Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

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

A finite element benchmark study based on experimental modeling of T

vibratory pile driving in saturated sand
Stylianos Chrisopoulosa, , Jakob Vogelsanga,b
⁎

a
Institute of Soil Mechanics and Rock Mechanics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany
b
IBO Döbbelin·Bansbach Beratende Ingenieure PartG mbB, Ettlingen, Germany

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The present study reports the approach and extensive results of FE back-calculations of model tests on vibratory
Vibratory pile driving pile installation in saturated sand. The model tests represent a half model setup with a half-pile driven into the
Numerical modeling soil body along an observation window. Due to this test setup, the soil displacements in vicinity to the pene-
Benchmark trating pile have been successfully evaluated by application of high-frequency image recording and Digital Image
Model tests
Correlation (DIC) techniques. Additionally, an extensive instrumentation has enabled the measurement of pile
motion, penetration resistance and pore water pressure during the penetration process. An axisymmetric model
which incorporates the pile-oscillator system in contact with the soil has been developed in the FE-software
ABAQUS/STANDARD for the simulation of the tests. The dynamic analysis of water-saturated soil is based on a u -p
formulation using a user-defined element. A hypoplastic constitutive model with intergranular strain has been
selected to describe the mechanical behavior of the soil. The various comparison opportunities establish a
comprehensive and quantitative validation benchmark of the numerical calculations. The generally good
agreement between the results confirms that the pile installation process can be satisfactory reproduced nu-
merically.

1. Introduction strongly simplifying assumptions regarding the influences of the pore

The vibratory driving technique is widely used for the installation of
displacement piles and sheet walls. However, although vibratory
driving often represents an efficient installation method, it is less
popular than impact driving [22]. The lower acceptance can primarily
be attributed to the prevailing opinion that vibratory driven piles will
show lower bearing capacity than impact driven piles [22]. Working
against this reservation is difficult and indeed, there are still important
uncertainties and questions to be answered regarding the installation
process (driveability and interaction with the surroundings) and its
influence on the load bearing behavior of vibratory driven piles [18].
It is not satisfactory that up to date pile installation processes cannot
be studied with sufficient reliability using numerical methods such as
the finite element method (FEM). Modeling pile penetration with FEM
or related methods is always a challenging task which particularly holds
for vibratory penetration. As pile driving often occurs below the ground
water table, it is important to incorporate the effects of soil-pore fluid
interaction which renders the simulations even more difficult. It is
therefore not surprising that still only very few simulations exist dealing
with vibratory pile driving in saturated soil. Most of them rely on
fluid or the pile-soil interaction. Vibratory pile driving is often simu-
lated under dry conditions [8,11,13] ignoring the presence of pore
water. If pore water effects are considered, then their influence is either
reduced to the buoyancy force [9] or locally undrained conditions are
assumed [17,25]. Another simplification used in recent numerical stu-
dies [2,3,17,25] regards the pile-soil interaction which is modeled
based on a simplified simulation technique by applying a sinusoidal
displacement boundary condition at the soil-pile interface. Some issues
and difficulties of the numerical modeling of vibratory pile driving are
discussed in the next section.
In general, after the first validation of developed numerical models
on a theoretical level (stability, plausibility), the evaluation of their
quality should be based on the comparison with reliable experimental
data. Model experiments have been shown to be very useful for this
purpose due to their good observability [24]. There are some very va-
luable experimental studies dealing with vibratory penetration
[4,5,16,19]. However, the measurements are mostly restricted to pile
motion and driving or tip force. Pore water effects are often excluded.
To the best knowledge of the authors, only in [3] a quantitative vali-
dation of numerical models using experimental results of vibratory pile

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: stylianos.chrisopoulos@kit.edu (S. Chrisopoulos).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.01.001

Available online 07 May 2019

0267-7261/ © 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
S. Chrisopoulos and J. Vogelsang Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260

Nomenclature t vibration time

uampl vertical pile displacement amplitude
Notation uampl,0 free amplitude of the pile-vibrator system
ux, uy horizontal and vertical soil displacement in the observa-
Ab pile cross section tion plane
a y,pile vertical pile acceleration u y,pile vertical pile position of the pile shoulder under the soil
d pile pile diameter surface
f vibration frequency vm mean penetration velocity
Fdyn dynamic force x, y cartesian coordinates in the observation plane
Fh pile head force pw change of pore water pressure with resp. to hydrostatic
hsand sand height value
mdyn dynamic mass (pile, load cell and vibrator) u[] displacement increment of component []
mi masses of the vibrating eccentric masses ampl shear deformation amplitude
Mstat static moment of the vibrator effective stress tensor
m pile mass of pile vis
viscous stress tensor
pw pore water pressure strain rate tensor
PWD1/2 pore water pressure transducers 1 and 2 ,µ viscosity coefficients
ri lever arms of the vibrating eccentric masses

driving in saturated soil has been carried out. Recently, Digital Image
Correlation (DIC) techniques have been applied for the investigation of
vibratory pile driving [23,26] which offers precious insights into the
cyclic soil behavior around penetrating piles and enables very inter-
esting comparisons with numerical simulations. Chrisopoulos et al. [3]
reveal this new potential by comparing distinct incremental displace-
ment patterns in the soil proving a good agreement between experi-
mental and numerical results. However, the investigated problem in [3]
is restricted to very small pile penetrations.
This paper refers to the results of one of the mentioned experimental
studies [26] and uses them for a benchmark of finite element simula-
tions. In contrast to [3], the problem now incorporates substantial pile
penetration and is therefore considered to be more realistic.
2. Preliminary considerations
The objective of this section is to characterize the process of vi-
bratory pile driving and to draw consequences as well as to formulate
requirements for its numerical modeling therefrom. Fig. 1a) shows a
typical pile-vibrator system (support unit not sketched) and Fig. 1b) its
commonly used idealization in numerical models.
Vibratory pile driving bases on the application of a harmonic ex-
citation to the pile in order to facilitate the penetration compared to
jacking or impact driving. The excitation is developed by rotating ec-
centric masses in the vibrator which is clamped to the pile head.
Modern vibrators can vary the driving frequency and the static moment
independently from each other in order to avoid resonance phenomena
[22]. The bias mass (also called isolator) is separated from the pile
vibration and exerts only a static force on the pile head. The pile motion
during vibratory penetration is a result of the excitation, the dynamic
properties of the pile-vibrator system and the soil response. In practice,
the range of applied frequencies is from 15 to 50 Hz while the typical
displacement amplitudes lie within 5–15 mm resulting in penetrations
per cycle of vibration of about 1–10 mm [5,19]. Generally speaking,
dense cohesionless soils require high displacement amplitudes whereas
in loose soil, it is beneficial to rely more on high frequencies [19].
2.1. Modeling techniques
The techniques and challenges for a realistic numerical simulation
of pile penetration problems are described based on the most popular
method which still is the FEM. However, most aspects to be mentioned
also hold for other numerical methods.
The effects of vibrator and bias mass are mostly reduced to a static
and a harmonically oscillating driving force. The pile motion is usually
assumed to be purely vertical and the pile is considered as a rigid body.
Often, the problem is idealized as axially symmetric but there are also
3D modeling approaches, partly due to the fact that some numerical
methods only exist as 3D procedures (like the Coupled Eulerian-
Lagrangian (CEL) method in ABAQUS [10,11]).
The conditions in the soil have to be considered as partly drained,
thus, pore water pressure build-up may occur but with ongoing parallel
consolidation. This involves serious problems for the modeling of the
dynamic process because most FE codes do not provide a build-in
procedure for such kind of analysis [2]. Special treatments are therefore
necessary either on element [2,17] or on material level [10].
In most FE models of pile penetration, the so-called zipper technique
is applied. The technique was systematically established by Cudmani
[5] and has been shown in many instances to provide realistic results.
The pile is introduced as a rigid surface in contact with the soil. It
possesses a pre-pile that represents an initial cavity in the soil, see
Fig. 1b). The diameter of the initial cavity should be chosen much lower
than that of the pile in order not to affect the numerical solution of the
boundary value problem under study.1
The rounded pile tip expands this cavity during penetration until the
full pile diameter is reached. This procedure prevents the finite ele-
ments from being ripped and distorted too strongly below the tip.
A realistic numerical modeling of vibratory pile driving is extremely

