Far East Journal of Applied Mathematics

© 2020 Pushpa Publishing House, Prayagraj, India

http://www.pphmj.com
http://dx.doi.org/10.17654/
Volume …, Number …, 2020, Pages … ISSN: 0972-0960

MATHEMATICAL AND NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF

THE SOIL-PILE BEHAVIORAL MODEL UNDER
LATERAL LOAD

Ibrahima Mbaye, Mamadou Diop, Malick Ba, Abdoulaye Oustaz Sall

and Ibrahima Danfakha

University of Thies
Senegal
e-mail: imbaye@univ-thies.sn

Abstract

In this paper, we study the existence and uniqueness of the solution of

soil-pile coupled model with imposed boundary conditions.
Furthermore, we use the finite element method to establish the
approximated variational problem and give a good approximation
solution of the problem. Finely, the influence of soil parameters
G p , K p and KW on the structure displacement is studied numerically
by the software MATLAB.

1. Introduction

On soil with poor characteristics, an appropriate design of deep

foundations under various stresses makes it possible to avoid significant
damage to the structures. The foundations deep offshore platforms, wharves,
bridges, industrial facilities, dams and retaining walls are stressed by lateral

Received: March 20, 2020; Accepted: May 2, 2020

2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 65N06, 65N30, 65N12, 74AXX, 74SXX.
Keywords and phrases: soil-pile, variational formulation, Sobolev space, Lax-Milgram, finite
element method, numerical analysis, parameters study.
2 I. Mbaye, M. Diop, M. Ba, A. O. Sall and I. Danfakha
loads [1]. An in-depth study of their behavior is therefore important. Lateral
loading due to the weight of the land, wind, waves and tides, earthquakes,
impacts and vehicle movements can affect the good performance of the
structure. In practice, these structures are dimensioned in order to take up
both axial and lateral forces and moments [1]. Thus, calculation methods in
the ultimate limit state appear, followed by displacement calculation
methods, making it possible to evaluate the response of the piles under lateral
stress (lateral loading or lateral displacement). At present, in practice, the
dimensioning of deep foundations is done on the basis of methods essentially
based on equations of empirical correlations determined from in situ tests
(penetrometer, pressure meter, etc.). In practice, the soil-pile interaction
phenomenon is not rigorously taken into account in the dimensioning of deep
foundations. Thus, to predict the future behavior of civil engineering works,
we cannot allow ourselves today to neglect the effect of relative movements
on the level of contact zones on the behavior of the structure. This means
that, currently, the use of so-called advanced calculation methods may be
more relevant in sizing. It is in this context that today, the study of the
mechanical behavior of piles has already been the subject of several research
works [2-15]. The latter resulted in modeling and calculation methods used
for the dimensioning of such structures. Among these calculation methods
we can cite that of finite differences and that of finite elements. The methods
for analyzing laterally loaded piles are divided into three categories [16]:
- Methods of limit balance analysis [17, 18],
- Methods with reaction coefficients;
- Methods modeling the soil as a continuous medium.
However although complex, the numerical methods by finite elements or
by finite differences make it possible to solve the problems of soil-pile
interaction with more rigor while including the effects of the loadings on the
interface, the inclination of the piles and soil rigidity. It also turns out that the
analytical approach remains more complex and has limits. It is in this context
that we are interested in the numerical calculation of piles under lateral loads,
taking into account the soil-pile interaction. This study essentially aims to
 Mathematical and Numerical Analysis of the Soil-Pile Behavioral … 3

rigorously establish the existence and the uniqueness of the solution of the
mathematical model considered and to make a good approximation of the
solution of the problem posed by the finite element method taking into
account a large number of parameters relating to piles and soils.

2. Governing Equations

In this part it is a question of first presenting the mathematical model of

the soil-pile coupling. We pose Ω = ]0, l [ on open set.

