Supplemental Analysis of Transversely

Loaded Piles

Zdravko Cimbola
BSc., Technologist
CESTA VARAŽDIN d.d.
zdravko.cimbola@ck.htnet.hr

Božo Soldo
Assistant Professor
University of Zagreb, Geotechnical Faculty, Croatia
bozo.soldo@gfv.hr

ABSTRACT
This paper contains the analysis of transversely loaded piles using the comparison of
Winkler's analytical (single-parameter) base, i.e. soil model and Mindlin's numerical
homogenous half-space. The coefficient of soil reaction is the central element being
researched for calculation using the analytical method. Numerical methods are more
complex, but probably also more exact, while analytical methods are simpler as used by
engineers, but are often shunned due to the entry parameter of the base reaction coefficient.
Results shown here are theoretical, as are certain explanations of how they were obtained.
KEYWORDS: Winkler base model, Mindlin's homogenous half-space, pile, coefficient
of base reaction

INTRODUCTION
There are numerous theories put forth by various authors mentioning the coefficient of soil
reaction and offering opinions on which values to use. Comparison shown in this paper is based
on the comparison of maximum moments, which we used them to search for the coefficient of
soil reaction and pile shifts. After finding applicable solutions, the next step was mathematical
analysis which showed that these solutions do not carry great deviations from pile moments and
shifts.
 Vol. 14 [2009], Bund. N 2

M
x H

M(z)
q(z)
EI, d
L
Q(z)
u(z)

pile

z
Figure 1: Transversely loaded vertical pile

ANALYTICAL METHOD
Most often used single-parameter model is the so-called Winkler base model for
approximation of real soil. The advantage of this method is its simplicity, even though this
simplicity also has one major drawback, namely the solutions are gained only on the part where
the foundation soil is loaded, excluding the area immediately surrounding the pile.

Parameter which Winkler uses is the Winkler coefficient (ks), i.e. coefficient of base/soil
reaction, or, more simply put, specific soil rigidity. The basic supposition of the Winkler model is
the following additional connection between the shift u and the reactive pressure q which
amounts to q(z)=ks ·u(z). The equation of the shift line of the transversely loaded pile is:

d 4u( z)
EI + k ⋅ u( z) = p + g (1)
dz 4

General solution of such homogenous differential equation is stated using the unknown
function of deformation, i.e. shift:

u ( z ) = e αz (C1 cos αz + C 2 sin αz ) + e −αz (C 3 cos αz + C 4 sin αz ) (2)

Where C1 , C2, C3 i C4 are integration constants determined based on marginal conditions, while α
represents the non-dimensional coordinate of the pile axis and amounts to:
 Vol. 14 [2009], Bund. N 3

k ⋅d
α=4 (3)
4EI

Where parameters used are:

E – Pile elasticity module
I - Pile cross-section moment of inertia
y – Unknown vertical shift of the pile
p – External load per unit of length
g – Pile's own weight per unit of length
p – Known active load per unit of length
q – Reactive soil pressure per unit of length
k – Base reaction module (Winkler coefficient)
d – Pile diameter

Bending moment is reached through the second shift derivation (of equation 2)

d 2 u (z ) M ( z) = −C1 2α 2 e αz sin αz + C 2 2α 2 e αz cos αz +

M ( z ) = − EI , i.e. (4)
dz 2 + C 3 2α 2 e −αz sin αz + C 4 2α 2 e −αz cos αz

Transversal forces in the pile are calculated using the third shift derivation (of equation 2)

d 3u (z ) Q( z) = −C1 2α 3e αz (cos αz + sin αz ) + C 2 2α 3e αz (cos αz − sin αz ) +

Q(z ) = −EI ,tj. (5)
dz 3 + C 3 2α 3e −αz (cos αz − sin αz ) + C 4 2α 3e −αz (cos αz + sin αz )

NUMERICAL METHOD
The procedure of forming the rigidity matrix is similar to the procedure given for the single
parameter solution. The difference is that in this case the rigidity matrix is not reached directly,
but as an addition of two matrices. One is the matrix of the differential operator and the other the
matrix of influential coefficients reached through the integration of the Mindlin solution.