Fig. 1. a) Typical pile-vibrator system used in practice and b) representation in 1

The ratio between the diameter of the pile and the initial cavity was chosen
a typical FE model. 1:16.5 in the present simulations.

249
S. Chrisopoulos and J. Vogelsang
challenging because the process represents a dynamic interaction problem
(contact soil-pile) with large material deformation resp. relative displace-
ments and a complicated combination of monotonic and cyclic deformation
paths in the soil (resulting in high requirements for the soil model).
2.2. Soil models
Substantial problems for most soil models to perform realistically in
vibratory penetration problems arise from the following characteristics
of the process:
• Large numbers of load/deformation cycles are induced in the soil.
• The cyclic deformation is superimposed by large monotonic de-
formations.
• The strain amplitudes are spatially and temporally varying.
• Large changes of the stress level occur within a single cycle, with
stresses up to a few MN/m2 during penetration and negligible stress
during upward motion of the pile.
Beside a realistic behavior in monotonic triaxial tests, suitable soil
models have to perform well in cyclic element tests with large strain
amplitudes (shear deformation amplitudes ampl > 0.01) while special
attention should be paid to the evolution of volumetric strain (con-
tractancy/dilatancy effects). Soil models that are worth considering are
e.g. hypoplastic models with intergranular strain [15,29], the SANIS-
AND model [20] and the recently proposed ISA model [7]. However,
Wichtmann [27] has shown that all of these models still suffer short-
comings when it comes to the description of deformation paths typical
for alternating pile penetration. Regarding hypoplasticity these short-
comings have also been demonstrated by Chrisopoulos et al. [3]. De-
spite this knowledge, it is still not clear how seriously the deficiencies of
the soil models affect the quality of the numerical simulations and
which soil model performs the best under the described conditions.
3. Experimental and numerical modeling
3.1. Brief description of the experiments
The test setup used for the experiments discussed here has been
developed for the investigation of monotonic and vibratory penetration
of model piles. Detailed descriptions of the test setup and experimental
methods can be found in [23,24,26]. The experimental concept intends
to represent a half model. The test container has a half cylindrical base
area and a plane acrylic glass front sheet (see Fig. 2a)), in order to
enable the measurement of the soil displacements around the pile using
the Digital Image Correlation (DIC) technique. As can be seen in
Fig. 2b), the model pile has an almost half-conical pile tip. The vibrator
is mounted guide-free on the pile head (without bias mass) and is
connected to the pile via a load cell. The static moment of the vibrator is
Mstat = 0.00533 kg·m and the vibrating mass of pile, load cell and vi-
brator is mdyn = 7.881 kg .
The test series described in [26] comprises three vibratory tests with
different initial densities of the soil. Some information about the tests is
summarized in Table 2, more details can be found in [26]. As test
material, the so-called Karlsruhe Sand is used, a medium coarse quartz
sand (mean grain size d50 = 0.55 mm , coefficient of uniformity
CU = 1.53 and maximum and minimum void ratios emax = 0.873 and
emin = 0.557 ). Keep in mind that throughout the last decades, different
sands have been referred to as Karlsruhe Sand. An extensive description
of the ”current” Karlsruhe Sand and laboratory test results can be found
in [24]. The sand is pluviated into deaerated water and subsequently
broad to its initial density by applying vibrations to the test container
through hammer blows against its base. Using this method, homo-
geneous samples with very high degrees of saturation can be obtained,
for details see [24,26]. The pile-vibrator system is then installed. The
pile tip penetrates into the soil due to the own weight of pile and
250
Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260
Fig. 2. a) Schematic illustration of the model test setup and b) conical pile tip
used in the present study (from [26]).
vibrator. Starting from this configuration, the vibration is applied with
a frequency of f = 25 Hz until the pile tip reaches its maximum pene-
tration depth of about 500 mm.
The measurement concept and instrumentation details are described
extensively in [24]. Here, we concentrate on the aspects that are im-
portant for understanding the comparison of numerical and experi-
mental results. Measurements that are used for comparison are:
• pile head force F measured between pile and vibrator
• pile head displacement u (trend and alternating part)
h
• pore water pressure p at two stationary locations PWD and PWD
y,pile
w 1 2
(without inhibiting the soil motion as the pressure transducers are
placed outside of the test container and are hydraulically connected
to the location of measurement through the front sheet, see for more
details in [24])
• displacement fields in the soil obtained from DIC analysis
The selected model tests are considered to be suitable for compar-
ison with numerical simulations due to their extensive instrumentation
comprising stress-like measurements (penetration resistance and pore
water pressures) as well as displacement measurements of the pile and
in the soil.
The most important findings from the experimental studies
[23,24,26] are as follows: A quasi-stationary state of the penetration
behavior is rapidly reached with only slowly varying characteristic
parameters. It is therefore admissible to consider individual cycles of
vibration as representative for the investigation of the process and for
comparison purposes. The similitude to real pile driving can be de-
monstrated and the reliability of the measurements is ensured. In par-
ticular, the temporal and spatial resolution of the DIC results are suf-
ficient for the investigation of incremental displacement fields allowing
the study of alternating deformations in the soil.
3.2. From half to full model problem
Although the experimental model intends to create conditions in the
soil that are close to axisymmetry (with respect to the pile center line) it
is still a 3-dimensional half problem. Discrepancies to axisymmetric
conditions may arise from the friction between observation window
and soil resp. pile and a deflection of the window. By comparison of full
and half model experiments, Vogelsang demonstrates in [24] that these
discrepancies are of secondary importance. It is consequently ad-
missible to simulate the half model tests using an axisymmetric FE
model. However, the quantitative comparison of the results is not evi-
dent. In order to achieve comparability, it is important that the pile
motion in the model test and its corresponding simulation is similar and
that the developed soil stresses are equivalent.
The dynamic behavior of the pile-vibrator system is mainly gov-
erned by the so-called free amplitude of the system uampl,0 that depends
on the static moment of the vibrator Mstat and the vibrating mass mdyn
S. Chrisopoulos and J. Vogelsang Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260

