INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR NUMERICAL AND ANALYTICAL METHODS IN GEOMECHANICS

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

General elastic analysis of piles and pile groups

K. J. XuR and H. G. PoulosS
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
Cowey Geosciences Pty. Ltd., and Professor of Civil Engineering, University of Sydney, Australia

SUMMARY
This paper describes the development of a boundary element analysis for the behaviour of single piles and
pile groups subjected to general three-dimensional loading and to vertical and lateral ground movements.
Each pile is discretized into a series of cylindrical elements, each of which is divided into several subelements. Compatibility of vertical, lateral and rotational movements is imposed in order to obtain the
necessary equations for the pile response. Via hierarchical structures, 12 non-zero sub-matrices in a global
matrix are derived for the basic in#uence factors.
Solutions are presented for a series of cases involving single piles and pile groups. In each case, the
solutions are compared with those from more simpli"ed existing pile analyses such as those developed by
Randolph and by Poulos. It is shown that for direct loading e!ects (e.g. the settlement of piles due to vertical
loading), the simpli"ed analyses work well. However, for &o!-line' response (such as the lateral movement
due to vertical loading) the di!erences are greater, and it is believed that the present analysis gives more
reliable estimates. Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
KEY WORDS:

pile groups; 3-D coupled problems; elastic analysis; boundary element method; in#uence
factors

1. INTRODUCTION
In general, a pile group may be subjected to simultaneous axial load, lateral load, moment, and
possibly, torsional load. Various numerical approaches have been employed to estimate the pile
group response to such loadings, and these may be broadly classi"ed into the following
categories:
1. Methods based on the theory of subgrade reaction, including equivalent bent (frame)
analyses that reduce the pile group to a structural system but take some account of the e!ect
of the soil by determining equivalent free-standing lengths of the piles [1}3].

*Correspondence to: K. J. Xu, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
RResearch assistant.
SSenior Principal.
Contract/grant sponsor: Australian Research Council

Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 8 September 1998

Revised 13 July 1999

1110

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

2. Hybrid analyses that combine load transfer analyses for single pile response and elastic
theory to estimate pile}soil}pile interaction [4}6].
3. Elastic-based analyses that use elastic theory for both single pile response and pile}soil}pile
interaction [7}10].
4. Finite element methods that include a number of ways to analyse pile group deformations
[11}13].
Computer programs for the analysis of pile groups vary in the type of approach used and in the
sophistication of treatment of di!erent aspects of group behaviour. Three programs which have
been used for pile group analysis are PGROUP [10], DEFPIG [7,14] and PIGLET [9], and
these have been compared by Poulos and Randolph [15]. All three programs are based on an
elastic continuum analysis, although DEFPIG can also be extended into the non-linear range by
specifying limiting values of skin friction and lateral pressure along the piles.
Although these programs have been used widely, they all involve a number of simpli"cations
and idealizations, owing to the limitations of computer technology at the time of their development.
For these and other similar programs (excepting "nite element analyses), there are simpli"cations and limitations with respect to at least six aspects:
1. Interaction: Pile}to}pile interaction is widely considered, but a more accurate method
requires consideration of pile element to pile element interaction.
2. Elements: Full cylindrical and/or annular elements are usually used, but the stress distribution on an element is generally not uniform around the pile circumference for cases of
general loading.
3. oading}deformation coupling: Normally the axial, lateral and torsional responses of the
piles and treated separately, i.e. de-coupled. However, pile}soil interaction is a threedimensional problem, and each of the load components has deformation-coupling e!ects,
e.g. vertical loading induces lateral movements as well as vertical movements.
4. Pile cross-section: Normally, the pile cross-sections are taken as uniform. However, for
some cases, such as piles with defects, the cross-sections of at least some of the piles are not
uniform.
5. oadings: Loadings applied to pile groups are usually applied directly to the piles (&on-pile'
loading), but sometimes loadings are induced by ground movements (&o!-pile' loadings),
such as those arising from loading caused by adjacent structures, or from nearby tunnel
construction or excavations.
6. Global pile foundation: Rather than a single group, multiple individual piles and/or pile
groups may exist simultaneously in many engineering projects.
All the e!ects mentioned above may be important if the behaviour of pile foundations is to be
modelled accurately. Because of rapid developments in computer technology, the use of accurate
algorithms can now take precedence over earlier concerns about computer speed and capacity.
This paper describes the development of a computer program that eliminates the above limitations and is therefore more general as a tool for the elastic analysis of the behaviour of piles and
pile groups. The accuracy of the program is tested via comparisons with existing solutions. Some
aspects of pile behaviour which cannot be computed by conventional approaches are also
described.
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

1111

2. BASIC PRINCIPLES
2.1. Introduction
Using the principles of three-dimensional boundary element method, the &analysis platform' is set
up for a half-space with a global foundation system, as illustrated in Figure 1. The analysis
considers the overall foundation performance of multiple single piles and pile groups and can
incorporate the e!ects of such factors as defective piles, soil movements, general on/o! pile
loadings, etc., at the same time.
In the governing equation, a global matrix is derived, which is composed of several-matrices.
Through the introduction of the concept of hierarchical structures and basic in#uence factor
matrices, a set of sub-matrices is developed both for the presentation of the analysis and for
computer program implementation. The development of the global matrix is described below.
2.2. Assumptions and terminologies
The following assumptions are employed for the analysis:
1. The soil is assumed to be an ideal homogeneous isotropic elastic weightless half-space,
having elastic parameters E and l that are not in#uenced by the presence of the piles.


