Consoli, N. C. et al. (2016) Géotechnique Letters 6, 216–220, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/jgele.16.

00066

Crosswise-loaded pile tests on residual soil site

N. C. CONSOLI*, V. P. FARO{, F. SCHNAID*, S. MAGHOUS* and R. B. BORN*

This manuscript reports certain aspects linked to an analysis of the results of crosswise-loaded
pile tests carried out in residual homogeneous lightly bonded soil. Data are shown relating crosswise
load–horizontal displacement response determined from tests carried out using cylindrical reinforced
concrete piles ranging from 0·10 to 0·40 m diameter and from 5·0 to 8·0 m long. Geometrical and
mechanical parameters are implicated in the existing analysis, highlighting the possibility to express
results in terms of dimensionless variables. This is achieved by expressing the outcomes in terms of
normalised applied lateral pressure against horizontal top displacement-to-pile diameter ratio. In such
plot, the effect of the pile area pressing laterally (reaching bearing capacity) is captured for this residual
soil site. Finally, comparisons with the available normalised procedures in the literature suggest that
the residual soil might not necessarily be handled as alluvial clay-like soil when the pile–soil interaction
problem is analysed.

KEYWORDS: fabric/structure of soils; piles & piling; residual soils

ICE Publishing: all rights reserved

NOTATION Bored piles submitted to lateral loading might involve

A area of the pile pressing the soil laterally
c′ effective cohesion intercept
D diameter of the pile
FH horizontal load
L length of the pile
Ln average linear displacement transducer reading at a specified
time interval t
Ln−1 average linear displacement transducer reading immediately
previous to Ln
L1 first reading of the stage of loading taken just after stage
loading application
δ horizontal displacement
δH horizontal displacement at the top of the pile
ϕ′ effective friction angle
INTRODUCTION
Residual soils regularly have some light structure due to
cementitious bonds. These soils are a product of weathering,
which generally increases their porosity and hydraulic con-
ductivity. The porous cemented structure leads to distinguish-
ing geotechnical characteristics that are different from that
of transported soils with similar densities and grain size
distributions. Interpretation approaches appropriate to
cohesionless soil under drained conditions or cohesive soil
under undrained conditions are not necessarily valid for
residual lightly bonded geomaterials.
Several structures in southern Brazil, such as retaining
walls, foundations of buildings, wind turbines and trans-
mission towers are founded on bored piles installed using
mechanical augers in residual soil profiles. The deficiency
of understanding certain features of the basic behaviour
has created problems in understanding the performance of
laterally loaded bored piles in these lightly bonded materials.
Manuscript received 6 May 2016; first decision 8 July 2016;
accepted 18 July 2016.
Published online at www.geotechniqueletters.com on 29 July
2016.
*Department of Civil Engineering, Federal University of Rio
Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
{Department of Civil Construction, Federal University of Paraná,
Curitiba, PR, Brazil
specific analysis to account for the probable consequences
of yielding due to structure collapse and punching failure
mechanisms at the side of piles. In particular, horizontal dis-
placements of laterally loaded piles embedded in such soils
are difficult to predict without laboratory tests that depict
the effect of cementation on stiffness, and difficulties of inter-
preting in-situ testing results. The use of inadequate models
might lead to incorrectly designed projects, higher total
cost of buildings and even pathologies in piled supported
structures.
Few studies of laterally loaded piles embedded in residual
soil profiles have been carried out. Among such reports,
Almeida et al. (2011) have shown, for horizontally loaded
bored piles in a lateritic soil from basalt profile, that pre-
dictive methods using the p–y curves from the dilatometer
had good agreement with the behaviour observed in the
pile-loading test. Choi et al. (2013) investigated the load–
displacement responses of laterally loaded bored piles in
weathered granite soil. These authors have unveiled the
reasons for underestimating the lateral load capacities of
piles in weathered granite soil: deficiency in the appropriate
estimation of cohesion component of soil, friction between
the pile and soil and volume expansion characteristics of
soil. In an effort to postulate some sound pile foundation
design rules for residual soils, an experimental testing pro-
gramme was carried out on homogeneous, lightly cemented
residual soil stratum in southern Brazil. The site investi-
gation involved cone penetration test (CPT) and dilatometer
tests, as well as laboratory triaxial tests on undisturbed block
samples.
The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate the
influence of pile size and plastic horizontal displacement
depths on lateral bearing capacity of bored piles inserted on
a uniform layer of lightly bonded weathered basalt clay.
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
The present research consists of laterally loaded piles set up
in a natural homogeneous residual soil layer. The charac-
teristics of the residual soil at the experimental site have been
determined by in-situ CPT and seismic dilatometer test