(pile, load cell and vibrator):

Mstat
uampl,0 =
mdyn (1)

Mstat depends on the number n, masses m i and lever arms ri of the vi-
brating eccentric masses with respect to their axis of rotation:
Mstat = n
i = 1 m i ri (2)

Mstat determines the dynamic force Fdyn exerted by the eccentric masses
for a given rotation frequency f:
Fdyn (t ) = Mstat (2 f )2 sin(2 f (t t 0 )) (3)

with t being the vibration time and t 0 the time at the beginning of vi-
bration.
A transition from half to full model is possible when both systems
have the same free amplitude uampl,0 and when the developed forces
(dynamic force Fdyn and inertial force a· mdyn ) relative to the cross sec-
tion of the pile are equal. This can be achieved by scaling the experi-
mental values of the static moment Mstat and the dynamic mass mdyn in Fig. 3. FE model: a) Geometry and boundary conditions, b) evolution of the
the numerical model by the ratio of the pile cross sections of full and prescribed driving frequency and point load at the vibrator during the first
second of vibration and c) detail of the FE-mesh in the vicinity of the pile tip.
half model. In our case, this ratio is equal to 1.73 (and not 2) because
the cross section of the half pile is slightly larger than a half circle.

3.3. Numerical model

The soil behavior is described using a hypoplastic soil model ac-
cording to von Wolffersdorff [29] and its extension with the inter-
The numerical model used in the present simulations is radially
granular strain concept proposed by Niemunis and Herle [15]. The
symmetric with respect to the pile center line and includes the pile-vi-
hypoplastic parameters of Karlsruhe sand are used in the present study,
brator system in a similar manner as described in [3]. The FE-model
see Table 1. The parameter set has been proposed for the test sand in
includes the soil body, the rigid pile and the vibrator connected to the
[28]. Triaxial and oedometric tests have been simulated with this
pile using a connector element, see Fig. 3. Pile and vibrator are defined as
parameter set by the authors with good prediction quality. The para-
two separate rigid bodies in order to allow an evaluation of the force
meter set has been also used for numerical simulations of vibratory
exactly where it is measured in the experiment. The dimensions of the
penetration in [3,25] and was used here without adjustments. Note that
model correspond approximately to those of the model tests. In order to
the aim of the present study was not to achieve the best possible
enable the pile penetration into the soil, the technique described in
agreement between the experimental and numerical results by fitting
Section 2.1 has been adopted. Therefore, the pile is extended below the
the constitutive parameters but rather to present an ”objective” pre-
pile tip at a horizontal distance of 1 mm from the symmetry axis building
diction quality after a calibration procedure based on laboratory tests
an extended rigid surface (see Fig. 3a). The frictionless contact of this
(like it would be feasible for actual construction projects). The model
surface to the soil body forms the boundary condition for the soil in the
tests have also been simulated with another parameter set determined
vicinity of the symmetry axis. It should be mentioned, that the use of the
for the present test sand in [24] and only slight quantitative differences
present user element in ABAQUS/STANDARD in contact problems is restricted
were observed. Contrary to the recommendations in [15], the material
to a frictionless contact behavior. To be able to impose a more realistic
parameters mR and mT are chosen to be identical. This choice is ad-
contact behavior, a user-defined formulation of the contact conditions
vantageous in dynamic calculations due to the fact that the small-strain-
via the user subroutine UINTER should be implemented, which has been
stiffness of the hypoplastic model becomes equal for different loading
omitted in the present study. However, as will be shown later on, in the
paths which improves the numerical stability. The same material
current simulations the tip resistance of the pile predominates and the
parameters for the intergranular strain have been used for the dynamic
role of the skin friction is not of primary importance.
calculations in the numerical studies [2,17].
The interaction is modeled using a node-to-surface contact for-
Fig. 3c) shows a detail of the FE-mesh near the pile tip. A structured
mulation [6] with the pile surface as master. The direct method avail-
mesh is used near the pile, while an arbitrary meshing is applied to-
able in ABAQUS (see for details in [6]) has been used to strictly enforce a
wards the outer boundaries. As a result of a sensitivity analysis re-
“hard” pressure-overclosure behavior for the normal contact condition.
garding mesh dependency, the size of the finite elements is taken about
A separation in normal direction of the nodes in contact is excluded
4 mm near the pile and 20 mm near to the outer boundary.3 An im-
since physically, a void-filled gap can not form in water saturated
portant issue for the numerical simulations under water-saturated
conditions (at least when cavitation does not occur). The ground sur-
conditions is the dynamic analysis of the two-phase medium consisting
face is taken to be traction-free while the boundary conditions at the
of water and solid grains. The present and widely used computer code
outer boundaries can be seen in Fig. 3a). The boundaries on the left,
ABAQUS/STANDARD does not provide a built-in solution procedure for dy-
right and bottom are defined as impermeable whereas the pore water
namic boundary value problems for fluid-saturated solids with non-zero
pressure is set to zero at the top surface. A K 0 -state is assumed for the
permeability. To overcome this limitation, the axisymmetric u8p 4 user
initial effective soil stresses with K 0 = 0.4 for all three model tests,
defined elements, presented and validated in [2], are used. The soil is
which corresponds approximately to 1 sin P with P being the peak
assumed to be fully saturated (Sr = 1) with a bulk modulus of the pore
friction angle of the soil for medium density, thus neglecting the de-
pendence of K 0 on the initial soil density.2
3
Note, that the first row of elements directly beside and under the pile toe are
2
It should be noticed, that the value of K 0 only slightly differs for the three elongated and rather coarse with a length of about 5.5 mm (corresponds to one-
model tests and its influence on the numerical results was found to be almost sixth of the pile diameter) in order to reduce mesh distortion problems during
negligible. the simulation of pile penetration process.

251
S. Chrisopoulos and J. Vogelsang Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260

Table 1 Table 2
a) Constitutive parameters of Karlsruhe Sand and b) additional constitutive Parameters for the simulation of the three vibratory model tests.
parameters of the extended hypoplastic model with intergranular strain.
Test hsand e0 DR,0 k
a) [m] [ ] [%] [m/s]

c [°] hs [MPa] n ec0 ed0 ei0 VIB-HM−04 0.81 0.6478 71 0.0012

VIB-HM−05 0.81 0.6127 82 0.0010
32.8 5800 0.28 0.866 0.568 0.953 0.13 1.05 VIB-HM−06 0.81 0.6923 53 0.0014

b)

R mR mT r

1 × 10 4 5.0 5.0 0.2 1.0

fluid of Kf = 2.2 GPa . The soil permeability k is density dependent, see

Table 2, according to the experimental measurements published in
[23,24].
The calculation is performed in ABAQUS/STANDARD and consists of three
steps:

• Step I: Geostatic equilibrium step. The pile-vibrator system is fixed

and the gravity load is applied without causing any deformations.
• Step II: The pile-vibrator system is released and penetrates slightly
due to its own weight.
• Step III: A point load simulating the rotation of the eccentric masses
(Fig. 3b) is applied at the vibrator until a penetration depth of the
pile tip of about 500 mm is reached.

