KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering (2012) 16(4):562-570 Geotechnical Engineering

DOI 10.1007/s12205-012-1354-6
www.springer.com/12205

Numerical Analyses of Piles Subjected to Lateral Soil Movement

Mehmet Rifat Kahyaoglu*, Gökhan Imançli**, Okan Önal***, and Arif S. Kayalar****
Received October 20, 2010/Revised May 26, 2011/Accepted August 12, 2011

···································································································································································································································

Abstract

Load transfer to piles due to the relative movement between the piles and the moving soil is a fairly complex soil-pile interaction
problem. Different analysis methods are available in literature to estimate the loads on piles. However, the predicted loads on the
piles calculated by these methods vary due to insufficient representation of loading conditions and ignoring relative pile and soil
movement. In this paper, three dimensional finite element analyses have been performed to evaluate the load transfer mechanism of
free head passive pile groups in purely cohesionless soils. Numerical analyses are classified to address two most common passive
pile cases, namely piles adjacent to embankments and piles used for slope stabilization. The effects of relative pile and soil
displacement, pile spacing and pile arrangement on soil arching are investigated by numerical simulations. It is observed that load
transfer decreases parallel to a decrease in pile spacing for piles adjacent to embankments contrary to piles used for slope
stabilization.
Keywords: passive piles, cohesionless soil, soil arching, pile spacing, pile arrangement
···································································································································································································································

1. Introduction surcharging. The effect of soil-pile interaction was accounted for

The piles may be broadly classified as active or passive piles
depending on how the lateral loads are transmitted to the piles.
Active piles are subjected to a horizontal load at the head and
transmit this load to the soil along their lengths. On the other
hand, passive piles are loaded by lateral movement of surrounding
soil, therefore, soil movement is the cause and pile deflection is
the effect in this case. Typical examples of passive piles are piles
supporting bridge abutments adjacent to approach embankments
and piles used to stabilize slopes.
The settlement of embankments can cause significant vertical
and horizontal movements of the soil adjacent to the embankment.
Piles supporting the bridge abutments may therefore be subjected
to axial and lateral loads which are induced by these soil move-
ments. Fig. 1 shows a schematic section through such a structure,
illustrating the forms of interaction which tend to increase lateral
structural loading and displacement.
Earlier works by DeBeer and Wallays (1972) and Begemann
and DeLeeuw (1972) where nineteen field observations and an
assumption of soil elasticity were made, Oteo (1977) derived
design charts for calculating the maximum lateral displacement
and bending moment in piles in soft soil subjected to adjacent
in a basic way. Also, Baguelin et al. (1977)’s load-transfer
relationship expressed by lateral load on the pile based on the
relative pile-soil lateral displacement and stiffness properties of
the soil was reinterpreted by Springman (1989) and Springman
and Bolton (1990). It was subsequently used by Stewart et al.
(1993) to describe pile-soil interaction in plane strain analyses of
undrained passive pile loading. The work described above has
been extended by Bransby (1995), using results from FEM
analyses. Poulos (1996) reviewed some available methods for
design of piles through embankment and presented comparison
between these methods for maximum bending moment in the
piles, lateral pile head deflection, maximum axial force in pile
and axial pile head settlement. He concludes that none of the
previously available methods appears able to provide a consistent
means of estimating the lateral response of piled embankment.
The method by Kelesoglu and Cinicioglu (2010) is capable of
producing soil stiffness degradation curves, which are the outcome
of real field behavior through free-field measurements. The
proposed method was described by applying the procedure on
Cubzac-les-Ponts test embankment case at which free-field
response and soil investigation data was available. The same
problem was also solved with Plaxis 3D to provide comparisons

*Graduate Research Assistant, Mugla University, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Kötekli Campus, Kötekli-Mugla 48000, Turkey (Corresponding Author, E-
mail: rifat.kahyaoglu@deu.edu.tr)
**Graduate Research Assistant, Dokuz Eylul University, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Kaynaklar Yerleskesi, Buca-Izmir 35160, Turkey (E-mail: gokhan.
imancli@deu.edu.tr)
***Graduate Research Assistant, Dokuz Eylul University, Civil Engineering Department, Kaynaklar Yerleskesi, Buca-Izmir 35160, Turkey (E-mail: okan.
onal@deu.edu.tr)
****Professor, Dokuz Eylul University, Civil Engineering Department, Kaynaklar Yerleskesi, Buca-Izmir 35160, Turkey (E-mail: arif.kayalar@deu.edu.tr)

