processes
Article
Numerical Study on Pile Group Effect and Carrying Capacity of
Four-Barreled Suction Pile Foundation under V-H-M Combined
Loading Conditions
Zhen Qi 1 , Tongzhong Wei 1 , Changtao Wang 2 , Fengyun Wang 2 , Yin Wang 1, * , Jianghong Wang 2 and Juan Li 2
Citation: Qi, Z.; Wei, T.; Wang, C.;
Wang, F.; Wang, Y.; Wang, J.; Li, J.
Numerical Study on Pile Group
Effect and Carrying Capacity of
Four-Barreled Suction Pile
Foundation under V-H-M Combined
Loading Conditions. Processes 2022,
10, 2459. https://doi.org/10.3390/
pr10112459
Academic Editor: Xiong Luo
Received: 29 October 2022
Accepted: 17 November 2022
Published: 20 November 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Processes 2022, 10, 2459. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10112459
1 State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology,
Dalian 116024, China
2 Offshore Oil Engineering Co., Ltd., Tianjin 300451, China
* Correspondence: y.wang@dlut.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-411-84708511-810
Abstract: Multi-barreled composite foundations are generally used in offshore oil platform structure.
However, there is still a lack of theoretical analyses and experimental research. This paper presents
the results of a three-dimensional finite element analysis of a four-barreled suction pile foundation in
heterogeneous clay foundation. The pile group effect and carrying capacity are numerically simulated.
The effects of different pile embedment depths, pile spacings and non-uniformity coefficients of clay
on the pile group effect are studied. Considering the changes in the foundation carrying capacity
under vertical, horizontal and bending moment coupling loads, the foundation carrying capacity
envelopes under horizontal and moment (H-M) and vertical, horizontal and moment (V-H-M) loading
modes are drawn. The results show that pile spacing and embedment depth have great influence on
the pile group effect. The bearing capacity envelope of foundations under V-H-M loading mode is
greatly affected by vertical load V. This can provide a reference for the selection of pile spacing and
embedded depth in practical engineering design. Furthermore, the stability of foundations can be
evaluated according to the relative relationship between design load and failure envelope.
Keywords: four-barreled suction pile foundation; finite element analysis; group effect; combined
carrying capacity; undrained shear strength
1. Introduction
With the rapid development of oil and gas exploration in deep waters, the conventional
gravity type and jacket type of shallow-sea offshore engineering foundation structures
are no longer applicable. Suction pile foundations have been widely used in offshore oil
production platform foundation structures in recent years because of the advantages of their
light weight, simple construction and recyclable use [1]. Compared with single-barreled
suction pile foundations, four-barreled suction pile foundations have higher carrying
capacity and better stability. A key problem in the design and construction of offshore
oil platforms is determining the overall failure mode and carrying capacity characteristics
of multi-bucket composite structures in complex marine environments so as to evaluate
the stability of offshore oil platforms and avoid the loss of peoples’ lives and property.
Evaluating the failure envelope of foundation carrying capacity is an effective method
to determine the limit state of foundation carrying capacity under composite loading
mode. The so-called foundation failure envelope refers to a convex surface formed by the
combination of various load components in the three-dimensional load space when the
foundation reaches the overall failure or limit equilibrium state under the combined load.
When the load combination is within the failure envelope, the foundation is in a stable
state; otherwise, the foundation is unstable.
Many researchers have studied the bearing characteristics of bucket foundations
on soft soil foundations by theoretical calculation [2–5], experimental research [6–8] and
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/processes
 combined load. When the load combination is within the failure envelope, the foundation
is in a stable state; otherwise, the foundation is unstable.
Processes 2022, 10, 2459 Many researchers have studied the bearing characteristics of bucket foundations on 2 of 19
soft soil foundations by theoretical calculation [2–5], experimental research [6–8] and nu-
merical simulation [9–12]. These researchers consider the influence of foundation shape,
foundation
numerical burial depth, soil
simulation strength
[9–12]. Theseheterogeneity and other
researchers consider the factors onof
influence thefoundation
bearing per- shape,
formance
foundation burial depth, soil strength heterogeneity and other factors on the
of bucket foundations. However, only a few researchers have explored thebear-
bearing
ing performance
characteristicsofof multi-barreled
bucket foundations. foundations.
However,The onlypile group
a few effect exists
researchers havedue to the the
explored
interaction between multi-barreled suction pile foundations. Gourvenec
bearing characteristics of multi-barreled foundations. The pile group effect exists due and Jensen [13]
to the
used the 2D finite element method to study the group effect of two-skirted
interaction between multi-barreled suction pile foundations. Gourvenec and Jensen foundations in[13]
homogeneous
used the 2D clay. The
finite results method
element show that to the
studygroup
the effect
groupofeffect
vertical bearing capacity
of two-skirted can
foundations
be ignored, and that the horizontal bearing capacity increases significantly
in homogeneous clay. The results show that the group effect of vertical bearing capacity with the in-
crease inin spacing and ultimately tends to be stable. Kim and Hung [14]
can be ignored, and that the horizontal bearing capacity increases significantly with the used the finite
element method
increase to analyze
inin spacing andthe carryingtends
ultimately characteristics of the
to be stable. Kimfoundation
and Hungunder different
[14] used the finite
L/Dselement L is the skirt
(wheremethod length of the foundation and D is the diameter of the
to analyze the carrying characteristics of the foundation under different foundation)
S/D ratios
andL/Ds L is theS skirt
(where(where is thelength
spacing between
of the the individual
foundation and D is thepiles of the foundation,
diameter as
of the foundation)
is shown
and S/Din Figure 1) for the
ratios (where tripod
S is foundation
the spacing between of offshore wind turbines,
the individual andfoundation,
piles of the verified theas is
pileshown
group effect
in Figure 1) L/D
of the for the S/D ratios
andtripod on the tripod
foundation foundation.
of offshore wind turbines, and verified the
pile group effect of the L/D and S/D ratios on the tripod foundation.

