835, Ed.
J.A. Langer, E.T. Mosley and C.D. Thompson, ASTM 122-139.
Dunnavant, T. W. and O'Neill, M W. (1986) Evaluation of design oriented methods for
analysis of vertical pile groups subjected to lateral load, Numerical Methods in Offshore

Piling, Institute Francais du Petrole, Laboratoire Central de Ponts et Chaussees, 303-

316.
Dunnavant, T. W. and O'Neill, M W. (1989) Experimental p-y model for submerged,
stiff clay, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 115 (1), ASCE, 95-114.
Dyson, G.J. (1999) Laterally loaded piles in calcareous sediments, PhD thesis, The
University of Western Australia.
Dyson, G.J. and Randolph, M.F. (1997) Load transfer curves for piles in calcareous
sand, 8th International Conference on the Behaviour of Offshore Structures, Delft, The
Netherlands, Elsevier Science Ltd, 2, 245-258.
Dyson, G.J. and Randolph, M.F. (2000) Monotonic lateral loading of piles in calcareous
sediments, Research report G:1472, Department of Civil and Resource Engineering,
The University of Western Australia.
Fleming, W.G.K., Weltman, A.J., Randolph, M.F., and Elson, W.K. (1992) Piling
Engineering, Blackie, Glasgow.
Focht, J.A. and Koch, K.J. (1973) Rational analysis of the performance of offshore pile
groups, 5th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, 2, Houston, 701-708.
Fragio, A.G., Santiago, J.L., and Sutton, V.J.R. (1985) Load tests on grouted piles in
rock, Proceedings 17th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, OTC 4851,
93-104.
Hetenyi M. (1946) Beams on Elastic Foundations, The University of Michigan Press,
Ann Arbor.
Jamiolkowski, M. and Garassino, A. (1977) Soil modulus for laterally loaded piles,
Proc. Specialty Session 10, 9th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, Tokyo, 43-58.
Matlock, H. S., and Reese, L. C. (1960) Generalised solutions for laterally loaded piles,
Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, 86 (SM5), 63-91.
O'Neill, M.W., Reese, L.C. and Cox, W.R. (1990) Soil behaviour for piles under lateral
loading, Proceedings 22nd Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, OTC
6377, 279-287.
Randolph M.F. (1981) The response of flexible piles to lateral loading, Geotechnique,
31(2), 247-259.
Randolph, M.F., Tchepak, S., Stone, K.J.L. (1991) Engineering of Piled Foundations,
short course held at The University of Western Australia.
Reese, L.C., Cox, W.R., and Koop, F.D. (1975) Field testing and analysis of laterally
loaded piles in stiff clay, Proceedings 7th Annual Offshore Technology Conference,
Houston, OTC 2312, 671-690.
Remaud, D., Garnier, J. and Frank, R. (1998) Laterally loaded piles in dense sand –
group effects, Proc. Int. Conf. Centrifuge 98, Tokyo, Balkema, 533-538.

Wesselink, B.D., Murff, J.D., Randolph, M.F., Nunez, I.L., and Hyden, A.M. (1988)
Analysis of centrifuge model test data from laterally loaded piles in calcareous sand,
Proc. Int. Conf. Calcareous Sediments, 1, Balkema, 261-270.
Williams, A.F., Dunnavant, T.W., Anderson, S., Equid, D.W. and Hyden, A.M. (1988)
The performance and analysis of lateral load tests on 356 mm dia piles in reconstituted
calcareous sand, Proc. Int. Conf. Calcareous Sediments, 1, Balkema, 271-280.


PygmyManual v2 - 31

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PygmyManual v2 - 31

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The University of Western Australia

Department of Civil and Resource Engineering

p-y analysis of laterally loaded piles under general loading

5.1 SIGN CONVENTION ........................................................................................................... 5

6 P-Y CURVE FORMULATIONS 6

6.1 SAND: API CRITERION ..................................................................................................... 6

7.1 DATA INPUT .................................................................................................................... 34

The University of Western Australia

7.1.4.6 Calcareous soil: Dyson criterion......................................................................... 42

8.1 STRUCTURAL LOAD APPLIED TO HEAD OF PILE – DISPLACEMENT CONTROL ............ 49

The University of Western Australia

The University of Western Australia

The University of Western Australia

Figure 5.1. Idealisation of laterally loaded pile as a beam supported by springs.

If the stiffness of the spring is constant, then solution of equation 1 is relatively

The University of Western Australia

The University of Western Australia

5.1 Sign Convention

Moment Shear force Soil resistance

The University of Western Australia

6 p-y Curve Formulations

6.1 Sand: API criterion

The University of Western Australia

60000 ABOVE THE

The University of Western Australia

Figure 6.2. Factors for limit pressure used in PYGMY.

depth = 2D, static

depth = 1D, static

depth = 1D, cyclic

The University of Western Australia

6.2 Soft Clay: API criterion

XR must be found by the intersection of equations 6 and 7 where the

The University of Western Australia

Limiting resistance, pu/su

Figure 6.4. Typical variation of limiting resistance with parameter J.

suggested range, Ashour et al. (1998)

Figure 6.5. Typical values of ε50.

The University of Western Australia

80 depth = 1D, static

20 depth = 2D, cyclic

The University of Western Australia

6.3 Stiff Clay: Dunnavant and O'Neill criterion

p = 1.02p u tanh 0.537   for y ≤ 8 y50 (8)

p = pu for y > 8 y50

σ'v = vertical effective stress at the current depth, x

Es = strength-correlated soil modulus

for 100 load cycles this reduces to:

The University of Western Australia

for 100 load cycles this reduces to:

Normalised displacement, y/y50

140 depth = 2D, static

120 depth = 1D, static

60 depth = 2D, cyclic

The University of Western Australia

6.4 Clay: simple linear elastic-perfectly plastic model

Lateral pressure, pult/su

Normalised displacement, y/D

Figure 6.9. Simple clay model.

Analytical expressions presented by Baguelin et al. (1977) can be used to derive a

The University of Western Australia

The University of Western Australia

6.5 Calcareous soil: Wesselink et al. criterion