The dynamic calculation is carried out with the implicit Hilber-

Hughes-Taylor (HHT) integration scheme [12]. The time increment is
taken to be constant and equal to 10 4 s , which corresponds to 400
increments per cycle of vibration. Additional viscous stresses have been
used for better numerical treatment of the third step, as proposed in [2]. Fig. 4. Evolution of measured and calculated a) mean penetration velocity vm
and b) displacement amplitude uampl at the pile head with penetration depth for
Furthermore, in order to avoid positive (tensile) mean effective stress in
the three model tests. Relative deviation of c) vm and d) uampl between experi-
the soil, the small-stress correction according to [2] has been used. For
mental and numerical results.
a more detailed explanation see Appendix A.
Some important parameters of the simulations are summarized in
Table 2. three model tests. Fig. 4a) shows the mean penetration velocity vm and
Fig. 4b) the pile head displacement amplitude uampl as functions of pile
penetration u y,pile . A schematic explanation of the definitions of vm and
4. Comparison of numerical and experimental results
uampl is provided in Fig. 4a). The continuous lines in the figures depict
the experimental results whereas the results obtained from the nu-
In the experiments as well as in the simulations, a quasi-stationary
merical simulations are illustrated with dashed lines. A further quan-
state of the penetration behavior is rapidly reached. All evaluated va-
titative comparison between the results is provided in Fig. 4c) and d) in
lues like penetration resistance, pile and soil motion and pore water
terms of the relative deviation of measured and calculated penetration
pressures oscillate according to the vibration frequency with only
velocity and displacement amplitude. The relative deviation is defined
slowly varying characteristics parameters. It can thus be concluded that
as follows:
the influence of wave reflections from the outer boundaries seems to be
of minor importance. Therefore, it is admissible to consider individual ([]FEM []EXP )/[]EXP ·100% (4)
cycles of vibration as representative for the whole process.
with []FEM resp. []EXP being the mean penetration velocity or displace-
The subsequent description of the comparison of the results begins
ment amplitude in the simulation (FEM) and in the experiment (EXP).
with an investigation of pile penetration behavior, understood as the
The mean penetration velocity decreases in absolute value with
pile motion and the evolution of penetration resistance. These mea-
depth and with increasing initial relative density (DR,0) which is qua-
surements can also be evaluated in other experiments such as calibra-
litatively well modeled by the simulations. The best agreement is ob-
tion chamber tests, therefore, some parallels are drawn to existing lit-
served for DR,0 = 71% where the relative deviation remains within a
erature studies. The comparison continues with the evolution of pore
margin of ± 20% throughout the whole penetration process. However,
water pressure which is interpreted as an indicator for the volumetric
the agreement is not as good for the other two model tests. For
soil behavior in direct vicinity to the penetrating pile. To conclude the
DR,0 = 82%, the penetration velocity in the simulation is slightly lower
comparison, the evaluation of alternating soil motion around the pile is
than in the corresponding model tests at the beginning of penetration
provided which is one of the highlight features of the experiments.
(rel. deviation about 25% ). With increasing depth, the trend of nu-
merical and experimental curves differ and the simulation over-
4.1. Penetration behavior estimates the penetration velocity by about 50% towards the end of the
test (in absolute value). For DR,0 = 53% during the whole test, the
To determine whether the numerical simulation can satisfactorily measured penetration rate is considerably larger than that calculated in
reproduce the global penetration behavior, the measured and calcu- the simulation. Towards the end of the tests, the trends of mean pe-
lated evolution of pile motion with depth is compared in Fig. 4 for the netration velocity are differing. The experimental results still show a