Figure 1. Geometry of four-barreled suction pile foundation and definition of loads: (a) oblique
Figure 1. Geometry
upper view; (b) of
topfour-barreled
view. suction pile foundation and definition of loads: (a) oblique up-
per view;(b) top view.
A great deal of research has also been carried out on the carrying capacity of foun-
A greatunder
dations deal of research loading
combined has also conditions.
been carriedZhang out onand the Kong
carrying[15]capacity of founda-
carried out centrifuge
tions under
model combined
tests on bucket loading
foundations conditions.
and pipe Zhang and Kong [15]
pile foundations, carried out
respectively. centrifuge
They agreed that
model
the tests on bucket
foundation foundations
is often and pipe
more vulnerable topile foundations,
instability respectively.
under bending Theyload
moment agreed
or com-
thatposite
the foundation is often more
loading conditions whichvulnerable
include to instability
bending moment underload
bending moment Gourvenec
components. load or
composite
and Mana loading conditions
[16] obtained thewhich includecarrying
foundation bendingcapacity
momentenvelope
load components. Gour-
of strip foundations
venec and
with anMana
apron[16] obtained
board the foundation
at different buried depthscarrying capacity envelope
for homogeneous of strip founda-
and heterogeneous foun-
tions with an
dations apron
under board atloads
different different
usingburied
finite depths
elementfor homogeneous
calculation and heterogeneous
and proposed an expression
foundations under different
that can reasonably estimate loadstheusing finite
carrying element
capacity of calculation
foundations. and proposed an ex-
pressionSo that can
far, thereasonably estimatemainly
existing research the carrying
focuses capacity of foundations.
on the tripod bucket foundations of off-
So far,
shore the existing
wind turbines,research
while there mainly focuses on
is relatively theresearch
less tripod bucket foundations
on four-barreled of off-pile
suction
shore wind turbines, while there is relatively less research on four-barreled suctioncaissons
foundations. Andersen et al. [17] reported field trials on a group of 2 × 2 adjacent pile
foundations.
and cyclicAndersen
loading in et aal.lightly
[17] reported field trials on
over-consolidated softa group of 2 ×found
soil. They 2 adjacent caissons
that the ultimate
andbearing
cyclic loading
capacityincan a lightly
be reduced over-consolidated
by 18–34%. Zhu softet soil. They
al. [18] found that
conducted the ultimate
a centrifugal model
bearing capacity
test of can be reduced
uplift bearing capacity by 18–34%. Zhu foundations
of four-barreled et al. [18] conducted
and derived a centrifugal model
an empirical model
test of uplift bearing capacity of four-barreled foundations and derived an empirical
to quantify the effect of caisson groups. In summary, there are few studies on the pile group
effect of four-barreled suction pile foundations under different direction loadings and there
is a lack of research on the joint working mechanism under a combined loading mode.
In this paper, a three-dimensional finite element model is established to numerically
simulate the pile group effect and carrying capacity of a four-barreled suction pile founda-
tion in clay foundation, and the validity is verified. A linear-elastic perfectly plastic model
obeying the Tresca failure criterion is used to simulate the stress–strain response of clay
Processes 2022, 10, 2459 3 of 19

under undrained conditions. It is assumed that the Young’s modulus and undrained shear
strength of cohesive soil increase linearly with soil depth. The foundation was subjected to
vertical, horizontal, bending moment and torque loading, and the embedded depth and
pile spacing were parametrically analyzed. The carrying capacity of the foundation under a
coupling load is also analyzed using the fixed displacement ratio loading method, and the
carrying capacity envelopes under H-M and V-H-M loading modes are drawn. Therefore,
it is hoped that through this paper’s research, a reference for the structural design and
construction of the suction pile foundation of a submarine oil production platform can be
provided to ensure the safety and stability of the foundation’s working state.

2. FE Numerical Model
2.1. Model Construction and Material Properties
Aimed at the four-barreled suction pile foundation structure of subsea oil production
platforms, a three-dimensional finite element model of four-barreled suction pile founda-
tions is established by ABAQUS commercial FE software. The study of Hung and Kim [9]
showed that D had no effect on the standardized carrying capacity. Therefore, in this study,
the D of all models is 10 m and the wall thickness is 25 mm, which is the common thickness
of steel cylinder foundations. The four suction piles adopt the same geometric size and
are squarely distributed in the plane range. As shown in Figure 1, the rigid connection
between the piles is constrained by the top surface in the same plane. Therefore, the relative
displacement between the piles is ignored [19]. The finite element model of the calculation
area and mesh division is shown in Figure 2. In order to eliminate the boundary effect, the
calculation area takes 10 times the pile spacing in the radial direction and 5 times the pile
length in the depth direction. The boundary conditions allow for no vertical or lateral soil
movement at the soil base and no horizontal movement at the vertical boundaries [20]. The
first-order, eight-node linear brick, reduced integration element C3D8R was used to model
the soil [21–24]. In order to ensure the calculation’s accuracy and convergence, the finite
element mesh of soil around pile is more compact.
The material of the four-barreled suction pile foundation is steel and its stiffness is
much higher than that of the soil. Therefore, it is assumed that the pile is a completely
elastic steel material, and the linear elastic constitutive model is adopted. The elastic
constants are E = 210 GPa and υ = 0.3. The elastic perfectly plastic constitutive model based
on the Tresca failure criterion is used in the description of the stress–strain relationship of
soil [25]. It is assumed that the undrained shear strength increases linearly with depth. The
formula is as follows [26]:
Su = Sum + kZ (1)
In the formula, Sum is the undrained shear strength of the surface, Z is the depth below
the surface, and k is the growth rate of strength with depth. Previous studies have shown
that the carrying capacity coefficient of foundations does not depend on a single param-
eter of Sum or k, but depends on the normalized non-uniformity coefficient kD/Sum [27].
Therefore, the non-uniformity of clay is defined by kD/Sum . For normally consolidated
clay, k = 1.25 kPa/m, and the undrained shear strength of the surface is almost 0. In order
to avoid the convergence difficulty of finite element calculation, Sum = 1.25 kPa and elastic
modulus E = 500 Su , the USDFLD subroutine is used to complete the numerical imple-
mentation in ABAQUS. The Poisson’s ratio is chosen to be 0.499 to simulate the constant
volume response of clay under undrained conditions.
When the suction pile foundation in clay is subjected to load, passive suction is gener-
ated inside it to prevent the soil inside the pile from separating from the pile. Therefore, in
order to consider the influence of passive suction, it is assumed that the contact interface
between the pile and the soil is completely rough and bonded [20,28,29]. The contact
surface between the outside of the pile and the soil of the suction pile foundation adopts
Coulomb friction, and the friction coefficient is set to u = 0.35 [30].
Processes 2022,10,
Processes2022, 10,x 2459
FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of
4 of2119

Figure
Figure2.2.Element
Elementmeshing:
meshing:(a)(a)typical
typical3D
3Dmesh
meshview;
view;(b)
(b)top
topview;
view;(c)
(c)side
sideview.
view.