216

Downloaded by [ Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul] on [19/09/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Crosswise-Loaded Pile Tests on Residual Soil Site 217
CPT SDMT
qc: MPa Rf: % P0/P1: kPa G: MPa
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 1000 2000 3000 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Depth below ground level: m

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19 P0 P1
20

Fig. 1. CPT and SDMT soil profiles at a depth of 20 m

(SDMT). The soil profile to a depth of 20 m is presented in 140

Fig. 1. CPT and SDMT results indicate homogeneity of the 120
Deviatoric stress: kPa

prospective soil layer, where the observed minor variations

100
on cone tip strength (qt) and initial shear modulus (Go) are
a common feature often encountered in residual soils 80
that undergo severe weathering process (Schnaid & Huat, 60
2012). The site investigation revealed silty red clay, classified
40
as low plasticity clay (CL) according to the Unified Soil
Classification System. Grain size distribution presents 0·4% 20
of coarse sand, 2·1% of medium sand, 18·6% of fine sand, 0
19·9% of silt and 59·0% of clay. Liquid limit is 58%, plastic 0 3 6 9 12 15
limit is 40% and the natural water content varies from 30 to εa: %
38%. The average bulk unit weight was around 15·8 kN/m3 0 3 6 9 12 15
and the water table was found at 10 m depth. Saturated 0
drained conventional triaxial tests (see Fig. 2 for a typical
stress–strain curve for a confining pressure of 20 kPa) on
undisturbed residual soil specimens sampled from about
1·2 m of depth exhibit effective peak friction angle (ϕ′) of
ε v: %

31·8° and effective peak cohesion intercept (c′) of 23·8 kPa. 1

Hydraulic conductivity is high (1·5 × 10−5 m/s), when com-
pared with hydraulic conductivity of alluvial clays. Unlike
transported soils with similar grain size distribution, the
residual soil is the product of in-situ weathering, which 2
decreases unit weight, increases porosity and hydraulic con-
ductivity, and exhibit parent rock features such as inter- Fig. 2. Saturated drained conventional triaxial test considering a
particle bonding, characteristic of cohesive-frictional confining pressure of 20 kPa (similar to the field stresses found
materials. at the depth where the residual soil sample was collected –
about 1·2 m)

FIELD-TESTING PROGRAMME
The field-testing research programme was carried out at the
experimental site described previously. Bored piles were
excavated with rotary auger and reinforced with a hollow
steel pipe with a diameter of 101·4 mm and a thickness
of 4·5 mm along the entire length. Piles of 0·30 and 0·40 m
(0·10 m piles were made only of steel) were constructed with
concrete of uniaxial strength of about 15 MPa. Laterally
loaded pile tests were conducted at the field test facility
using two identical symmetrical piles [total number of six
pile tests (three pairs of distinct piles)] in a suitable reaction
system where one pile reacts against the other. Thus, it was
simultaneously possible to have reaction to a pile and repeat-
ability in test results. The load was applied through a system
comprising a hydraulic jack horizontally placed between two
steel tubes and two calibrated load cells, reacting against the

Downloaded by [ Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul] on [19/09/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 218 Consoli, Faro, Schnaid, Maghous and Born
Steel tube Load cell
Support Support
Pile
Reference beam Reference beam
Square
Displacement Load cell Displacement plates
Load cell Hydraulic
transducer transducer jack
Steel tube Steel tube
D
Pile Pile Natural soil
Square Square
plates Hydraulic plates
D jack D

Support Natural soil Support

(a) (b)

