98.11.

06

(
)

1.
2.
3. ( )

4.
1. 1~4
2. ( )
3.
4. ( )

1. 1~4
2.
3.
1.
2. ( )
( 3. ( )
) 4.
1. 1~4

2.
1.

2.

3.

4.
1. (

)
2.

Qu

Qu = Qs + Q p

Qs = f s As
Q
Qa = u
FS

FS = 2 ~ 4 3
Q p = qu Ap

Load
transfer
mechanism

5
 (Mobilization)
Q = Q1 + Q2 Qu = Qs + Q p
Qs (0.5%D)
Qp ( 10~20%D)
Q Qu Q Qu

1 Q 1 Q

Qs
Qp

Qp Qs

0.1 s D 0.1 s D

(2001)
Qu

Qu
Qa =
FS
Qs Q
Qa = + b
FS1 FS 2
Qs = f s As

FS FS1 FS2

2 3 3

1.5 2 2 Qb = qu Ab

6
-5.3-1

Ff Fb FS

3 3 3
2 0.1D/3cm 3 3
3
4
3.33 3.33

3.33 1.67
( Q b / Q u 0.6)
1.67~3.33
(0.6< Q b / Q u 1)
2.5

AASHTO 1.9~3.5*
3 ( )
4 (N )

(1)

f s = c a + K v tan

(2)

q b = cN c + v N q + 0 .5DN
* * *

7

(1)

f s = ca = cu

Skempton(1959)0.3
0.60.45

(2)
f s = K v tan
1 2
( ~ )
3 3
-5.3-2 (K) NAVFAC DM7.2 (1982)

0.5~1.0 0.3~0.5
1.0~1.5 0.6~1.0
1.5~2.0 1.0~1.3

0.4~0.9 0.3~0.6
0.7 0.4 60

8

(1)
q b = cu N c
*

*
N c 9

*
N c 6

(2)

qb = v N q *

20D (NAVFAC DM-7.2)

-5.3-3

26 28 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
N q* 10 15 21 24 29 35 42 50 62 77 86 120 145

N q* 5 8 10 12 14 17 21 25 30 38 43 60 72

9
 (, 1993)

(1)

fs N / 3( 15) N / 3( 15) N / 5( 15) 1.5

qb 30 N 7.5N 25N 25N

N 4N
1N50

10


(2)



1800 tf/
750 tf/

(3)

-5.3-4 N

fs qb

2
N /3 N /3 30 N 1800tf/m 7.5 N

2
0.2 N 0.5 N 30 N 300tf/m
2 2
10tf/m 20tf/m ( N 40) ( N 30)
0.3 N +3
2 2 2 2
15tf/m 0.5 N 20tf/m 30 N 1000tf/m 7 N 350tf/m


2 2 2
0.2 N 10tf/m 30 N 1500tf/m 10 N 750tf/m

N /5 30 N

AASHTO f s m a x 19.2tf/m 2 5.75 N ( N 75)
2
431tf/m (N75)

0.2 N 0.1 N 40 N 12 N

11


Meyerhof (1976)
q b = 40 N (tf/m 2 )
N
fs = (tf/m 2 )
5
q b = 12 N (tf/m )
2

N
fs = (tf/m 2 )
10
90)

Qu = 40 NA p + 0 .2 N s As + 0 .5 N c Ac

77
Qu = 15 N A p + 0.2 N s As ( f s 10 tf m 2 )

-5.3-5 (tf/m2)

qc500 qc/60 qc/60 qc/120
fs 500qc1200 qc/100 qc/100 qc/200
qc>1200 qc/15015 qc/15015 qc/30010
qb 0.5qca 0.5qca 0.4qca

12
1.5D

q ca
(1) 1.5
q c qc 2
1.5D q ca (2) 1.5
1.3 qc 2 1.3 qc 2
1.5 0.7 qc 2
0.7 qc 2
(3) 1.5
q ca

(Bustamante & Gianeselli, 1982

13
 Qu

1
Ra = W p + f s As
FS

5.3-3 Qs = f s As

1.5 3
3 6

(2)
f s = K v tan
1 2
( ~ )
3 3

-5.3-2 (K) NAVFAC DM7.2 (1982)

0.5~1.0 0.3~0.5
1.0~1.5 0.6~1.0
1.5~2.0 1.0~1.3

0.4~0.9 0.3~0.6
0.7 0.4 60

14
 -5.3-6

2/3 3 1.5

6 3

8 3.33 ()
6.67 ()
3 2.5

6 ()
8 (N )

1.
2.