252
S. Chrisopoulos and J. Vogelsang
Fig. 5. Evolution of related soil reaction force during the pile penetration a)-c) for the three model tests and d)-f) for the FE-simulations (m p = m pile and a p = a y,pile ).
decreasing penetration velocity for large penetration depths whereas
the calculated values reach an asymptotic state with constant velocities.
Seen overall, no clear dependence of the deviation on the relative
density can be observed.
Both, the numerical and experimental results reveal larger pile head
amplitudes than the free amplitude of the pile-vibrator system, see
Fig. 4b). The soil behavior and the boundary conditions seem to trigger
an amplification effect. This interesting observation is discussed in
more detail in Appendix Appendix B. The difference to the free am-
plitude is more pronounced in the numerical simulations. After a few
cycles of vibration all three numerical solutions reach a quasi-stationary
state and the amplitude remains constant with depth. Thus, the simu-
lations cannot model the increasing displacement amplitude with depth
that is observed in two of the model tests. Contrary to the experimental
results, there is only a very small growth of the amplitude with in-
creasing relative density. As seen from Fig. 4d) the maximum deviation
between experimental and numerical results appears for DR,0 = 71%,
where the relative deviation is almost constantly at about 40% during
the penetration. It should be noticed, that the decrease of the measured
displacement amplitude towards the end of model test with DR,0 = 53%,
as explained in [26], is caused by a problematic measurement and is not
the result of the soil response.4
Seen overall, the trend and the alternating part of pile motion are
qualitatively adequately modeled in the simulations within an accep-
table deviation range for a geotechnical purpose. In terms of both, mean
velocity and displacement amplitude, the lack of skin friction in the
numerical model and system friction effects in the experiment (i.e. the
4
The pile motion is inhibited by cables (connection between vibrator and
power station) touching the test container, see [26].
253
Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260
friction between pile resp. soil and the glass front sheet) are considered
to be the primary source of the observed differences.
The evolution of penetration resistance is investigated in Fig. 5 for
three representative cycles of vibration. These cycles have been chosen
at different time periods, in such a manner, that the distance of the pile
to the container bottom is equal and the pile tip locates at the same
vertical level as the pore water pressure transducer PWD1. Due to the
different initial sand heights in the model tests, the penetration depth
differs slightly between the experimental and numerical results. The
penetration resistance is compared using the so-called related soil re-
action force which is the pile head force Fh subtracted by the inertial
force of the pile a p ·m p . This force is related to the cross section of the
pile Ab in order to achieve comparability between full model (simula-
tion) and half model (experiment). Note, that the measured soil reac-
tion force contains skin friction and tip resistance, however, in the
current application the tip resistance is dominant.
Experimental and numerical results reveal a qualitatively similar
penetration mechanism that corresponds well to experimental results
reported in other studies [4,5,24]. During the penetration phase a sig-
nificant soil resistance is mobilized which leads to a strong increase of
penetration resistance. This increase is roughly linear with penetration
without reaching a limit state. Although the simulations achieve to
reproduce the rise of soil resistance within the same order of magni-
tude, they fail to reproduce the very low reloading stiffness at the be-
ginning of each penetration phase, most clearly visible in the test with
the highest density DR,0 = 82% (following the short phase of very high
stiffness just after the reversal point, attributed to the reversal of shaft
friction). Instead, in the simulations, the soil stiffness increases directly
after reloading. Both experimental and numerical results reveal an in-
crease of the maximum penetration resistance with increasing relatively
density. However, this increase is more pronounced in the experimental
S. Chrisopoulos and J. Vogelsang
Fig. 6. Evolution of pore water pressures at two observation points PWD1 and
PWD2 during VIB-HM-05 (DR,0 = 82% ) obtained from a) experimental mea-
surements and b) numerical simulation. c) Position of the pile tip with respect
to the locations of measurement for the instants of time I–IV.
results. In all three simulations, the penetration resistance is under-
estimated. While the deviation is only about 15 ÷ 20% for the two lower
densities, it is significantly larger for the test with DR,0 = 82% (rel. de-
viation 32%). This difference cannot be explained solely by the lack of
skin friction in the simulation. It is also likely that the hypoplastic soil
model does not cover the complete range of densities with the same
quality of constitutive behavior.
On the other hand, the measured and calculated soil reaction force
remains small during upward pile motion. This force results from fric-
tion along the shaft and pore water effects in experiments and from
viscous and pore water effects in the simulations. It should be noted
that, in the experiments, the evaluated soil reaction force is not sig-
nificantly affected by system friction.
4.2. Evolution of pore water pressure
The evolutions of measured and calculated pore water pressures are
compared in Fig. 6, exemplarily for test VIB-HM-05 at the two mea-
surement locations PWD1 and PWD2 , depicted in Fig. 2a). Fig. 6a) and
b) illustrate the experimental and numerical results respectively. The
marked instants of time I-IV in Fig. 6a) and b) correspond to four dif-
ferent positions of the pile tip with respect to the observation points
PWD1 and PWD2 , illustrated in Fig. 6c).
At both observation points, the measured and calculated mean pore
water pressures do not increase significantly during the pile penetration
process, but oscillate around the corresponding hydrostatic pressure
254
Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260
level.5 Changes of mean pore water pressures are limited to about only
0.5 kN/m2 to 1 kN/m2. The pore water pressure amplitudes increase
when the pile tip approaches an observation point, reach their max-
imum values when the pile tip lies at the same vertical level and sub-
sequently decrease gradually when the pile tip is located below. The
pore water pressures are significantly lower than the maximum total
stresses (in absolute value) developed below the pile tip, see Fig. 5. It
can therefore be concluded that liquefaction-like phenomena do not
appear in the process.
Although at PWD2 the measured pore water pressure amplitude is in
good agreement with the numerical simulation, this does not hold for
PWD1. At this observation point, the pore water pressure amplitude
increases significantly in the experiment and its maximum value
amounts approximately three times of that at PWD2 . Qualitatively this
increase can be explained with the larger distance of the lower ob-
servation point PWD1 to the drained boundary of the soil surface
(pw = 0) . This leads to a consolidation deceleration and consequently
greater pore water pressure amplitudes at larger depths. However, al-
though this effect should be incorporated in the simulation, the ob-
served phenomenon is not reproduced numerically which can not be
explained yet. In the simulation, the maximum pore water pressure
amplitudes are almost equal at the two observation points and the
different penetration depths do not seem to have a significant influence.
Similar observations were made by evaluation of the two other
model tests and are therefore not presented here. An increase of pore
water pressure amplitudes with increasing initial soil density was also
observed. This dependence was found to be more pronounced in the
experiment.
In order to improve the understanding of the mechanism of the
evolution of pore water pressures during the pile installation process
and to achieve a more profound comparison between experimental and
numerical results, the evolution of measured and calculated excess pore
water pressure at PWD1 is plotted in Fig. 7 in combination with the pile
displacement for all three tests during the same test sections as in Fig. 5.
The left vertical axis of each image corresponds to the pore water
pressure change and the right vertical axis to the pile displacement. The
vertical dashed lines in the figures indicate the reversal points of pile
motion in the representative cycle. The Figs. 7a) to c) in the first row
present the experimental results while the numerical results are given
in Figs. 7d) to f) in the second row.
As can be observed from Fig. 7, there are significant differences in
the evolution of excess pore water pressure between the three model
