IFCEE 2015 ASCE 2015 1142

Group Effects on Piles Behavior under Lateral Loading

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Misgun Samuel on 03/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Pooya Allahverdizadeh1, S.M. ASCE

1
PhD Candidate, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Colorado
School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA, pallahve@mines.edu

ABSTRACT: In this study, behavior of a 33 pile group under lateral loading in sand
is investigated by means of numerical modeling. A three-dimensional finite element
model was developed using the ABAQUS software to simulate the behavior of steel
pipe piles and soil. In this model, the behavior of the soil is described using an elastic-
plastic constitutive model while the piles were treated as elastic materials. P-
multipliers were developed for each row of the pile groups. Values of 0.78, 0.40, and
0.38 were calculated for a 33 free-headed pile group with 3D spacing in the both
directions. Piles spacing and piles head conditions effects on the group interaction and
consequently p-multipliers have been studied. It has been resulted that piles spacing
in a group is an important parameter affecting the piles behavior under lateral loading,
however, the piles head condition does not have a considerable effect on the values of
p-multipliers.

INTRODUCTION

Laterally loaded piles have received extensive attention due to their common
occurrence and usage in practice. Several methods for analyzing pile behavior under
such loads have been proposed during the decades. Although fairly reliable methods
have been developed for predicting the lateral resistance of single piles, methods for
predicting the lateral resistance of pile groups are still a challenging area for the
researchers and engineers. Pile-soil-pile interaction leads to a different behavior of
piles in a group. The piles in the front row of a group can have a similar behavior as
single pile under lateral loading; however, piles located in the rear rows have a
considerable different response to lateral loading. Figure 1 shows a schematic plan
view of a 33 pile group under lateral loading with shadowing and edge effects
(Walsh 2005). Brown et al. (1988) were the first to propose the p-multiplier method
for pile groups under lateral loading. They conducted cyclic loading tests on nine steel
pipe piles, and defined the p-multiplier indexes which are the ratio of the soil
resistance in a group to it a single pile. The p-multipliers were calculated to be 0.8,
0.4, and 0.3 for the lead, middle, and trail rows respectively. Further studies have
been made by other researchers on calculating the p-multipliers using full-scale and

Page 1
IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 ASCE 2015 1143

centrifuge tests (e.g. Rollins et al. 1998, 2005, 2006, McVay et al. 1995, 1998).
The behavior of single piles and pile groups under lateral loading has also been
studied by numerical modeling (e.g. Brown and Shie 1990, 1991, Wakai et al. 1999,
Yang and Jeremic 2003, Gatmiri et al. 2011). However, limited researches on
calculating the p-multipliers for pile groups using numerical modeling have been
done (e.g. Allahverdizadeh 2011). In this study, a 3D finite element model has been
developed by the ABAQUS software to study the behavior of piles in a group and
calculating the p-multiplier indexes. Pile spacing and piles head condition effects on
group interaction and p-multipliers have been studied using this model.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Misgun Samuel on 03/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 1. Plan view of a 33 pile group under lateral loading (Walsh 2005)

MODELLING

A full-scale test performed by Rollins et al. (2005) has been modeled in this study
to verify the numerical model results. In this section, a brief description of the full-
scale test has been provided.
The full-scale test was performed on a 33 steel pile group by Rollins et al. The
piles spacing s, in both directions was equal to 3.3D in which D is the diameter of the
pipe piles. The piles had a thickness of 9mm, diameter of 324mm and a total length of
12.19m. The lateral load was applied to the piles in a way that simulated the free-head
pile group. More details about this full-scale test can be found at Rollins et al. (2005).

Model Verification

A 3D finite element model was developed in ABAQUS to verify that the pile group
model has reasonable and accurate results. Figure 2 shows the finite element meshing
of the 33 steel pile group. Because of the model symmetry, only half of the pile
group is modeled. 4 nods shell elements are used for modeling the steel piles, and the
soil is modeled by 8 nods brick elements. The sides and bottom of the model in all
three coordinate directions are fixed except the symmetry plane which is only fixed in
the Y direction (perpendicular to the symmetry plane). The piles are modeled in free-
head condition, and an identical displacement is applied to each piles head.

Page 2
IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 ASCE 2015 1144
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Misgun Samuel on 03/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 2. Finite element mesh of the 33 steel pile group under lateral loading

The steel piles are modeled as elastic materials with Youngs Modulus E= 200GPa
and Poisson ratio = 0.3. The soil, on the other hand, is modeled as an elastic-plastic
material using Mohr-Coulomb failure criteria. The soil mechanical properties used in
the numerical model are shown in Table 1. The soil is modeled in four layers to
simulate the field conditions more precisely. , , c, and present the density,
internal friction angle, cohesion and dilation angle of the soil respectively.