Qu Qu

Q s = f s As Q s = f s As
0 . 2 N 0 . 33 N FS = 6
FS = 3

Q b = q u Ab
40 N 15 N 7 .5 N

15
 PC
9
L(m) D(mm) Qs(ton) Tu(ton)
R1,A5 23 500 ML15 408 MLT3 138
12 500 ML6 278 MLT5 108
R6 23 500 ML18 249 MLT6 161
23 500 ML19 360 MLT7 162
25 500 ML21 414 MLT8 193
12 500 ML28 203 MLT9 119
D1 25 500 ML4 314 MLT13 170
23 400 ML29 187 MLT10 103
20 600 LY2 235 LYT1 158

300

250

200 MLT1
MLT3
MLT5
MLT6
150 MLT7
MLT8
Load(ton)

MLT9
MLT10
100 MLT11
MLT12
MLT13
LYT1
50 DAT1

900
0
0 10 20 30 40 800 50 60 70 80 90

ML1
700
ML4
ML6
600 ML15
ML16
Load(ton)

500 ML18
ML19
400 ML21
ML28
300 ML29
ML31
LY2
200
DA1

100

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Displacement(mm)

16


5.3.4
1.

2.

17


(1)(N<20)
Ln=0.8L
(2)
Ln=0.9L
(3)()
Ln=1.0L

f n = v K tan f = v
2
f n = (tf/m )
K =
f = ( )
2
v = (tf/m )

18
 -5.3-7 (Garlanger, 1974)

0.2 -0.25
0.25 -0.35
0.35 -0.50

5.3-8 (, 1978)

(%)
20 0.2 -0.25
20-50 0.25 -0.35
(N<10) 50-70 0.35 -0.50

N
fn = 3 +
5
2
f n = (tf/m )
N =
SPT-N

19

(P + P )/ A
fn p sa

( P + P ) (Q + R ) / 1.2
fn p f

P = (tf)
Pfn = (tf)
Q p = (tf)
R f = (tf)
Ap = (m 2 )
sa = (tf/m 2 )

20
5.5
WO
5.5.1

(Vesic, 1977)
WO = WS + WPP + WPS (5.5-5)

1. Qb + Qs

WS = (Qb + QS )
L
AE P

= Qs

Qb
=0.5 =0.5 =0.67 =0.33

21
 2.

C p Qb
W pp =
Bq0
q0 = (tf/)

- 5.5-1 C p

( ) 0.02 0.04 0.09 0.18
( ) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.06
( ) 0.03 0.05 0.09 0.12

3.

CS QS
WPS =
Dqo

D = (m)
CS = = 0.93 + 0.16 D C P
B

22


H
H

() (0)

23






EI

24


~ DL
~ D2

~ D L0 L0 <<L

(mm) (m)
@s=2.5cm @u=1.0cm

800 PC 34 600 ton 20 ton

1500 34 1100 ton 70 ton

600PC 30 450 ton 15 ton

1500 70 2080 ton 70 ton

1200 16.5 800 ton 30 ton

1000 30 1800 ton 130 ton

25


p
p = kh y
kh
(tf/m3)y


kh

Winkler Model

p~y Model

Linear Soil Spring Winkler Model

Beam on Elastic Foundation

k h ( F L3 ) - (horizontal subgrade reaction coeff.)