Let the following shearing layer model, find u : Ω → ℜ such that:

u ( 4 ) ( x ) − αu ( 2 ) ( x ) + βu ( x ) = f ( x ) , ∀x ∈ Ω (1)

u (0 ) = 0 (2)

u (1) (0 ) = 0 (3)

u (1) (l ) = 0 (4)

u (3) (l ) =
H
(5)
EpI p

Gp K
Where the constants α = and β = with:
EpI p EpI p

• E p the elasticity modulus of the pious,

• I p the inertia of the pious,

• E p I p the rigidity in flexion,

• H the trenchant effort of the free pious head,

• G p the shear modulus of the soil in horizontal plane,

• K p the soil response modulus,

4 I. Mbaye, M. Diop, M. Ba, A. O. Sall and I. Danfakha

• f ∈ L2 (Ω ) the uniform vertical loading.

Remark 2.1. If α vanishes then we obtain Winkler model [1] defined by

u ( 4 ) ( x ) + β u ( x ) = f ( x ) , ∀x ∈ Ω (6)

Figure 1. Pious of length l.

3. Existence and Uniqueness of the Solution

The variational formulation (VF) is: Find

u ∈ V : a(u , v ) = L(v ) , ∀v ∈ V

Where V = {v ∈ H 2 (Ω ) ; v(0) = v (1) (0 ) = v (1) (l ) = 0} is a Sobolev space

because it’s a closed subspace of the Sobolev space H 2 (Ω ) [19]

( 2 ) ( x ) v ( 2 ) ( x ) dx + α (1) ( x ) v (1) ( x ) dx + β
a(u , v ) = ∫Ω u ∫Ω u ∫ Ω u( x) v( x) dx,
∫ f ( x ) v( x ) dx − E p I p v(l ).
H
L(v ) =

We choose the inner product:

, :V ×V → ℜ

Defined by
 Mathematical and Numerical Analysis of the Soil-Pile Behavioral … 5

( 2 ) ( x ) v ( 2 ) ( x ) dx, ∀(u , v ) ∈ V × V
u, v = ∫u
and the associate norm on V is defined by:

V V = V ( 2 ) L2 (Ω )

Lemma 3.1. Let v ∈ V we have the following results:

(1) v L2 (Ω ) ≤ l 2 v V ∀V ∈ V ,

(2) v(l ) ≤ l l v V ∀v ∈ V ,

(3) v (1) L2 (Ω ) ≤ l v V ∀v ∈ V .

x (1) l (1) (t ) dt (a ). Let

Proof. (1) Let v( x ) = ∫0 v (t ) dt we have v( x ) ≤ ∫0 v
also v (1) ( y ) =
y (2)
∫0 v ( x ) dx we have by Schwarz’s inequality, v (1) ( y ) ≤

l v V and we also have by (a) v( x ) ≤ l l v V .

Then we obtain the result v L2 (Ω ) ≤ l 2 v V .

l (1)
(2) Let v(l ) = ∫0 v (t ) dt we have by Schwarz’s inequality

l (1) (t ) dt ≤
v(l ) ≤ ∫0 v l V (1) L2 (Ω ) according to V (1) ( y )  l V V

We deduce therefore v(l ) ≤ l l v V .

(3) The inequality v (1) ( y ) ≤ l v V yields v (1) L2 (Ω ) ≤ l v V .

We will verify the hypotheses of the Lax-Milgram theorem.

Fist we prove that the bilinear form a is V-elliptic. Since the expression:
6 I. Mbaye, M. Diop, M. Ba, A. O. Sall and I. Danfakha
( 2 ) ( x ))2 dx + α ( 2 ) ( x ))( 2 ) dx + β
a(u , u ) = ∫Ω (u ∫ Ω (u ∫ Ω (u( x ))
2
dx

yields
( 2 ) ( x ))2 dx u 2
a(u , u ) ≥ ∫Ω (u V

There after, we will prove the continuity of the bilinear form a, so, by
Cauchy-Schwartz inequality we have:

a(u , v ) ≤ u V v V + α u (1) L2 (Ω ) v (1) L2 (Ω ) + β u L2 (Ω ) v L2 (Ω )

And also by the results of Lemma 3.1. we obtain:

a(u , v ) ≤ (1αl 2 + βl 4 ) u V v V .