Fig. 3. General view of lateral loading tests: (a) plan view and (b) lateral view

head of two symmetrically positioned piles, as illustrated in

Fig. 3. A polyvinyl chloride pipeline was installed at the axis
of some of the piles, embedded in the concrete shaft, 70 D40L8 – left D40L8 – right
allowing horizontal displacements to be measured during 60
load using a slope indicator that slides down the tube from 50
the top to the bottom of the pile. Besides, two linear displace-
40
FH: kN

ment transducers with a resolution of 0·01 and 50 mm travel

were used for the measurement of horizontal displacements 30
at about 100 mm above the soil surface. The installation pro- 20
cedure for carrying out the lateral load tests was in accor-
10
dance with ASTM D 3966 (ASTM, 2007). After each lateral
load increment, the necessary time to stabilise the displace- 0
0 10 20 30 40 50
ments was awaited. In accordance with the Brazilian stan-
δ H: mm
dard ABNT (1991), each increment was maintained for a
minimum of 30 min until the following criterion was (a)
reached. 50 D30L6 – left D30L6 – right
Ln
Ln
1  005ðLn
L1 Þ ð1Þ
40
where Ln is the average linear displacement transducer
reading at a specified time interval t; Ln−1 is the average 30
FH: kN

linear displacement transducer reading immediately pre-

vious to Ln and L1 is the first reading of the stage of loading 20
taken just after stage loading application.
10
Tested piles are 0·1, 0·3 and 0·4 m in diameter (D) and 5·0,
6·0 and 8·0 m long (L), respectively, exhibiting L/D ratios of 0
50, 20 and 20, respectively. 0 10 20 30 40 50
δ H: mm
(b)

TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS 20 D10L5 – left D10L5 – right

Since two piles are reacting against each other, lateral load
(FH) against horizontal displacements at the top of the pile 15
(δH) of identical symmetrical (a) 0·4 m diameter and 8·0 m
long piles (named left and right), (b) 0·3 m diameter and
FH: kN

6·0 m long piles and (c) 0·1 m diameter and 5·0 m long piles 10
are shown in Fig. 4. The measured loading, unloading
and reloading cycles in the FH against δH curves show 5
very similar trends, presenting sound reproducibility at the
applied horizontal loads. The system response was predomi- 0
nantly non-linear elastic–plastic, with irrecoverable horizon- 0 10 20 30 40 50
tal displacements and a strong hysteretic response. The δ H: mm
greater the pile diameter, the higher the lateral loads at large (c)
horizontal displacements. Besides, it can be observed that
pile 1 with a larger diameter (0·4 m diameter) holds larger Fig. 4. Lateral load against horizontal displacement curves of
maximum lateral load than pile 2 (0·3 m diameter). Both identical symmetrical piles (right and left) of (a) 0·4 m diameter
piles have the same L/D, indicating that the L/D ratio is not a and 8·0 m long, (b) 0·3 m diameter and 6·0 m long and (c) 0·1 m
parameter controlling maximum lateral load. diameter and 5·0 m long

Downloaded by [ Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul] on [19/09/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Crosswise-Loaded Pile Tests on Residual Soil Site 219
δ H: mm
–5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
0

3
Slope indicator – pile 1
L: m

4 LVDT – pile 1
5 Slope indicator – pile 2
LVDT – pile 2
6 Slope indicator – pile 3
LVDT – pile 3
7

Fig. 5. Slope indicator measurements for horizontal displacements with depth and linear variable differential transformer (LVDT)
measurement at the top of pile 1 (D40 cm_L8 m at horizontal load of 60 kN), pile 2 (D30 cm_L6 m at horizontal load of 40 kN) and
pile 3 (D10 cm_L5 m at horizontal load of 14 kN)

240
220
200
180
160
FH /(Ac'): %

140
120
100
80 (D10 cm_L5 m) – left
60 (D10 cm_L5 m) – right
(D40 cm_L8 m) – left
40 (D40 cm_L8 m) – right
20 (D30 cm_L6 m) – left
(D30 cm_L6 m) – right
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
δH/D: %

Fig. 6. Normalised horizontal pressures against horizontal displacements at the top of the pile-to-pile diameter ratio (δH/D) considering
L/D = 20 (piles 0·4 m diameter and 8·0 m long and 0·3 m diameter and 6·0 m long) and L/D = 50 (piles 0·1 m diameter and 5·0 m long)