Es = k h D ( F L2 )
- (horizontal subgrade reaction modulus)

Beam Equation
E p I p y = M
E p I p y = S
E p I p y = p = k h Dy = Es y

26
 Uniform kh along depth
d4y
E p I p 4 + Es y = 0
dx
Es k D
Define = 4 =4 h ( L1 )
4E p I p 4E p I p

1
L
y = e x ( A cos x + B sin x)
+ e x (C cos x + D sin x)
For long pile, C=D=0
A & B are determined by boundary
conditions at pile head

S ( 0) = H 0 2 H 0 x
y= e cos x
M ( 0) = 0 Es

2

H
y = y' M=EI y'' -S=EI y''' p=EI y''''

Response of a laterally loaded pile (k=const)

27

S (0) = 0 2 2 M 0 x
y= e (cos x sin x)
M (0) = M 0 Es
M0
y = y' M=EI y'' -S=EI y''' p=EI y''''

Response of a laterally loaded pile (k=const)

H 0 applied at pile head M 0 applied at pile head
2 H 0 x 2 2 M 0 x
y= e cos x y= e (cos x sin x)
Es Es
2 2 H 0 x 4 3 M 0 x
= e (cos x + sin x) = e cos x
Es Es
H
M = 0 e x sin x M = M 0 e x (cos x + sin x)

S = H 0 e x (cos x sin x) S = 2 M 0 e x sin x
p = 2 H 0 e x cos x p = 2 2 M 0 e x (cos x sin x)

Pile head y0 1 2 2 2 H 0
response = Es = 4 E p I p 4
0 Es 2 4 3 M 0
2

28

all
H0 H 0 = 4 EI 3
1.0cm y0 =
H0 y0 = 1
2 EI 3 0 = 0
1.5cm

H all = 2 E p I p 3 all

H all = 4 E p I p 3 all

kh D
=4
4E p I p

(1993)

d4y
EI + Es y = 0
dx 4
Es = k h D = const D D

k D 1
= ( h )4
4 EI

d4y
EI + (nh x) y = 0
dx 4
Es = k h D = nh x
1
nh 5
=( )
EI

29
 Non-Linear Soil Spring p~y model

p~y

p-y (Matlock,1970)
1. Wedge
failure model
pu = cN c D
D z
N c = [3 + ( + 0.5) ] 9
c D

Lateral flow
failure model

6D
zr = 6D
D
+ 0.5
c

30
 p-y (Matlock,1970)

2. 3. p-y
yc = 2.5 50 D
1
p y 3
= 0.5
50=0.02 for soft clay pu yc

p-y (Reese, et al., 1974)

1.
k x tan sin tan
pst = x 0 + (D + x tan tan )
tan ( ) cos tan ( )
+ k0 x tan (tan sin tan ) k a D ]

[( ) ]
psd = k a Dx tan 8 1 + k0 Dx tan tan 4

2. yu=3D/80
pu = As p s

3. ym=D/60
p m = Bs p s

31

Wedge failure model Lateral flow failure model

p-y (Reese, et al., 1974)

1. C(yu, pu)
yu D = 3 80
2. B(yB, pB)
y B D = 1 60
p B pu = B A
1 puB y B
=
m yuB pB
3. Curve OB
1
p y
= ( )m
pB yB
4. Line OA
k1 z
p= y k1 : Terzaghi subgrade coef .
D

32
 p-y (API, 1987)
1.
pus = (C1 x + C2 D ) x

pud = C3 D x

2. p-y
kx
p = Apu tanh y
Apu
x
A = 3.0 0.8 0.9
D
p

kx
p = Ap u tanh y
Ap u

33


34


1.
Mindlin

2.

3.
Winkler model)

(t-zq-z p-y )

I.
N V
M M
H H
1.






kh
2.





ks (1)

(2)

(3)

kt

35
 (1)

(2)
V (3)
M
H

kh (tf/m3)
ks (tf/m3)
kH
kt (tf/m3)

(tf/m)
kVs kHkh(DL )
kVs=ks(DL )
kVt =kt(D2/4 )
kVt

(1)
khE
Vesic (1961)
0.65 ED 4 E
kh = ( )12 ( )
D E p I p 1 s 2

Broms (1964)
(0.45 ~ 0.9) E
kh =
D
Poulos (1980)
0.82 E
kh =
D

36

R. F. Scott1981

E
kh =
D

G
k s = kt =
2D

4G
k s = kt =
D

(2)

0.5
k h ( y1 ) = 0.8E0 D 0.75 y
k h ( y ) = k h ( y1 )
y1
y1 = 1cm D/100

37

k h ( y1 ) = 0.34(E0 )1.1 D 0.31 (EI )
3 0.103
k H = k HO (BH / 30 )