However, it is possible to consider, in an approximate manner, the soil mass as a nonhomogeneous continuum.
2. Piles are assumed to be circular in cross-section and made of a homogeneous isotropic
elastic material with two unchangeable elastic parameters E and l . The piles are vertical


and perfectly rough. Where the diameter of a pile changes abruptly, no account is taken of
local stress concentrations.
3. The deformation of the piles and soil mass are elastic and the superposition principle is
valid.
4. Two kinds of elements are considered at the soil}pile interface, soil elements and pile
elements. These boundary elements are meshed in partly cylindrical or annular surfaces. The
distributions of the stress components on the boundary elements at the pile}soil interface
are assumed to be uniform over each element.

Figure 1. Schematic global foundation system.

Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1112

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

Figure 2. Elements and stresses of a pile.

5. To simplify the compatibility and equilibrium equations for pile heads and caps, the load
and displacement components at the top of each pile are assumed to be uniform and equal
to the average value.
6. The pile caps above each pile group are assumed to be rigid and not in contact with the soil
surface.
7. There is no slip and gap at the pile}soil interface, i.e. the soil element and the pile element are
in contact at the soil}pile interface.
The term &stress' above and below is used for the load over the area of pile}soil element whose
shape is either plane (at the pile base elements) or cylindrical (at the pile side elements).
A diagrammatic illustration of elements and stresses on a pile is given in Figure 2. Each element
has three stress components (p , p , p ) acting on it in the Cartesian co-ordinate system. It should be
V W X
noted that the elements, in fact, are subjected to shear tractions, q and q , and a normal traction q
PX
PF
PP
in a polar co-ordinate system. However using the Cartesian co-ordinate system it is easier to set up
compatibility and equilibrium equations in the pile group analysis. The computed stresses in the
X, >, Z directions are translated into the real tractions by co-ordinate transformation.
For &structural analysis', each pile is treated as a one-dimensional column which is able to
compress or extend axially, bend in the X}Z and >}Z planes and twist in the X}> plane. E!ects
of Poisson's ratio of piles are involved in torsional behaviour since the shear modulus of the piles
is determined by E and l . Although the piles are treated as one-dimensional columns, three


basic deformations and considered simultaneously, i.e. the axial, bending and torsional deformations of piles are produced by the three components of stresses (p , p , p ) on the elements. For
V W X
example, p results in axial and bending deformations while p and p produce bending and
X
V
W
torsional deformations.
In developing this method, stresses, loads and displacements in Cartesian co-ordinates are
assumed to obey the right-hand &srew' rule. In numbering piles, priority is given to piles within
pile groups and then to individual piles.
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

1113

Figure 3. Schematic compatibility of pile head and cap.

2.3. Global equation

The general equations contain the following four kinds of independent equations:
1. Compatibility equations at the pile}soil interfaces: The relative displacements at any pile}soil
element are zero for elastic response.
2. Equilibrium equations for pile heads and caps: The loads on the pile caps are balanced by the
head loads on piles in the corresponding group.
3. Compatibility equations for pile heads and caps: The pile cap displacements are compatible
with the head displacements of the grouped piles as shown in Figure 3. The pile head
displacements have contributions from pile}soil stresses, tip displacements of piles in the
group, and head loads of the grouped piles.
4. Equilibrium equations for piles: Tractions or stresses on the pile}soil interfaces (including tip
loads) are balanced by the head loads on the piles, which are generally unknown for grouped
piles but are generally known for individual piles.
2.3.1. Global equation. A global equation can be set up based on the four kinds of equations, as
shown in Equation (1):




A B

G H

O P

Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

X
>

O
X
>

" 
X


X
>



(1)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1114

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

where  is the zero sub-matrix or vector, A the sub-matrix describing pile and soil behaviour at all
elements ("SIF#PIF), SIF the sub-matrix of displacements due to stresses at soil elements,
PIF the sub-matrix of displacements due to stresses at pile elements, B the sub-matrix of pile
element displacements due to pile tip displacements, D the sub-matrix of pile element displacements due to pile head loads, G the sub-matrix of pile cap loads due to pile cap displacements by
cap-tie-cap beam forces (to allow for pile caps jointed by tie beams), H the sub-matrix of pile cap
loads due to pile head loads, O the sub-matrix of pile head displacements due to pile element
stresses, P the sub-matrix of pile head displacements due to pile tip displacements, Q the
sub-matrix of pile head displacements due to pile cap displacements, R the sub-matrix of pile head
displacements due to pile head loads, S the sub-matrix of pile head loads due to pile element
stresses, < the sub-matrix of pile head loads due to pile head loads, > the vector of element stress

o!sets, ("> #> ), > the vector of pile element displacements due to head loads on
O
O
O
individual piles, > the vector of pile element displacements due to external soil displaceO
ments/stresses/forces, > the vector of loads on pile caps, > the vector of pile head loads on


individual piles, X the vector of pile}soil stresses, X the vector of pile tip displacements, X the




vector of pile cap displacements and X the vector of pile head forces at the pile cap.

The global foundation is assumed to contain ncap pile groups with any con"guration, npils
non-identical piles which have nipsum individual piles and ncpsum piles in pile groups, and ntot
elements of any size which may include partly cylindrical elements on shafts and partly ring
elements on both bases and discontinuities. Then, a coupled global matrix with [3 ntot#
6 npils#6 ncap#6 ncpsum] dimensions is set up, and the following unknowns can be solved:
3 ntot pile}soil element stresses +X ,,

6 npils pile tip displacements +X ,,


6 ncap pile cap displacements +X ,.

6 ncpsum pile head loads for grouped piles +X ,.

After the pile}soil stresses +X , and pile tip displacements +X , are computed from Equation (1),



the head displacements of individual piles +X , can be determined from the following equation:

+X ,"[O] +X ,#[P] +X ,#[R] +> ,
(2)





As a special case, if only individual piles exist, Equation (1) can be reduced to a much simpli"ed
form, as shown in (3)
1.
2.
3.
4.