Figure 5 presents the slope indicator data (right pile –
slope indicator measurements were made only in one of the
two identical reacting piles), in which horizontal displace-
ments (δH) are plotted against depth for a horizontal
load of 60 kN [pile 1–0·4 m diameter and 8·0 m long
(L/D = 20)], 40 kN [pile 2–0·3 m diameter and 6·0 m long
(L/D = 20)] and 14 kN [pile 3–0·1 m diameter and 5·0 m
long (L/D = 50)]. The values of δH are shown to reduce with
increasing depth and are limited to 2·0, 1·8 and 2·2 m below
ground level (values based on slope indicator measure-
ments). At the surface there is redundancy in the measure-
ments of displacements, with the slope indicator and the
external linear displacement transducer measuring (a) 41·1
and 41·5 mm, respectively, at a horizontal load of 60 kN
(pile 1), (b) 36·4 and 37·7 mm, respectively, at a horizontal
load of 40 kN (pile 2) and (c) 37·3 and 38·7 mm, res-
pectively, at a horizontal load of 14 kN (pile 3).
In the lack of design methods specifically devised for
residual soils, a study by Hsiung & Chen (1997) using a
normalisation procedure for laterally loaded long piles
driven in clay-like soils was evaluated. Such normalisation
of the load–deflection curves could be achieved dividing the
deflection by the yielding displacement of such curves. The
use of the normalised procedures of Hsiung & Chen (1997)
was unsuccessful when used for the crosswise-loaded pile
tests carried out in residual homogeneous lightly bonded soil
studied herein. The lack of success occurred because the
yielding displacement of the load–deflection curves is nearly
zero for the lightly bonded residual soil (Fig. 4), due to its
high stiffness.
An effective correlation should ideally be stated in
terms of dimensionless variables. It is possible to formulate
a rigorous framework for normalisation of testing data
based on continuum mechanics and dimensional analysis
theorems. Lin et al. (2015) carried out direct measurements
of soil–pile interaction compressive pressures combined with
lateral displacement along the pile length. Such authors
found out that the soil–pile interaction force per unit length
was ultimately a constant below the soil surface where soil
yielding had occurred. It is assumed in the present analysis
that the laterally yielded area of soil (A) is formed by half of
the pile perimeter [(πD)/2] multiplied by the depth above the
hinge. The latter is located at 2·0 m (pile 1–0·4 m diameter),
1·8 m (pile 2–0·3 m diameter) and 2·2 m (pile 3–0·1 m dia-
meter) below ground level. The measured data of piles 1 and
2 (both with same L/D = 20) and pile 3 (L/D = 50) are
replotted in Fig. 6 in a space that correlates the normalised
applied pressure [FH/(Ac′)] and horizontal displacements
at the top of the pile-to-pile diameter ratio (δH/D), where c′ is
the effective cohesion intercept. For piles having the same