At last, we will prove the continuity of the linear form L so by Cauchy-

Schwartz inequality we have:

H
L (v ) ≤ f L2 (Ω ) v L2 (Ω ) + v(l )
EpI p

And also by the results of lemma 3.1. we obtain

⎛ H ⎞
L(v ) ≤ ⎜⎜ l 2 f L2 (Ω ) + l l ⎟ v V.
⎝ E p I p ⎟⎠

Finally, the hypotheses of the Lax-Milgram theorem are verified

therefore the boundary value problem have and unique solution [19].

4. Approximation by Finite Element Method

Let 0 < x0 < x1 < L < x N h +1 = l be a partition of Ω = ]0, l [ and

l
h= . We denote xi = x0 + ih the nodes for all i ∈ {0, 1, L, N h + 1},
Nh + 1
x0 = 0 and x N h +1 = l. Let the following approximate variational problem

(AVP):
 Mathematical and Numerical Analysis of the Soil-Pile Behavioral … 7

Find u h ∈ Vh such that a(u h , vh ) = L(vh ) , ∀vh ∈ Vh

Where, Vh = {vh ∈ Vh ; vh (0) = vh(1) (0) = vh(1) (l ) = 0}, is a subset of V and

Vh = {vh ∈ C1 (Ω ) ; vh | ]xi , xi +1[ ∈ P3 }, the elements of Vh are totally

defined by w(i ) ( x j ) = δij and ( w(i ) )′ ( x j ) = 0 and ( z (i ) )′ ( x j ) = δij and

z (i ) ( x j ) = 0 for all w(i ) ∈ Vh and z (i ) ∈ Vh for all i ∈ {0, 1, L , N h + 1}

and the dimension of the under space Vh is equal to 2( N h + 2 ) [20].

Lemma 4.1. B = {( w(i ) , z (i ) ) : 1 ≤ i ≤ N h + 1; 1 ≤ j ≤ N h } is a basis of

Vh .

Proof. The set ( w(i ) , z (i ) ) is linearly independent since

N h +1 Nh
∑ u hi w(i ) ( x ) + ∑ (uhi )′ z (i ) ( x ) = 0 (7)
i =1 i =1

Implies
N h +1 Nh
∑ u hi w(i ) ( x j ) + ∑ (uhi )′ z (i ) ( x j ) = 0 (8)
i =1 i =1

Thus, u hi = 0, for all i ∈ {1, K , N h + 1} by the definition of w(i ) and

by
N h +1 Nh
∑ u hi ( w(i ) )′ ( x j ) + ∑ (uhi )′ ( z (i ) )′ ( x j ) = 0 (9)
i =1 i =1

Therefore, (u h(i ) )′ = 0, for all i ∈ {1, L , N h } by the definition of z (i ) .

The set ( w(i ) , z (i ) ) spans Vh . Given u h ∈ Vh . Let u ∈ V so that

8 I. Mbaye, M. Diop, M. Ba, A. O. Sall and I. Danfakha
N h +1 Nh
u( x ) = ∑ u hi w(i ) ( x ) + ∑ (uhi )′ z (i ) ( x) (10)
i =1 i =1

For each xi we obtain u ( xi ) = u hi and u ′( xi ) = (u hi )′ therefore u = u h

and finally the set ( w(i ) , z ( j ) ) spans Vh . The dimension of Vh is card ( B ) =

2 N h + 1 and for all u h ∈ Vh we have

Nh Nh
uh ( x ) = ∑ u hi w(i ) ( x ) + ∑ (uhi )′ z (i ) ( x) where uhi and (uhi )′ are the degrees
i =1 i =1
of freedom.