Table 1. Soil mechanical properties used in the numerical modeling of the full-
scale test

Layer Depth(m) (kg/m3) E(MPa) c(kPa)

1 0- 2.97 2500 32 0.35 38 0 25
2 2.97-3.99 2000 35 0.35 36 0 24
3 3.99-7.49 2000 38 0.35 33 0 22
4 7.49-11.5 2000 40 0.35 20 15 0

Figures 3 and 4 show the load-displacement curves for each pile in the lead row of
the pile group, and the load distribution between the 3 rows respectively. As it can be
seen in Figure 3, the numerical modeling results have a good agreement with the full-
scale test. The model assumed to be symmetric; therefore, the load-displacement
curves for both left and right piles are identical in the numerical model and have good
agreement with the right piles in the full-scale test. In the full-scale test, however, the
left piles seem to carry more load than the right piles. Rollins et al. (2005) reported
that the reason for different behavior of the left and right piles could be a slight
torsion during the test, soil heterogeneity, and the soil different density due to the
piles installation. Another observation of this graph is that the side piles carry more
load than the middle piles. This happens because the middle piles experience more
group interaction (edge effects) than the side piles (Figure 1).

Page 3
IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 ASCE 2015 1145

80

60

Lateral load (kN)

40
Middle pile-fullscale test
Right pile-fullscale test
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Misgun Samuel on 03/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

20 Left pile-fulscale test

Side pile-this study
Middle pile-this study
0
0 10 20 30 40
Displacement (mm)

FIG. 3. Lateral load vs. piles head displacement for the numerical and full-scale
test for the first row of the 33 pile group

200

150
Lateral load (kN)

100

50 Lead row
Middle row
Trail row
0
0 10 20 30 40
Displacement (mm)

FIG. 4. Load-displacement curves for each row of the 33 steel pile group

According to Figure 4, the piles in the lead row carry more load than the piles in the
middle and trail rows. The reason is that the shadowing effect doesnt affect the piles
in the front row, as there are no piles in front of them. This leads to less group
interaction, and subsequently more load capacity.
The piles are modeled as free-headed, so the maximum bending moment happens in
a depth bellow the ground surface. This depth is equal to 1.6m and 2m for the lead
row piles and middle and trail row piles respectively. Figure 5 shows the comparison
of the maximum bending moment for the rows in the numerical model with the full-
scale test results. As it can be seen, there is a good agreement in moment distribution
between the numerical model and full-scale test as well.

Page 4
IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 ASCE 2015 1146

100

Max bending moment (kN.m)

80

60

40
Lead row- This study
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Misgun Samuel on 03/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Middle row- This study

20 Trailrow-This study
Lead row-fullscale test
Middle & Trail row-fullscale test
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Displacement (mm)

FIG. 5. Maximum bending moment distribution for the three rows of the 33
pile group for both numerical and full-scale models.

P-MULTIPLIERS (Pm)

Another 33 pile group is modeled similar to the Rollins et al. (2005) model with
different piles dimension and soil mechanical properties for calculating the p-
multipliers. The diameter D, thickness, and length of the piles are equal to 60mm,
18mm, and 25.5m respectively. Piles spacing s, in both directions are equal to 3D.
The same meshing and boundary conditions are used for this pile group with different
mechanical properties for the soil. Table 2 shows the mechanical properties of the
sandy soil used in this model. The purpose of this model is to simulate an offshore
pile group condition (bigger dimensions and weaker soil).

Table 2. Soil mechanical properties used in the numerical model for the offshore
pile group model

Layer Depth(m) (kg/m3) E(MPa) c(kPa)

1 0- 4 2000 9 0.35 32 0 21
2 4-14 2000 23 0.35 33 0 22
3 14-24 2000 58 0.35 36 0 24
4 24-30 2500 150 0.35 38 0 25

Figure 6 illustrates the load-displacement graphs for each pile in the 33 group. As
it can be seen, the side piles carry more load than the middle piles, and the piles in the
lead row have the maximum load for a given displacement while the trail row piles
have a minimum value of the load corresponding to the same displacement.