− 562 −
 Numerical Analyses of Piles Subjected to Lateral Soil Movement
Fig. 1. Finite Number of Passive Piles Adjacent to Embankments
with the results of the application of the method.
The slip surface of landslides is substantially weaker (softer)
than the materials above or below it. This zone has been referred
to as the discrete shear zone (Poulos, 1995). One way to improve
the resistance at the weak shear zone is employing piles. Reinforced
cylindrical piles that pass through the landslide are anchored at
their lower end instable soil or bedrock. The pile anchorage
provides lateral bearing resistance near the base of the moving
ground. Design of the reinforcement steel is controlled by the
maximum bending moment developed in the pile. Poulos (1995)
reported that the prediction of soil lateral movements requires a
knowledge of the distribution of lateral soil modulus and limiting
lateral pile-soil pressure with depth, and the free-field horizontal
soil movements. For problems involving slope instability, a distri-
bution of free-field soil movements such as that shown in Fig. 2
appears to be appropriate.
Some of the successful applications of such techniques have
been reported by Esu and D’Elia (1974), Ito and Matsui (1975),
DeBeer and Carpentier (1977), Sommer (1977), Wang et al.
Fig. 2. Infinite Number of Passive Piles used for Slope Stabilization
Vol. 16, No. 4 / May 2012 − 563 −
(1979), Ito et al. (1982), Nethero (1982), Morgenstern (1982),
Gudehus and Schwarz (1985), Reese et al. (1992) and Rollins
and Rollins (1992). For example, Rowe and Poulos (1979)
developed a two-dimensional finite element approach that allowed
for the three dimensional effect of soil flowing through rows of
piles. A three dimensional finite element approach has been
developed by Hassiotis and Chameau (1984) for the analysis of
stabilization of surcharged slope with drilled piles. Chow (1996)
presented an approach to analysis piles for slope stabilization,
where piles are modeled using the modulus of subgrade reaction
and the pile-soil-pile interaction considered using the theory of
elasticity. Jeong et al. (2003) and Won et al. (2005) presented a
numerical comparison of predictions by limit equilibrium analysis
and 3D numerical analysis for a slope-pile system to investigate
the response of the pile groups by using both coupled and un-
coupled analysis. Coupled analyses were performed for stabiliz-
ing piles in a slope, in which the pile response and the slope stability
are considered simultaneously and subsequently the factors of
safety are compared to a solution for a homogeneous slope using
an uncoupled analysis (limit equilibrium analysis). It has been
found that the factor of safety in slope is much more conservative
for an uncoupled analysis than for a coupled analysis based on
three-dimensional finite element analysis. Laudeman and Chang
(2004) discussed and tabulated a summary of available design
methods based on a simple slope configuration analyzed by using
finite element method. Based on this analysis, it is concluded that
the finite element method appears to be effective to analyze this
difficult problem.
In this study, various numerical simulations have been per-
formed with the aid of Finite Element Method (FEM) in order to
evaluate the loads acting on passive pile groups and to determine
the behavior of soil around piles due to the soil arching mecha-
nism. Numerical analyses are classified to address two most com-
mon passive pile cases, namely piles adjacent to embankments
and piles used for slope stabilization. In order to examine the
problem associated with passive piles adjacent to embankments,
a finite number of free head model piles were set in a box over a
 Mehmet Rifat Kahyaoglu, Gökhan Imançli, Okan Önal, and Arif S. Kayalar