A B
S 

X
>
 " 
X
>




(3)

2.3.2. Sub-matrix classixcations and known vectors. In the global matrix, there are 12 non-zero
sub-matrices, i.e. SIF, PIF, B, D, G, H, O, P, Q, R, S, <. These sub-matrices can be classi"ed into
four categories according to the method of their derivation:
1. The sub-matrix SIF for displacements and stresses on soil elements, is obtained by integration of Mindlin's equations [16].
2. The sub-matrices PIF, D, G, O, R relating displacements due to stresses or loads on a pile,
are determined via the principles of structural analysis.
3. The sub-matrices B, P, Q relating displacements among heads, tips and elements on piles,
are derived via the deformation geometry of the piles.
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1115

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

4. The sub-matrices H, S, < relating pile head loads, loads on the pile caps, or stresses on piles,
are established by force equilibrium.
The detailed expressions for the various sub-matrices are set out in Appendix A.
There are four types of known vectors, i.e. > , > , > , > . The vector of element displacements
O O  
due to pile head loads > is determined by structural analysis. Both vectors of pile cap loads
O
> and individual pile head loads > have six components. Element displacements due to external


soil displacements/stresses/forces are incorporated into the vector > , which will be described in
O
detail later in the paper.
2.4. Numerical analysis of the sub-matrices in the global matrix
2.4.1. Basic inyuence factor matrix (BIFM). The term &in#uence factor' in this paper is used
to de"ne the response of one mechanical parameter (such as load/stress/displacement) caused
by imposing another unit mechanical parameter. The concept of in#uence factors was introduced into pile foundation analysis by Poulos et al. [17] for de-coupled cases. However,
it is di$cult to set up a general 3-D fully coupled pile analysis if the single de-coupled in#uence
factors are considered, since the in#uence factors are coupled and are tensors rather than
scalar values. For any two soil elements i and j, for example, there are nine stress}displacement
in#uence factors I
in a general 3-D fully coupled problem, for example, I
"soil disGHIJ
GHIJ
placement in k direction at element i due to a unit stress in l direction on element j (l, k"1, 2, 3).
The matrix which contains all components of the in#uence factors is called here the basic
in#uence factor matrix (BIFM). The above in#uence factors I
, for example, are composed
GHIJ
of a 3;3 basic in#uence factor matrix (BIFM) of stress}displacement response. It is found
that an e$cient way to set up the sub-matrices in the global matrix is to consider the basic
in#uence factor matrices (BIFMs) as &basic elements' in sub-matrices, i.e. instead of single
in#uence factors, the sub-matrices are formed by assembling the individual basic in#uence
factor matrices (BIFMs). This important concept simpli"es the setting up of the general 3-D
fully coupled pile analysis. Corresponding to the sub-matrices, there are 12 BIFMs which are
de"ned in Appendix A. Because of space limitations, the expressions of BIFMs are derived in
other paper [18].
2.4.2. Hierarchical structure of sub-matrices in the global matrix. Because of the full coupling of
the six stress/displacement components with element}element interaction, expressing these submatrices in the global matrix in full is cumbersome. However, it is found that every sub-matrix
has a hierarchical structure, i.e. a sub-matrix can be divided (or &layered') into some smaller
sub-matrices. The &innermost layer' of a sub-matrix is composed of several basic in#uence factor
matrices (BIFMs), and the outline of the hierarchical structure is as follows:

A"


2

2
2

a
L
2

a
2
GH
a
2 a
K
KL
2



GFFFFHFFFFI

1
-  

Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Na
"
GH

b




c


2

2
b
G

Nb "
G
c
G
b
c
K
K

GFFFFFFFFFFHFFFFFFFFFFI

&    -  

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1116

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

The global matrix A outlined above is assembled from sub-matrices a

(i1"1, m1; j1"1, n1).
GH
The sub-matrix a
is formed from diagonally arranged matrices b (i2"1, m2) where the
GH
G
matrix b is obtained from basic in#uence factor matrices c (i3"1, m3) which are arranged
G
G
vertically.
Each of these BIFMs has clear physical meaning and can be evaluated easily via short
computer subroutines. The sub-matrices in the global matrix can be conveniently built up by
calling the corresponding subroutines. The hierarchical structures of the sub-matrices are presented in more detail in Appendix A.
2.4.3. Soil element movements. The soil movements in this paper are evaluated via soil in#uence
factors through the integration of Mindlin's equations [16] (displacement in l direction at point
i due to a unit force in the k direction at point j in half-space, l, k"1, 2, 3) on a soil element area. It
should be emphasized that there are nine soil in#uence factors which form a BIFM, because the
loads and deformations are fully coupled in three dimensions.
It is found that most of the computer running time is consumed in generating the "rst type of
sub-matrix, which involves numerical integration of Mindlin's equations. It is obvious that the
result is increasingly insensitive to the number of integration points as the distance between two
elements is increased. Therefore, the &changeable integration point' method has been introduced
here, and involves the use of adjustable integration points, with less integration points being used
as the distance between two elements becomes greater.
2.4.4. Pile element movements. The deformations due to axial and horizontal forces,
moments and torsion in pile elements are coupled, and the diameter of any element
may be arbitrary. Calculation of the second kind of sub-matrix is therefore more complicated than the de-coupled model presented by Poulos [19]. Considering the advantages
of do-loop functions in computation, the expressions for load}deformation characteristics
of pile elements are derived via a nested recursion form which makes the computer program
shorter and easier than in previous methods. Suppose a pile is divided into a number of
cylindrical elements, then, as an example, the nested recursion form for rotation of pile element i is
as follows:
( /2)
h "h
# G G
(4)
XG
XG\
GJ
G G
where h and h
are the rotations of pile elements i and i!1, respectively, , , G , J are
XG
XG\
G G G G
torsion, length, shear modulus and polar moment of inertia, respectively, of element i of the pile.
Derivations of the pile behaviour equations are relatively cumbersome. In de-coupled situations,
Poulos [19] derived pile displacement equations that are expressed by a product of a summation
matrix AD and a pile compression matrix FE. However, following this concept in the full-coupled
situation will be very complicated. The method proposed in this paper uses &adding operations'
instead of &multiplier operations', i.e. pile displacement behaviour is decomposed and expressed
by two sub-matrices (sub-matrix of displacements due to stresses at pile elements PIF, and
sub-matrix of pile element displacements due to pile head loads D for pile groups) and a vector
(the vector of pile element displacements due to pile head loads > for individual piles). The
O
matrices and vector are relatively simple to express and may be derived from the principles of
structural analyses.
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