tests, while the evolutions in the numerical simulations are very similar
between each other. In the three simulations as well as in the mea-
surements of model tests VIB-HM-05 and VIB-HM-06, the evolutions of
excess pore water pressure clearly contain frequencies corresponding to
the double of the excitation frequency. Although intuitively a rise of
pore water pressure during the pile penetration phase and respectively
a decrease during the upward pile motion could be expected, the ob-
served evolutions are more complex. Each reversal of pile motion is
followed by a short phase of positive excess pore water pressures while
the excess pore water pressures become negative (suction) towards the
end of each phase of pile motion. According to the authors belief this
behavior can only be explained with the volumetric soil behavior. The
vibratory pile motion induces alternating deformations in the sur-
rounding soil that lead to a double alternation of contractant and di-
latant behavior in the soil during each excitation period [26] and thus
to the observed frequency doubling of pore water pressure. The evo-
lution of pore water pressure can therefore be interpreted as an in-
dicator of volumetric soil behavior around the pile.
The phenomenon of frequency doubling has also been observed
5
These hydrostatic levels differ slightly between experiments and simulations
because of a water head of about 5–10 cm above the sand surface in the ex-
periments.
S. Chrisopoulos and J. Vogelsang
Fig. 7. Evolution of pore water pressure changes at PWD1 in three representative cycles of vibration of the model tests: a) VIB-HM-06 (DR,0 = 53%), b) VIB-HM-04
(DR,0 = 71%), c) VIB-HM-05 (DR,0 = 82%). d)-f) corresponding results of numerical simulations.
during vibro-installation of piles [21] and is known to occur in cyclic
triaxial tests on medium dense and dense sand, if the shear deformation
amplitude exceeds a threshold value [27]. The alternation of con-
tractant and dilatant soil behavior around a vibrating pile has also been
observed in other experiments and numerical back-calculations, see
[3,23].
At first sight, the result of experiment VIB-HM-04 is contradictory to
the explanation given above. In this experiment, the pore water pres-
sure oscillates primarily with a frequency corresponding to the dynamic
excitation. However, this behavior can occur in medium dense or dense
sand for particular patterns of pile motion. Notably, when the phase of
upward pile motion is not sufficiently long to mobilize dilatancy in the
soil, it is likely that the subsequent contractive phase at the beginning
of pile penetration is less pronounced or even vanishes. The result is an
alternation of pore water pressures more or less with the same fre-
quency as the excitation. A similar effect can also be observed in triaxial
tests [3,27].
4.3. Soil displacements
The occurring soil displacements are compared based on test VIB-
HM-05. However, similar observations can be made comparing the
experimental and numerical results of the model tests VIB-HM-04 and
VIB-HM-06. Some of these results can be found in [1].
Figs. 8 and 9 compare the measured and calculated incremental
displacement fields near the pile toe for a representative cycle of vi-
bration of test VIB-HM-05, highlighted in Fig. 5c) and f) with the
marked characteristic curve points 1–5. The incremental displacement
fields are divided into four sections: two sections during the penetration
phase (between the marked points 1 ÷ 2 and 2 ÷ 3, Fig. 8) and two
sections during the phase of upward pile motion (between the marked
points 3 ÷ 4 and 4 ÷ 5, Fig. 9). The sections in each phase are split at the
maximum of pore water pressure in the phase (see Fig. 7). Due to the
fact that the displacement increments may differ significantly, a direct
comparison of the displacement fields is not feasible. In order to
achieve better comparability, the incremental soil displacements are
normalized by the value of incremental pile displacement occurring in
255
Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260
the relevant time section. The thick black line in the images denotes the
position of the pile tip in the initial configuration of each section. The
experimental results are depicted in the left part of each image and the
numerical results in the right.
Comparing the images, the following observations can be made:
• Phase 1 ÷ 2:
The numerical results are in good accordance with the experimental
measurements. In both cases, the penetrating pile tip moves the soil
outwards from the symmetry axis and vertically downwards. The
soil displacements concentrate on the direct vicinity of the pile tip
with an affected soil volume forming an approximately spherical
area of about one pile diameter. Compared to the model test, the soil
displacements and the affected area are slightly larger in the nu-
merical simulation.
• Phase 2 ÷ 3:
The displacement patterns reveal a qualitatively different deforma-
tion mechanism compared to the phase 1 ÷ 2. As has been described
in detail in [26], the phase 2 ÷ 3 comprises the significant mobili-
zation of soil resistance under the pile tip and the occurring soil
deformations are similar to those during monotonic pile penetration
[24]. As a result, a deeper and larger zone of soil than in phase 1 ÷ 2
is activated. The simulation can precisely reproduce this me-
chanism.
• Phase 3 ÷ 4 :
The displacement fields in this phase exhibit strong parallels to
those of the previous phase 2 ÷ 3 but with reversed direction of
motion. The soil displacements are directed towards the symmetry
axis following the vertical motion of the pile upwards. It is inter-
esting to notice that the match between numerical and experimental
results is much better considering the horizontal displacements
compared to the vertical displacements. In the simulation, the ver-
tical displacements are overestimated further away from the pile tip.
• Phase 4 ÷ 5:
The numerical and experimental results are very similar to each
other. Both reveal displacement fields with characteristics related to
phase 1 ÷ 2 (opposite direction of motion). The soil moves towards
S. Chrisopoulos and J. Vogelsang
Fig. 8. Comparison of normalized incremental displacement fields for the representative cycle of test VIB-HM-05 (DR,0 = 82%) during the penetration phase. The
horizontal displacements (left) and the vertical ones (right) are shown in the images. The left part of each image depicts the experimental results and the right the
results of the FE simulation.
the pile center line and follows the pile motion upwards. Compared
to phase 3 ÷ 4 the affected soil zone is narrower and concentrates on
the region near to the pile tip.
It has to be noted that most of the observed differences are en-
countered in regions with very small absolute values of soil displace-
ments (about a few hundreds of mm) which are of minor importance.
They may also originate from friction between sand particles and the
observation window in the experiment and thus, are not necessarily
attributed to deficiencies of the numerical simulation.
The displacement fields in Figs. 8 and 9 already prove a very good
agreement between experiments and simulations and are well suited to
illustrate the deformation mechanism in characteristic phases of pile
motion. Nevertheless, for quantitative comparison purposes it is useful
to concentrate on the behavior of selected points or to consider the
displacements along selected paths. Within this scope, Fig. 11 presents a
comparison of the measured and calculated incremental soil displace-
ment magnitudes along a selected path for the representative cycle, as
shown in Fig. 5. The path is located diagonally below the pile tip, see
256
Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260
Fig. 10. Fig. 11a) and b) illustrate the displacement magnitude obtained
from experimental measurements (EXP) and numerical simulation
(FEM) during the two phases of pile penetration (Phase 1 ÷ 2 and
2 ÷ 3), whereas in Fig. 11c) the relative deviation is evaluated. The
same applies for Fig. 11d) to f), but for the two phases of upward pile
motion (Phase 3 ÷ 4 and 4 ÷ 5). Similarly to Figs. 8 and 9, the incre-
mental displacement magnitudes are normalized by the value of in-
cremental pile displacement in vertical direction.
As already seen from Figs. 8 and 9 the soil deformation mechanisms
obtained from experimental evaluation and numerical simulation are
qualitatively very similar for all four phases. Notable differences with
deviations above 10% of the pile displacement are only observed in the
direct vicinity of the pile tip. It has to be kept in mind that the ex-
perimental evaluation of soil displacements in this region is error-prone
due to the displacement discontinuity between pile and soil, see dis-
cussions in [23,24].
In phase 1 ÷ 2 , the simulation overestimates the displacement
magnitude in the direct vicinity of the pile tip with relative deviations
up to 20%. At larger distances from the pile the differences between
S. Chrisopoulos and J. Vogelsang Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260