2.2. Validation of the Numerical Model

The material of the four-barreled suction pile foundation is steel and its stiffness is
much For the four-barreled
higher than that of the suction
soil. pile foundation
Therefore, it is in clay foundation,
assumed thereisisano
that the pile systematic
completely
elastic steel material, and the linear elastic constitutive model is adopted. The elastic con-of
theoretical analytical solution and test results at present. In order to verify the validity
the three-dimensional
stants are E = 210 GPa and finiteυelement analysis
= 0.3. The model
elastic adopted,
perfectly this
plastic paper refers
constitutive to thebased
model tripod
bucket foundation [14], using the same barrel geometry, plane layout,
on the Tresca failure criterion is used in the description of the stress–strain relationship of soil constitutive
relationship
soil [25]. It is and contact
assumed parameters
that of the shear
the undrained barrel strength
and soil as described
increases in Chapter
linearly with 1depth.
above.
The finite element analysis model of the three-dimensional tripod bucket foundation is
The formula is as follows [26]:
established, and the carrying capacity under monotonic load is calculated and compared
with the existing calculation results, as= Sshown
u Sumin+ Figure
kZ 3. (1)
It can be seen from Figure 3 that the error between the calculation results for vertical
In the capacity
carrying formula, andSum ishorizontal
the undrained shearcapacity
carrying strengthand of the surface,
the existingZ isresearch
the depth belowis
results
the surface,
within The ktripod
5%. and is the bucket
growthfoundation
rate of strength with depth.
established Previous
according to thestudies
modeling have shownin
method
that
thisthe carrying
paper capacitycalculate
can reliably coefficient
theof foundations
carrying doesofnot
capacity depend
suction pileon a single parame-
foundations in clay
ter of Sum or k,Therefore,
foundations. but depends on the normalizedfinite
the three-dimensional non-uniformity
element analysis modelkD/S
coefficient usedum in[27].
this
Therefore, the non-uniformity of clay is defined by kD/Sum. For normally consolidated
study can reliably and accurately evaluate the carrying capacity of four-tube suction pile
clay, k = 1.25 kPa/m,
foundations in clay and the undrained shear strength of the surface is almost 0. In order
foundations.
to avoid the convergence difficulty of finite element calculation, Sum = 1.25 kPa and elastic
modulus E = 500 Su, the USDFLD subroutine is used to complete the numerical implemen-
tation in ABAQUS. The Poisson’s ratio is chosen to be 0.499 to simulate the constant vol-
ume response of clay under undrained conditions.
When the suction pile foundation in clay is subjected to load, passive suction is gen-
erated inside it to prevent the soil inside the pile from separating from the pile. Therefore,
 of the three-dimensional finite element analysis model adopted, this paper refers to the
tripod bucket foundation [14], using the same barrel geometry, plane layout, soil consti-
tutive relationship and contact parameters of the barrel and soil as described in Chapter 1
above. The finite element analysis model of the three-dimensional tripod bucket founda-
Processes 2022, 10, 2459 tion is established, and the carrying capacity under monotonic load is calculated and com- 5 of 19
pared with the existing calculation results, as shown in Figure 3.

(a)

(b)
Figure 3. Comparison
Figure of load–displacement
3. Comparison curves between
of load–displacement two methods
curves between [14]. [14].
two methods

It can be seen Carrying

3. Loading from Figure 3 that the
Capacity error
of the between the calculation results for vertical
Foundation
carrying capacity and horizontal carrying capacity and the existing research results is
3.1. Determination of Loading Carrying Capacity
In order to obtain the ultimate carrying capacity of four-barreled suction pile foun-
dations, the displacement control analysis method is used, which is suitable for obtaining
the ultimate carrying capacity of foundations [31,32]. Vertical displacement (v), horizontal
displacement (h) and angular displacement (θ) are applied at the geometric center RP (load
reference point) of the upper surface of the four-barreled suction pile foundation until
either the reaction force in the corresponding direction does not continue to increase with
the increase in displacement or tends to be stable. The displacement and reaction force of
the reference point in this direction are extracted, and the load–displacement relationship
curve of the foundation is drawn. The method plots two tangential lines along the initial
and latter portions of the load–displacement curve [33]. The load corresponding to the
intersection point of these two lines is considered as the carrying capacity, as is shown in
Figure 4.

Processes 2022, 10, 2459
with the increase in displacement or tends to be stable. The displacement and reaction
force of the reference point in this direction are extracted, and the load–displacement re-
lationship curve of the foundation is drawn. The method plots two tangential lines along
the initial and latter portions of the load–displacement curve [33]. The load corresponding
to the intersection point of these two lines is considered as the carrying capacity, as6 is
of 19
shown in Figure 4.

Bearing capacity

Load

0
0
Displacement

Figure 4. Tangent
Figure intersection
4. Tangent method
intersection forfor
method determining carrying
determining capacity.
carrying capacity.

Figure 5 shows an example of obtaining the H-M failure envelope using the fixed
Figure 5 shows an example of obtaining the H-M failure envelope using the fixed
displacement ratio method [34]. The so-called fixed displacement ratio method involves
displacement ratio method [34]. The so-called fixed displacement ratio method involves
taking the ratio of the displacement increments in the two directions as a constant for
taking the ratio of the displacement increments in the two directions as a constant for
displacement control loading until the load components in both directions reach the limit
displacement control loading until the load components in both directions reach the limit
value. At this time, the loading path converges to a point on the envelope. Through
value. At this time, the loading path converges to a point on the envelope. Through mul-
multiple fixed displacement ratio loading tests, a series of points on the envelope surface
tiple fixed displacement ratio loading tests, a series of points on the envelope surface can
Processes 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 21
can be obtained to construct the foundation carrying capacity failure envelope surface of
be obtained to construct the foundation carrying capacity failure envelope surface of the
the bucket foundation. However, this method requires multiple loadings to fit a complete
bucket foundation. However, this method requires multiple loadings to fit a complete en-
envelope surface, especially when the form of the envelope surface is unknown.
velope surface, especially when the form of the envelope surface is unknown.
M（MN·m）

600

500 envelope

400

300

200

100

0
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
H（MN）
Figure 5. Carrying capacity envelope by fixed displacement ratio method.
Figure 5. Carrying capacity envelope by fixed displacement ratio method.
3.2. Definition of Load and Displacement
3.2. Definition
The signofdefinitions
Load and Displacement
are provided in Table 1. The definitions were modified based on
The sign[35].
Gourvenec definitions are provided in Table 1. The definitions were modified based on
Gourvenec [35].1, N*(F) and N*(S) indicate the single- and four-barreled suction pile foun-
In Table
dations’ dimensionless loads, respectively. A(*) is the cross-sectional area of single- and
Table 1. Summary
four-barreled of notation
suction for loads and displacement.
pile foundations. V ult , Hult , Mult and Tult are the vertical, horizontal,
moment and torque carrying capacities of single- and four-barreled suction pile founda-
Vertical Horizontal Moment Torque
tions, respectively. Suo is the undrained shear strength of clay at a depth of D/4 below the
Load at RP V H M T
skirt tip level.
Displacement at RP V h 𝜃𝜃 𝜃𝜃
Carrying capacity Vult Hult Mult Tult
Dimensionless load NV = Vult/(ASuo) NH = Hult/(ASuo) NM = Mult/(ADSuo) NT = Tult/(ADSuo)
Group efficiency EV = NV(F)/NV(S) EH = NH(F)/NH(S) EM = NM(F)/NM(S) ET = NT(F)/NH(S)
 Processes 2022, 10, 2459 7 of 19

Table 1. Summary of notation for loads and displacement.