We begin with the basic differential equation:

d 4u( z) (6)
EI + p( z ) = f ( z )
dz 4

where
EI – Pile rigidity
u (z) – Unknown function of pile shift vertical to its axis
p (z) – Unknown function of reactive air pressure
f (z) – Known external pressure
 Vol. 14 [2009], Bund. N 4

We observe the pile loaded with external force only at the top, so that only the homogenous
part of the differential equation could be observed, while external load is used over pertinent
marginal conditions.

The system of differential equations for a certain problem of marginal conditions may
generally be written as follows:
EI
[B ]{z} + [D ]{p} = { f } (7)
h4

where
[B] Differential equation coefficient matrix
[D] Diagonal matrix
{z} Unknown shift vector
{p} Unknown reactive pressure vector
{f} External load vector
EI Pile rigidity
H Differential step

Elements of the influential soil shift matrix uij represent shifts of point i from singular load in
points j and are determined using the Mindlin solution for actions of concentrated horizontal force
within the homogenous, isotropic and elastic half-space. Internal cross-section forces (bending
moment and transverse forces) may be stated as:

d 2 u (z )
M (z ) = − EI
dz 2
(8)
d 3u ( z )
Q (z ) = − EI
dz 3

We can express the given marginal conditions, which dictate the look of the matrix [B]
(differential operator matrix) as:
EI
[B ][U ]{p} + [D ]{p} = { f } (9)
h4

or, if we expunge the unknown vector {p}:

 EI 
 4 [B ][U ] + [D ]{p} = { f } (10)
h 

Matrices [B], [U] and [D] are of the same level (square), and can thus be added and multiplied;
therefore, the following can be written:

 EI 
 4 [B ][U ] + [D ] = [C ] (11)
 h 
 Vol. 14 [2009], Bund. N 5

[C ]{p} = { f } (12)

Solving this system of n+1 equations gains values of reactive pressures in discrete points, and
over the matrix of influential coefficients [U] also the links

{u}=[U]{p} (13)

PILE BASE REACTION MODULUS (kS)

It is known that natural soil, as the usual base used for many structures, due to its
characteristics largely differs from the ideal model of linear elastic, homogenous and isotropical
medium. However, there do exist circumstances in which soil can be idealized as an elastic base.
To that end, the simplest soil approximation is gained using the Winkler model. Basic
characteristic of this model is the exchange of soil with the infinite group of parallel-joined elastic
springs. Module (or coefficient) of base reaction (kS) is the base rigidity per base unit. That
module (or coefficient) is also called Winkler's coefficient.
The link between translation-linear spring rigidity (k) and the base reaction module (ks) may
best be presented using the following diagram:

Translation-linear rigidity

Spring Winkler base model

k [kN/m/] kS [kN/m3] kB [kN/m3] kA [kN/m/]

Figure 2: Rigidity coefficient diagram

Spring rigidity k, put simply, represents the force needed for the spring to deform (shorten or
lengthen) for a certain unit of length, and is therefore expressed as kN/m/. Analogous, the base
reaction module kS represents the load of the base area unit which will cause singular settlement;
therefore, it is expressed as (kN/m2)/ml = kN/m3

P = kA u (F = KD) (14)

Dividing the above expression with the area of base foot (A) we get:
 Vol. 14 [2009], Bund. N 6

P kA
= u (15)
A A

And, since P/A=p i kA/A=kS:

p = kS u (16)

Finally:
p
kS = (17)
u

Browsing through literature one can find several different soil reaction coefficients, and in
this case, some of them are listed specifically for transversely loaded piles:

q = k h ⋅ y Winkler , 1867
k s1
kh = Terzaghi , 1955
1 .5 ⋅ D
0 .4 ⋅ k 0 ⋅ B
kh = Vesic, 1961 (18)
D
67 ⋅ cu
kh = Davisson , 1970
D
2⋅Ms
kh = Frisch , 1973
3⋅ b

SOLUTION CONCEPT
The analysis used pile diameters marked (d) from 0.4 m to 1.5 m and pile length (l) of 5 m,
10 m and 15 m. Soil compressibility module (Ms) runs from 5000 kN/m2 to 25000 kN/m2.
Placing stated values in Winkler's (single-parameter) soil model gains various solutions for
the soil reaction coefficient. On the other hand, we used the same entry values to make the
calculation of Mindlin's homogenous half-space. The most interesting values here are maximum
moments and pile shifts. The same entry values gave us different maximum moment and pile shift
values, i.e. by using two different methods. The analytical method is more often used in practice
and can be calculated quicker, but that also carries questionable exactness. Therefore, we decided
to find the unknown factor κ and the correlation factor fk in order to get better exactness in the
numerical method and use it in the analytical method. The equation below is the initial step in
finding the unknown factor κ:

Mv
ks = (19)
κ ⋅d

Entering values in the above equation gained us solutions for the soil reaction coefficients,
and thereby (using both methods) also maximum moments. After theoretical analysis we reached
the diagram shown below.
 Vol. 14 [2009], Bund. N 7

0,9

0,8
d=0,4

0,7
Unknown factor κ

d=0,6
0,6
d=0,8
0,5

0,4 d=1,0

0,3 d=1,2

0,2
d=1,5
0,1

0
2,0 6,0 10,0 14,0 18,0 22,0 26,0 30,0 34,0 38,0

Relation of pile length and diameter, l/d

Figure 3: Diagram of relation l/d and unknown factor κ

The diagram shows that the x axis houses the pile length/diameter relation (l/d), while the y
axis shows the value of the unknown factor κ.
When considering entry values, we are also entering values for diameter and length of the
pile, which right away gives us the value of the relation l/d on the x axis. We proceed to make a
vertical/perpendicular line from the value l/d to the curve representing the entry value of pile
diameter d. At the intersection, we are drawing a horizontal line from the x axis to the y axis,
giving us the unknown factor κ. This number gets entered in the calculation.

The calculated soil reaction coefficient is still used in the calculation. By comparing the
calculation of Winkler's single-parameter soil modes and the Mindlin homogenous half-space, we
can ascertain that the results of maximum moments are very similar.
After obtaining results for moments, we proceeded to obtain the correction factor fk of pile
shift. Obtaining the value for pile shift proceeds thusly: after gaining values for maximum pile
moments, we compare pile shifts using two different, earlier noted, methods. After mathematical
analysis we come to the diagram of the relation between the correlation factor fk and l/d.
 Vol. 14 [2009], Bund. N 8

2,6

2,4
d=0,4

2,2 d=0,6
correlation factor fk

d=0,8
2
d=1,0
1,8
d=1,2

1,6
d=1,5

Average value
1,4

1,2
7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27

Relation of pile length and diameter, l/d

Figure 4: Diagram of relation between correlation factor fk and l/d

Fig. 4 shows the diagram of the relation length/diameter of the pile and the factor of
correction fk. The diagram shows that correction factor, i.e. the difference of pile shift at the top
differs 1.5 to 2.5 according to calculations using analytical and numerical methods for piles where
the relation of sides is l/d ≥ 7. The correction factor is estimated at approx. 2 for estimation of
shift using the analytical method and exactness using the numerical method.

CONCLUSION
Calculations of piles loaded with transverse force is complex, since one must take in
consideration a number of factors influencing the final solution for the pile in the soil enduring
said load. One can reach the solution quickly and exactly, using the Winkler base model, which is
simpler to use in engineering practice.

REFERENCES
1. Aboshi, H., Mizuno, Y. and Kuwabara, M. (1991) Present state of sand compaction pile
in Japan, in Deep Foundation Improvements: Design, Construction, and Testing, ASTM
Special Technical Publication 1089, Esrig, M.I. and Bachus, R.C., Editors. American
Society for Testing and Materials: Baltimore: p. 32-46.
2. Alvarez, C. (2006) Extensive Test Pile and Production Pile Programs at the UC Davis
Medical Center. The Deep Foundations Institute's Speciality Seminar: Augered Cast-In-
Place Piles: Los Angeles, CA; 65-71.
3. Alvarez, C., Zuckerman, B., Lemke, J., (2006) Dynamic Pile Analysis Using CAPWAP
and Multiple Sensors. ASCE GEO Congress: Atlanta, Georgia. (CD-ROM)
4. Brown, DA, Morrison, C, and Reese, LC (1988) "Lateral load behavior of a pile group in
sand, J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 114(11), 1261-1276.
Vol. 14 [2009], Bund. N 9