Downloaded by [ Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul] on [19/09/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 220 Consoli, Faro, Schnaid, Maghous and Born
L/D = 20 (piles 1 and 2), the normalisation is effective in
providing a unique pile response regardless of their length
and diameter. Even the unload–reload loops show similar
trends in these tests, including hysteresis and magnitude of
irreversible plastic displacements. Differences in the normal-
ised curves are observed between piles 1 and 2 (L/D = 20 and
made of reinforced concrete) and pile 3 (L/D = 50 and made
of a hollow steel pipe). Such dissimilarities might be due to
distinct moment of inertia of piles 1 and 2 and pile 3.
However, the maximum normalised lateral pressure is about
the same (210%) for all the tests carried out. Such nor-
malised lateral pressure holds once the area of the pile
pressing the soil laterally (A) is properly taken into account.
In conclusion, the analysis developed in this paper offers
an innovative normalising procedure to establish the ulti-
mate horizontal capacity of loaded piles in lightly bonded
residual soils, but still present shortcomings with respect to
the normalisation of the whole load–displacements curve.
The observed trends are valid for long piles – that is, piles
long enough for the failure mechanism defining the free
plastic flow to develop above the pile end. For the long
piles it appears that the normalisation based on horizontal
top displacements by pile diameter is able to account for
scale effects, not only because they unified the observed pile
response in the present work but because it has already
proved to be effective in normalising settlements in plate
load tests (e.g. Consoli et al., 1998; Briaud, 2007). However,
the δH/D ratio cannot be modelled by means of a unique
normalised curve for piles 1 and 2 and pile 3. This is attrib-
uted to the difference in moment of inertia between piles 1
and 2 (L/D = 20) and pile 3 (L/D = 50). Future research will
be developed to provide further understanding on the factors
controlling pile response.
Finally, Costa et al. (2003) have shown that the response of
the soil–plate systems is highly influenced by the magnitude
of soil matric suction in lateritic soils. However, preliminary
measurements taken with the Imperial College suction probe
have indicated that matric suction is fairly small (lower than
5 kPa) and therefore the lateral load–displacement response
of piles in this residual soil is mainly dependent on the
cementitious bonded structure.
CONCLUSIONS
This manuscript presents a set of horizontal load tests
carried out in piles embedded in homogeneous, lightly
bonded residual soils. Although based on a limited number
of tests, some conclusions can be drawn from the observed
Downloaded by [ Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul] on [19/09/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
pile response. The lateral load capacity increases with
increasing pile diameter and the corresponding horizontal
displacements are concentrated at shallow depths. The
measured pile response can be formulated in terms of a
normalisation procedure expressed in terms of dimensionless
applied pressure [FH/(A.c′)] against the dimensionless dis-
placement (δH/D). In this space, the response of long piles is
controlled by the pile diameter, yielding depth and soil
cohesion intercept, whereas the horizontal top displacement
is sensitive to the pile inertia moment. Within these assump-
tions it is recognised that the existing methods based on the
p–y elastic–plastic type of analysis are useful in providing
first approximations of ultimate lateral loads for piles
embedded in residual soils, expanding the early experience
gathered in sand and clay. Further experimental investi-
gation is necessary and should concentrate on the ability of
assessing the pile yielding depth, which could be evaluated
in the future from the limit analysis reasoning.
REFERENCES
ABNT (Brazilian Standard Association) (1991). NBR-12131:
Foundations – static loading tests. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil:
Brazilian Standards Association.
Almeida, M. A., Miguel, M. G. & Teixeira, S. H. C. (2011).
Horizontal bearing capacity of piles in a lateritic soil. J. Geotech.
Geoenviron. Engng, ASCE 137, No. 1, 59–69.
ASTM (2007). D 3966: Standard test method for deep foundations
under lateral load. West Conshohocken, PA, USA: ASTM
International.
Briaud, J. L. (2007). Spread footings in sand: load settlement curve
approach. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Engng 133, No. 8, 905–920.
Choi, H. Y., Lee, S. R., Park, H. I. & Kim, D. H. (2013). Evaluation
of lateral load capacity of bored piles in weathered granite
soil. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Engng, ASCE 139, No. 9,
1477–1489.
Consoli, N. C., Schnaid, F. & Milititsky, J. (1998). Interpretation
of plate load tests on residual soil site. J. Geotech. Geoenviron.
Engng 124, No. 9, 857–867.
Costa, Y., Cintra, J. & Zornberg, J. (2003). Influence of matric
suction on the results of plate load tests performed on a lateritic
soil deposit. Geotech. Test. J. 26, No. 2, 219–227.
Hsiung, Y. M. & Chen, Y. L. (1997). Simplified method
for analyzing laterally loaded single piles in clays. J. Geotech.
Geoenviron. Engng, ASCE 123, No. 11, 1018–1029.
Lin, H., Ni, L., Suleiman, M. & Raich, A. (2015). Interaction
between laterally loaded pile and surrounding soil. J. Geotech.
Geoenviron. Engng, ASCE 141, No. 4, 04014119.
Schnaid, F. & Huat, B. B. K. (2012). Sampling and testing of
tropical residual soils. In Handbook of tropical residual soils
engineering (eds B. B. K. Huat, B. G. Toll and A. Prasad),
pp. 65–112, New York, NY, USA: CRC Press.
HOW CAN YOU CONTRIBUTE?
To discuss this paper, please submit up to 500 words to
the editor at journals@ice.org.uk. Your contribution will be
forwarded to the author(s) for a reply and, if considered
appropriate by the editorial board, it will be published as a
discussion in a future issue of the journal.