Fig. 9. Comparison of normalized incremental displacement fields for the representative cycle of test VIB-HM-05 (DR,0 = 82%) during the phase of upward pile
motion. The horizontal displacements (left) and the vertical ones (right) are shown in the images. The left part of each image depicts the experimental results and the
right the results of the FE simulation.

numerical and experimental results become very small and lie within a
few percent of the pile displacement. During the second phase (Phase
2 ÷ 3) the observed differences are almost negligible and the two dis-
placement curves coincide almost perfectly. On the other hand, during
the phase 3 ÷ 4 the numerical solution underestimates the soil dis-
placement magnitudes near the pile tip. The calculated displacement
curve is similar to that in the previous phase and deviates up to 40%
from the experimental measurements. However, during the second
phase of upward pile motion (Phase 3 ÷ 4 ) there is a very good
agreement between numerical and experimental results and the relative
deviation along the path remains below 5% .

5. Concluding remarks

The comparison of the experimental and numerical results have

Fig. 10. Location of the selected path for the illustration of the incremental soil
displacement magnitudes presented in Fig. 11.
shown that the presented numerical method is able to capture the es-
sential aspects of the mechanism of vibratory pile driving. Considering
the complexity of the underlying process of the presented benchmark
study and the fact that it is based on results originating from two
completely different worlds - namely numerical and physical modeling,

257
S. Chrisopoulos and J. Vogelsang
Fig. 11. Comparison of normalized incremental displacements along a selected path below the pile tip (see this path in Fig. 10) for the representative cycle of test
VIB-HM-05 (DR,0 = 82%) : during downward pile motion in a) phase 1 ÷ 2 , b) phase 2 ÷ 3 and c) relative deviation in the two phases. d)–f) analogously for upward pile
motion. FEM: numerical results, EXP: experimental results.
both challenging on their own with various error sources - a very sa-
tisfactory overall similarity is observed. Important conclusions re-
garding important qualitative effects observed in both cases and
quantitative agreements or discrepancies are:
• In the experiments as well as in the simulations a quasi-stationary
state with only slowly varying penetration velocity and displace-
ment amplitude is rapidly reached. These motion quantities are
modeled satisfactorily with deviations mostly in the range of
10–20%. However, in some cases also discrepancies of about
40–50% have been observed.
• The numerical simulations reveal a very realistic pile penetration
behavior though slightly underestimating the penetration resistance
compared to the experiments (deviation below 20%). Only the re-
sults of the model test with the highest density indicate that the soil
model is not perfectly able to cover the whole range of densities
with the same quality (deviation of 32%).
• Experimental and numerical evaluations show a frequency doubling
of the evolution of pore water pressures with comparable pressure
amplitudes. Although the pore water pressure amplitudes are sig-
nificantly lower in the simulations, the results prove that major ef-
fects of soil behavior in the vicinity to the penetrating pile are in-
corporated in the numerical model, namely contractancy/dilatancy
effects. The numerical simulations are qualitatively very similar
between each other while the experiments reveal some qualitative
differences that are not trivial to be captured numerically.
• The evaluation and comparison of incremental soil displacements
around the vibrating pile allow the identification of typical dis-
placement patterns in the soil corresponding to characteristic phases
258
Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260
of pile penetration. The good agreement between the measured and
calculated soil displacements - especially during the penetration
phases - has to be highlighted (deviations mostly within a few per-
cent). These results show that the deformation process in the soil is
realistically modeled in the simulations.
Serious shortcomings of the constitutive model have not been ob-
served. This can be attributed to the well known excellent behavior of
the applied hypoplastic model under monotonic shear deformation and
its reasonably good response for cyclic deformation paths. However, for
vibratory pile driving problems with low penetration rates - as dis-
cussed e.g. in [3] – where cyclic deformation becomes predominant, the
prediction quality is likely to decrease. Such processes might also in-
troduce liquefaction-like phenomena around the pile which in many
cases are not easy to model using hypoplasticity.
In the present study the friction between soil and pile has not been
considered. Therefore, the experimental model was intentionally de-
veloped with a relatively smooth pile minimizing the effects of shaft
friction. In other applications, notably in most practical problems, it
may be essential to model frictional contact even in combination with
water saturated conditions. The development of capable numerical
models is therefore one of the next challenges to be tackled.
Another important issue to be mentioned is that the stress level de-
veloped in the soil below the pile tip is moderate due to the low general
stress level (<1 MN/m2 vertical effective stress). In real scale problems
the stress generated under the pile can be roughly one to two orders of
magnitude higher and other effects like grain crushing may become
important. Therefore it should be envisaged to conduct model tests at
higher stress levels or to use existing data from calibration chamber or
S. Chrisopoulos and J. Vogelsang Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260

centrifuge tests to validate the numerical model according to these. Acknowledgments

The present comparative study with high-quality experiments re-
sults in a first level of model validation that - in the opinion of the
authors - has not been achieved elsewhere so far. It will hopefully serve
as a basis for further numerical simulations using different simulation
techniques in order to establish real benchmarks for the difficult pro-
cess of vibratory pile driving and to improve the prediction quality for
actual engineering problems under natural soil conditions. It is em-
phasized that we do not consider the presented numerical simulations
to be the end of the story and believe that there is still room for further
research and development. In this sense, we highly encourage other
researchers working in the field of pile penetration to use the presented
(or similar) results for objective benchmarks of their calculation
methods in order to evaluate the actual capabilities of each approach.
The study was financed by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft as
part of the Research Unit FOR 1136 ‘Simulation of geotechnical con-
struction processes with holistic consideration of the stress strain soil
behaviour’ as a cooperation of the ‘Central project with experimental
demonstrator’ and Subproject 6 ‘Soil deformations close to retaining
walls due to vibration excitations’. The authors deeply acknowledge
this support over the whole period of their PhD thesis. The authors
would also like to thank all colleagues from the research unit with
special regard to Prof. Theodoros Triantafyllidis, Dr. Gerhard Huber
and Dr. Vladimir Osinov for their guidance, support and confidence.

Appendix A. Small stress correction and viscous stresses

For the numerical solution of the boundary value problem with the hypoplastic model two supplements to the calculation of stresses are required:
a small-stress correction and viscous stresses.
During the pile penetration process tensile deformations may occur in the soil. In the present case of nonzero permeability, the local drainage
allows the pore fluid to flow leading to soil compaction in some regions and extension in others. For tensile deformation hypoplastic materials show
zero stress for finite strain. In this case, the numerical integration of the hypoplasticity equation will yield in positive (tensile) stress which will stop
the computation. In order to overcome this problem the small-stress correction has been introduced in the numerical algorithm, as proposed in [2]: if
the current effective-stress tensor (the diagonal components are taken to be negative for compression) is such that tr /3 > *, where
* = 0.001 kN/m2 is a prescribed small stress, a hydrostatic stress is added to , such that tr( + )/3 = * is guaranteed.
Although the small-stress correction prevents the mean stress from being positive, the stress-strain behavior of granular soils at small stress states
and high deformation rates can lead to the loss of convergence during the implicit time integration. To ensure the convergence of the computation an
additional viscous stress has been introduced
vis = Itr + 2µ (5)
where is the strain rate tensor, I is the second order unit tensor and , µ are viscosity coefficients. The values of , µ in the calculations were taken
between 0.02 and 0.05 kN*s/m2. These values provide convergence and are small enough not to affect the numerical results. Notice that the sum of
, pw I and vis represent the total stress in the numerical calculations.

Appendix B. Discussion on the amplitude of pile motion

The amplitude of pile motion is one of the most important factors describing and controlling the pile penetration process. The equipment and
configuration (pile type, pile and vibrator weight, static moment of the vibrator, vibration frequency) have to be chosen appropriately depending on
the soil type for successful pile driving. In order to estimate the behavior of a pile-vibrator-system, the so-called free amplitude uampl,0 (see Eq. (1)) is
often used as a reference value. Usually, the interaction with the soil (friction and tip resistance) leads to a decrease of actual pile displacement
amplitude compared to the free amplitude. However, both, experiments and simulations presented in this paper, have shown larger amplitudes than
the free amplitude. Therefore, additional simulations have been performed to investigate the influencing factors on the resulting pile motion. Fig. 12
shows results obtained from FE simulations with different vibration frequencies and thus applied dynamic force (referred to as ‘model scale’). The
other input parameters have been chosen according to the simulations discussed above. In comparison to these ‘small’ or ‘model scale’ simulations
also a series of ‘real scale’ simulations has been performed. The ‘real scale’ model is similar to the one for the model tests, but the pile has a diameter
of 0.3 m and is initially placed in a depth of about 5 m.
Fig. 12 shows that for both, ‘model scale’ and ‘real scale’ simulations, the free-amplitude is exceeded for vibration frequencies above 16 Hz. The peak
amplification is observed for frequencies around 20 Hz. In order to investigate under which conditions an amplification of the pile displacement
amplitude occurs, some existing literature data [4,5,16] of field and laboratory tests have been evaluated. The results indicate that under field con-
ditions, the displacement amplitude is to be expected equal to or lower than the free amplitude. However, under some conditions in calibration chamber
tests, larger amplitudes have been observed [4,5] with comparable amplification factors. The frequency of about 20 Hz where peak amplification is
observed is similar to the optimum frequency for efficient pile driving evaluated in [16] and also to the resonance frequency discussed in [14].