Vertical Horizontal Moment Torque

Load at RP
Displacement at RP
Carrying capacity
Dimensionless load
Group efficiency
V H M T
V h θ θ
V ult Hult Mult Tult
NV = V ult /(ASuo ) NH = Hult /(ASuo ) NM = Mult /(ADSuo ) NT = Tult /(ADSuo )
EV = NV(F) /NV(S) EH = NH(F) /NH(S) EM = NM(F) /NM(S) ET = NT(F) /NH(S)

4. Pile Group Effect

4.1. Under Vertical Loading Condition
The relationship of the vertical dimensionless load NV(F) and pile group effect coeffi-
cient EV with different L/D and S/D ratios is shown in Figure 6. The NV(F) increases with
the increase in L/D ratios, and the EV decreases with the increase in L/D ratios. From the
diagram, it can be seen that as the S/D ratios increases, the vertical dimensionless load
curve gradually stabilizes, and the larger the aspect ratio, the greater the S/D ratio needed
Processes 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 21
to achieve this steady state. When the S/D ratio is less than 2, the EV varies from 0.96 to 1.
When the S/D ratio is greater than 2, the EV is 1.

(a)

(b)
FigureFigure
6. Vertical dimensionless
6. Vertical load and group
dimensionless loadefficiency
and group L/D and S/D
withefficiency ratios:
with L/D(a)and
vertical
S/Ddi-ratios: (a) vertical
mensionless load NV(F); (b) group efficiency EV(F).
dimensionless load NV(F) ; (b) group efficiency EV(F) .
Figure 7 shows the displacement contours under vertical loading of the four-barreled
suction pile foundation with the L/D ratio = 1 and the S/D ratios of 0.5, 1 and 2. When the
S/D ratio is less than 1, the soil around the adjacent suction pile foundation interacts under
the vertical load, resulting in a decrease in carrying capacity. When the S/D ratios = 2, the
Processes 2022, 10, 2459 8 of 19

Figure 7 shows the displacement contours under vertical loading of the four-barreled
suction pile foundation with the L/D ratio = 1 and the S/D ratios of 0.5, 1 and 2. When the
S/D ratio is less than 1, the soil around the adjacent suction pile foundation interacts under
the vertical load, resulting in a decrease in carrying capacity. When the S/D ratios = 2, the
Processes 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 21
interaction effect is weakened or even disappears, and the pile group effect coefficient EV is
gradually stabilized at 1.

Figure 7.
Figure 7. Displacement
Displacement contours
contours under
under vertical
vertical loading:
loading: (a) S/D ==0.5;
(a) S/D (b)S/D
0.5;(b) (c)S/D
S/D==1;1;(c) S/D= 2.
= 2.

4.2.
4.2. Under
Under Horizontal
Horizontal Loading
Loading Condition
Condition
Figure 8 shows the relationship of the horizontal dimensionless load NH(F) and pile
Figure 8 shows the relationship of the horizontal dimensionless load NH(F) and pile
group effect coefficient EH with different L/D and S/D ratios. It can be seen from the figure
group effect coefficient EH with different L/D and S/D ratios. It can be seen from the figure
that the horizontal dimensionless load NH increases with the increase in the L/D and S/D
that the horizontal dimensionless load NH increases with the increase in the L/D and S/D
ratios. As S/D ratios increase, the final curve tends to be stable, and the larger the L/D
ratios. As S/D ratios increase, the final curve tends to be stable, and the larger the L/D
ratios, the larger the S/D ratio needed to achieve this steady state, which is the same as the
ratios, the larger the S/D ratio needed to achieve this steady state, which is the same as the
vertical dimensionless load.
vertical dimensionless load.

Processes 2022, 10, 2459
Figure 8 shows the relationship of the horizontal dimensionless load NH(F) and pile
group effect coefficient EH with different L/D and S/D ratios. It can be seen from the figure
that the horizontal dimensionless load NH increases with the increase in the L/D and S/D
ratios. As S/D ratios increase, the final curve tends to be stable, and the larger the L/D
ratios, the larger the S/D ratio needed to achieve this steady state, which is the same as9 the
of 19
vertical dimensionless load.

Processes 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 21

Horizontaldimensionless
Figure8.8.Horizontal
Figure dimensionlessload
loadwith L/Dand
withL/D S/D
andS/D ratios.
ratios.
Figure
Figure9 9shows
showsthe thedisplacement
displacementcontours
contours of of single-barreled
single-barreled and andfour-barreled
four-barreledsuction
suc-
tion pile foundations under horizontal load. It is worth noting that
pile foundations under horizontal load. It is worth noting that the single-barreled suction the single-barreled
suction pile foundation
pile foundation rotatesrotates under horizontal
under horizontal load, and load, and its rotation
its rotation center iscenter
locatedisinside
locatedthe
inside the pile. For the four-barreled suction pile foundation with
pile. For the four-barreled suction pile foundation with the S/D ratio of 1, when L/D the S/D ratio of 1, when = 1,
L/D
the= four-barreled
1, the four-barreled suction suction pile foundation
pile foundation only moves
only moves horizontally
horizontally under under the hor-
the horizontal
izontal
load. load.
This This
conclusionconclusion is similar
is similar to that
to that developed
developed in the
in the work work of Kim
of Kim andandHung Hung[11],
[11],
whichwhich reported
reported that
that when
when the S/Dratio
theS/D ratio is
is greater
greater than than aacertain
certainvalue,
value,thethehorizontal
horizontal
dimensionless
dimensionless loadload ofof
the tripod
the tripod bucket
bucket foundation
foundation is is
similar toto
similar thethedimensionless
dimensionless load ofof
load
the fixed single-barreled rotation degree of freedom. When the L/D ratio
the fixed single-barreled rotation degree of freedom. When the L/D ratio is 2 or 3, the four- is 2 or 3, the four-
barreled
barreled suction
suction pile foundation
pile foundation rotates,
rotates, and
anditsits
rotation
rotation center is is
center located
located atat
the
thetiptip
ofof
the
the
pile.
pile.Therefore,
Therefore,under underaahorizontal
horizontalload,
load, due
due toto the
the different modesof
different modes offour-barreled
four-barreledsuction
suc-
tion
pilepile foundations
foundations with
with differentL/D
different L/DandandS/DS/D ratios
ratios usedusedtotomobilize
mobilizethe thesurrounding
surrounding
soil
soiltoto
allow
allow it ittotoresist
resistdeformation
deformation and
and failure,
failure, a aspecific
specificexpression
expression cannot
cannot bebeused
usedtoto
characterize
characterize thethe pile
pilegroup
group effect
effectcoefficient
coefficientofofthethehorizontal
horizontalcarrying
carryingcapacity.
capacity.