5. Brown, DA, Reese, LC, and O'Neill, MW (1987) "Behavior of a large scale pile group
subjected to cyclic lateral loading", J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 113(11), 1326-1343.
6. Bullock, P.J. (2008) The Easy Button for Driven Pile Setup: Dynamic Testing. From
Research to Practice in Geotechnical Engineering, Geotechnical Publication No.180,
Laier, J. E., Crapps, D. K., and Hussein, M. H., Eds, American Society of Civil
Engineers: Reston, Virginia; 471-488.
7. Chen, Fu Hua (1999) SOIL ENGINEERING, Testing, Design and Remediation, CRC
PRESS Boca Raton London New York Washington, D.C.
8. Collin, J.G. (2004) "Column Supported Embankments - Technical Summary #7. Ground
Improvement Methods", FHWA NHI-04-001, October, Federal Highway Administration,
Washington, D.C.
9. DFI (2005) "Manual for Non Destructive Testing and Evaluation of Drilled Shafts", Deep
Foundations Institute, Chernauskas, L.E. (Ed.) Hawthorne, NJ.
10. Geotechnical Engineering (2004) Pile Design and Construction Guide, Author: Ruwan
Rajapakse ISBN: 0972865713 Hardcover: 330 pages Publisher: Ruwan Rajapakse
11. Hussein, M.H., Goble, G. G. (2004) A Brief History of the Application of STRESS-
WAVE Theory to Piles. Current Practices and Future Trends in Deep Foundations,
Geotechnical Special Publication No. 125, DiMaggio, J. A., and Hussein, M. H., Eds,
American Society of Civil Engineers: Reston, VA; 186-201.
12. Hussein, M.H., Mondello, B., Alvarez, C. (2004) Simulated Pile Load-Movement
Incorporating Anticipated Soil Set-up. Geotechnical Special Publication No. 94,
Proceedings of Geo-Institute's Geo-Trans 2004 Conference: Los Angeles, CA; 1153-
1160.
13. Hussein, M.H., Woerner, W. A., Sharp, M., Hwang, C. (2006) Pile Driveability and
Bearing Capacity in High-Rebound Soils. ASCE GEO Congress: Atlanta, Georgia. (CD-
ROM).
14. Ivandić, K. (1997) Savijanje poprečno opterećenih pilea – magistarski rad. In Croat.
15. Lee, F.H., Juneja, A. and Tan, T.S. (2004) Stress and pore pressure changes due to sand
compaction pile installation in soft clay. Géotechnique. 54(1) p. 1-16.
16. Lee, F.H., Ng, Y.W. and Young, K.Y. (2001) Effects of Installation Method on Sand
Compaction Piles in Clay in the Centrifuge. Geotechnical Testing Journal, ASTM. 24(3)
p. 314-323.
17. Likins, G. E. (2004) Pile Testing – Selection and Economy of Safety Factors. Current
Practices and Future Trends in Deep Foundations, Geotechnical Special Publication No.
125, DiMaggio, J. A., and Hussein, M. H., Eds, American Society of Civil Engineers:
Reston, VA; 239-252.
18. Likins, G. E., Rausche, F., August (2004) Correlation of CAPWAP with Static Load
Tests. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on the Application of
Stresswave Theory to Piles 2004: Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia; 153-165.
19. Likins, G. E., Webster, O., Saavedra, M., August (2004) Evaluations of Defects and
Tomography for CSL. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on the
Vol. 14 [2009], Bund. N 10

Application of Stresswave Theory to Piles 2004: Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia; 381-
386.
20. Matlock, H (1970) “Correlations for design of laterally-loaded piles in soft clay,” Procs.,
Second Annual Offshore Technology Conf., Paper No. OTC 1204, Vol. 1, 577-594.
21. Meimon, Y, Baguelin, F, and Jezequel, JF, (1986) "Pile group behaviour under long time
lateral monotonic and cyclic loading," Proc., Thrd Int'l. Conf. on Numerical Methods in
Offshore Piling, Inst. Francais Du Petrole, Nantes, p. 286-302.
22. Mitchell, J.K. (1981) Soil Improvement - State-of-the-Art-Report. X International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. Stockholm, Sweden:
Balkema, Rotterdam: p. 509-565.
23. Morgano, C.M., White, B., August (2004) Identifying Soil Relaxation from Dynamic
Testing. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on the Application of
Stresswave Theory to Piles 2004: Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia; 415-421.
24. Muhovec, I. (1993) Statika tla, Geotehnički fakultet Varaždin, Zagreb. In Croat.
25. Muhovec, I. (1999) Geotehnički radovi i objekti - II dio, Geotehnički fakultet u
Varaždninu. In Croat.
26. Nykamp, M. (2007) Geotechnical Challenges of Pile Driving in a Marginally Stable
Slope, Terminal 46 Apron Upgrade, Port of Seattle, WA. Deep Foundations Magazine,
49-52. posted with permission from the Deep Foundations Institute
27. Peterson, KT and Rollins, KM (1996) “Static and dynamic lateral load testing of a full-
scale pile group in clay”, Civil Engineering Dept. Research Report CEG.96-02, Brigham
Young University, Provo, Utah.
28. Piscsalko, G., White, B. (2004) Inspection and Quality Control of Augercast Piles.
Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on the Application of Stresswave
Theory to Piles 2004: Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia; 493-498.
29. Rausche, F., Liang, L., Allin, R., Rancman, D. (2004) Applications and Correlations of
the Wave Equation Analysis Program GRLWEAP. Proceedings of the Seventh
International Conference on the Application of Stresswave Theory to Piles 2004: Petaling
Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia; 107-123.
30. Rausche, F., Likins, G. E., Hussein, M.H. (2008) Analysis of Post-Installation Dynamic
Load Test Data for Capacity Evaluation of Deep Foundations. From Research to Practice
in Geotechnical Engineering, Geotechnical Publication No.180, Laier, J. E., Crapps, D.
K., and Hussein, M. H., Eds, American Society of Civil Engineers: Reston, Virginia;
312-330.
31. Rausche, F., Pezzetti, G., Jannacci, C., Klesney, A. (2006) Dynamic Analysis of Follower
Driven Piles for the Venice Flood Gate Project. Tenth International Conference on Piling
and Deep Foundations: Amsterdam, the Netherlands; 763-772.
32. Rausche, F., Robinson, B., Likins, G. E. (2004) On the Prediction of Long Term Pile
Capacity From End-of-Driving Information. Current Practices and Future Trends in Deep
Foundations, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 125, DiMaggio, J. A., and Hussein,
M. H., Eds, American Society of Civil Engineers: Reston, VA; 77-95.
Vol. 14 [2009], Bund. N 11

33. Rausche, F., Webster, S. (2007) Behavior of Cylinder Piles During Pile Installation. Geo-
Denver 2007 New Peaks in Geotechnics: Denver, CO. (CD-ROM)
34. Ražnjević, K. (1985) Fizikalne veličine i mjerne jedinice međunarodnog sustava (SI),
Nakladni zavod ZNANJE, Zagreb. In Croat.
35. Reese, LC and Wang, ST (1994) Documentation of computer program LPILE version 4.0
for windows, Ensoft, Inc., Austin, Texas, 365 p.
36. Reese, LC, Cox, WR, and Koop, FD (1974) “Analysis of laterally loaded piles in sand,”
Procs., Fifth Annual Offshore Technology Conf., Paper No. OTC 2080, Houston, Texas
37. Rollins, KM, Peterson, KT, and Weaver, TJ (1998) “Lateral Load Behavior of a Full-
Scale Pile Group in Clay”, J. Geotech. and Geoenv.. Engrg. ASCE, (124)6, 468-478.
38. Ruesta, PF and Townsend, FC (1997) “Evaluation of laterally loaded pile group at
Roosevelt Bridge, J. Geotech. and Geoenv. Engrg., ASCE, 123(12), 1153-1161.
39. Šimić, V. (1992) Otpornost materijala I, Građevinski fakultet, Sveučilišta u Zagrebu,
Školska knjiga, Zagreb. In Croat.
40. Šimić, V. (2002) Otpornost materijala II, Građevinski fakultet, Sveučilišta u Zagrebu,
Školska knjiga, Zagreb. In Croat.
41. Soldo, B. (2004) Doktrorska disertacija: Analiza nosivosti pilea s proširenjima
Građevinski fakultet sveučilišta u Zagrebu, Zagreb. In Croat.
42. Teferra, W., Basford, J., Rausche, F., August, 2004. Large Drop Hammer Testing of
Driven Piles in Delaware. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on the
Application of Stresswave Theory to Piles 2004: Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia; 423-
428.
43. Terzaghi, K. (1972) Teorijska mehanika tla, Naučna knjiga, Beograd. Croatian translation
of Theoretical Soil Mechanics.
44. Verić, F. (1999) Jednoparametarski model tla, Bilješke, Skripte, Građevinski fakultet
sveučilišta u Zagrebu, Zagreb. In Croat.

© 2009 ejge