Fig. 12. Pile displacement amplitude as a function of the vibration frequency (numerical results).

259
S. Chrisopoulos and J. Vogelsang Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 122 (2019) 248–260

References
piles and sheet piles. Geotechnik 2017;40(2):126–41.
[15] Niemunis A, Herle I. Hypoplastic model for cohesionless soils with elastic strain
[1] Chrisopoulos S. Contributions to the numerical modeling of vibratory pile driving in
range. Mech Cohesive-Frict Mater 1997;2(4):279–99.
saturated soil. Dissertation. vol. 184. Publications of the Institute of Soil Mechanics
[16] O’Neill MW, Vipulanandan C, Wong D. Laboratory modeling of vibro-driven piles. J
and Rock Mechanics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology; 2018.
Geotech Eng 1990;116(8):1190–209.
[2] Chrisopoulos S, Osinov VA, Triantafyllidis T. Dynamic problem for the deformation
[17] Osinov VA, Chrisopoulos S, Triantafyllidis Th. Numerical study of the deformation
of saturated soil in the vicinity of a vibrating pile toe. In: Triantafyllidis T, editor.
of saturated soil in the vicinity of a vibrating pile. Acta Geotech 2013;8:439–46.
Holistic Simulation of Geotechnical Installation Processes. Benchmarks and
[18] Randolph MF, Dolwin J, Beck R. Design of driven piles in sand. Géotechnique
Simulations Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 53–67.
1994;44(3):427–48.
[3] Chrisopoulos S, Vogelsang J, Triantafyllidis Th. FE simulation of model tests on
[19] Rodger AA, Littlejohn G. A study of vibratory pile driving in granular soils.
vibratory pile driving in saturated sand. In: Triantafyllidis T, editor. Holistic
Géotechnique 1980;30(3):269–93.
Simulation of Geotechnical Installation Processes. Theoretical Results and
[20] Taiebat M, Dafalias Y. Sanisand, simple anisotropic sand plasticity model. Int J
Applications Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2017. p. 124–49.
Numer Anal Methods Geomech 2008;32(8):915–48.
[4] Cudmani RO, Huber G, Gudehus G. Zyklische und dynamische Penetration nicht-
[21] Triantafyllidis Th. Neue Erkenntnisse aus Messungen an tiefen Baugruben am
bindiger Böden. In: Proceedings of workshop on Boden unter fast zyklischer
Potsdamer Platz in Berlin. Bautechnik 1998;75(3):133–54.
Beanspruchung, Bochum; 2000.
[22] Viking K. The vibratory pile installation technique. TRANSVIB 2006, Gonin,
[5] Cudmani RO. Statische, alternierende und dynamische Penetration in nichtbindigen
Holeyman et Rocher-Lacoste (ed.), Editions du LCPC, Paris 2006. p. 65–82.
Böden. Dissertation. vol. 152. Publications of the Institute of Soil Mechanics and
[23] Vogelsang J, Huber G, Triantafyllidis Th, Bender T. Interpretation of vibratory pile
Rock Mechanics, University of Karlsruhe; 2001.
penetration based on Digital Image Correlation. In: Triantafyllidis T, editor. Holistic
[6] Dassault Systèmes Simulia Abaqus Analysis User’s Manual. Version 6.14
Simulation of Geotechnical Installation Processes. Benchmarks and Simulations
Documentation (2014).
Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 31–51.
[7] Fuentes W, Triantafyllidis Th. A constitutive model for soils with yield surface in the
[24] Vogelsang J. Untersuchungen zu den Mechanismen der Pfahlrammung.
intergranular strain space. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech
Dissertation. vol. 182. Publications of the Institute of Soil Mechanics and Rock
2015;39(11):1235–54.
Mechanics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology; 2017.
[8] Grabe J, Mahutka K-P. Finite-Elemente-Analyse zur Vibrationsrammung von
[25] Vogelsang, J., Chrisopoulos, S. Experimentelle und numerische Untersuchungen
Pfählen. Bautechnik 2005;82(9):632–40.
zumVibrationsrammen in nichtbindigem Boden. Technical papers of the special
[9] Grabe J, Henke S, Schümann B. Numerical simulation of pile driving in the passive
session”Forum for young geotechnical engineers”, Baugrundtagung in Berlin, vol.
earth pressure zone of excavation support walls. Bautechnik special issue. Geotech.
33; 2014. p.195–202.
Eng 2009:40–5.
[26] Vogelsang J, Huber G, Triantafyllidis Th. Experimental investigation of vibratory
[10] Hamann, T. Zur Modellierung wassergesättigter Böden unter dynamischer
pile driving in saturated sand. In: Triantafyllidis T, editor. Holistic Simulation of
Belastung und großen Bodenverformungen am Beispiel der Pfahleinbringung.
Geotechnical Installation Processes. Theoretical Results and Applications
Dissertation. Publication of the Institute of Geotechnical Engineering and
Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2017. p. 101–23.
Construction Management, TUHH, vol. 34 (2016).
[27] Wichtmann T. Soil behaviour under cyclic loading – experimental observations,
[11] Henke S. Influence of pile installation on adjacent structures. Int J Numer Anal
constitutive description and applications. Habilitation. vol. 181. Publications of the
Methods Geomech 2010;34:1191–210.
Institute of Soil Mechanics and Rock Mechanics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology;
[12] Hilber HM, Hughes TJR, Taylor RL. Improved numerical dissipation for time in-
2016.
tegration algorithms in structural dynamics. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn
[28] Wienbroer H. Umlagerung von Sand durch Wechselbeanspruchung. Dissertation,
1977;5(3):283–92.
Publications of the Institute of Soil Mechanics and Rock Mechanics, Karlsruhe
[13] Mahutka K-P, König F, Grabe J. Numerical modelling of pile jacking, driving and
Institute of Technology, vol. 174 (2011).
vibratory driving. In: Triantafyllidis Th., editor. Numerical modelling of construc-
[29] von Wolffersdorff P-A. A hypoplastic relation for granular materials with a pre-
tion processes in geotechnical engineering for urban environment. London: Taylor
defined limit state surface. Mech Cohesive-Frict Mater 1996;1:251–71.
& Francis; 2006. p. 235–46.
[14] Massarsch KR, Fellenius BH, Bodare A. Fundamentals of the vibratory driving of

260