weak soil layer. The box was forced by applying horizontal
external load to make uniform horizontal soil displacement as in
the previous experimental studies (Matsui et al., 1982; Cox et al.,
1983; Chen et al., 1997; Pan et al., 2000). As the second passive
pile case, the slope stabilizing piles were simulated with a slice
from an infinitely long row of piles. Only plan view of box was
changed while the other properties of the simulation established
for piles adjacent to embankments remained constant. The para-
metric studies were carried out to determine the effects of the
ratio of pile spacing (s) to pile diameter (d) and the angle of inter-
nal friction on the load transfer behavior in two different passive
pile cases. The loads acting on the piles and group behavior of
the piles were determined by making use of the numerical
results. Both objectives for two most common passive pile cases
have not been dealt together in the existing literature. Besides,
contribution to the literature has been made by investigating the
effect of pile arrangement in the moving soil area on load
transfer mechanism.
2. Finite Element Modeling
The finite element analysis program, PLAXIS 3D Foundation
(Version 1.5) (Brinkgreve and Broere, 2006) was used for the
analysis of load transfer process between moving soil and piles
and the behavior of soil around free head piles. Firstly, the pro-
blem associated with the displacement effects of embankments
sliding on a weak soil on passive piles was examined with a
finite number of piles. Secondly, the slope stabilizing pile case
was simulated with a slice from an infinitely long row of piles.
The parametric studies have been carried out to determine the
effects of the ratio of pile spacing to pile diameter (s/d) and the
angle of internal friction on the load transfer behavior in two
different passive pile cases.
The model used in this study consists of eleven main elements
namely, large box, cohesionless soil, weak soil, concrete block,
three model piles, and four springs. The dimensions and material
properties used in the model simulation are given in Table 1.
A common problem in a model simulation may be insufficient
ratio between the minimum dimension of an embedded structure
(e.g. pile diameter, d) and the soil particle size. With some
exceptions, it is generally accepted that a minimum structural
dimension of 20 to 30 times the mean particle size (D50) of the
soil is sufficient to avoid scaling effects (Ovesen, 1979; Nunez et
al., 1988). To avoid scaling effects mean particle size of soil
should be smaller than 1.67 mm because of the selected pile
having 5 cm diameter. D50 is selected for sandy soil as 1.5 mm
(Dmax = 1.7 mm, Dmin = 1.3 mm). Box length is selected as 2 m
initially and it is changed in the other analyses to determine its
effect on the loads acting on the piles. No significant variation
was found in the pile load for box lengths equal to or grater than
40 cm. The box length in front of the piles is selected as 50 cm.
The inside dimensions of the box is selected as 100 cm long.
Analyses were conducted with the finite element model as
illustrated in Fig. 3. Numerical experiments with different number
of elements in the mesh around the pile were performed to
investigate the model including mesh refinement. The Finite
Element mesh used for the parametric studies consists of 4867
elements and the computation time for each analysis was ap-
proximately 2 h of CPU time.
The box, which has the dimensions of 100×B×100 cm, was
modeled. The width of the box (B) was varied according to pile
arrangement. Model piles, with a diameter of 5 cm, were inserted
into this box, which was filled with cohesionless soil simulating
moving soil. In this study, the model was based upon a linear-
elastic non-porous pile with a length of 0.5 m embedded in a
rigid concrete block simulating stationary soil. For every case
throughout the analyses, the pile was long enough to act as
flexible. The Young’s Modulus of the pile should be less than
1.4×1012 kN/m2 to correspond to a flexible pile depending on pile
flexibility factor KR (Poulos and Davis, 1980) which is defined as
follows (Eq. (1)):
Ep Ip
-4 < 10–5
KR = --------- (1)
Es L
where; Ep is the Young’s modulus of the pile, Ip is the moment of
inertia of the pile section, Es is the secant modulus of the soil and
Fig. 3. Soils and Structure Finite Element Simulation: (a) Structural
Elements, (b) Soil Matrix

Table 1. Material Properties

Soil Properties
Thickness
Item Material γ Stiffness Strength
(cm) R
Model (kN/m3) E (kPa) υ c* (kPa) φ
Sand 100 Mohr-Coulomb 17 5000 0.3 1 30 0.67
Weak Soil 5 Mohr-Coulomb 17 1000 0.3 1 5 0.67
Rigid Block 100 Linear-Elastic 25 2×106 0.15 - 1
Pile 5 Linear-Elastic 24 3×107 0.15 - 1
* for numerical stability purposes

− 564 − KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

 Numerical Analyses of Piles Subjected to Lateral Soil Movement

L is the embedded pile length.