Preposition 4.1. u h ∈ Vh is the solution of the approximate variational

problem if and only if X = (u hi , (u hj )′ ){1≤ i ≤ N +1; i ≤ j ≤ N } will be the

h h
solution of the linear system AX = b with A ∈ M 2 N h +1 (ℜ ) and

b ∈ M 2 N h +1; 1 (ℜ ).

Proof. Let
N h +1 Nh
uh ( x ) = ∑ u hi w(i ) ( x ) + ∑ (uhi )′ z (i ) ( x ) (11)
i =1 i =1

The solution of the approximate variational problem. Since, a(u h , vh ) =

L(vh ) , ∀vh ∈ Vh , we have for all w(i ) and z (i ) :

a(u h , vh ) = L( w( j ) ) , ∀j ∈ {1, 2, L , N h + 1} (12)

a(u h , z h ) = L( z ( j ) ) , ∀j ∈ {1, 2, L , N h } (13)

By the bilinear form a the equations (12) and (13) become

N h +1 Nh
∑ u hi a( w(i ) , w )+j
∑ (uhi )′ a( z (i ) , w( j ) )
i =1 i =1
 Mathematical and Numerical Analysis of the Soil-Pile Behavioral … 9

= L( w( j ) ) , ∀j ∈ {1, 2, L , N h + 1} (14)

N h +1 Nh
∑ u hi a( w(i ) , z )+
j
∑ (uhi )′ a( z (i ) , z ( j ) )
i =1 i =1

= L( z ( j ) ) , ∀j ∈ {1, 2, L , N h } (15)

⎛ A11 A12 ⎞⎟ ⎛ b1 ⎞ ⎛ 1⎞
We pose: A = ⎜⎜ 21 , B = ⎜ ⎟ and X = ⎜ X ⎟ with,
A22 ⎟⎠ ⎜ b2 ⎟ ⎜X2⎟
⎝A ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠

X 1 = (u hi )1≤ i ≤ N +1; X 2 = ((u hi )′ )1≤ i ≤ N ;

h h

b1 = ( L( w( j ) )1≤ i ≤ N +1; b 2 = ( L( z ( j ) ))1≤ j ≤ N ;

h h

A11 = a( w(i ) , w( j ) )1≤ i ≤ N +1; 1≤ j ≤ N +1;

h h

A12 = a( z (i ) , w( j ) )1≤ i ≤ N +1; 1≤ j ≤ N ;

h h

A21 = a( w(i ) , z ( j ) )1≤ i ≤ N ; 1≤ j ≤ N +1;

h h

A22 = a( z (i ) , z ( j ) )1≤ i ≤ N ; 1≤ j ≤ N
h h

Therefore the equations (14) and (15) will be equivalent to the following
linear system AX = b.

Preposition 4.2 (Error estimates). Let u the solution of the variational

problem (VP) and u h that approximate variational problem (AVP). We

suppose that f ∈ C 0 (Ω ) such that C 4 (Ω ). Then it exists a constant C ≥ 0

independent of h and u such that:

u − u V ≤ Ch 2 .

Proof. Let u h ∈ P3 the interpolant of u, i.e the function of Vh such that

u h ( xi ) = u ( xi ) , u h ( xi +1 ) = u (u x +1 ) , (u h )′ ( xi ) = (u )′ ( xi ) and (u h )′ ( xi +1 ) =
10 I. Mbaye, M. Diop, M. Ba, A. O. Sall and I. Danfakha
(u )′ ( xi +1 ). We have:

Nh
∑ ∫ xi
xi +1
u− u h V2 = u ′′ − u ′′ 22 = u ′′ − u ′′ 2 ( x ) dx (16)
L (Ω )
i =0

Thus w = u − u h on each ]xi , xi +1[, then w ∈ C 4 (]xi , xi +1[) and by

construction we obtain: w( xi ) = w( xi +1 ) = w′( xi ) = w′( xi +1 ) = 0. And by
Rolle’s theorem w′′(c ) = 0 for some c satisfying c ∈ ]xi , xi +1[. Thus, on the
x ( 3)
interval ]xi , xi +1[ : w′′( x ) − ∫c w (t ) dt , so that :

w′′( x ) ≤ h sup w(3) (t ) .