Figure 9. Cont.
Processes 2022,
Processes 10, 10,
2022, x FOR
2459PEER REVIEW 11 of1021
of 19

Figure 9. Displacement
9. Displacement
Figure contours
contours under
under horizontalloading:
horizontal loading:(a) L/D= =1 1(single-barreled);
(a)L/D (single-barreled);(b) L/D== 1
(b)L/D
(four-barreled);(c)(c)L/D
1(four-barreled); = 2(four-barreled);
L/D = 2(four-barreled); L/D
(d)(d) = 3(four-barreled).
L/D = 3(four-barreled).

4.3. Under Moment Loading Condition

4.3. Under Moment Loading Condition
Figure 10 shows the moment dimensionless load NM(F) and the pile group effect
Figure 10 shows the moment dimensionless load NM(F) and the pile group effect coef-
coefficient EM with S/D and L/D ratios. The moment dimensionless load NM(F) increases
ficient EM with S/D and L/D ratios. The moment dimensionless load NM(F) increases with
with the increase in the L/D ratios, and EM decreases with the increase in the L/D ratios,
the increase in the L/D ratios, and EM decreases with the increase in the L/D ratios, both of
both of which increase with the increase in the S/D ratios.
which increase with the increase in the S/D ratios.
By calculating the bending capacities under various working conditions, an equation
for calculating the bending capacity of four-barreled suction pile foundations is proposed,
which can be obtained by multiplying the moment dimensionless load NM(S) of single-
barreled suction pile foundations with the pile group effect coefficient EM :

Mult = EM NM(S) A(F) DSuo

S β
EM = 1 + α( )
D
L
α= 0.7e0.2( D )
L
β= 10.8e− D
Figure 11 shows the displacement contours of the four-barreled suction pile foundation
under moment loading. It can be seen from the figure that the suction pile rotates as a
whole, and its rotation center is located between adjacent suction piles.

4.4. Under Torsional Loading Condition

Figure 12 shows the torsional dimensionless load NT(F) with S/D and L/D ratios. The
NT(F) increases with the increase in S/D and L/D ratios.
Figure 13 shows the displacement contours of the four-barreled suction pile foundation
under torsional loading. Since the single-barreled suction pile foundation rotates around the
central axis of the pile when subjected to torsional load, its carrying capacity contribution
mainly comes from the friction between the foundation and the soil. The four-barreled
suction pile foundation rotates around the reference point RP central axis, and the pile
body moves horizontally.
cesses 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 21
Processes 2022, 10, 2459 11 of 19

(b)
Figure 10. Moment dimensionless
Figure 10. load and group
Moment dimensionless loadefficiency with
and group L/D and
efficiency S/DL/D
with ratios
and: (a)
S/Dmoment
ratios: (a) moment
dimensionless load NM(F); (b)
dimensionless group
load efficiency
NM(F) EM(F)
; (b) group .
efficiency EM(F) .

By calculating the bending

Therefore, capacities
its torsional undercapacity
carrying variouscan
working conditions,
be calculated an equationthe horizon-
by multiplying
for calculating the bending
tal carrying capacity
capacity ofsingle-barreled
of the four-barreled suction
suctionpile
pilefoundations is proposed,
foundation with the fixed rotational
which can be obtained
degree by multiplying
of freedom length: dimensionless load NM(S) of single-bar-
the moment
by the torque
reled suction pile foundations with the pile group effect coefficient EM:
Tult = ET 4Hult = ET NH (S) A( F) DSuo (2)
Mult = EMNM(S)A(F)DSuo
where ET is the pile group effect coefficient of the torsional carrying capacity. Figure 14
S of torsional carrying capacity, which decreases with
shows the ET with L/D and S/D ratios
EMand
the increase in L/D ratio = 1+ （ )β tends to 1 with the increase in S/D ratio.
α
gradually
D
4.5. Effect of Non-Homogeneity of Clay on Group Efficiency
L
Studies have shown that clay0.2( )
heterogeneity has no significant effect on the pile group
α = 0.7 ecapacity
effect coefficient of the carrying
D
of tripod bucket foundations [11]. In this paper,
the effect of non-homogeneity of clay on the group efficiency of four-barreled suction pile
foundations is analyzed. We set kD/S L
− um to 2 and 4, and the specific parameters are shown
in Table 2. β = 10.8 e D

FigureTable
11 shows thevalues
2. Input displacement contours
for analyzing of the
the effect four-barreled suction
of non-homogeneity of soil. pile founda-
tion under moment L/Dloading. It can beS/Dseen from theKfigure
(kPa/m)that the suction pile rotates as
Sum (kPa) kD/Sum
a whole, and its rotation center is located between adjacent suction piles.
1 0.5–3 1.25 3.125 4
2 0.5–3 1.25 6.25 2
 Processes2022,
Processes 10,2459
2022,10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 19
12 of 21

Processes 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 21

Figure
Figure11. Displacement contours
11. Displacement contoursunder
undermoment
momentloading
loading(S/D
(S/D = (a)
= 1): (a) L/D
1): L/D (b)= L/D
= 1;L/D
= 1; (b) 2; (c)=L/D
2;
= 3.
(c) L/D = 3.

150
4.4. Under Torsional Loading Condition
L/D-1
L/D-1
Figure 12 shows the torsional dimensionless load NT(F) with S/D and L/D ratios. The
120 L/D-2
L/D-2
NT(F) increases with the increase in S/D and L/D ratios.
L/D-3
L/D-3
90
NT(F)

60

30

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
S/D
Figure
Figure12.
12.Torsional
Torsionaldimensionless
dimensionlessload withL/D
loadwith andS/D
L/Dand S/Dratios.
ratios.

Figure 13 shows the displacement contours of the four-barreled suction pile founda-
tion under torsional loading. Since the single-barreled suction pile foundation rotates
around the central axis of the pile when subjected to torsional load, its carrying capacity
contribution mainly comes from the friction between the foundation and the soil. The
four-barreled suction pile foundation rotates around the reference point RP central axis,
and the pile body moves horizontally.
 Figure 12. Torsional dimensionless load with L/D and S/D ratios.