4

1 0 .5
k HO = E o y
30
k h ( y ) = k h ( y1 )
BH = D y1
= 4 k H D 4EI
k H = (kgf/cm ) y1 = 1cm D/100
3

3
k HO = 30 (kgf/cm )
EO =(kgf/cm ) EO = 28 N
2

= 1 2
4 29
4 EID 3
BH = (cm) BH =
(1 30) E0
14

D = (cm)
(cm - 1 )
EI

BH = D

1

2

38


3 3
1 B 1 B
kh = E0 ( ) 4 = (28N )( ) 4 (kgf cm3 )
30 30 30 30

kh = 0.8E0 B0.75 = 0.8(7 N ) B0.75 (kgf cm3 )

kh = 0.502N 0.37 (kgf cm3 )

kh = 0.691N 0.406 (kgf cm3 )

kh (tf m3 ) = (100 ~150) N

kh (tf m3 ) = (200 ~ 300)Su Su (tf m2 )

(3)
V
M
H

kh p~y
ks t~z
kh
kt q~z

ks

kt

39
 Q
T-z & q-z
Winkler Model
Soil resistance is modeled by
Distributed Linear Elastic
Springs

1. t~z()
2
t max = c + v K tan
3
z z
t = t max (2 ) zu 0.5cm
zu z u
2. q~z()
: qmax = cN c + q( N q 1)
: qmax = qu ( N + 1) (Goodman, 1980)
qu ,design = 0.2qu ,lab N = tan 2 (45 + 2)
q = qmax ( z zu )1 3 zu 0.05 D

40
 p-y
(Matlock, 1970) (Reese, et al., 1974)

1
1 puB y B
1
p y 3 p y
= ( )m =
= 0. 5 pB yB m yuB p B
pu yc

.
Mt
Ht Mt Ht

Pile is modeled by
beam elements
Soil is regarded as an i
elastic continuum and -Fi Fi

perfectly bonded to
the pile elements
Responses of soils
subjected to the pile
load are modeled
through continuum
approach

41
 . 0.5 m 11.5 m

15 m
z ABAQUS



15 m

42


(2001)
5.4.1



1. 2
60cm
2. 2.5
75cm
3. 2
75cm
2.575cm
4. 2.5
1m
5. 3.0
1m

43
 (2001)
5.4.2
1.
(1)
S>2.5d

(2)

(3)
c

d

2.

(1)
(2) Rat = W + LU G / FS

(2001)
5.5.2

44
 (2001)
5.5.3

1. Winkler

2.

3.

45


.
Mt
Ht Mt
Recall Ht

Pile is modeled by
Beam Elements
i
Soil is regarded as an -Fi Fi
elastic continuum and
perfectly bonded to the
pile elements
Responses of soils
subjected to the pile
load are modeled
through continuum
approach

46

T
U s = u1s ,1 v1s ,1 L v1s , n +1 u s2,1 vs2,1 L vs2,n +1
T
p = p1x ,1 p1y ,1 L p1y , n +1 p x2,1 p 2y ,1 L p y2,n +1

Displ. induced by two piles

v1s ,i v s2,i
2 n +1 2 n +1
u 1s ,i u s2,i u1s ,i = I xxl ,ij p xl , j + I xyl ,ij p ly , j
l =1 j =1 l =1 j =1
2 n +1 2 n +1
p 1y , j p y2, j v1s ,i = I yx
l
,ij p x , j + I yy ,ij p y , j
l l l

p1x , j p x2, j l =1 j =1 l =1 j =1

U s = Ip 4( n + 1) 4( n + 1)
p = K s vs Full matrix
Elastic interaction
R s = Yp = YK s U s

2.1
1.

2.


3.

47
II.

(1)

(2)

(3)


()

Axx x + Axy y + Ax = H 0
Ayx x + Ayy y + Ay = V0
Ax x + Ay y + A = M 0

x , y ,

Axx = ( K1 cos 2 i + KV sin 2 i )

Axy = Ayx = ( KV K1 ) sin i cos i )
Ax = Ax = {( KV K1 ) xi sin i cos i K 2 cos i )
Ayy = ( KV cos 2 i + K1 sin 2 i )
Ay = Ay = {( KV cos 2 i + K1 sin 2 i ) xi + K 2 sin i }
A = {( KV cos 2 i + K1 sin 2 i ) xi + ( K 2 + K 3 ) xi sin i + K 4 }
2