t∈Ω

Now, on the interval ]xi , xi +1[, we define u h by:

u h ( x ) = α 3 ( x − xi )3 + α 2 ( x − xi )2 + α1 ( x − xi ) + α 0 , (17)

With α 0 = u ( xi ) , α1 = u ′( xi ) ,

1
α2 = [3u ( xi +1 ) − 3(u ′( xi ) h + u ( xi )) − hu ′( xi +1 ) + hu ′( xi )]
h2
and

1
α3 = [− 2(u ( xi +1 ) − u ( xi )) + hu ′( xi +1 ) + hu ′( xi )]
h3

u (3) ( xi )
By Taylor’s expansion of u around xi , we obtain: α 3 = + ri
6
− h (4) 1
u (θi ) + u ( 4 ) (θi2 ) , with (θ1i , θi2 ) ∈ ]xi ,
h
where the remnant ri =
12 6

sup u ( 4 ) (t ) . This
1
xi +1[×] xi , xi +1[. We have ri ≤ Kh where K =
4
calculus yields for all t ∈ ]xi , xi +1[,
 Mathematical and Numerical Analysis of the Soil-Pile Behavioral … 11

w(3) (t ) = u (3) (t ) − u (3) ( xi ) − ri . (23)

Again, by Taylor’s expansion, we obtain: sup w(3) (t ) ≤ ( K + 1) h after

t∈Ω

all is said and done: w′′ 22 ≤ ( K + 1)2 h 5 and by the equality (21) we
L (Ω )

have the following result u − u h V2 ≤ ( K + 1)2 ( N h + 1) h5 ≤ l ( K + 1)2 h 4 .

Therefore we have the result: u − u h V2 ≤ l ( K + 1) h 2 .

5. Computation of Approximate Solution

For each i ∈ {1, L , N h + 1} define w(i ) by the requirement that

⎧⎪w(i ) ( x j ) = δij
⎨ (i )
⎪⎩( w )′ ( x j ) = 0

And for each i ∈ {1, L , N h } define z (i ) by the requirement that

⎧⎪( z (i ) )′ ( x j ) = δij
⎨ (i )
⎪⎩ z ( x j ) = 0

We compute the basis functions:

⎧⎪ 1 ( x − x ) ( x − x )2 , on ]x0 , xi [
z (0 ) ( x ) = ⎨ h 2 0 1
⎪⎩0, elsewhere

⎧⎪ 1 ( x − x )2 ( x − x ]x N h , x N h +1[
z ( N h +1) ( x ) = ⎨ h 2 Nh N h +1 ) , on
⎪⎩0, elsewhere
12 I. Mbaye, M. Diop, M. Ba, A. O. Sall and I. Danfakha

⎧ 1 ( x − x ) ( x − x )2 , on ]xi −1, xi [
⎪ h2 i i +1
⎪⎪ 1
z (i ) = ⎨ ( x − xi ) ( x − xi +1 )2 , on ]xi , xi +1[
2
⎪h
⎪0, elsewhere
⎪⎩

⎧ 2 ( x − x )2 ⎛ x + x0 + x1 ⎞ , on ]x0 , x1[
⎪ 1 ⎜ ⎟
w( 0 ) ( x ) = ⎨ h 3 ⎝ 2 ⎠
⎪⎩0, elsewhere

⎧⎪ − 2 ( x − x )2 ⎛ x − x h⎞
]x N h , x N h +1[
w( N h +1) ( x ) = ⎨ h 3 Nh ⎜ N h +1 − 2 ⎟ , no
⎝ ⎠
⎪⎩0, elsewhere

⎧ − 2 ( x − x )2 ⎛ x − x − h ⎞ , on ]x , x [
⎪ h3 i −1 ⎜ i ⎟ i −1 i
⎝ 2⎠
⎪⎪ 2
w(i ) ( x ) = ⎨ ( x − xi +1 )2 ⎛⎜ x − xi −1 − ⎞⎟ , on ]xi , xi +1[
h
⎪h
3 ⎝ 2⎠
⎪0, elsewhere
⎩⎪