Processes 2022, 10, 2459
Figure 13 shows the displacement contours of the four-barreled suction pile founda-
tion under torsional loading. Since the single-barreled suction pile foundation rotates
around the central axis of the pile when subjected to torsional load, its carrying capacity
contribution mainly comes from the friction between the foundation and the soil. The 13 of 19
four-barreled suction pile foundation rotates around the reference point RP central axis,
and the pile body moves horizontally.

Processes 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 21

(a)

Processes 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 21

(b)
(c)
Figure 13. Displacement contours under torsional loading (S/D = 1): (a) L/D = 1; (b) L/D = 2; (c) L/D
= 3.

Therefore, its torsional carrying capacity can be calculated by multiplying the hori-
zontal carrying capacity of the single-barreled suction pile foundation with the fixed ro-
tational degree of freedom by the torque length:

= T 4 H ult
Tult E= ET N H ( S ) A( F ) DSuo (2)

where ET is the pile group effect coefficient (c) of the torsional carrying capacity. Figure 14
shows the ET with L/D and S/D ratios of torsional carrying capacity, which decreases with
(a) L/D==1):
Figure
Figure13.
13.Displacement contours
Displacement underunder
contours torsional loading loading
torsional (S/D = 1):(S/D (a)L/D
1; (b) L/D 1; L/D
= 2;=(c) (b) L/D = 2;
= 3.increase in L/D ratio and gradually tends to 1 with the increase in S/D ratio.
the
(c) L/D = 3.

Therefore, its torsional carrying capacity can be calculated by multiplying the hori-
1.4
L/D-1
L/D-1
zontal carrying capacity of the single-barreled suction pile foundation with the fixed ro-
tational
1.2 degree of freedom
L/D-2 by the torque length:
L/D-2

=
L/D-3 Tult T 4 H ult
E= ET N H ( S ) A( F ) DSuo
L/D-3 (2)
1

where ET is the pile group effect coefficient of the torsional carrying capacity. Figure 14
0.8
ET(F)

shows the ET with L/D and S/D ratios of torsional carrying capacity, which decreases with
the increase in L/D ratio and gradually tends to 1 with the increase in S/D ratio.
0.6

1.4
0.4 L/D-1
L/D-1
1.2
0.2 L/D-2
L/D-2

L/D-3
L/D-3
1
0
0.8
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
ET(F)

S/D
0.6
Figure
Figure14.
14.Torsional
Torsionalgroup
groupefficiency withL/D
efficiencywith andS/D
L/Dand S/Dratios.
ratios.
0.4
4.5. Effect of Non-Homogeneity of Clay on Group Efficiency
0.2
Studies have shown that clay heterogeneity has no significant effect on the pile group
effect coefficient
0 of the carrying capacity of tripod bucket foundations [11]. In this paper,
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
the effect of non-homogeneity of clay on the group efficiency of four-barreled suction pile
S/D
ocesses 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 21
Processes 2022, 10, 2459 14 of 19

Figure 15 shows the comparison of pile group effect coefficients of four-barreled suc-
Figure 15 shows the comparison of pile group effect coefficients of four-barreled
tion pile foundations under different clay non-homogeneity coefficients kD/Sum. It can be
suction pile foundations under different clay non-homogeneity coefficients kD/Sum . It can
seen that the non-homogeneity of clay has little effect on the pile group effect coefficient
be seen that the non-homogeneity of clay has little effect on the pile group effect coefficient
of the carrying capacity of four-barreled suction pile foundations.
of the carrying capacity of four-barreled suction pile foundations.

Figure 15. Comparison of group efficiency

Figure 15. Comparison of group factors at various
efficiency kD/S
factors um ratios:
at various (a) vertical
kD/S efficiency,
um ratios: (b) efficiency,
(a) vertical
moment efficiency and efficiency
(b) moment (c) torque and
efficiency.
(c) torque efficiency.
022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 21
Processes 2022, 10, 2459 15 of 19

5. Carrying Capacity Envelope under Combined Loading Conditions

5.1. Combined H-M 5. Capacity
CarryingEnvelope
Capacity Envelope under Combined Loading Conditions
5.1. Combined H-M Capacity Envelope
A series of displacement loading scenarios are carried out using the fixed displace-
ment ratio method toAobtain
series the
of displacement
H-M load space loading scenarios
carrying are carried
capacity out using
envelope. the16
Figure fixed displacement
ratio method to obtain the H-M load space carrying capacity
shows the dimensionless carrying capacity envelope of a four-barreled suction pile foun- envelope. Figure 16 shows the
dimensionless carrying capacity envelope of a four-barreled
dation under different L/D and S/D ratios. It can be seen from the figure that under the suction pile foundation under
different L/D and S/D ratios. It can be seen from the figure
combined action of horizontal and bending moment loads, the foundation carrying capac- that under the combined action
ity envelope of theof horizontal
H-M load and
spacebending
shows moment
obvious loads, the foundation
asymmetry, carrying
and as the capacity
L/D ratio in- envelope of the
H-M load space shows obvious asymmetry, and as the L/D ratio increases, the asymmetry
creases, the asymmetry of the envelope is more obvious, and the size is larger. As the S/D
of the envelope is more obvious, and the size is larger. As the S/D ratio increases, the
ratio increases, the bending capacity increases significantly. But for the horizontal carry-
bending capacity increases significantly. But for the horizontal carrying capacity, due to the
ing capacity, due to the gradual weakening of the pile group effect, with the S/D ratio
gradual weakening of the pile group effect, with the S/D ratio increases from 2 to 3, the
increases from 2 to 3, the impact on the horizontal carrying capacity is not significant.
impact on the horizontal carrying capacity is not significant.