Based on the Coulomb’s frictional law, interface elements are
used along the outside surfaces of the piles to simulate pile-soil
interaction in terms of slippage and gapping at pile-soil interface
(Desai et al., 1984; Trochianis et al., 1988; Wang and Richwien,
2002). These elements are specified with interface reduction
factor (Rinter) to model a possibly reduced strength between piles
and soil. The soil-pile interface strength parameter is set to two-
thirds (0.67) of sand and weak soil strength parameters for the
box sliding, three-thirds (1.0) of rigid block strength parameters
according to the recommendations from program manual to
provide and follow the box-soil displacements by means of Rinter.
So that strength reduction due to slippage of the soil around the
pile is taken into consideration.
The friction between the cohesionless soil and the rigid block
was minimized by placing a thin weak soil layer that enables
sliding simulating sliding surface. Springs were attached to the
four edges of the box on the opposite side of the load to measure
the load on box due to moving soil. The box was forced to move
by a uniform horizontal load after the removal of soil clusters
that are in the back and front positions of the box. In order to
determine the ratio effect of pile spacing to pile diameter on the
pile response, the rigidity of the pile, the pile lengths, as well as
the Young’s modulus of the soils were accepted constant throughout
the analysis, while only the pile spacing was changed.
2.1 Finite Element Simulation of Passive Piles Adjacent to
Embankments
The problem associated with piles supporting bridge abutments
adjacent to approach embankments has been examined with a
model simulation with finite number of piles. Loads on passive
piles in a row due to moving soil are investigated. A uniform
distributed load was applied on the right face of the box which
forced the soil move horizontally. Plan and three dimensional
view of the model are given in Figs. 4 and 5, respectively.
Initially, the analysis without piles was performed to determine
the friction load along the sliding surface (Fr) on weak layer. Fr
was computed by subtracting the total loads on the springs (Fs)
from the applied load (P). This friction load was considered in
the interpretation of the analyses results. Then, single pile was
Fig. 5. 3D View of Model Simulation
positioned at the centre of the box width and single pile analysis
was performed. The load carried by pile was determined by
subtracting the load difference between P and Fr from Fs through-
out the analyses.
An extensive parametric study was carried out to investigate
the effects of variation of parameters on the arching behavior.
Specifically, the parameter selected for the study was pile spa-
cing. In this model study, five different pile spacing configur-
ations (s = 2d, s = 4d, s = 6d, s = 8d and s = 10d) were examined
in the box with different box width dimensions in each configur-
ation. The pile spacing and the box dimensions used in the test
series are summarized in Table 2. Here, spacing equal to or larger
than two diameters was selected, because the ratios less than 2
are not usual.
It should be noted that the lateral loads on the piles varies
during the soil movement. Reaction force on the pile depends on
the relative displacement between pile and soil. Once the soil
movements exceed the pile deflection, then driving forces start to
mobilize on the pile. In order to examine the effects of the
magnitude of the relative displacement between pile and soil (∆),
the responses of the passive piles for ∆ = 0.2d, 0.35d, 0.6d,
0.85d, 1.0d, 1.2d and 1.4d were compared. Moment and shear
force values increase parallel to increase with relative displace-
ment, and approach to a limiting value after relative displacement
of 1.2d. The relative displacement of 1.2d is found to be suffi-
cient for the explanation of any behavior of passive load versus
pile displacement.
A series of analyses, in different pile spacing, has been per-

Table 2. Box Dimensions

Box Dimensions (cm)
s/d
L (x) B (z) H (y)
10 100 180 100
8 100 160 100
6 100 140 100
4 100 120 100
Fig. 4. Plan View of Model Simulation 2 100 100 100

Vol. 16, No. 4 / May 2012 − 565 −

 Mehmet Rifat Kahyaoglu, Gökhan Imançli, Okan Önal, and Arif S. Kayalar

formed in order to find the lateral applied load that causes 1.2d (6
cm) relative displacement between the soil and piles. By varying
the spacing, s, and increasing the relative displacement, ∆, the
loads acting on the piles were calculated. The calculated values
of soil and pile displacements, maximum bending moments and
shear forces on piles for different pile spacing in the test series
are summarized in Table 3.
Results of the analyses show that pile spacing has some effect
on the pile response (shear force and moment distribution). As
expected, the second pile in the middle has the minimum shear
force and moment values. The calculated shear forces and
moment values of the first and the third piles for 1.2d relative
movement are a bit different although the system is symmetric. Fig. 7. Angle of Internal Friction Effect on Load Acting on Center
This ignorable difference is thought to have originated from Pile
numerical approach adopted. The loads acting on the piles are
determined by varying the spacing, s, and increasing the applied displacement of soil between piles are evaluated. Fig. 8 shows
force to reach 1.2d relative displacement. The calculated loads the variation of the displacement of soil between piles with dif-
acting on the center piles (pile #2) against pile spacing are plotted ferent angle of internal friction values, when ∆ is equal to 1.2d.
in Fig. 6. The soil with higher friction angle produces greater granular
It can be seen that the loads acting on the piles increase, as the interlocking, and more loads will be transferred to the piles and
spacing increases, and approach a limiting value. This indicates fewer displacements will occur in the soil between piles owing to
that load transfer is not as effective in large spacing as in small the arching effect. It can also be seen that the displacement of
spacing for piles adjacent to embankments. soil between the piles increases as the spacing increases and
Since the arching takes place within the soil, the soil properties approaches to a limiting value. The effect of internal frictional angle
such as angle of internal friction are expected to influence the on displacement of soil between piles becomes negligible when
soil arching mechanism directly (Liang and Zeng, 2002). Various the pile spacing is 8d. This indicates that load transfer is not
numerical analyses have been performed with three different effective after larger spacing than 8d (Figs. 7 and 8).
angle of internal friction (25o, 30o and 35o). Induced forces acting So as to investigate the effect of pile-soil-pile interaction on the
on piles are plotted in Fig. 7. The variation of internal friction has free head pile behavior, the response of each individual pile within
a significant influence on the arching effect. It can be seen that a group is compared to that of a single pile. Group effects may be
the soil with higher friction angle is more likely to produce greater assessed in terms of loads or moments for passive piles. Group
granular interlocking and develop stronger arching. Both the factor can be determined by comparing the load acting on a pile
residual load acting on the soil mass between the piles and the determined from a pile group test with that of the single pile test
(FL) or comparing the maximum moment of the pile in a group
Table 3. Analysis Results @ ∆ =1.2d with that of the single pile (FM) at the same amount of relative
Pile Numbers displacement between pile and the soil (Chen et al., 1997;
1 2 3 Jeoung et al., 2003). In order to show the effect of pile spacing on
s/d
M T M T M T the group factor, the group factors in terms of load and moment in
(kNm) (kN) (kNm) (kN) (kNm) (kN)
finite number of passive pile case are given in Table 4.
2 2.746 30.61 2.674 30.43 2.909 30.75
4 3.047 34.57 3.115 34.31 3.204 34.62
6 3.485 37.07 3.444 36.34 3.470 36.81
8 3.623 39.02 3.571 38.10 3.701 38.82
10 3.626 39.06 3.574 38.18 3.708 38.85