And also we have the coefficients of the matrix A defined by:

⎧a11 = 24 − α 12 + β 26h , ∀i ∈ {1, 2, L , N }

⎪ ii h3 5h 35 h
⎪ 12 6 13h
⎪a11 = −α +β
A11 = ⎨ N h +1, N h +1 h 3 5h 35
⎪ 11 − 12 6 9h
⎪aij = 3 + α 5h + β 70 , if i − j = 1, ∀(i, j ) ∈ {1, 2, L , N h + 1}
2

⎪ h
⎩0, elsewhere
 Mathematical and Numerical Analysis of the Soil-Pile Behavioral … 13
⎧ 12 6 1 13h 2
⎪aij = 3 − α 10 + β 420 , if i − j =
⎪ h
⎪ − 1, ∀(i, j ) ∈ {1, 2, L , N h + 1} × {1, 2, L , N h }
⎪
A12 = ⎨ 12 − 6 1 13h 2
a
⎪ ij = + α + β , if i
⎪ h2 10 420
⎪ − j = 1, ∀(i, j ) ∈ {1, 2, L , N h + 1} × {1, 2, L , N h }
⎪⎩0, elsewhere

⎧ 21 6 1 13h 2
⎪aij = − 3 + α 10 + β 420 , if i − j =
⎪ h
⎪ − 1, ∀(i, j ) ∈ {1, 2, L , N h } × {1, 2, L , N h + 1},
21 ⎪
A = ⎨ 21 6 1 13h 2
⎪ aij = − α − β , if i
⎪ h2 10 420
⎪ − j = 1, ∀(i, j ) ∈ {1, 2, L , N h } × {1, 2, L , N h + 1},
⎪⎩0, elsewhere

⎧ 22 8 4h 12h 3
⎪aii = h − α 15 + β 105 , ∀i ∈ {1, 2, L , N h },
⎪
22 ⎪ 22 2 h h3
A = ⎨aij = + α + β , if i − j = 1, ∀(i, j ) ∈ {1, 2, L , N h }12 ,
h
⎪0, elsewhere30 140
⎪
⎪
⎩

By using trapezoidal rule formula, we obtain:

⎧bi1 = h × f ( xi ) , ∀i ∈ {1, 2, K , N h },
⎪⎪ h H
b1 = ⎨b1N +1 = × f ( x N h +1 ) −
⎪ h 2 E pI p
⎪⎩0, elsewhere

And b 2 = {bi2 = 0, ∀i ∈ {1, 2, K , N h }}

Remark 1.5. A21 = ( A12 )t .

14 I. Mbaye, M. Diop, M. Ba, A. O. Sall and I. Danfakha
6. Numerical Simulations

In this part we do the parametric study by numerical simulation with

MATLAB software and we also interpret and discuss the results obtained.
q l
The simulation parameters [21] are as follow: f ( x ) = ,h= ,
EpI p Nh + 1
N h = 100.

Table 1. Parameters of simulation

Pasternak Model Winkler Model

Data E p I p = 5300MN .m 2 m; l = 20m; q = 200kN m; H = 5 × 10−4

Parameters of soil
G p = 315000kN m; K p = 1748kN m 2 K w = 1748kN m3
models

Figure 2. Behavior of the Pasternak and Winkler model.

The norm of the vector displacement u in the case of Pasternak model is:
u ∞ = 0.0493 and the norm of the vector displacement u in the case of
Winkler model is: u ∞ = 0.1212. We can deduce quantitatively that the
displacement in the case of Pasternak model is less important than Winkler.
This fact is due to the shear layer in the Pasternak model.