Figure H−M
Figure 16. Dimensionless capacity envelopes
16. Dimensionless under different
H-M capacity envelopesL/D S/D ratios:
and different
under L/DS/D
(a)and
L/D = 1, ratios: (a) L/D = 1,
(b) L/D = 1.5 and (c)(b)
L/D = 2.= 1.5 and (c) L/D = 2.
L/D
rocesses 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 21

Processes 2022, 10, 2459 16 of 19

5.2. Combined V-H-M Capacity Envelope

The 5.2.
failure envelope
Combined characteristics
V-H-M of a four-barreled suction pile foundation with
Capacity Envelope
different S/D ratios in the V-H-M load space are studied. Firstly, different proportions of
The failure envelope characteristics of a four-barreled suction pile foundation with
vertical loads are directly applied at the reference point RP of the foundation, which is
different S/D ratios in the V-H-M load space are studied. Firstly, different proportions of
used as the initial state of displacement control loading. Keeping the vertical load un-
vertical loads are directly applied at the reference point RP of the foundation, which is used
changed, the fixed displacement ratio loading in the H-M load space is carried out.
as the initial state of displacement control loading. Keeping the vertical load unchanged,
It can be seen from Figure 17 that the size of the failure envelope of the foundation
the fixed displacement ratio loading in the H-M load space is carried out.
carrying capacity under the H-M load space of the four-barreled suction pile foundation
It can be seen from Figure 17 that the size of the failure envelope of the foundation
decreases with the increase in the vertical load. Taking S/D = 3 as an example, the vertical
carrying capacity under the H-M load space of the four-barreled suction pile foundation
load increases from V = 0.5 Vult to V in
decreases with the increase = 0.75 Vult, theload.
the vertical moment
Takingcapacity
S/D =is3 reduced by 57%,
as an example, the vertical
and the horizontal carrying
fromcapacity
V = 0.5isVreduced by 9%. As the foundation structures of
load increases ult to V = 0.75 V ult , the moment capacity is reduced by
submarine oil production
57%, platforms
and the horizontal often bears
carrying large
capacity isvertical
reducedloads,
by 9%.it is
Asnecessary to com-structures
the foundation
prehensively consider structural weight and carrying capacity in the design and construc-
of submarine oil production platforms often bears large vertical loads, it is necessary
tion process.
to comprehensively consider structural weight and carrying capacity in the design and
construction process.

Figure 17. Cont.

esses 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 21
Processes 2022, 10, 2459 17 of 19

Figure 17. Dimensionless V−H−M capacity

Figure 17. Dimensionless V-H-Menvelopes
capacityunder different
envelopes S/Ddifferent
under ratios: (a)
S/DS/D = 1(2D);
ratios: (a) S/D = 1 (2D);
(b)S/D = 1(3D);
(b)(c) S/D==13(2D);
S/D and
(3D); (c) S/D S/D
(d) = = 3(3D).
3 (2D); and (d) S/D = 3 (3D).

6. Conclusions
6. Conclusions
Through
Through a series a series of three-dimensional
of three-dimensional finite element finite element
analyses, theanalyses, the group
group effect of effect of
four-barreled suction pile foundations in clay foundations
four-barreled suction pile foundations in clay foundations under undrained conditionsunder undrained conditions and
the carrying characteristics under combined loading modes
and the carrying characteristics under combined loading modes are studied. The follow- are studied. The following
conclusions are drawn:
ing conclusions are drawn:
(1) At S/D ratios ≤ 2, the EV varies from 0.96 to 1. At an S/D ratio ≥ 2, the EV is 1.
(1) At S/D ratios ≤ 2, the EV varies from 0.96 to 1. At an S/D ratio ≥ 2, the EV is 1. The
The bending capacity can be obtained by multiplying the moment dimensionless
bending capacity can be obtained by multiplying the moment dimensionless load
load NM(S) of the single-barreled suction pile foundation with the pile group effect
NM(S) of the single-barreled suction pile foundation with the pile group effect coeffi-
coefficient EM . The torsional carrying capacity can be calculated by multiplying the
cient EM. The torsional carrying capacity can be calculated by multiplying the hori-
horizontal carrying capacity of the single-barreled suction pile foundation with a fixed
zontal carrying capacity of the single-barreled suction pile foundation with a fixed
rotational degree of freedom by the torque length.
rotational degree of freedom by the torque length.
(2) The non-homogeneity of clay has little effect on the pile group effect coefficient of the
(2) The non-homogeneity of clay has little effect on the pile group effect coefficient of the
carrying capacity of four-barreled suction pile foundations.
carrying capacity of four-barreled suction pile foundations.
(3) Under the combined action of horizontal and bending moment loads, the foundation
(3) Under the combined action of horizontal and bending moment loads, the foundation
carrying capacity envelope of the H-M load space shows obvious asymmetry. With the
carrying capacity envelope
increase in S/D of the H-M
ratios, load space
the bending shows
moment obvious
carrying asymmetry.
capacity With
increases proportionally.
in S/D
the increase Due ratios, the bending moment carrying capacity increases propor-
to the weakening of the pile group effect, the horizontal carrying capacity finally
tionally. Duereaches
to the weakening of the at
a constant value pile
S/D group effect,
= 2–3. the horizontal
Appropriate carrying
pile spacing capac-be selected to
should
ity finally reaches a constant value at S/D = 2–3. Appropriate
weaken the pile group effect in practical engineering design. pile spacing should be
selected(4)
to weaken the pile group effect in practical engineering design.
The size of the failure envelope of the foundation carrying capacity under the H-M
(4) The size of the failure
load spaceenvelope of the foundation
of the four-barreled suction carrying capacity
pile foundation under the
decreases withH-M
the increase in
load space of the four-barreled suction pile foundation decreases with the increase in
Processes 2022, 10, 2459 18 of 19