Fig. 8. Angle of Internal Friction Effect on Displacement of Soil

Fig. 6. Loads Acting on Centre Pile Versus Pile Spacing Between Piles

− 566 − KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

 Numerical Analyses of Piles Subjected to Lateral Soil Movement

Table 4. The Effect of Pile Spacing Variation on Group Factors and the lateral loads cause 1.2d relative displacement have been
Pile Spacing
FL
FL
FM
FM determined. By varying the spacing, s, and increasing the applied
(s) (Jeoung et al., 2003) (Chen et al., 1997) force to get the state of 1.2d relative displacement, the loads
2d 0.82 - 0.83 - acting on the piles are calculated. The calculated loads acting on
2.5d - 0.64 - 0.83 the piles against pile spacing are plotted in Fig. 10.
4d 0.93 - 0.91 - It can be seen that the loads acting on the piles decrease, as the
5d - 0.78 - 0.94 spacing increases. In other words, when pile spacing increases, a
6d 0.98 - 0.98 -
smaller amount of load will be transferred to the piles. This indi-
7.5d - 0.89 - 0.98
cates that arching is not as effective at large spacing as in small
8d 1.00 - 1.00 -
spacing. Around 80% of load will be transferred to the piles if
10d 1.00 - 1.00 -
the piles are placed in a row with s/d=2. For a wide pile spacing
with s/d=6, however, less than 40% load have transferred to the
Group factor is really influenced by pile spacing that is parallel piles. Once the pile spacing becomes larger than 8d, there would
to the decrease in pile spacing, group factor decreases. Therefore, be no arching so that each pile behaves like a single pile.
group factor can be determined as group action reduction factor Various numerical analyses have been performed with three
in finite number of passive pile case. different angle of internal friction (25o, 30o and 35o). By varying
the angle of internal friction (f) and the pile spacing ratio (s/d) at
2.2 Finite Element Simulation of Passive Piles used for the ultimate state, the loads acting on the piles are determined.
Slope Stabilization The calculated loads acting on the piles induced by moving soil
The slope stabilizing pile case was simulated with a slice from with different angle of internal friction are plotted in Fig. 11.
infinite number of piles. Within this scope, plan view of model Consequently, more loads will be transferred to the piles owing
simulation established before was changed as given in Fig. 9 while to the arching effect. The soil with higher friction angle produces
the other properties remained constant. In this slope stabilizing greater granular interlocking, and more loads will be transferred
piles simulation study, five different pile spacing configurations to the piles.
(s = 2d, s = 4d, s = 6d, s = 8d and s = 10d) were examined in the In order to show the effect of pile spacing on the group factor,
box which had different widths (B) in each configuration. The the group factors in terms of load and moment in infinite number
pile spacing and the box dimensions used in the test series are of passive pile case are given in Table 6. Group factor is really
summarized in Table 5. influenced by pile spacing that is parallel to the decrease in pile
Various analyses with different pile spacing have been performed

Fig. 10. Loads Acting on Center Pile versus Pile Spacing

Fig. 9. Plan View of Model Simulation

Table 5. Box Dimensions

Box Dimensions (cm)
s/d
L (x) B (z) H (y)
10 100 150 100
8 100 120 100
6 100 90 100
4 100 60 100
Fig. 11. Angle of Internal Friction Effect on Loads Acting on Center
2 100 30 100 Pile