Table 2. Parameters of comparison

l (m ) E p I p ( MN .m2 m ) K p (kN m 2 ) G p ( kN m3 ) KW ( kN m3 )
 Mathematical and Numerical Analysis of the Soil-Pile Behavioral … 15
20 3000 100 37393 294
20 3000 552 186966 1470
20 3000 1103 373933 2940
40 3000 87 63059 192
40 3000 437 315296 958
40 3000 874 630591 1916

Figure 3. Behavior of the Pasternak model with respect to several values of

parameters G p , K p for l = 20m.

Figure 4. Behavior of the Pasternak model with respect to several values of

parameters G p , K p for l = 40m.
16 I. Mbaye, M. Diop, M. Ba, A. O. Sall and I. Danfakha

Figure 5. Behavior of the Winkler model with respect to several values of

parameter KW for l = 20m.

Figure 6. Behavior of the Winkler model with respect to several values of

parameter KW for l = 40m.

7. Results and Discussions

We observe from Figure 3. And Figure 4. that the deformation of the

pious depends on soil parameters. Then, if G p and K p increase together the
 Mathematical and Numerical Analysis of the Soil-Pile Behavioral … 17
deformation of structure will decrease. In Figure 5. And Figure 6 we observe
also the same behavior, if KW increases, the deformation of the pious will
decrease. Finally, we can keep that in order to reduce the deformation of the
pious under lateral load and a trenchant effort on the free head, we must take
into account soil parameters [22-23]. In Figure 2. We observe that the
displacement of pious modelling by Pasternak is less important than the
displacement modelling by Winkler. This can be explained by the fact that
the Pasternak model takes into account the shear layer.

8. Conclusion

In this work, we use on the one hand mathematical analysis results to

prove the existence and uniqueness of the solution and on the other hand we
use finite element method to determine an approximate solution to boundary
value problems. Moreover, numerical simulations show us the pious
deformation and the influence of soil parameters on the structure. We
observe that when soil parameters G p , K p increase then the displacement of
pious decrease and also when the parameter KW in Winkler model increase
then the displacement of pious decrease. In the further paper, we will extend
the work to a two-dimension Pasternak model and a two-dimension Winkler
model. This study may also be extend to a dynamic shearing layer model.
Finally, the authors believe that the present investigations could help
engineers and researchers in studying and designing shell structure and a
more suitable foundation model for obtaining the optimal dynamic response.