Page 5
IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 ASCE 2015 1147

250

200

Lateral load (kN)

150

100
Lead row-side pile
Lead row-middle pile
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Misgun Samuel on 03/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Middle row- side pile

50 Middle row-middle pile
Trail row-side pile
Trail row-middle pile
0
0 50 100 150
Displacement (mm)

FIG. 6. Lateral load vs. piles head displacement for each pile of the 33 pile
group

P-multipliers for this 33 pile group (s=3D) are calculated. For this purpose, p-y
curve for a single pile model, which has the identical properties as the pile group,
were derived, and the p-y curves of the piles in the group were compared to this
curve. For increasing the accuracy, the p-multipliers averaged between their values in
three different depths. These depths were chosen based on the element sizes. Figure 7
shows the p-y curves for the single pile and the piles in the group at the depth of
0.98m. The p-multipliers (Pm) calculated from the p-y curves have been illustrated in
Table 3.

50

40
P (kN/m)

30
Lead row-side pile
Lead row-middle pile
20
Middle row-side pile
Middle row-middle pile
10 Trail row-side pile
Trail row-middle pile
Single Pile
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Y (mm)

FIG. 7. P-y curves for the single pile and piles in the 33 pile group at the depth
of 0.98m (s=3D)

Page 6
IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 ASCE 2015 1148

Table 3. P-multipliers for the 33 pile group (s=3D)

Depth (m) Pm, lead row Pm, middle row Pm, trail row
Side pile Middle Side pile Middle Side pile Middle
pile pile pile
0.98 0.78 0.72 0.45 0.38 0.38 0.38
1.6 0.82 0.75 0.48 0.39 0.38 0.38
2.31 0.85 0.77 0.53 0.46 0.35 0.4
Average Pm 0.78 0.40 0.38
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Misgun Samuel on 03/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The averaged values for the p-multipliers for the 33 pile group with 3D pile spacing
are 0.78, 0.4 and 0.38 for the lead, middle, and the trail rows respectively. Figure 8
compares the values for the p-multipliers calculated from the numerical model by the
p-multipliers recommended by other researchers. According to this Figure, the p-
multipliers of the numerical model are very close to that calculated by full-scale and
centrifuge tests. There is a difference between the Rollins et al. (1998) and McVay et
al. (1998) recommended p-multiplier values; the FEA results of this study lies in
between of these two models, but more close to the McVay et al. (1998).

0.9
0.8
P-multipier

0.7 FE model
0.6
0.5 Brown et al. (1988),
McVAy et al. (1998)
0.4
Rollins et al. (1998)
0.3
0.2
0 1 2 3 4
Row number

FIG. 8. P-multipliers proposed by the numerical model, full-scale tests, and

centrifuge test for a 33 pile group (s=3D)

Fixed-head Pile Group

A rigid pile cap was added to the model to investigate the effect of piles head
condition. The piles and soil models have the same characteristics and geometry as
the offshore pile group. Figure 9 shows a cross section of the pile group under lateral
loading with the vertical displacement contours. An identical procedure to the free-
head pile group is applied for calculating the p-multipliers for the fixed-head pile
group.
The p-multipliers values are calculated to be 0.78, 0.47, and 0.37 for the front,
middle and the rear rows respectively. Comparing these numbers with Table 3, it can
be concluded that the piles head condition does not have a considerable influence on
the p-multipliers.

Page 7
IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 ASCE 2015 1149
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Misgun Samuel on 03/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 9. Cross section view of the fixed-head 33 pile group with displacement
contours in the Z direction (s=3D)

Piles Spacing Effect

The free-head pile group is modeled with s= 4D, 5D, 6D, and 7D to study the effect
of the pile spacing on group interaction and p-multipliers. The piles spacing in the
direction perpendicular to the load were kept constant and equal to 3D. The soil
mechanical properties and meshing geometry were the same as the previous model.
Figure 10 illustrates the load percentages carried out by each row of the pile group for
the groups with different pile spacing ratio (s/D). It has been shown that by increasing
the pile spacing, the different between the load carried out by each row in the group
decreases. By increasing the pile spacing, the group interaction decreases (lower
shadowing effect) which leads to a more uniform load distribution between the rows.
The p-multipliers variation with the piles spacing ratio (s/D) is shown in Figure 11.
According to this figure, by increasing the piles spacing, p-multipliers increase. It
means that, by increasing s, the group interaction decreases and piles behave more
similar to a single pile; thus, it leads to higher values for the p-multipliers. Another
observation from Figure 11 is that by increasing the piles spacing to 7D, the p-
multiplier for the lead row of the group is 1, which means that piles in this row
experience no group interaction under lateral loading although the piles in the middle
and trail row still have p-multipliers less than 1.