48


PNi = KV yi'
PHi = K1 xi' K 2
M ti = K 3 xi' + K 4
xi' = x cos i ( y + xi ) sin i
yi' = x sin i + ( y + xi ) cos i

Vi = PNi cos i PHi sin i

H i = PNi sin i + PHi cos i

- ( =0)

( KV xi + n K 4 ) H 0 + n K 2 M 0
2

x =
n( KV xi + n K 4 ) K1 (n K 2 ) 2
2

y = V0 /(n KV )
Ki M 0 + K 2 H 0
=
( KV xi + n K 4 ) K1 n K 2
2 2

PNi = KV ( y + xi )
PHi = K1 x K 2 = ( H 0 / n)
M ti = K 3 x + K 4

49
 K1, K2, K3 & K4
For a long pile embedded in uniform soils (Chang, 1937)

Recall: y0 1 2 2 2 H 0
M,1 =
0 Es 2 4 3 M 0
2
H,1

1 1

2 EI 3 2 EI 2 H
=
1 1 M
EI
2 EI 2 EI

H 4 EI 3 2 EI 2
M =
2 EI
Es
2 EI =4
2
(a) beam-spring model
4EI

(1)
- D=1m l=30m (l/D =30, long pile)
- EI=2.7*10 6 *0 .0491=1.326*10 5 t-m
- K V =55100 t/m
- k h 0 = E0 / 30 = 1 28 N / 30 = 9.33 kg/cm3 (N=10, N )

- k H = 2 k h 0 (BH / 30 )
3

4 = 4.6 kg/cm3
- = 4 k h D 4 EI = 0.257 m ( BH = D / = 1.974 m )
-1

-
K1 = 4 EI 3 = 9003 t/m
K 2 (= K 3 ) = 2 EI 2 = 17516 t/rad
K 4 = 2 EI = 68156 t m/rad

-
V o =1500 t
o M o =5000t-m
H o =1000 t
- n = 4 3 = 12
- xi = 3 {3.752 + 1.252 +(1.25) 2 + (3.75) 2 } = 93.75 m 2
2

50

(2)
( KV xi + n K 4 ) H 0 + n K 2 M 0
2

o x = = 1.17 10 2 m
n( KV xi + n K 4 ) K1 (n K 2 ) 2
2

o y = V0 /(n KV ) = 2.27 10 3 m
Ki M 0 + K 2 H 0
= = 1.25 103 rad
( KV xi + n K 4 ) K1 n K 2
2 2

PN 1 = K v ( y + x1 ) = 55100 (2.27 10 3 + 1.25 10 3 3.75) = 383 t

PN 4 = K v ( y + x4 ) = 55100 (2.27 10 3 + 1.25 10 3 (3.75)) = 133 t
PHi = K1 x K 2 = H 0 / n = 1000 / 12 = 83.3 t
M ti = K 3 x + K 4 = 120 t - m

2.2
1.

2.


3.

51



s
= 1 0.2(2.5 ) s 2.5 D
D

k hg = eg k h

eg

52
 p~y
p


p Elastic Transition Shadow or
interaction zone edge effects

Single pile
y
Group pile

y
(Bhowmik, 1992)

Fl


Cl+Tl
Cn+T
Fl Fp
Fp
Cn+Tn
Fn W
Fl H
Cl+Tl Fn

W : Fl :
Fn : Tl :
Tn : Cl :
Cn : Fp :

53

s

H0

Ztan-(s-D)/2cot

H0

54
 p - fm

edge effect a Shadowing effect Shadowing effect for

for leading pile bl trailing pile bt

fmi=1i2i3i ji mj

p-y
p
p
y modification

Elastic interaction
y
and edge effect

y
modification

Single Pile
Shadowing

Group Pile
Back Front

55
p-y

p
Single Pile

p effect
y effect
Group Pile

. 3

56
 III.
Pile Foundation

Layered
Soil

Half
Space

(a) Soil ~ Pile System

(ABAQUS)

57


1998
1996
Reese, L.C., Isenhower, W.M., and Wang, S.T. (2006).
Analysis and Design of Shallow and Deep Foundations.

Thanks for your attention

58