1117

2.5. Ground movements

One of the most attractive advantages of the proposed analysis is that externally imposed
movements are very easily incorporated into the governing equations if the distributions of these
movements are known. These movements are taken to be &free-"eld' ground movements, i.e.
independent of the presence of the piles, and it is assumed that the principle of superposition can
be applied. The ground movements can then be absorbed into the vector +> , in the governing
O
equation (1).
The e!ects of external ground movements can be considered in two ways: as directly imposed
displacements based on the known ground movements, or as induced stresses based on the
known ground movements. In the "rst case, the free-"eld soil movements at the pile}soil interface
are indicated by a vector +u ,, i.e.
 
+> ,"+u ,
O
 

(5)

In the second case, the induced stresses are represented by a vector +p ,. The corresponding soil
 
movements due to the soil stresses are the product of the soil in#uence factor matrix [SIF] and
the soil stress vector +p ,, which is assumed to exhibit an elastic response, i.e.
 
+> ,"[SIF] +p ,
O
 

(6)

2.6. Non-homogeneous soil

In the elastic continuum theory, the soil sti!ness is directly related to Young's modulus of the soil.
If a non-homogeneous soil mass is considered, the following approximation is used by Poulos [7,
19] to evaluate the stress}displacement in#uence factors of soil elements by Mindlin's equation
when the soil variation between adjacent elements is not large or a soil layer is not overlain by
a much sti!er layer:
E "0.5 (E #E )
QGH
QG
QH

(7)

where E and E are the values of Young's modulus of the soil at elements i and j, respectively.
QG
QH
As shown in Appendix A, the element (in#uence factor) of BIFM of soil element I in the
GH
sub-matrix SIF is I
(soil displacement is k direction at element i due to a unit stress in
GHIJ
l direction on element j, k, l"1, 2, 3). It is convenient of I
can be expressed as the value of the
GHIJ
in#uence factor for a unit value of Young's modulus, IF
, divided by the average soil Young's
GHIJ
modulus, E , i.e.
GH
I

IF
" GHIJ
GHIJ
E
QGH

(8)

The solution for the displacement within a uniform semi-in"nite soil mass caused by a pile can
also be used to estimate the displacement of a pile founded within a layer of a system of m layers of
di!erent soils which lie below the pile tip [17]. The displacement of the pile is given approximately as
IF
K\ IF
!IF
GHIJL
GHIJL># GHIJK
I
"
GHIJ
E
E
GHL
GHK
L
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

(9)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1118

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

where IF
"IF
(in Equation (8) with following de"ned j) for layer n, E
"E
(in
GHIJL
GHIJ
QGHL
QGH
Equation (7) with following de"ned j) for layer n, j is the soil element, if n"1; or refers to the pile
axis at the level of the top of layer n, if n'1.

3. COMPUTER PROGRAM GEPAN

To implement the above analysis, a FORTRAN computer program called general pile analysis
(GEPAN) has been developed.
After reading the source soil and pile data, GEPAN automatically generates a group of uni"ed
geometry and control parameters. The movements of pile and soil of shaft, base and discontinuity
elements can be calculated via appropriate subroutines. Each sub-matrix in the global matrix is
assembled by combining the relevant BIFMs, which are formed by relatively simple subroutines.
Discontinuity elements (annular elements at diameter changes within a pile) can be automatically
generated and labeled. The main chart #ow for program GEPAN is shown in Figure 4.
The cylindrical or annular boundary elements are transformed into rectangular elements by
mathematical transforms. Then the simple rectangular integration method, where the rectangular
elements are divided into J;J smaller rectangles, is used for integration of Mindlin's equation.
GEPAN automatically eliminates the singularity of the integration for the displacements of an
element from loads of the element itself via appropriate mathematical processes.
Because the proposed analysis considers element}element interaction within a global foundation system, the global matrix in GEPAN can be very large. GEPAN uses dynamic memory
storage technology for more rational and e!ective use of the computer memory. A matrix with
changeable dimensions is allocated only when needed and de-allocated as soon as it is no longer
needed.

Figure 4. Flow chart for program GEPAN.

Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

1119

4. EVALUATION OF ANALYSIS
Comparisons have been made between the results of the program GEPAN and the widely used
pile analysis programs DEFPIG [14] and PIGLET [9], as well as with other published solutions.
In these comparison, results obtained by the authors using these programs are labelled with the
program names, while results from published papers are indicated by the appropriate source and
reference number. In pile parametric studies, two important parameters which describe the
behaviour under axial and lateral loadings, respectively, are the pile sti!ness factor K and the
pile-#exibility factor K , where K is de"ned as ratio of Young's moduli of pile and soil (E /E )
0
 
and K is a dimensionless measure of the #exibility of the pile relative to the soil (E I /E /)
0
  
[17]. Some of these comparisons are presented below.
4.1. Single pile
Figures 5 and 6 compare various solutions for the top settlement S and distribution of shear stress
p along the shaft, respectively, for a single pile under an axial load. The comparisons for a single
pile with horizontal loading and moment among results via using GEPAN, DEFPIG, PIGLET
and the "nite element analyses from Hull [20] are shown in Figures 7 and 8, where I is de"ned
M+
as the in#uence factor for displacement caused by moment for constant E , and I , I are the

F+ F&
in#uence factors for rotation caused by moment and horizontal load, respectively, for constant
E (I "I from the reciprocal theorem) [17]. A further comparison, for the rotation of a single
 M+
F+
pile subjected to torsion, is shown in Figure 9. Although the principles of the programs GEPAN,
DEFPIG and PIGLET are quite di!erent, the results agree well in most cases. It should be
noted that the solutions from PIGLET for a very compressible axially loaded pile, and for
a rigid laterally loaded pile, are inaccurate because of the inherent assumptions involved in that
analysis [9].