Page 8
IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 ASCE 2015 1150

45

Load Percentage
40

35

30 Lead row
Middle row
25 Trail row
3 5 7
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Misgun Samuel on 03/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(s/D)

FIG. 10. Load percentage carried out by each row in the 33 pile group vs. s/D

0.8
P-multipliers

0.6

0.4
Lead row
0.2 Middle row
Trail row
0
3 4 5 6 7
(s/D)

FIG. 11. P-multipliers vs. s/D for the 33 pile group

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, a 3D finite element model was developed to study the behavior of 33
pile groups under lateral loading. Comparison of results from FEM and full-scale
study showed that elastic-plastic finite element analysis can predict the behavior of
pile groups with very good accuracy. Particularly, load distribution and maximum
moment distribution results for each pile and each row from the finite element
analyses agree very well with that from full-scale study. P-multipliers were calculated
for 33 pile group with the piles spacing equal to 3D, 4D, 5D, 6D, and 7D, in which
D is the diameter of the piles. The p-multipliers were calculated 0.78, 0.40 and 0.38
for the pile group with 3D spacing. It was shown that, by increasing the pile spacing
in the load direction, the group interaction decreases and it leads to higher values for
p-multipliers. The group interaction is different for the pile based on their location in
the group. The numerical model results demonstrated that by increasing the piles
space to 7D, the group interaction for the front row piles were disappeared and led to
a p-multiplier equal to 1. However, group interaction effects still can be noticed in the

Page 9
IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 ASCE 2015 1151

following row as the p-multipliers are less than 1 for the piles in these rows. Two pile
groups with both free and fixed head conditions were modeled and it was resulted that
the piles head condition does not have a considerable influence on the p-multiplier
values. The p-multipliers for the fixed headed group were equal to 0.78, 0.47, and
0.37 for the lead, middle and trail rows respectively which are very close to the free-
headed pile group.

REFERENCES
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Misgun Samuel on 03/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Allahverdizadeh, P. (2011). Behavior of offshore pile groups under lateral and

vertical loading, Masters thesis, University of Tehran.
Brown, D.A., Morrison, C, and Reese, L.C. (1988). Lateral loaded behavior of pile
group in sand J. Geotech. Eng., ASCE, 114(11): 12611277.
Brown, D.A., and Shie, C.F. (1990). Numerical experiments into group effects on
the response of piles to lateral loading Computers and Geotechnics, 10: 211230.
Brown, D.A., and Shie, C.F. (1991). Some numerical experiments with a three
dimensional finite element model of a laterally loaded pile Computers and
Geotechnics, 12: 149162.
Gatmiri, B., Allahverdizadeh, P., and Abbasi, A. (2011).Numerical modeling of pile
groups under lateral loading in sand 14th Pan-Am CGS Geotechnical Conference,
Toronto, Canada.
McVay, M., Casper, R. and Shang, T. I. (1995). Lateral response of three-row
groups in loose to dense sands at 3D and 5D spacing, J. Geotech. Eng., ASCE,
121(5): 436-441.
McVay, M., Zhang, L., Molnit, T., and Lai, P. (1998). Centrifuge testing of large
laterally loaded pile groups in sands, J. Geotech. & Geoenv. Eng., ASCE, 124(10):
1016-1026.
Rollins, K. M., Peterson, K. T. and Weaver, T. J. (1998), Lateral load behavior of
full-scale pile group in clay, J. Geotech. & Geoenv. Eng., ASCE, 124(6): 468-478.
Rollins, K. M., Lane, J. D., and Gerber, T. M. (2005). Measured and computed
lateral response of a pile group in sand, J. Geotech. & Geoenv. Eng., ASCE,
131(1): 103-114.
Rollins, K. M., Olsen, R. J., Egbert, J. J., Olsen, K. G., Jensen, D. H., and Garrett, B.
H. (2006a). Pile spacing effects on lateral pile group behavior: Load tests. J.
Geotech. & Geoenv. Eng., ASCE, 132(10): 12621271.
Rollins, K. M., Olsen, K. G., Jensen, D. H., Garrett, B. H., Olsen, R. J., and Egbert, J.
J. (2006b). Pile spacing effects on lateral pile group behavior: Analysis. J.
Geotech. & Geoenv. Eng., ASCE, 132(10): 12721283.
Wakai, A., Gose, S., and Ugai, K. (1999). 3D elasto-plastic finite element analyses
of pile foundations subjected to lateral loading Soils and Foundations, 39(1): 97-
111.
Walsh, J. M. (2005). Full-scale lateral load test of a 3x5 pile group in sand, M.S.
Thesis, Brigham Young University, Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering.
Yang, Z. and Jeremic, B. (2003). Numerical study of group effects for pile groups in
sands In. J. Numeric. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 27: 1255-1276.

Page 10
IFCEE 2015