Vol. 16, No. 4 / May 2012 − 567 −

 Mehmet Rifat Kahyaoglu, Gökhan Imançli, Okan Önal, and Arif S. Kayalar

Table 6. The Effect of Pile Spacing Variation on Group Factors Table 7. The Effect of Pile Spacing Variation on Group Factors as
Pile FL FM Obtained from FEM Analyses
Spacing FL (Ito and Matsui, FM (DeBeer and Passive piles adjacent to Passive piles used for slope
(s) 1975) Carpentier, 1977) s/d embankments stabilization
2d 1.72 7.01 1.70 1.92 FL FM FL FM
4d 1.17 1.69 1.15 1.21 10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
6d 1.08 1.26 1.07 1.09 8 1.00 1.00 1.02 1.01
8d 1.02 1.12 1.01 1.04 6 0.98 0.98 1.08 1.07
10d 1.00 1.04 1.00 1.02 4 0.93 0.91 1.17 1.15
2 0.82 0.83 1.72 1.70

spacing, group factor increases. It can be said that if the pile

spacing increases, the amount of load transferred to the piles
decreases in infinite number of passive pile case.
3. Determinations from Numerical Results
Various numerical analyses have been performed on both two
passive pile cases for five different pile spacing configurations (s
= 2d, s = 4d, s = 6d, s = 8d and s = 10d) with three different angle
of internal friction (25o, 30o and 35o). Some determination can be
made from the results as follows:
3.1 Effect of Relative Pile/Soil Displacement
As relative displacement (∆) increases, the loads acting on the
piles increase rapidly as a result of arching induced stress transfer
for both cases. When the relative movement reaches a certain
value, ∆ = 1.2d for cohesionless soils, the acting loads reach a
maximum value and remain constant as the soil movement con-
tinues to increase. This indicates that the excess soil movement
has no more influence on the load transfer mechanism.
3.2 Effect of Material Properties of Soil
The soil with higher angle of friction produces greater granular
interlocking and develops stronger arching. Consequently, more
loads will be transferred to the piles and fewer displacements
will occur in the soil between piles owing to the arching effect
for both two passive pile cases.
3.3 Effect of Pile Spacing
The loads acting on the piles adjacent to embankments increase
with an increase of the pile spacing. Contrary to the piles used for
slope stabilization, the loads acting on the piles decreases.
However, for s > 8d, each pile behaves like a single pile for both
two passive pile cases (Fig. 12).
The group factor is also influenced by the pile spacing. Parallel
to a decrease in pile spacing, group factor values decrease for
piles adjacent to embankments and increase for piles used for
slope stabilization (Table 7).
4. Conclusions
Three dimensional finite element analyses have been carried
out on two most common passive pile cases, namely piles
adjacent to embankments and piles used for slope stabilization.
Loads acting on piles for five different pile spacing configuration
are used to evaluate the group factors. Parallel to a decrease in
pile spacing, group factor values decrease for piles adjacent to
embankments and increase for piles used for slope stabilization.
However, load transfer is not effective after larger spacing than
8d for both two passive pile cases. The numerical results also
indicate that the loads acting on the piles reach a maximum value
after the relative displacement reaches 1.2d.
Analysis results shows that pile performance can bes effect-
ively evaluated taking soil-structure-interaction into account.
One needs to determine the pile arrangement in the moving soil
area in order to decide for the proper passive pile case to be
utilized in analyses. The proposed group factors should be con-
sidered as a solution plane of the lateral pile response bounded
by the predetermined pile head displacement, variation range of
the angle of internal friction and pile diameter. It should be
noted; however, that reinforcement ratio of a concrete pile may
alter its response and may cause even a smaller diameter pile to
behave as a rigid one under certain conditions. The engineer
should be cautious while deciding for the type of the passive pile
case. The methodology presented in this study can be applied
to other cases such as piles in cohesive soils and different pile
materials.

References

Baguelin, F., Frank, R., and Said, Y. H. (1977). “Theoretical study of

lateral reaction mechanism of piles.” Geotechnique, Vol. 27, No. 3,
pp. 405-434.
Fig. 12. Load Acting on Centre Pile from FEM Analyses for Two
Different Passive Pile Cases
Begemann, H. K. S. and De Leeuw, E. H. (1972). “Horizontal Earth