the vertical load. When the vertical load increases from V = 0 to 0.75 V ult , the bending
moment carrying capacity can be reduced by 59%. Considering the large weights of
subsea oil platforms, it is necessary to pay attention to the vertical load in their design
and construction.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Z.Q. and Y.W.; methodology, Z.Q.; software, Z.Q.; valida-
tion, T.W., C.W. and Y.W.; formal analysis, Z.Q.; investigation, F.W.; resources, J.W.; data curation,
J.L.; writing—original draft preparation, Z.Q.; writing—review and editing, Z.Q.; visualization, Y.W.;
supervision, T.W.; project administration, Z.Q.; funding acquisition, Y.W. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant
No. 51879035).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Achmus, M.; Kuo, Y.S.; Abdel-Rahman, K. Behavior of monopile foundations under cyclic lateral load. Comput. Geotech. 2009, 36,
725–735. [CrossRef]
2. Houlsby, G.T.; Wroth, C.P. Calculation of Stresses on Shallow Penetrometers and Footings. In Seabed Mechanics; Springer:
Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1984; pp. 107–112.
3. Butterfîeld, R.; Houlsby, G.T.; Gottardi, G. Standardized sign conventions and notation for generally loaded foundations.
Geotechnique 1997, 47, 1051–1054. [CrossRef]
4. Hu, Y.; Randolph, M.F.; Watson, P.G. Bearing response of skirted foundation on nonhomogeneous soil. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.
1999, 125, 924–935. [CrossRef]
5. Wang, H.; Cheng, X. Undrained bearing capacity of suction caissons for offshore wind turbine foundations by numerical limit
analysis. Mar. Geores. Geotechnol. 2015, 34, 252–264. [CrossRef]
6. Houlsby, G.T.; Kelly, R.B. Field trials of suction caissons in clay for offshore wind turbine foundations. Geotechnique 2005, 55,
287–296. [CrossRef]
7. Chen, W.; Randolph, M.F. Uplift capacity of suction caissons under sustained and cyclic loading in soft clay. J. Geotech. Geoenviron.
Eng. 2007, 133, 1352–1363. [CrossRef]
8. Yadav, S.K.; Ye, G.L.; Khalid, U.; Fukuda, M. Numerical and centrifugal physical modelling on soft clay improved with floating
and fixed sand compaction piles. Comput. Geotech. 2019, 115, 103160. [CrossRef]
9. Kim, S.R. Evaluation of vertical and horizontal bearing capacities of bucket foundations in clay. Ocean Eng. 2012, 52, 75–82.
10. Vulpe, C. Design method for the undrained capacity of skirted circular foundations under combined loading: Effect of deformable
soil plug. Geotechnique 2015, 65, 669–683. [CrossRef]
11. Yadav, S.K.; Ye, G.L.; Xiong, Y.L.; Khalid, U. Unified numerical study of shallow foundation on structured soft clay under
unconsolidated and consolidated-undrained loadings. Mar. Geores. Geotechnol. 2020, 38, 400–416. [CrossRef]
12. Tanoli, A.Y.; Yan, B.; Xiong, Y.L.; Ye, G.L.; Khalid, U.; Xu, Z.H. Numerical analysis on zone-divided deep excavation in soft clays
using a new small strain elasto—Plastic constitutive model. Undergr. Space 2022, 7, 19–36. [CrossRef]
13. Gourvenec, S.; Jensen, K. Effect of embedment and spacing of cojoined skirted foundation systems on undrained limit states
under general loading. Int. J. Geomech. 2009, 9, 267–279. [CrossRef]
14. Kim, S.R.; Hung, L.C.; Oh, M. Group effect on bearing capacities of tripod bucket foundations in undrained clay. Ocean Eng. 2014,
79, 1–9. [CrossRef]
15. Zhang, L.M.; Kong, L.G. Centrifuge modeling of torsional response of piles in sand. Can. Geotech. J. 2006, 43, 500–515. [CrossRef]
16. Gourvenec, S.M.; Mana, D.S.K. Undrained vertical bearing capacity factors for shallow foundations. Geotechnique 2011, 1, 101–108.
[CrossRef]
17. Andersen, K.H.; Dyvik, R.; Schrøder, K.; Hansteen, O.E.; Bysveen, S. Field tests of anchors in clay II: Predictions and interpretation.
J. Geotech. Eng. ASCE 1993, 119, 1532–1549. [CrossRef]
18. Zhu, B.; Dai, J.L.; Kong, D.Q.; Feng, L.Y.; Chen, Y.M. Centrifuge modelling of uplift response of suction caisson groups in soft clay.
Can. Geotech. J. 2020, 57, 1294–1303. [CrossRef]
19. Stergiou, T.; Terzis, D.; Georgiadis, K. Undrained bearing capacity of tripod skirted foundations under eccentric loading.
Geotechnik 2015, 38, 17–27. [CrossRef]
20. Yun, G.; Bransby, M.F. The undrained vertical bearing capacity of skirted foundations. Soils Found. 2007, 47, 493–505. [CrossRef]
Processes 2022, 10, 2459 19 of 19

21. Lai, Y.; Chen, C.; Zhu, B.; Dai, J.L.; Kong, D.Q. Numerical modelling on effect of loading rate on uplift behavior of suction caissons.
Ocean Eng. 2022, 260, 112013. [CrossRef]
22. Bhowmik, D.; Baidya, D.K.; Dasgupta, S.P. A numerical and experimental study of hollow steel pile in layered soil subjected to
lateral dynamic loading. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2013, 53, 119–129. [CrossRef]
23. Sinha, A.; Hanna, A.M. 3D numerical model for piled raft foundation. Int. J. Geomech. 2017, 17, 04016055. [CrossRef]
24. Achmus, M.; Akdag, C.T.; Thieken, K. Load-bearing behavior of suction bucket foundations in sand. Appl. Ocean Res. 2013, 43,
157–165. [CrossRef]
25. Taiebat, H.A.; Carter, J.P. Numerical studies of the bearing capacity of shallow foundations on cohesive soil subjected to combined
loading. Geotechnique 2000, 50, 409–418. [CrossRef]
26. Houlsby, G.T.; Martin, C.M. Undrained bearing capacity factors for conical footings on clay. Geotechnique 2003, 53, 513–520.
[CrossRef]
27. Martin, C.M.; Hazell, E.C.J. Bearing Capacity of Parallel Strip Footings on Non-Homogeneous Clay. In Proceedings of the
International Symposium on Frontiers in Offshore Geotechnics, Perth, Australia, 19–21 September 2005; pp. 427–433.
28. Gourvenec, S.; Steinepreis, M. Undrained limit states of shallow foundations acting in consort. Int. J. Geomech. 2007, 7, 194–205.
[CrossRef]
29. Xiao, Z.; Tian, Y.; Gourvenec, S. A practical method to evaluate failure envelopes of shallow foundations considering soil strain
softening and rate effects. Appl. Ocean Res. 2016, 59, 395–407. [CrossRef]
30. Fan, Q.L.; Luan, M.T. Elasto-Plastic FEM Analyses of Large-Diameter Cylindrical Structure in Soft Ground Subjected to Wave
Cyclic Loading. Slope Stability, Retaining Walls, and Foundations. In Proceedings of the 2009 GeoHunan International Conference,
Changsha, China, 3–6 August 2009.
31. Bransby, F.; Randolph, M. The effect of embedment depth on the undrained response of skirted foundations to combined loading.
Soils Found. 1999, 39, 19–33. [CrossRef]
32. Bandyopadhyay, S.; Sengupta, A.; Parulekar, Y.M. Behavior of a combined piled raft foundation in a multi-layered soil subjected
to vertical loading. Geomech. Eng. 2020, 21, 379–390.
33. Mansur, C.I.; Kaufman, R.I. Pile Tests, Low-Sill Structures, Old River, Louisiana. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div. 1956, 82, 1079. [CrossRef]
34. Supachawarote, C.; Randolph, M.; Gourvenec, S. Inclined Pull-Out Capacity of Suction Caissons. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth
International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Toulon, France, 23–28 May 2004.
35. Gourvenec, S. Effect of embedment on the undrained capacity of shallow foundations under general loading. Geotechnique 2008,
58, 177–185. [CrossRef]