Figure 5. Comparison of the top settlements S of axially loaded single pile.

Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1120

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

Figure 6. Comparison of axial load distribution along single pile.

Figure 7. Comparison of the in#uence factor I

F+

of horizontally loaded single pile.

4.2. Pile group

Figures 10 and 11 show group reduction factors (group reduction factor"ratio of group sti!ness
to the sum of the sti!ness of individual piles [17]) for a 2 and a 3 pile group, for vertical and
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

1121

Figure 8. Comparison of the in#uence factor I of horizontally loaded single pile.

M+

Figure 9. Comparison of the top rotation of torsionally loaded single pile.

horizontal loading, respectively. Figure 12 compares the load distribution, expressed in terms of
the ratio of pile head load P and average pile head load P , in a 3 pile group subjected to
J
a vertical load. The agreement is generally good, although GEPAN gives lower values of the
group reduction factors than DEFPIG or PIGLET for horizontal loading. For a 3 pile group
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1122

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

Figure 10. Comparison of the reduction factors of vertically loaded pile groups.

Figure 11. Comparison of the reduction factors of horizontally loaded pile groups.

subjected to torsion, Figure 13 shows the load distribution, expressed as the ratio of pile head
torsion load and average pile head torsion load , by GEPAN and PIGLET. GEPAN
J
considers torsional interaction whereas PIGLET ignores torsional interaction [9] and therefore
does not distinguish between the various piles. Figure 14 illustrates a practical problem presented
by Poulos and Davis [17]. Four methods are compared in Table I in which o , o and h are the
J 
vertical head displacement of pile no. 3, the horizontal head displacement of the piles, and the
head rotation of the piles, respectively. Good agreement is observed among the three analyses
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

1123

Figure 12. Comparison of the load distributions of vertically loaded in 3 group.

Figure 13. Comparison of the load distributions of torsion loading of 3 group.

which consider pile}soil}pile interaction, whereas the equivalent-bent method (which represents
the pile group as a structural frame) gives rather di!erent results.
4.3. Piles embedded in non-homogeneous soils
Figure 15 compares the head settlements of end-bearing piles with di!erent base Young's moduli
E using programs GEPAN and PIES [19]. The latter analyses the axial movement of piles by


Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1124

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

Figure 14. Pile groups considered in comparison of methods.

Table I. Comparison methods of the general analysis on a pile group.

Quantity
< (kN)

< (kN)

< (kN)

H (kN)

H (kN)

H (kN)

M (kN m)

M (kN m)

M (kN m)

o (mm)

o (mm)

h (rad)

Equivalent-bent
analysis [17]
67.2
200
332.8
66.8
66.7
66.6
!6.2
!6.2
!6.2
17.5
8.9
0.00581

Elastic continuum
analysis [17]
50.5
163.4
386.1
75.9
48.2
75.9
!39.6
!23.5
!39.6
14.8
11.8
0.00248

PIGLET
55.7
155
389.3
80.4
39.3
80.4
!42.0
!16.3
!42.0
9.9
11.4
0.00242

GEPAN
54.0
156.0
390.0
73.7
50.9
75.4
!38.5
!26.1
!38.6
10.8
10.5
0.00241

consideration of the interaction of annular ring elements at the pile}soil interface. There is a good
agreement between the solutions. Figure 16 compares the computed head settlements of a #oating-pile embedded in an underlying rigid base below the soil layer. Solutions from GEPAN, PIES
and DEFPIG all agree well. The settlement interaction between two piles in which the soil pro"le
is layered is illustrated for two cases in Figure 17, using Equation (7) for the non-homogeneous
soil pro"le. The agreement between settlement interaction factors from the present approach, and
from the solution of Mylonakis et al. [21], is again good (the settlement interaction factor is the
ratio of the additional settlement caused by an adjacent pile to the settlement of an isolated pile
under an equal load).
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

1125

Figure 15. Head settlements of an end-bearing pile.

Figure 16. Head settlements of a #oating-pile embedded an underlying rigid base.

Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1126

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

Figure 17. Interaction factors for pile groups embedded in layered soils.

4.4. Numerical ezciency of GEPAN

It is found that, for a typical pile length, when the pile is divided into 20 or more elements
vertically and 4 or more circumferentially, the numerical results for GEPAN become almost
independent of the number of elements.
The technique of changeable integration points in GEPAN results is substantial savings in
computer time, without sacri"cing accuracy, as shown in Figure 18 and Table II. For vertical
loading with a symmetrical con"guration of piles, three cases are given in Figure 18(a). In case I,
9;9 integration points are used, regardless of the distance between two elements. For cases II
and III, changeable integration points are used. The integration point depends on the distance
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

1127

Figure 18. Numerical e$ciency on dynamic integration point methods.

Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1128

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

Table II. Comparison of unchangeable and changeable integration points.

Number
of piles

Case I
S

X

1
4
9

(mm)

4.7123
2.7977
2.1169

Case II
Time, t

19
501
3643

X

(mm)

4.7098
2.7969
2.1164

Case III

Time, t


S (mm)
X

Time, t


4
118
1722

4.6394
2.7763
2.1042

2
56
1559

Note: "20 m, d"1 m, s"3 m, E "30 000 MPa, E "20 MPa, l "0.3, l "0.5.




S "Top vertical movement of piles for case i, t computer running time for case i.
XG
G
Computer: CP, Pentium 200, 160Mb RAM.

between two elements over pile diameter X/d, with a smaller of number of integration points
being taken as the distance between two elements increases. In case II, for example, 9;9 points
are used if X/d"0, 8;8 if X/d"2, 2 , down to 2;2 if X/d*8. It is seen that, in case II,
GEPAN saves about 75 per cent computer running time as compared with the time for case I,
while the relative error is only about 0.05 per cent.

5. SOME APPLICATIONS
The GEPAN analysis appears to have potential application to a variety of pile analysis problems.
While some of these applications will form the subject of future papers by the authors, three
simple applications are described below to illustrate the utility of the analysis.
5.1. Ow-line ewects of piles
&O!-line' response exists between piles. For example, two piles with vertical loads may also
experience some horizontal movement. Since GEPAN is a fully coupled load}deformation
program, it can, as a matter of course, describe the o!-line e!ects. Figure 19 shows an example of
the horizontal pile head movements due to vertical load on a group of to piles. It is found that the
o!-line horizontal movements are signi"cant for axially loaded piles that are highly compressible
and closely spaced. It should also be noted that the horizontal o!-line movement in case II
(anti-symmetrical) is larger than one in case I (symmetrical). As a further example, for two
horizontally loaded piles, Figure 20 shows the torsional twist at the pile head due to the
horizontal loads. When the angle b (between the direction of loading and the piles) is about 453,
the o!-line twist reaches a maximum value.
5.2. Diwerence between positive and negative interaction factors
The concept of intraction factors is widely applied to pile foundation problems [17,20,21}23] to
compute group e!ects on deformations. The interaction factor a, which is de"ned as the ratio of
additional settlement caused by adjacent pile and settlement of pile under its own load [17], is
generally determined for two piles with loads in the same direction (symmetrical). If two loads are
opposite (anti-symmetrical) this interaction factor a is generally assumed to have the same
magnitude but to be opposite in sign. However, the magnitude of the positive and negative
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

1129

Figure 19. O!-line e!ects of vertically loaded piles.

Figure 20. O!-line e!ects of horizontal loaded piles.

Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1130

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

Figure 21. Positive and negative interaction factors of vertical loaded piles

in#uence factors are, in fact, di!erent, as can be discovered indirectly from some two-dimensional
analyses [17,21]. The GEPAN analysis reveals that the interaction factor in the anti-symmetrical
case is larger, especially when the two piles are closely spaced, Figures 21 and 22 show this for the
interaction factors a and a which apply for a free-head pile subjected to horizontal load only
M&
F&
[17]. This phenomenon is mainly attributed to the e!ects of the di!erent o!-line responses, as
already discussed in relation to Figure 19.
5.3. Interaction between two pile groups
GEPAN can analyse the interaction behaviour of multiple groups of piles. Group interaction
factors can be de"ned in a similar manner to the interaction factors for individual piles. For
example, the group interaction factors a (a
) can be de"ned as the ratio of additional vertical
 M&
(horizontal) movement caused by an adjacent pile group over vertical (horizontal) movement of
pile group under its own vertical (horizontal) load. Figures 23 and 24 show group interaction
factors for two 2 groups, for the "xed head condition, for vertical and horizontal loadings,
respectively. As can be seen, the interaction factors between the two groups have a similar trend to
those for two individual piles.
5.4. Other potential applications
The method presented in this paper has the potential to analyse complex pile foundation
problems and is capable of being developed to consider more general pile foundation analyses
such as the following:
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

1131

Figure 22. Positive and negative interaction factors of horizontal loaded piles

Figure 23. Group interaction factor a of two 2 vertical loaded groups

E

Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1132

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

Figure 24. Group interaction factor a

of two 2 horizontal loaded groups
EM&

(1) Ground}pile interaction problems: In practical engineering problems, ground movements,

such as those from soil shrinkage/expansion, tunneling, excavation, embankment construction, and installation of adjacent piles, may a!ect the pile behaviour. If the directly imposed
&free-"eld' ground displacements or stresses are known, the complex ground}pile interaction problems may be assessed by employing Equation(5) and/or Equation (6).
(2) Behaviour of pile groups containing defective piles: At present, most available computer
programs appear to have no capability for analysing the e!ects of defective piles. The
program GEPAN may be used to examine the e!ects of various defects and numbers of
defective piles on a pile group because each pile in the group can be speci"ed as having
di!erent properties and/or geometry.
(3) oad-transfer analysis: A general load-transfer analysis may be carried out by representing
the sub-matrix SIF by the &t-z1 and &p-y1 concepts. In this case, only diagonal elements are
considered in the matrix SIF.
(4) Non-linear and elastoplastic analysis: A general non-linear and elastoplastic analysis for piles and pile groups may be developed by modifying the matrices SIF and
PIF.
(5) Pile foundation}structure analysis: Since multiple pile-groups can be analysed by this
analysis, it can be extended further to consider pile foundation}structure interaction if the
global matrix is expanded into a &global pile foundation}structure matrix' by assembling
the pile foundation matrix presented in this paper and the structure matrix developed via,
for example, a conventional direct sti!ness method.
At present, some of above applications are being developed and will be published in future
papers.
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

1133

6. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents a general three-dimensional load}deformation analysis for pile foundations
using the boundary element method.
For a &global' foundation which includes multiple pile groups and the e!ects of soil movements,
the analysis uses the concepts of hierarchical structures and a basic in#uence factor matrix
(BIFM), to derive the sub-matrices for the global matrix. The analysis is implemented via
a computer program, GEPAN.
Through extensive comparisons, it is shown that, for direct loading e!ects, the three di!erent
pile analyses, PIGLET, DEFPIG and GEPAN generally agree well, although each of these
approaches has a di!erent basis.
However, the present analysis is more general and allows proper considerations of &true'
three-dimensional situations, as it considers all 6 load components and 6 displacement components for each of the piles, and also incorporates full coupling e!ects. Arbitrary dimensions of
piles and general 3-D soil movements can be analysed, enabling problems involving both direct
loading and ground movements to be analysed. GEPAN exhibits a high numerical e$ciency and
the method of changeable integration points enables signi"cant savings to be made in computation times.
The present analysis reveals some subtle phenomena, which conventional analysis cannot, such
as o!-line e!ects of piles, di!erent interaction factors for compression and uplife loadings,
interaction among pile groups, and interaction within groups subjected to torsion. It is also
capable of being extended to cover more complex ground}pile interaction problems, such as
those involving ground movements and defects within some of the piles in a group.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The work described in the paper forms part of a project on the behaviour of pile groups containing defective
piles, which is supported by a grant from the Australian Research Council.
APPENDIX A: HIERARCHICAL STRUCTURES AND BIFMs

In the governing equation the global matrix has 12 non-zero sub-matrices which are hierarchical
and assembled by several basic in#uence factor matrices (BIFMs). The hierarchical structures of
and the BIFMs of the sub-matrices are introduced below.
1. Sub-matrix SIF:

SIF"

I
I




I
G
LRMR

I

I

2
2

H
2
I
GH
2

LRMR
2
2

I
LRMRLRMR

3 ntot;3 ntot

I is the 3;3 BIFM of soil element displacements due to soil element stresses, which is expressed
GH
as I
(soil displacement in the k direction at element i due to a unit stress in the l direction on
GHIJ
element j ).
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1134

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

2. Sub-matrix PIF:

J


PIF"

J


J
G

J
LNGJQ

J

2

LCNQG
2

J
2
GH
J"
G
J
2 J

LCNQG
LCNQGLCNQG

2



3 ntot;3 ntot

nept(i);nept(i)

where nept(i) is the total number of elements of pile i, neps(i) the total number of shaft and
discontinuous elements of pile i. J the 3;3 BIFM of pile elements displacements due to pile
GH
element stresses, which is expressed as J
(displacement in the k direction at pile element i due
GHIJ
to a unit stress in the l direction at pile element j).
3. Sub-matrix B:



b

B"


b
G

G
2

b"
G

2
b
LNGJQ

G

b
GH

b
GLCNRG

3 ntot;6 npil

3 nept(i);6

b is the 3;6 BIFM of pile element displacements due to pile tip displacements, where the
GH
elements are b
(displacement in the k direction at element j of pile i due to a unit tip
GHIJ
displacement in l component at pile i).
4. Sub-matrix D:

d


D"

d


d
G

d
LANQSK
2




d"
G

3 ntot;6 ncpsum

d
G
d
G
d
GH

GLCNQG


3 nept(i);6

d is the 3;6 BIFM of pile displacements due to pile head loads, with the elements
GH
d
"displacement in k direction at element j of pile i due to a unit head load in l component on
GHIJ
pile i.
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

5. Sub-matrix G:

g

g
G" 
2

g
LA?N
2

2

2 2

g
LA?N

g
2
GH
2 g
LA?NLA?N

1135

6 ncap;6 ncap

g is the 6;6 BIFM of cap loads due to load displacement. If cap i and cap j are independent,
GH
g is a zero sub-matrix. If cap i and cap j are joined by a tie beam, g is expressed as g
"load
GH
GH
GHIJ
in k component of cap i due to a unit displacement in l component of cap j.
6. Sub-matrix H:

h


H"

h


h
G

h
LA?N

h "(h h h h
)
G
G G GH GLANGJG 6;6 ncpil(i)

6 ncap;6 ncpsum

where ncpil(i) is the total number of the piles under pile cap i and h the 6;6 BIFM for cap loads
GH
due to pile head loads, and the elements are h
"head load (k component) on cap i due to
GHIJ
a unit head load (l component) on pile j.
7. Sub-matrix O:

o


O"


o



o
G

2
o
LA?N

o "(o o o o
)
G
G G GH GLCAQG 6;nect(i)

,
6 ncpsum;3 ntot

where nect(i) is the total number of elements of the piles under pile cap i, necs(i) the total number
of shaft and discontinuous elements of the piles under pile cap i, and o "the 6;3 BIFM of the
GH
pile head displacements due to pile element stresses, the element is o
"the head displacement
GHIJ
(k component) of pile i due to a unit stress (l direction) on element j of pile i.
8. Sub-matrix P:

p


P"

p


p
G

p
LANQSK

6 ncpsum;6 npils

p is the 6;6 BIFM of the pile head displacements due to pile tip displacements, and the elements
G
are expressed as p "the head displacement (k component) of pile i due to a unit tip
GIJ
displacement (l component) of pile i.
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1136

K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

9. Sub-matrix Q:

q


q


Q"

q
G

q
LA?N



q"
G

q
G
q
G
q
GH

q
GLANGJG

6 ncpsum;6 ncap

6 ncpil(i);6

q is the 6;6 BIFM of the pile head displacements due to cap displacements, and the elements
GH
are q
"the head displacement (k component) of pile j due to a unit cap displacement
GHIJ
(l component) of cap i.
10. Sub-matrix R:

R"

r
G

r
LANQSK

6 ncpsum;6 ncpsum

r is the 6;6 BIFM of the pile head displacements due to pile head loads, with the elements
G
r "the head displacement (k component) due to a unit head load (l component) of pile i.
GIJ
11. Sub-matrix S:

S"

s


s
G

LNGJQ

s "(s s s s
)
G
G G GH GLCNRG 6;3 nept(i)

,
6 npils;3 ntot

s is the 6;3 BIFM of the pile head loads due to pile elements stresses, with the elements s
"
GH
GHIJ
the head load (k component) on pile i due to a unit stress on element j (l component) of pile i.
12. Sub-matrix <:

v


v


<"

v
G

v
LANQSK
2


6 npils;6 ncpsum

v is the 6;6 BIFM of the pile head loads due to pile head loads, with elements v "the head
G
GIJ
load (k component) of pile i due to a unit head load (l component) of pile i.
Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF PILES AND PILE GROUPS

1137

APPENDIX B: NOMENCLATURE
In principle and Appendix A parts
Control values
ncap
npils
ntot
nipsum
ncpsum
ncpil(i)
nept(i)
neps(i)
nect(i)
necs(i)

"total
"total
"total
"total
"total
"total
"total
"total
"total
"total

number of
number of
number of
number of
number of
number of
number of
number of
number of
number of

pile caps
piles
elements
individual piles
piles of pile-groups
the piles under cap i
elements of pile i
shaft and discontinuous elements of pile i
elements of the piles under pile cap i
shaft and discontinuous elements of the piles under pile cap i

Basic in-uence factor matrices

I
"displacements at soil element i due to unit stresses on soil element j
GH
J
"displacements at pile element i due to unit stresses on pile element j
GH
b
"displacements at element j of pile i due to unit tip displacements at pile i
GH
d
"displacements at element j of pile j due to unit head loads on pile i
GH
h
"loads on pile cap i due to unit head loads on pile j
GH
o
"head displacements on pile i due to unit stresses on element j of pile i
GH
p
"head displacements of pile i due to unit tip displacements of pile i
G
q
"head displacements of pile j due to unit displacements of cap i
GH
r
"head displacements of pile i due to unit head loads on pile i
G
s
"head loads on pile i due to unit stresses on element j of pile i
GH
v
"head load on pile i due to unit loads on pile i
G
In evaluation and application parts
Pile and soil parameters
E
"Young's modulus of pile

E
"Young's modulus of soil

E
"base Young's modulus


l
"Poission's ratio of pile

l
"Poission's ratio of soil

P, H, M, "vertical, horizontal, moment, torsional loadings, respectively
, d
"length and diameter of pile, respectively
I
"moment of inertia of pile section

s, c
"spacing (c/c) between two piles and pile groups, respectively
Geo-factors of pile parameter studies
K
K
0
I ,I ,I ,
F+ M+ F&
R
R
%4 %&M

"pile sti!ness factor

"pile #exibility factor
"in#uence factors
"group reduction factors

Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138

1138
a, a , a
M& F&
a ,a
 M&
Others
GEPAN
BIFM


K. J. XU AND H. G. POULOS

"interaction factors
"group interaction factors

"general pile analysis

"basic in#uence factor matrix
"zero sub-matrix or vector

REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.

Hrenniko! A. Analysis of pile foundations with batter piles. ransactions of the ASCE 1950; 115:351}374.
Kocsis P. ateral loads on piles. Bureau of Eng., Chicage, 1968.
Nair K, Gray J, Donovan N. Analysis of pile group behavior. ASM, SP 444, 1969; 118}159.
Focht JA, Koch KJ. Rational analysis of the lateral performance of o!shore pile groups. Proceedings of 5th O+shore
echnical Conference, Houston, vol. 2, 1973; 701}708.
O'Neil MW, Ghazzaly OI, Ha HB. Analysis of three-dimensional pile groups with nonlinear soil response and
pile}soil}pile interaction. Proceedings of 9th Annual OC, Houston, Paper OTC 2838, 1977; 245}256.
Chow YK. Analysis of vertically loaded pile groups. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in
Geomechanics, 1986; 10(1):59}72.
Poulos HG. An approach for the analysis of o!shore pile groups. Proceedings, Conference on Numerical Methods in
O+shore Piling. Institution of Civil Engineers: London, England, 1979; 119}126.
Poulos HG. Pile behaviour-theory and application, 29th Rankine Lecture. GeH otechnique 1989; 39(3):365}415.
Randolph MF. PIGLET: a computer program for the analysis and design of pile groups under general loading
conditions. Soil Report R91, C;ED/D. Cambridge University, Cambridge, England, 1980.
Baneerjee PK, Driscoll RMC. Three-dimensional analysis of raked groups. Proceedings, Institution of Civil Engineers
1976; 61:653}671.
Ottaviani M. Three-dimensional "nite element analysis of vertically loaded pile groups. GeH otechnique 1975;
25(2):159}174.
Desai CS. Numerical design * analysis for piles in sands. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE 1974;
100(GT6):613}635.
Pressley JG, Poulos HG. Finite element analysis of mechanisms of pile group behavior. International Journal for
Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 1986; 10:213}221.
Poulos HG. DEFPIG-Deformation Analysis of Pile Groups. ;ser1s Guide. Centre for Geot Res, Univ of Sydney,
Australia, 1990.
Poulos HG. Randolph MF. Pile group analysis, a study of two methods. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division,
ASCE 1983; 109(GT3):355}372.
Mindlin RD. Force at a point in the interior of a semi-in"nite solid. Physics 1936; 7:195}202.
Poulos HG, Davis EH. Pile Foundation Analysis and Design. Wiley: New York, 1980.
Xu KJ, Poulos HG. Principle of program GEPAN for general pile elastic analysis. Research Report No. R782,
Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Sydney, 1999.
Poulos HG. PIES ;sers Guide. Centre for Geot. Res. Univ. of Sydney, Australia, 1989.
Hull TS. The static behaviour of laterally loaded piles. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Sydney, Australia 1987.
Mylonakis G, Gazetas G. Settlement and additional internal forces of grouped piles in layered. GeH otechnique 1998;
48(1):55}72.
Cheung YK, Tham LG, Guo DJ. Analysis of pile group by in"nite layer method. GeH otechnique 1988; 38(3):415}431.
Lee CY. Settlement of pile group-practical approach. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE 1993;
199(9):1449}1461.

Copyright  2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2000; 24:1109}1138