− 568 − KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

 Numerical Analyses of Piles Subjected to Lateral Soil Movement
pressures on foundation piles as result of nearby soil fills.” Proc. 5th
Eur. Conf. Soil Mech. & Fdn. Engrg., Madrid, Vol. 1, pp. 1-9.
Bransby, M. F. and Springman, S. M. (1996). “3-D Finite element
modelling of pile groups adjacent to surcharge load.” Computers
and Geotechnics, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 301-324.
Bransby, M. F. and Springman, S. (1999). “Selection of load-transfer
functions for passive lateral loading of piles.” Computers and
Geotechnics, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 155-184.
Cai, F. and Ugai, K. (2000). “Numerical analysis of the stability of a
slope reinforced with piles.” Soils and Foundations, Vol. 40, No. 1,
pp. 73-84.
Chen, C. Y. and Martin, G. R. (2002). “Soil-structure interaction for
landslide stabilizing piles.” Computers and Geotechnics, Vol. 29,
No. 5, pp. 363-386.
Chen, L. T., Poulos, H. G., and Hull, T. S. (1997). “Model tests on pile
groups subjected to lateral soil movement.” Soils and Foundations,
Vol. 37, No. l, pp. l-12.
Chow, Y. K. and Yong, K. Y. (1996). “Analysis of piles subject to lateral
soil Movements.” Journal Institute of Engineers, Singapore, Vol. 36,
No. 2, pp. 43-49.
Comodromos, E. M. and Pitilakis K. D. (2005). “Response evaluation
of horizontally loaded fixed-head pile groups using 3-D nonlinear
analysis.” International Journal for Numerical and Analytical
Methods in Geomechanics, Vol. 29, No. 6, pp. 597-625.
Cox, W. R., Dixon, D. A., and Murphy, B. S. (1983). Lateral load tests
of 25.4 mm diameter piles in very soft clay in side-by-side and in-
line groups, Laterally Loaded Deep Foundations: Analysis and
Performance, ASTM, SPT835.
De Beer E. and Carpentier, R. (1977). “Discussions: Methods to
estimate lateral force acting on stabilizing piles.” Soils and Foundions,
Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 68-82.
De Beer, E. E. and Wallays, M. (1972). “Forces induced in piles by
unsymmetrical surcharges on the soil around the pile.” Proc. 5th
European Conf. on Soil Mechanics.
Desai, C. S., Zaman, M. M., Lighter, J. G., and Siriwardane, H. J.
(1984). “Thin-layer element for interface and joints.” International
Journal of Numerical Analysis Methods in Geomechanics, Vol. 8,
pp. 19-43.
Esu, F. and D’Elia, B. (1974). “Interazione terreno-struttura in un palo
sollecitato dauna frana tip colata.” Rev. Ital di Geot., Vol. III, pp. 27-
38.
Goh, A. T. C., Teh, C. I., and Wong, K. S. (1997). “Analysis of piles
subjected to embankment induced lateral soil movements.” Journal
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 123, No. 9,
pp. 792-801.
Gudehus, G. and Schwarz, W. (1985). “Stabilisation of creeping slopes
by dowels.” Proceedings, 11th International Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, San Francisco, Vol. 3, pp.
1697-1700.
Hassiotis, S. and Chameau, J. L. (1984). “Stabilization of slopes using
piles.” In Slope Stabilization, Report FHWA/IN/JHRP-84-8, Purdue
University, West Lafayette, Indiana, p. 181.
Hassiotis, S., Chameau, J. L., and Gunaratne, M. (1997). “Design
method for stabilization of slopes with piles.” Journal Geotechnical
and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 123, No. 4, pp. 314-323.
Ito, T. and Matsui, T. (1975). “Methods to estimate lateral force acting
on stabilizing piles.” Soils and Foundations, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 43-
59.
Ito, T., Matsui, T., and Hong, W. P. (1982). “Extended design method for
multi-row stabilising piles againts landslides.” Soils and Founda-
Vol. 16, No. 4 / May 2012 − 569 −
tions, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 1-13.
Jeong, S., Kim, B., Won, J., and Lee, J. (2003). “Uncoupled analysis of
stabilizing piles in weathered slopes.” Computers and Geotechnics,
30, 671-682.
Kahyaoglu, M. R., Imancli, G., Ozturk, A. U., and Kayalar, A. S. (2009).
“Computational 3D finite element analyses of model passive piles.”
Computational Materials Science, Vol. 46, No. 1, pp. 193-202.
Kelesoglu, M. K. and Cinicioglu, S. F. (2010). “Free-field measure-
ments to disclose lateral reaction mechanism of piles subjected to
soil movements.” Journal Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, Vol. 136, No. 2, pp. 331-343.
Laudeman, S. and Chang, N. Y. (2004). “Finite element analysis of
slope stabilization using piles.” Geotechnical Engineering for Trans-
portation Projects-Proceedings of Geo-Trans, Los Angeles, CA.
Liang, R. and Yamin, M. (2009). “Three-dimensional finite element
study of arching behavior in slope/drilled shafts system.” Inter-
national Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geo-
mechanics, DOI: 10.1002/nag.851
Liang, R. and Zeng S. (2002). “Numerical study of soil arching
mechanism in drilled shafts for slope stabilization.” Soils and
Foundations, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 83-92.