References

[1] L. Hazzar, Analyse numérique de la réponse des pieux sous sollicitations latérales,
thèse de doctorat, Université de Sherbrooke (Québec) Canada, (2014) pp. 192.
[2] D. Gouvenot, Essais de chargement de flambement de pieux aiguilles, Annales
I.T.B.T.P., supplément au n° 334, série Sols et Fondations 124 (1975) 25-39.
[3] T. Imai, Method of calculation of transverse behavior of pile based on
measurements results by L T Chapter 4 of OYO Technical Note TN-13, Studies of
18 I. Mbaye, M. Diop, M. Ba, A. O. Sall and I. Danfakha
subgrade reaction coefficient K-value of soil ground, OYO Corporation, Tokyo,
Japan, (1976).
[4] C. P. Pantelides, Stability of columns on biparametric foundations, Computers &
Structures 42(1) (1990), 21-29.
[5] J. Lee, P. Monica et S. Rodrigo, Experimental investigation of the combined load
response of model piles driven in sand, Geotechnical Testing Journal 34(6)
(2011), 653-667.
[6] O. A. Sall, M. Ba, D. Sarr et al., Prise en compte de l’interaction sol-structure dans
l’étude du comportement des pieux sous charge axiale, Afrique Science 13(6)
(2017), 435-445.
http://www.afriquescience.info
[7] M. N. Hussien, T. Tobita, S. Iai and K. M. Rollins, Soil-pile separation effect on
the performance of a pile group under static and dynamic lateral load, Canadian
Geotechnical Journal 47(11) (2010), 1234-1246.
[8] M. N. Hussien, T. Tobita, S. Iai and K. M. Rollins, Vertical load effect on the
lateral pile group resistance in sand response, An International Journal of
Geomech. Geoeng. 7(4) ( 2012), 263-282.
[9] M. N. Hussien, T. Tobita, S. Iai and M. Karray, On the influence of vertical loads
on the lateral response of pile foundation, Computers and Geotechnics Journal 55
(2014), 392-403.
[10] L. Hazzar, M. Karray, M. Bouassida and M. N Hussien, Ultimate lateral resistance
of piles in cohesive soil, Deep Foundations Institute Journal 7(1) (2013),
44-52.328.
[11] L. Hazzar, M. Karray, M. N. Hussien and M. Bouassida, Three dimensional
modeling of a pile group under static lateral loading using finite differences
method, Geo Montreal 2013, Montréal, Québec, September 29 -October 3, (2013)
pp. 201.
[12] E. A. Ellis, I. K. Durrani and D. J. Reddish, Numerical modeling of discrete pile
rows for slope stability and generic guidance for design, Geotechnique 60(3)
(2010), 185-195.
[13] S. Kanagasabai, Three Dimensional Numerical Modeling of Rows of Discrete
Piles used to Stabilise Large Landslides, Thesis for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy, University of Southampton (2010) pp. 217.
[14] J. Lee, P. Monica and S. Rodrigo, Experimental investigation of the combined
load response of model piles driven in sand, Geotechnical Testing Journal 34(6)
 Mathematical and Numerical Analysis of the Soil-Pile Behavioral … 19
(2011), 653-667.
[15] B. C. Richmond, MCIF: Manuel Canadien de l’Ingénierie des Fondations, (4eÉd.),
Canadian Geotechnical Society (2013), pp. 558.
[16] C. C. Fan and J. H. Long, Assessment of existing methods for predicting soil
response of laterally loaded piles in sand, Computers and Geotechnics 32 (2005),
274-289.
[17] B. B. Broms, Lateral resistance of piles in cohesive soils, Journal of Soil Mech.
Found. Div. 90(2) (1964), 27-64.
[18] B. B. Broms, Lateral resistance of piles in cohesionless soils, Journal of Soil
Mech. Found. Div. 90(SM3) (1964), 123-156.
[19] Haim Brezis, Analye Fonctionnelle Théorie et applications, 2° tirage, Masson
Paris, (1983).
[20] Brigitte Lucquin, Equation aux dérivées partielles et leurs applications, Ellipses.
[21] Bakri Basmaji, Développement d'un modèle analytique d'interaction sol-structure
pour l’étude du comportement mécanique des structures soumises à un
mouvement de terrain: influence des déformations de cisaillement et de la
plasticité, Matériaux et structures en mécanique [physics.cla ss-ph], Université de
Lorraine, Français, NNT: 2016LORR0290, tel-01541448, (2016).
[22] B. A. Malick, Oustasse Abdoulaye Sall, Ibrahima Mbaye, Interaction Sol-pieu
appliquée au calcul numérique du modèle comportemental des pieux sous charge
latérale, Afrique Science14(4) (2018), 313-328.
[23] Damjan Banic, Michele Bacciocchi, Francesco Tornabene, and Antonio J. M.
Ferreira, Influence of Winkler-Pasternak Foundation on the Vibrational Behavior
of Plates and Shells Reinforced by Agglomerated Carbon Nanotubes, Applied
Sciences (2017).
 Proof read by: …………………….…………
Paper No. PPH-2003043-AM
Copyright transferred to the Pushpa
Publishing House
Kindly return the proof after
correction to: Signature: .………………………..…...……

The Publication Manager Date: ……..………………………………….

Pushpa Publishing House
Vijaya Niwas
198, Mumfordganj
Prayagraj-211002 (India)
along with the print charges*.
*Invoice attached
Tel: ……..……………………….……………
e-mail: ………..……………..………………
Number of additional reprints required
………………………………………….……
Cost of a set of 25 copies of additional
reprints @ U.S. Dollars 15.00 per page.
(25 copies of reprints are provided to the
corresponding author ex-gratis)