Matsui, T., Hong, W. P., and Ito, T. (1982). “Earth pressures on piles in a
row due to lateral soil movements.” Soils and Foundations, Vol. 22,
No. 2, pp. 71-81.
Morgenstern, N. R. (1982). “The analysis of wall supportsto stabilize
slopes.” Application of Walls to Landslide Control Problems, Edited
by R.B. Reeves, pp. 19-29.
Nethero, M. F. (1982). “Slide control by drilled pier walls.” Application
of Walls to Landslide Control Problems, Reeves, R. B. (ed.), ASCE,
pp. 61-76.
Nunez, I. L. (1988). “Driving and tension loading of piles in sand on a
centrifuge.” Proceedings International Conference Centrifuge 88,
Paris, Corté, J. F. (ed.), Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 353-362.
Oteo, C. S. (1977). “Horizontal loaded piles – Deformation influence.”
Proc. 9th Int. Conf. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
Tokyo, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 101-106.
Ovesen, N. K. (1979). “The use of physical models in design: The
scaling law relationship.” Proc., 7th European Conf. on Soil Mechanics
and Foundation Engineering, Brighton, Vol. 4, pp. 318-323.
Pan, J. L., Goh, A. T. C., Wong, K. S., and Teh, C. I. (2000). “Model
tests on single piles in soft clay.” Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 890-897.
Pan, J. L., Goh, A. T. C., Wong, K. S., and Teh, C. I. (2002). “Ultimate
soil pressures for piles subjected to lateral soil movements.” Journal
of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol.
128, No. 6, pp. 530-535.
Poulos, H. G. (1973). “Analysis of piles in soil undergoing lateral
movement.” Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineer-
ing Division, ASCE, Vol. 99, pp. 391-406.
Poulos, H. G. (1995). “Design of reinforcing piles to increase slope
stability.” Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 808-
818.
Poulos, H. G. (1996). “A comparison of some methods for the design of
piles through embankments.” 12th Southeast Asian Geotechnical
Conference, Kuala Lumpur.
Poulos, H. G. and Davis, E. H. (1980). Pile foundation analysis and
design, New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Reese, L.C., Wang, S. T., and Fouse, J. L. (1992). “Use of drilled shafts
in stabilising a slope.” In Stability and Performance of Slopes and
Embankments-II, Seed, R. B. and Boulanger, R. W. (eds.), ASCE,
 Mehmet Rifat Kahyaoglu, Gökhan Imançli, Okan Önal, and Arif S. Kayalar
Vol. 2, pp. 1318-1332.
Rollins, K. M. and Rollins, R. L. (1992). “Landslide stabilisation using
drilled shaft walls.” In Ground Movements and Structures, Geddes,
J. D. (eds.), Pentech Press: London, Vol. 4, pp. 755-770.
Rollins, K. M., Peterson, K. T., and Weaver, T. J. (1998). “Lateral load
behaviour of full-scale group in clay.” Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 124, No. 6, pp. 468-478.
Rowe, R. K. and Poulos, H. G. (1979). “A method for predicting the
effect of piles on slope behaviour.” Proc. 3rd ICONMIG, Achen,
Vol. 3, pp. 1073-1085.
Sommer, H. (1977). “Creeping slope in a stiff clay.” Proc. 10th Spec.
Session, 9th Int. Conf. Soil Mechs and Found. Engrg., Tokyo, pp.
113-118.
Springman, S. M. (1989). Lateral loading on piles due to simulated
embankment construction, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Cam-
bridge University, England.
Springman, S. M. and Bolton, M. D. (1990). “The effect of surcharge
loading adjacent to piles.” Transport & Road Research Laboratory-
Contractor Report 196.
Stewart, D. P. (1992). Lateral loading of piled bridge abutments due to
embankment construction, PhD Thesis, University of Western
− 570 −
Australia.
Stewart, D. P., Jewell, R. J., and Randolph, M. F. (1993). “Numerical
modeling of piled bridge abutments on soft ground.” Computers and
Geotechnics, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 21-46.
Trochanis, A., Bielek, J., and Christiano, P. (1988). “A three-dimensional
nonlinear study of piles leading to the development of a simplified
model.” Carnegie Institute of Technology, Report No. R, pp. 88-176.
Wakai, A., Gose, S., and Ugai, K. (1999). “3-D Elasto-plastic finite
element analyses of pile foundations subjected to lateral loading.”
Soils and Foundations, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 97-111.
Wang, Z. and Richwien, W. (2002). “A study of soil-reinforcement
interface friction.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., Vol. 128, No. 1,
pp. 92-94.
Wang, M. C., Wu, A. H., and Scheessele, D. J. (1979). “Stress and de-
formation in single piles due to lateral movement of surrounding
soils.” Behaviour of Deep Foundations, ASTM 670, Raymond
Lunggren, Ed., American Society for Testing and Materials, pp.
578-591.
Won, J., You, K., Jeong, S., and Kim, S. (2005). “Coupled effects in
stability analysis of pile-slope system.” Computers and Geotechnics,
Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 304-315.
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering