Theoretical Manual For Pile Foundations
Theoretical Manual For Pile Foundations
William P. Dawkins
Oklahoma State University
Stillwater, OK 74074
Final report
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
Conversion Factors, Non-SI to SI Units of Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x
1—Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Pile Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Axial Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Lateral Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Battered Piles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Classical Analysis and/or Design Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
State-of-the-Corps-Art Methods for Hydraulic Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2—Single Axially Loaded Pile Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Load-Transfer Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Synthesis of f-w Curves for Piles in Sand Under Compressive Loading . . . 8
Synthesis of f-w Curves for Piles in Clay Under Compressive Loading . . . 17
Tip Reactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Synthesis of q-w Curves for Piles in Sand Under Compressive Loading . . 24
Synthesis of q-w Curves for Piles in Clay Under Compressive Loading . . . 27
Other Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Bearing on Rock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Cyclic Loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Algorithm for Analysis of Axially Loaded Piles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Observations of System Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3—Single Laterally Loaded Pile Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Load Transfer Mechanism for Laterally Loaded Piles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Synthesis of p-u Curves for Piles in Sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Synthesis of p-u Curves for Piles in Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Algorithm for Analysis of Laterally Loaded Piles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Observations of System Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Linearly Elastic Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Variation of Lateral Resistance Stiffness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
iii
Pile Head Stiffness Coefficients for Lateral Loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Evaluation of Linear Lateral Soil Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
4—Algorithm for Analysis of Torsionally Loaded Single Piles . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Elastic Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
5—Pile Head Stiffness Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Three-Dimensional System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Pile Head Fixity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Pinned-Head Pile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Partial Fixity at Pile Head . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Free-Standing Pile Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Alternatives for Evaluating Pile Head Stiffnesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
6—Analysis of Pile Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Classical Methods for Pile Group Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Moment-of-Inertia (Simplified Elastic Center) Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Culmann’s Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
“Analytical” Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Stiffness Method of Pile Foundations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Appendix A: Linear Approximation for Load Deformation of Axial Piles . . A1
Appendix B: Nondimensional Coefficients for Laterally Loaded Piles . . . . . B1
SF 298
List of Figures
iv
Figure 12. Side friction - soil strength relation for Method CSF1 . . . . . . . . . 19
Figure 13. f-w curve by Method CSF2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Figure 14. Strength reduction coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Figure 15. f-w curve by Method CSF4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Figure 16. q-w curve by Method ST1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Figure 17. Ultimate tip resistance for Method SF1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Figure 18. q-w curve by Method SF4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Figure 19. Ultimate tip resistance for Method SF5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Figure 20. q-w curve by Method SF5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Figure 21. Assessment of degradation due to static loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Figure 22. Laterally loaded pile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Figure 23. p-u curve by Method SLAT1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Figure 24. Factors for calculation of ultimate soil resistance for
laterally loaded pile in sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Figure 25. Resistance reduction coefficient - A for Method SLAT1 . . . . . . . 37
Figure 26. Resistance reduction corefficient - B for Method SLAT1 . . . . . . 38
Figure 27. p-u curves by Method SLAT2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Figure 28. p-u curves by Method CLAT1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Figure 29. p-u curves by Method CLAT2 for static loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Figure 30. Displacement parameter - A for Method CLAT2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Figure 31. p-u curve by Method CLAT2 for cyclic loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Figure 32. p-u curve by Method CLAT3 for static loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Figure 33. p-u curve by Method CLAT3 for cyclic loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Figure 34. p-u curve by Method CLAT4 for static loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Figure 35. p-u curve by Method CLAT4 for cyclic loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Figure 36. p-u curve by Method CLAT5 for static loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Figure 37. p-u curve by Method CLAT5 for cyclic loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Figure 38. Model of laterally loaded pile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Figure 39. Proposed torsional shear - rotation curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Figure 40. Notation for pile head effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Figure 41. Linearly elastic pile/soil system with free-standing segment . . . . 71
Figure 42. Pile cap loads, displacements, and coordinates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Figure 43. Head forces, displacements, and coordinates for iTH pile . . . . . . . 78
v
Figure 44. Relationship between global and local coordinates . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Figure 45. Geometric definitions for computation of added displacement . . 83
Figure 46. Modification of unit load transfer relationship for
group effects at Node i, Pile I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Figure A1. Typical f-w curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A2
Figure A2. Axial stiffness coefficient for constant soil stiffness . . . . . . . . . A4
Figure A3. Axial stiffness coefficient for soil stiffness varying
linearly with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A7
Figure A4. Axial stiffness coefficient for soil stiffness varying
as square root of depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A8
Figure B1. Deflection coefficient for unit head shear for soil
stiffness constant with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B4
Figure B2. Slope coefficient for unit head shear for soil stiffness
constant with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B5
Figure B3. Bending moment coefficient for unit head shear for
soil stiffness constant with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B6
Figure B4. Shear coefficient for unit head shear for soil stiffness
constant with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B9
Figure B5. Deflection coefficient for unit head shear for soil stiffness
varying linearly with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B10
Figure B6. Slope coefficient for unit head shear for soil stiffness
varying linearly with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B11
Figure B7. Bending moment coefficient for unit head shear for
soil stiffness varying linearly with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B14
Figure B8. Shear coefficient for unit head shear for soil stiffness
varying linearly with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B15
Figure B9. Deflection coefficient for unit head shear for soil
stiffness varying linearly with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B16
Figure B10. Slope coefficient for unit head shear for soil stiffness
varying parabolically with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B19
Figure B11. Bending moment coefficient for unit head shear for
soil stiffness varying parabolically with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . B20
Figure B12. Shear coefficient for unit head shear for soil
stiffness varying parabolically with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B21
Figure B13. Deflection coefficient for unit head moment for soil
stiffness constant with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B24
Figure B14. Slope coefficient for unit head moment for soil
stiffness constant with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B25
vi
Figure B15. Bending moment coefficient for unit head moment for
soil stiffness constant with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B26
Figure B16. Shear coefficient for unit head moment for soil stiffness
constant with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B29
Figure B17. Deflection coefficient for unit head moment for soil
stiffness constant with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B30
Figure B18. Slope coefficient for unit head moment for soil
stiffness constant with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B31
Figure B19. Bending moment coefficient for unit head moment
for soil stiffness varying linearly with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B32
Figure B20. Shear coefficient for unit head moment for soil
stiffness varying linearly with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B33
Figure B21. Deflection coefficient for unit head moment for soil
stiffness varying parabolically with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B34
Figure B22. Slope coefficient for unit head moment for soil
stiffness varying parabolically with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B35
Figure B23. Bending moment coefficient for unit head moment for
soil stiffness varying parabolically with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . B36
Figure B24. Shear coefficient for unit head moment for soil stiffness
varying parabolically with depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B37
Figure B25. Pile head deflection coefficients for unit head shear . . . . . . . . B38
Figure B26. Pile head slope coefficients for unit head shear . . . . . . . . . . . . B39
Figure B27. Pile head deflection coefficients for unit head moment . . . . . . B40
Figure B28. Pile head slope coefficients for unit head moment . . . . . . . . . . B41
List of Tables
vii
Table 9. Values of Es for 1-ft-Wide Piles in Precompressed Clay . . . . . . . 58
Table 10. Values of Constant of Horizontal Subgrade Reaction nh
for a 1-ft-Wide Pile in Sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Table A1. Adjustment in G for Various Loading Conditions
(Adjustment factor = G (operational/G (in situ))) . . . . . . . . . . . A10
Table B1. Nondimensional Coefficients for Laterally Loaded Pile
for Soil Modulus Constant with Depth (Head Shear
Vo = 1, Head Moment Mo = 0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B2
Table B2. Nondimensional Coefficients for Laterally Loaded Pile
for Soil Modulus Constant with Depth (Head Shear
Vo = 0, Head Moment Mo = 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B7
Table B3. Nondimensional Coefficients for Laterally Loaded Pile
for Soil Modulus Varying Linearly with Depth (Head Shear
Vo = 1, Head Moment Mo = 0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B12
Table B4. Nondimensional Coefficients for Laterally Loaded Pile
for Soil Modulus Varying Linearly with Depth (Head Shear
Vo = 0, Head Moment Mo = 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B17
Table B5. Nondimensional Coefficients for Laterally Loaded Pile
for Soil Modulus Varying Parabolically with Depth
(Head Shear Vo = 1, Head Moment Mo = 0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B22
Table B6. Nondimensional Coefficients for Laterally Loaded Pile
for Soil Modulus Varying Parabolically with Depth
(Head Shear Vo = 0, Head Moment Mo = 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B27
viii
Preface
This theoretical manual for pile foundations describes the background and
research and the applied methodologies used in the analysis of pile foundations.
This research was developed through the U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center (ERDC) by the Computer-Aided Structural Engineering
(CASE) Project. The main body of the report was written by Dr. Reed L.
Mosher, Chief, Geosciences and Structures Division, Geotechnical and
Structures Laboratory, ERDC (formerly with the Information Technology
Laboratory (ITL)), and Dr. William P. Dawkins, Oklahoma State University.
Additional sections were written by Mr. Robert C. Patev, formerly of the
Computer-Aided Engineering Division (CAED), ITL, ERDC, and Messrs.
Edward Demsky and Thomas Ruf, U.S. Army Engineer District, St. Louis.
Members of the CASE Task Group on Piles and Pile Substructures who
assisted in the technical review of this report are as follows:
At the time of publication of this report, Director of ERDC was Dr. James R.
Houston. Commander was COL James S. Weller, EN.
The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication,
or promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an
official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products.
ix
Conversion Factors, Non-SI to
SI Units of Measurement
Multiply By To Obtain
pounds (mass) per cubic inch 27,679.9 kilograms per cubic centimeter
pounds (mass) per square foot 4.882428 kilograms per square meter
tons (force) per cubic foot 32036.9 kilograms per cubic meter
x
1 Introduction
Purpose
Pile Behavior
The purpose of a pile foundation is to transmit the loads of a superstructure to
the underlying soil while preventing excessive structural deformations. The
capacity of the pile foundation is dependent on the material and geometry of
each individual pile, the pile spacing (pile group effect), the strength and type of
the surrounding soil, the method of pile installation, and the direction of applied
loading (axial tension or compression, lateral shear and moment, or combina-
tions). Except in unusual conditions, the effects of axial and lateral loads may
be treated independently.
Axial Behavior
A compressive load applied to the head (top) of the pile is transferred to the
surrounding soil by a combination of skin friction along the embedded length
and end bearing at the tip (bottom) of the pile. For relatively short piles, only
the end bearing effect is significant. For relatively long piles in soil (excluding
tip bearing piles on rock), the predominant load transfer is due to skin friction.
Unless special mechanical provisions are present (e.g., an underreamed tip),
axial tension load is resisted only by skin friction.
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
Lateral Behavior
Piles are often required to support loads applied perpendicular to their longi-
tudinal axes (lateral loads). As stated previously, lateral load resistance is
largely independent of axial effects. However, a high axial compression may
interact with lateral displacements (the beam-column effect) to increase lateral
displacements, bending moments, and shears.
Battered Piles
If the horizontal loads imparted to the pile foundation are large, a foundation
consisting solely of vertical piles may not possess sufficient lateral resistance.
In such circumstances, battered (inclined) piles are installed to permit the hori-
zontal foundation load to be supported by a component of the axial pile/soil
resistance in addition to the lateral resistance.
Pile groups
2 Chapter 1 Introduction
State-of-the-Corps-Art Methods
for Hydraulic Structures
System modelling
For analysis of a pile subjected to axial loads, the soil surrounding the em-
bedded length of the pile is modelled as a distribution of springs which resist
longitudinal displacements of the pile. The resistance of the soil springs is rep-
resentative of the skin friction of the soil on the pile. The effect of tip resistance
is represented by a concentrated spring. The characteristics of these springs are
provided in the form of resistance-displacement (load-transfer) curves represent-
ing the skin friction effects (Seed and Reese (1957), and other references) and a
force-displacement curve representing the tip reaction.
The load-transfer curves and tip reaction curves have been obtained from
field tests of instrumented piles subjected to axial compression. Research is
continuing to permit evaluation of load-transfer curves for piles in tension. The
underlying principles on which the load-transfer curves and tip reaction curve
are based and the modelling of the pile/soil system are presented in Chapter 2.
The soil which resists displacements of a laterally loaded pile is also replaced
by distributed springs. The force-displacement characteristics of the springs are
presented as curves which have been extracted from field tests of laterally
loaded piles. Techniques for lateral load analysis are discussed in Chapter 3.
Chapter 1 Introduction 3
tends to be essentially linear through the range of loads usually allowed (the
working loads) in design. The relationship becomes highly nonlinear as an
ultimate condition is neared. For design purposes, the linearly elastic relation-
ship between head loads and head displacements is usually presented as a matrix
of stiffness coefficients. These coefficients may be extracted from the full range
analyses for axially or laterally loaded piles cited above. In addition, the stiff-
ness coefficients may be estimated using linearized solutions. These processes
are discussed in Chapters 2 and 3.
Pile groups
Although the group analysis method was originally developed for linear sys-
tems with rigid pile caps, it has been extended to allow for flexible caps and, by
iterative solutions, can account for nonlinear behavior (e.g. CPGA). The method
is described in detail in Chapter 4.
4 Chapter 1 Introduction
2 Single Axially Loaded Pile
Analysis
Introduction
A schematic of an axially loaded pile is shown in Figure 1. In the discussions
which follow, the pile is assumed to be in contact with the surrounding soil over
its entire length. Consequently, the embedded length and the total length of the
pile are the same. The effect of a free-standing portion of the pile will be
discussed later.
The pile is assumed to have a straight centroidal axis (the z-axis, positive
downward) and is subjected to a centric load at the head (top of the pile) Po.
Displacements parallel to the axis of the pile are denoted w and are positive in
the positive z-direction. The pile material is assumed to be linearly elastic for all
levels of applied loads. “Ultimate” conditions referred to subsequently indicate
that a limit has been reached in which any additional head load would cause
excessive displacements.
Load-Transfer Mechanism
The head load Po is transferred to the surrounding soil by shear stresses (skin
friction) along the lateral pile/soil interface and by end-bearing at the pile tip
(bottom of the pile). The rate at which the head load is transferred to the soil
along the pile and the overall deformation of the system are dependent on
numerous factors. Among these are: (a) the cross section geometry, material,
length, and, to a lesser extent, the surface roughness of the pile; (b) the type of
soil (sand or clay) and its stress-strain characteristics; (c) the presence or absence
of groundwater; (d) the method of installation of the pile; and, (e) the presence
or absence of residual stresses as a result of installation.
A heuristic approach has been followed to reduce the complex three- dimen-
sional problem to a quasi one-dimensional model (illustrated in Figure 2) which
is practicable for use in a design environment. In the one-dimensional model,
the soil surrounding the pile is replaced by a distribution of springs along the
length of the pile and by a concentrated spring at the pile tip which resist axial
displacements of the pile. The characteristics of these springs are presented in
the form of curves which provide the magnitude of unit skin friction (f-w curves)
or unit tip reaction (q-w curve) as a function of pile displacement. The nomen-
clature used to define axial curves is based on unit skin friction f, unit tip
reaction q, and w = displacement in the z-direction for axial loads.
The f-w and q-w curves have been developed using the principles of contin-
uum and soil mechanics and/or from correlations with the results of field tests on
instrumented axially loaded piles. Several different criteria are presented below
for development of f-w and q-w curves. The reliability of any method in
predicting the behavior of a particular pile depends on the similarity of the
system under investigation with the database used to establish the method. Most
of the methods account explicitly or implicitly for the three factors cited on
page 5 (a, b, and c). In all cases the pile is assumed to be driven into the soil or
to be a cast-in-place pier. Only one of the procedures attempts to account for the
effects of residual stresses; the remaining methods exclude these effects.
Mosher (1984) utilized the results of load tests of prismatic pipe piles driven
in sand and the work of Coyle and Castello (1981) to arrive at the hyperbolic
representation of the f-w curve (see Figure 3).
'
(1)
%
The initial slope kf of the curve is given in Table 1 as a function of the angle of
internal friction and the ultimate side friction fmax is given in Figure 4 as a
function of relative depth (depth z below ground surface divided by the
diameter of the pile 2R).
28 - 31 6,000 - 10,000
32 - 34 10,000 - 14,000
35 - 38 14,000 - 18,000
1
A table of factors for converting non-SI units of measurement to SI (metric) units is presented
on page x.
Numerous analyses (Randolph and Wroth 1978; Vesic 1977; Kraft, Ray, and
Kagawa 1981; Poulos and Davis 1980) have been performed in which the
pile/soil system is assumed to be radially symmetric and the soil is assumed to
be a vertically and radially homogeneous, elastic medium. The principles of
continuum mechanics as well as finite element methods have been used to arrive
at the relationship between side friction and axial pile displacement. The
process due to Kraft, Ray, and Kagawa (1981) is outlined below.
J ' (2)
R = pile radius
If radial deformations of the soil are ignored, the shear strain at any point in
the soil may be expressed as
J
( ' ' ' (3)
m
' ' (4)
where
rm = a limiting radial distance beyond which deformations of the soil mass are
negligible
where
D & <
&
' (7)
&
where Rf is a curve fitting parameter (Kraft, Ray, and Kagawa 1981) which may
be taken as 0.9 for most conditions. The value of fmax may be obtained from the
curves due to Mosher (Figure 4) or may be estimated as suggested under method
SSF3 which follows.
After fmax has been reached, the f-w curve becomes a horizontal line at fmax .
The f-w curve produced by this method is illustrated in Figure 6 by the solid
curve 0 - 1 - 2 .
The softening portion of the f-w curve is obtained by scaling the normalized
direct shear curve to the f-w curve (dashed line 1-3 in Figure 6).
Because the shear strength of sands increases with depth (i.e. confining
pressure), the shear modulus G is not constant along the length of the pile.
Finite element analyses have indicated, for a linear increase in G with depth, the
value of D to be
D ' (9)
where
The preceding equations also assume that the soil modulus G is unaffected
by the pile installation. Randolph and Wroth (1978) performed finite element
analyses for two hypothetical variations of shear modulus radially away from the
pile. These variations and the effective shear modulus were:
a. G = G4/4 for 1 # r/R # 1.25 ; G = G4 for r/R > 1.25 which produced
4
'
D & < (10)
%
4
'
D & < (11)
%
where
' 6 FN (12)
FoN = mean effective stress in the soil (vertical stress plus two times horizontal
stress); with G and FoN in psi
Vijayvergiya (1977)
Coyle and Sulaiman (1967) performed tests on miniature piles in sand and
correlated the laboratory results with data from field tests of instrumented piles
in sand. They concluded that skin friction increases with pile deflection up to
pile displacements of 0.1 to 0.2 in. They further concluded that the ratio of skin
friction to soil shear strength is high (greater than one) near the ground surface
and decreases to a limiting value of 0.5 with increasing depth. Two curves, as
shown in Figure 9, were proposed for the analysis of axially loaded piles in sand.
Curve A was proposed for use at depths less than 20 ft below the surface and
Curve B for depths greater than 20 ft.
Analyses using the f-w curves discussed above do not consider the presence
of residual stresses in the pile/soil system which result from the installation
process. Field tests of instrumented piles indicate that significant residual
stresses may be encountered in long, flexible piles driven in sand or gravel (see,
for instance, Mosher (1984)). If the f-w curves and tip reaction representation
(see later) are both based on ignoring residual stresses, the predicted pile head
' &
(14)
%
&
with
' (15)
' (16)
S ' (17)
' S (18)
where
L = length of pile
The results of load tests of instrumented piles in clay as well as the results of
laboratory tests of model pile/soil systems were used by Coyle and Reese (1966)
to establish the three load transfer curves shown in Figure 11. Curve A is
applicable for points along the pile from the ground surface to a depth of 10 ft,
curve B applies for depths from 10 ft to 20 ft, and curve C is applicable for all
depths below 20 ft.
The relationship between maximum side friction and soil shear strength
provided by Coyle and Reese is shown in Figure 12.
Data obtained from a large number of field load tests of piles in clay were
examined by Aschenbrener and Olson (1984) with the intent to devise load
transfer relationships which provided the best fit to the diverse pile and soil
properties represented by the database. The simple bilinear relationship shown
in Figure 13 was selected as a result of their study.
Aschenbrener and Olson expressed the relationship between fmax and soil
shear strength as
Figure 12. Side friction - soil strength relation for Method CSF1
where
Aschenbrener and Olson were able to evaluate " from the field test data as
&
" ' (20)
where
In a design situation, the ultimate head and tip loads will not be known. For
design, the value of " may be obtained from the curves provided by Semple and
Rigden (1984) shown in Figure 14 as
The procedure of Method SSF2 due to Kraft, Ray, and Kagawa (1981)
described previously for sand side friction, may be applied to piles in clay. For
clays, the shear modulus may again be evaluated from seismic tests, from
resonant column tests, approximated as 400 to 500 times su , or evaluated from
the modulus of elasticity as E/3 for undrained conditions and E/2.75 for drained
conditions.
'
(22)
%
' % (23)
and
where
Eavg = the average initial undrained modulus of elasticity over the entire length
of the pile
Vijayvergiya (1977)
Tip Reactions
The influence of the tip reaction on the axial load-displacement behavior
depends on the relative stiffness of the pile as well as side friction stiffness of
the soil. In the following paragraphs several curves are presented for assessing
the tip reaction as a function of the tip displacement. In general these curves
have been developed primarily from a consideration of the properties of the soil
at the tip elevation. However, numerous theoretical studies (see, for instance,
Randolph and Wroth (1978)) have indicated that the tip reaction depends on the
characteristics of the soil both above and below the tip elevation. Some of the
methods for developing q-w curves for the tip reaction account for the profile in
the vicinity of the tip by using average soil properties. Other methods, derived
from test results where the soil at the test site was relatively homogeneous, are
dependent on the properties of the soil at the tip.
The curves presented below are for unit tip reaction (i.e. force per unit of tip
area). To evaluate the total tip reaction, this unit force must be multiplied by the
area of the pile tip actually bearing on the soil. For solid or closed-end piles the
tip bearing area is reasonably taken as being equal to the gross cross section
area. For open-end piles (e.g. pipes) or H-piles the effective tip area may be as
little as the material area of the pile or may be as much as the gross section area.
Mosher (1984) expanded the work of Coyle and Castello (1981) to determine
the q-w relationship for piles in sand. Mosher proposed the exponential q-w
curve shown in Figure 16. Values of ultimate unit tip reaction qmax are given as a
function of relative depth (L/2R) in Figure 17.
Kraft, Ray, and Kagawa (1981) did not attempt to produce a q-w curve
corresponding to their analytical f-w curve, but approximated the q-w relation-
ship by the elastic solution for a rigid punch according to
where
w = tip displacement
q = tip pressure
It = influence coefficient ranging from 0.5 for long piles to 0.78 for very short
piles
Vijayvergiya (1977)
' (26)
Briaud and Tucker (1984) offer a means of accounting for the presence of
residual stresses due to pile installation on the tip reaction. The hyperbolic
relationship between unit tip reaction and tip displacement shown in Figure 18 is
given by
' %
(27)
%
&
' (28)
' S (29)
' (30)
where
qmax , qr = ultimate and residual unit tip resistances, respectively, in tsf. Other
terms are defined on page 6
Coyle and Castello (1981) provided ultimate tip reactions based on correla-
tions for instrumented piles in sand as shown in Figure 19. Coyle1 recom-
mended the tip reaction curve shown in Figure 20.
1
Unpublished Class Notes, 1977, H. M. Coyle, “Marine Foundation Engineering,” Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX.
Data for tip load and tip settlement were not recorded in sufficient detail in
the database considered by Aschenbrener and Olson (1984) to allow establishing
a nonlinear q-w relationship. It was concluded that the sparsity and scatter of
field data warranted nothing more complex than a simple elasto-plastic relation-
ship. In their representation, q varies linearly with w reaching qmax at a displace-
ment equal to 1 percent of the tip diameter and remains constant at qmax for larger
displacements. Ultimate tip reaction was evaluated according to
' (31)
where
Test data indicated that Nc varied from 0 to 20 and had little correlation with
shear strength. When ultimate tip reaction was not available from recorded data,
Aschenbrener and Olson used a conventional value for Nc equal to 9.
Vijayvergiya (1977)
Vijayvergiya (1977) recommends that the exponential q-w curve for sand as
discussed on pages 24-26 is applicable for piles in clay. He indicates that qmax
can be calculated from Equation 31 above but provides no guidance for the
selection of Nc.
Other Considerations
Uplift loading
procedures used for compression loading, except that the tip reaction should be
omitted unless it is explicitly accounted for as discussed below. In sands, use of
the same procedures employed in compression loading is recommended, with
the exception that fmax should be reduced to 70 percent of the maximum compres-
sion value.
For the methods that explicitly include residual driving stress effects in
nonlinear f-w and q-w curves (pages 16-17 and 26), it is recommended that the
appropriate curves for uplift loading be generated by extending the solid curves
in Figures 10 and 18 in the negative w direction with the same initial slopes as
exist in the positive w direction and assuring that the q-w curve terminates at q =
0. That is
' &
& (32)
%
where w is negative and fmax, fr, and kf are positive. And
' % (33)
&
Bearing on Rock
The tip reaction-tip displacement relationship for a pile driven to bearing on
rock may be assumed to be linear. The tip reaction stiffness given by Equation
25 may be used where the modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio should reflect
the characteristics of the surficial zone of the rock. The influence coefficient It
in Equation 25 may be taken as 0.78 for very sound rock but should be reduced
to account for such effects as fracturing of the rock surface due to driving.
Cyclic Loading
Studies have shown (Poulos 1983) that the principal concern associated with
cyclic axial loading is the tendency for fmax to reduce as the ratio of the cyclic
component of axial load Poc to the ultimate static capacity Pous increases beyond
some critical value. As long as the ratio remains below the failure envelope
shown in Figure 21, no significant degradation of the pile capacity or force-
displacement behavior is likely to occur.
where
w = axial displacement
R = effective radius of pile soil interface; and f(z,w) is the unit side friction,
which is a function of both position on the pile as well as pile
displacement
Because the displacements must be known before the side friction f(z,w) can
be determined, numerical iterative solutions of Equation 34 are required. The
most common approach to the solution is to replace the continuous pile-soil
system with a discretized model (Coyle and Reese 1966, Dawkins 1982,
Dawkins 1984) defined by a finite number of nodes along the pile at which
displacements and forces are evaluated. The solution proceeds by a succession
of trial and correction solutions until compatibility of forces and displacements
is attained at every node.
Introduction
Although the usual application of a pile foundation results primarily in axial
loading, there exist numerous situations in which components of load at the pile
head produce significant lateral displacements as well as bending moments and
shears. Unlike axial loads, which only produce displacements parallel to the
axis of the pile (a one-dimensional system), lateral loads may produce displace-
ments in any direction. Unless the pile cross section is circular, the laterally
loaded pile/soil system represents a three-dimensional problem. Most of the
research on the behavior of laterally loaded piles has been performed on piles of
circular cross section in order to reduce the three-dimensional problem to two
dimensions. Little work has been done to investigate the behavior of noncircular
cross section piles under generalized loading. In many applications, battering of
the piles in the foundation produces combined axial and lateral loads. However,
the majority of the research on lateral load behavior has been restricted to
vertical piles subjected to loads which produce displacements perpendicular to
the axis of the pile. In the discussions which follow, it is assumed that the pile
has a straight centroidal vertical axis. If the pile is nonprismatic and has a
noncircular cross section, it is assumed that the principal axes of all cross
sections along the pile fall in two mutually perpendicular planes and that the
loads applied to the pile produce displacements in only one of the principal
planes.
A schematic of a laterally loaded pile is shown in Figure 22. The x-z plane is
assumed to be a principal plane of the pile cross section. Due to the applied
head shear Vo and head moment Mo , each point on the pile undergoes a transla-
tion u in the x-direction and a rotation 2 about the y-axis. Displacements and
forces are positive if their senses are in a positive coordinate direction. The
surrounding soil develops pressures, denoted p in Figure 22, which resist the
lateral displacements of the pile.
lateral resistance p at each point on the pile to the lateral displacement u at that
point (i.e. the Winkler assumption). The relationship between soil resistance and
A series of static and cyclic lateral load tests were performed on pipe piles
driven in submerged sands (Cox, Reese, and Grubbs 1974; Reese, Cox, and
Koop 1974; Reese and Sullivan 1980). Although the tests were conducted in
submerged sands, Reese et al. (1980) have provided adjustments by which the
p-u curve can be developed for either submerged sand or sand above the water
table. The p-u curve for a point a distance z below the pile head extracted from
the experimental results is shown schematically in Figure 23. The curve consists
of a linear segment from 0 to a , an exponential variation of p with u from a to
b, a second linear range from b to c, and a constant resistance for displacements
beyond c .
Steps for constructing the p-u curve at a depth z below the ground surface are
as follows:
a. Determine the slope of the initial linear portion of the curve from
' (35)
where k is obtained from Table 2 for either submerged sand or sand above the
water table.
Table 2
Representative Values of k for Method SLAT1
Relative Density
' % (N (36)
' (N (37)
N $ $ N
' %
$ & N N $ & N
(38)
% $ N $ & N
$
' & & N
$ & N (39)
where
$ = 45 + N/2
Values of C1, C2, C3, and the depth zcr at which the transition from wedge
failure (Equation 36) to flow failure (Equation 37) occurs are shown in
Figure 24.
Figure 24. Factors for calculation of ultimate soil resistance for laterally loaded
pile in sand
' (41)
' (42)
&
' (43)
' (44)
where the parameters C, n, and the terminus of the initial linear portion pa and
ua are obtained by forcing the exponential function in Equation 44 to pass
through pb and ub with the same slope s as segment bc and to have the slope kp at
the terminus of the initial straight line segment at a. This results in
' (45)
' (46)
&
' (47)
' (48)
' (49)
where
pu = ultimate lateral soil resistance from either Equation 36 for z < zcr or
Equation 37 for z > zcr
n = geometry factor = 1.5 for tapered piles or 1.0 for prismatic piles
Several illustrative curves for this method are shown in Figure 27.
' (50)
(N
' % % (51)
' (52)
for flow failure at depth; and uc , the lateral displacement at one-half of the
ultimate resistance, given by
' , (53)
where
' (54)
(N %
For cyclic loads, the basic p-u curve for static loads is altered as shown in
Figure 28b. The exponential curve of Equation 50 is terminated at a relative
displacement u/uc = 3.0 at which the resistance diminishes with increasing
displacement for z<zcr or remains constant for z>zcr .
250-500 0.02
500-1,000 0.01
1,000-2,000 0.007
2,000-4,000 0.005
4,000-8,000 0.004
Reese, Cox, and Koop (1975) performed lateral load tests of instrumented
piles to develop p-u curves for piles in stiff clay below the water table. The p-u
curve for static loading, Figure 29, consists of five segments determined as
follows.
a. The initial linear p-u relationship 0a has a slope equal to the product of
soil stiffness k (see Table 4) and the depth z to the location at which the
curve applies.
' (55)
(N
' % % (56)
' (57)
and
' , (58)
c. Points a and b, Figure 29, are joined by a parabolic curve of the form
' (59)
(N
' % % (60)
' (61)
' , (62)
where
a. The initial linear p-u relationship 0a has a slope equal to the product of
soil stiffness k (see Table 4) and the depth z to the location at which the
curve applies.
where
' (65)
c. A second linear p-u relationship joins points b and c with the slope
shown in Figure 31. For displacements greater than u = 1.8up, the lateral
resistance remains constant.
' (66)
The p-u curve for cyclic loading, shown in Figure 33, is constructed as
follows:
a. Values of p/pu for various values of static displacement us/uc are com-
puted from Equation 66.
b. The displacement for cyclic loading for each value of p/pu is obtained
from
' % (67)
Each method for p-u curves for piles in clay described above was developed
for a single soil profile; hence there were no recommendations provided for
transitioning from “soft” clay criteria to “stiff” clay criteria. Sullivan (1977) and
Sullivan, Reese, and Fenske (1979) reexamined the data for soft clays (Matlock
1970) and stiff clays (Reese, Cox, and Koop 1975) and developed a unified
criterion (Reese and Sullivan 1980), which yields computed behaviors that are in
reasonable agreement with both soft and stiff conditions. However, some
judgement on the part of the user is required in selecting appropriate parameters
for use in the prediction equations.
The p-u curve by the unified criteria for static loading, illustrated in
Figure 34, consists of an initial linear segment 0a, an exponential segment ab, a
second linear segment bc and a constant lateral resistance for large displace-
ments. The curve for static loading at a particular depth z is constructed as
follows:
F
' % % (68)
' % (69)
where
_
Fv = average effective vertical stress over the depth z
c = cohesion at depth z
b = pile diameter
' (70)
b. Compare the properties of the soil profile under analysis with those listed
in Table 5 and select the values of parameters Aand F to be used in the
following calculations.
' (71)
' (72)
with
' , (73)
Clay Description A F
= 0.7%
Overconsolidation ratio =1
Liquid limit = 92
Plasticity index = 68
Liquidity index =1
= 0.5%
Liquid limit = 77
Plasticity index = 60
Table 6
Representative Values of k for Method CLAT4
Cohesion (psf) k (pci)
200-500 30
500-1,000 100
1,000-2,000 300
2,000-4,000 1,000
4,000-8,000 3,000
The p-u curve by the unified method for cyclic loading, Figure 35, also
consists of an initial linear segment, followed by an exponential variation of p
with u, a second linear segment, and a constant resistance for large displace-
ments. Construction of the curve for cyclic loading follows the same steps as for
the static curve, with the exceptions that the exponential segment terminates at a
resistance equal to one half of pu , the second linear segment terminates at a
displacement u = 20uc , and the constant resistance for u > 20uc is given by
' (75)
O’Neill and Gazioglu, as well as other researchers, reasoned that there exists
a critical length of pile such that longer piles no longer influence the pile head
behavior. This critical length is presented as
' (76)
Table 7
Soil Modulus for Method CLAT5
Undrained Shear Strength c (psf) Soil Modulus Es (psi)
<500 50
>8,000 5,000
The reference lateral displacement uc (see Equations 53, 58, 62, and 73) is
obtained from
' N, (77)
' (78)
' % # (79)
Table 8
Soil Degradability Factors
UU Triaxial Compression Failure Strain
where zcr = Lc/4, indicating a transition from wedge type failure to flow failure at
a depth equal to one fourth the critical length which, unlike the previous meth-
ods, reflects the relative pile/soil stiffness.
The p-u curves for static load (Figure 36) and cyclic loads (Figure 37) have
an initial exponential relationship between lateral resistance and displacement
given by
' (80)
with the static curve terminating at p/pu = 1 and the cyclic curve at p/pu = 0.5.
The second linear section of the curves terminates at
' % &
(81)
'
(82)
Figure 38, the governing differential equation for bending in the x-z plane of a
prismatic, linearly elastic pile is
where
p(z,u) = lateral resistance which is a function of both position z on the pile and
the lateral displacement u at z
The second term in Equation 83 represents the interaction of the axial load in
the pile with the lateral displacement to increase the bending moments in the pile
(the “beam-column” effect). Distribution of the axial load is not influenced
significantly by lateral loading; hence, the distribution may be determined using
the axial load analysis techniques described in Chapter 2 before a lateral load
analysis is performed. In usual pile-soil systems, the beam-column effect is
small and conservative estimates of its influence may be obtained by taking the
axial force in the pile equal to the applied head load Po.
where E(z) = secant stiffness of the lateral resistance and the minus sign indi-
cates that the resistance is opposite in direction to the displacement. For a
prismatic pile with constant axial force and a linear resistance function, Equation
83 becomes
% % ' (85)
% % ' (86)
&
' % % % (87)
' (88)
' % 8 (90)
8 ' (91)
For a sufficiently long pile (see Page 51) conditions at the pile tip have no
effect on the response at the pile head. In this case the relationship between
loads (Mo , Vo) and displacements (uo , Do) at the pile head may be expressed as
& 8
' (92)
D
& 8
' (93)
is the buckling load for the long pile. Hetenyi (1946) gives the buckling load for
a finite length pile with both ends fixed against displacement as less than or
equal to
For usual pile-soil systems the axial head load must be significantly less than the
value given by Equation 93 in order to prevent overstress of the pile material at
the head. Hence 82 is always considerably less than 1, so that the beam-column
effect may be neglected and the second term of Equations 83, 85, and 86 may be
omitted. Consequently, the governing differential equation for elastic analyses
becomes
% ' (95)
' (96)
,
Table 9
Values of Es for 1-ft-Wide Piles in Precompressed Clay
Consistency of Clay Stiff Very Stiff Hard
Table 10
Values of Constant of Horizontal Subgrade Reaction nh for a 1-ft-
Wide Pile in Sand
Relative Density Loose Medium Dense
' % (97)
The stiffness of sand at the ground surface will be zero; hence, Ko will be zero.
Although the p-u curves for clays suggest that Ko will not be zero, it is conserva-
tive to take Ko as zero for these materials. Therefore, the elastic solutions
presented in the following paragraphs will take Ko to be zero in all cases.
%
' (98)
' (99)
' (100)
' % (101)
where Vo and Mo are the applied head shear and moment, respectively; and Au(Z)
and Bu(Z) are nondimensional functions of the nondimensional depth Z.
% ' (102)
and
% ' (103)
&
' (107)
&
& D
where
Auo = Au(Z = 0)
Buo = Bu(Z = 0)
Aso = As(Z = 0)
Bso = Bs(Z = 0)
The coefficients Auo , Buo , Aso , and Bso are shown for various relative pile lengths
Zmax in Appendix B (Figures B25 through B28). The following items should be
noted: (a) Aso = Buo ; (b) piles with Zmax < 2 may be treated as rigid (see page
76); and (c) The A and B coefficients remain constant for Zmax $ 4.
' % D (108)
From an equilibrium analysis of the rigid pile, the head shear and moment are
given in terms of the head displacements by
% %
' % (110)
D
% %
b. Estimate a variation and lateral stiffness (i.e., K and n in Equation 97) for
the soil profile using Terzaghi's soil moduli. (Reese, Cooley, and
Radhakrishnan (1983) suggest that a value of T (Equation 98) be
assumed; Terzaghi's moduli provide a means for this assumption.)
c. Evaluate the deflections at the locations of the p-u curves in step a using
the appropriate nondimensional curves for head loads in the working
range.
d. Determine the slope of a secant line from the p-u curve for the deflection
calculated for each location. This establishes the soil modulus Ez at each
p-u curve location and allows Ez to be plotted versus depth z.
e. Revise the variation and lateral soil stiffness (i.e., new K and n in Equa-
tion 97) to best approximate the curve of Ez versus z in step d.
g. Use the final values of K and n to calculate the pile head stiffness coeffi-
cients in Equations 107 and 110.
J ' J (111)
and
J
' (112)
where
If there is no slippage between the pile and soil at the interface, the tangential
displacement of a point on the interface is
' 2 (113)
where 2 is the rotation of the pile. And, finally, the required relation is
J
' (114)
2
The linear relationship between surface shear and pile rotation represented by
Equation 113 is assumed to terminate when the surface shear Jo reaches a limit
of
J ' F * (115)
for sands, or
Jou = ultimate surface shear resisting rotation of the pile about its longitudinal
axis
Elastic Analysis
So long as the surface shear is less than Jou , the entire pile-soil system is
linearly elastic. The governing differential equation for torsional response of the
linear pile-soil system is
2
& B 2 ' (117)
where
J = torsional area property of the pile cross section (polar moment of inertia
for a circular section)
(Note: Scott (1981) indicates that the torsional resistance to twist at the pile tip
may be included as was done for tip reaction for the axially loaded pile. How-
ever, in most situations the tip resistance against twist will be negligible.)
Three-Dimensional System
Figure 40 illustrates the coordinate system, forces, and displacements at the
pile head which must be considered in a three-dimensional analysis. The x- and
y-axes are the principal axes of the pile cross section and the z-axis is the
longitudinal axis of the pile. Forces and displacements are assumed to have
positive senses in the positive coordinate directions (“right-hand rule” for
moments and rotations).
For a linearly elastic system, the forces and displacements are related by
' (118)
N
The b coefficient matrix array is the pile head stiffness matrix and the individual
elements bij are obtained from Equations A21, 107, and 108.
'
& (119)
'
& (120)
'
(121)
'
(122)
Equation 98 coefficients Auo , Aso , Buo , and Bso are obtained from Figures B25
through B28 with Zmax = L/Txz ; terms appearing in Equation 122 are defined in
Chapter 2; and, terms in Equation 123 are defined in Chapter 4. The remaining
elements of the pile head stiffness matrix, b22 , b24 , b55 , and b44 , are evaluated
for bending in the y-z plane.
' % (123)
D ' % (124)
The attendant inverse relationship, considering only the terms associated with
lateral loading and the notation of Equation 119,
' (125)
' (126)
or
N '
(127)
DN ' (128)
NN ' % (129)
&
NN ' (131)
&
D
&
' (132)
% & %
D
(133)
'
D (134)
'
or
' (135)
' % (136)
&
' & % (138)
&
' & % ' (139)
where
NNN NNN
NNN
is the pile head stiffness matrix for bending in the xz-plane. A similar operation
is required for bending in the yz-plane. The torsion stiffness coefficient is given
by
&
NNN ' % (141)
where b66 is the torsional coefficient for the embedded segment from Chapter 4,
and G and J are shear modulus and torsional area moment of inertia, respec-
tively, for the free-standing segment.
For complex soil conditions and/or nonprismatic piles which are not readily
approximated by one of the procedures for linearly elastic systems discussed
previously, the pile head stiffness matrix may be obtained with the aid of
computer programs such as CBEAMC, CAXPILE, or COM624.
Moment-of-Inertia (Simplified
Elastic Center) Method
A complete description of the Elastic Center method is given by Andersen
(1956). For the simplified procedure presented here, it is assumed, in addition to
a rigid cap, that only vertical loads are applied to the cap, that all piles are verti-
cal, that all piles have the same axial stiffness (EA/L), and that the magnitudes of
the axial loads in the piles vary linearly with distance from the centroid of the
pile group. The axial load at the head of the ith pile is given by
' (142)
Mx , My = moments of the vertical loads on the cap about the x- and y-axes,
respectively
Culmann's Method
The method attributed to Culmann (see Terzaghi (1943)) requires three
nonparallel subgroups of piles in the foundation. The piles within each subgroup
are assumed to be parallel and are assumed to have the same head load. Each
subgroup is replaced by a single pile at the centroid of the subgroup. A graphical
procedure is used to resolve the superstructure load applied to the rigid cap to
each subgroup.
“Analytical” Method
Teng (1962) describes a simplified procedure for including the effects of
horizontal loads as well as battered piles. The vertical component of the axial
force in each pile due to the resultant vertical load and moments of the super-
structure on the rigid cap is calculated according to the moment of inertia
method. The total axial pile load and its horizontal component may be calculated
from the vertical component. Teng suggests that an adequate design has been
attained if the applied horizontal foundation load does not exceed the sum of the
horizontal components of axial pile forces by more than 1,000 lb/pile.
The pile head displacements in the local coordinate system for a pile are
expressed in terms of the pile cap displacements by the transformation
' (143)
where {u}i = {ui vi wi Ni Di 2i}T = pile head displacements in the local coordinate
system for the ith pile; [A]i , [G]i = geometric transformation matrices given by
(see Figure 44 for definitions of symbols)
$ " $ " $
' (144)
$ " " " & $
$ " $ " $
&
&
&
'
(145)
The relationship between pile cap forces and pile cap displacements is given
by
' j (146)
'
'
& (147)
&
&
After Equation 146 has been solved for the pile cap displacements, the head
displacements and head forces in the local coordinate system for each pile are
obtained from Equations 143 and 118, respectively. This method of analysis has
been incorporated into the CASE computer program CPGA (Hartman et al.
1984).
N ' ) (148)
where ()) is the vector of global deflections at the origin. By using this trans-
formation, each pile stiffness is moved to the origin of the pile cap. By using
Equations 93, 94, and 95, a single-pile force-deflection relationship can be
expressed as
' ) (149)
' j (150)
'
where
' j ) (151)
'
An iterative solution is used to determine the deformation vector for the rigid
pile cap. Initial b-factors are taken as the initial tangents to the various relation-
ships described in the previous paragraph. The three-dimensional load vector is
then applied, the cap deformation vector is computed, and the pile-head deforma-
tion vectors are computed. From these deformations pile-head reactions are
computed from the present b-values. A check is then made of the compatibility
of the reactions and deformations at each pile head using the predetermined
nonlinear relationships. If compatibility in the reaction and deformation values is
noted, new b-values are computed as secants to the axial and lateral pile head
load-deformation relationships at the computed values of deformation, and the
process is repeated as necessary until tolerance between the computed deforma-
tions and deformations on the predetermined relationships at the computed value
of pile-head reaction is achieved at every pile.
(152)
% & & < &
% %
B & <
% & % (153)
B & <
% & %
B & <
The solution for pile-cap deformations is then repeated using the modified
unit load transfer curves, which produce, in general, different b matrices for each
pile in the system during this pass through the solution. The regeneration of the
load-deformation relationships for this second pass for every pile in the system is
the source of the high computational effort required for this method compared
with Saul's method and which makes it generally impractical for the design
office. Once the new, compatible pile head loads and deformations have been
determined, the cap deformation vector is defined, and the axial and lateral
algorithms are entered with pile-head deformations as boundary conditions to
compute moments, shears and axial thrusts along the piles, if desired. If greater
accuracy is desired, the correction process can be repeated; however, one set of
The pile analysis methods described above assume that the pile cap, or
structure base slab, is rigid in comparison to the stiffness of the piles. For many
structures, such as U-frame lock monoliths, this is not a valid assumption, and
the flexibility of the base slab should be considered. Currently there are no
special-purpose programs to perform this type analysis, so the use of large
general-purpose programs like SAP or STRUDL that can represent a flexible
pile-cap foundation and piles must be used. The pile element used in the rigid
base method has been added to several versions of the SAP and STRUDL
programs. Flexible base analyses have already been performed for pile-founded
structures designed by the Corps of Engineers. A more detailed report on
flexible base analysis will be furnished at some future date.
Nonlinear analysis
One of the assumptions made in the rigid base analysis method is that a pile
can be represented by a set of linear stiffnesses. The actual behavior of the pile-
soil system may be highly nonlinear. Some existing programs are capable of
nonlinear analysis of a structure that is supported by only a few piles. One such
Cox, W. R., Reese, L.C., and Grubbs, B. R. (1974). “Field testing of laterally
loaded piles in sand.” Proceedings, Offshore Technology Conference, Paper
No. 2079, Houston, TX.
Coyle, H. M., and Castello, R. R. (1981). “New design correlations for piles in
sand,” Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, Proceedings
Paper 16379, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol 107(GT7).
Coyle, H. M., and Reese, L. C. (1966). “Load transfer for axially loaded piles
in clay,” Journal Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, Proceedings
Paper 4702, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol 93(SM6).
Coyle, H. M., and Salaiman, I. H. (1967). “Skin friction for steel piles in sand,”
Journal Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, Proceedings Paper 5590,
American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol 93(SM6).
References 87
Dawkins, W. P. (1984). “Users guide: Computer program for soil-structure
interaction analysis of axially loaded piles (CAXPILE),” Instruction
Report K-84-4, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicks-
burg, MS.
Hartman, J. P., Jaeger, J. J., Jobst, J. J., and Martin, D. K. (1989). “User’s
guide: Pile group analysis (CPGA) computer program,” Technical Report
ITL-89-3, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
MS.
Kraft, L. M., Ray, R. P., and Kagawa, T. (1981). “Theoretical t-z curves,”
Journal Geotechnical Engineering Division, Proceedings Paper 16653,
American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol 107(GT11).
88 References
O’Neill, M.W. (1964). “Determination of the pile-head torque-twist relation-
ship for a circular pile embedded in a clay soil,” M.S. thesis, University of
Texas, Austin.
Poulas, H. G., and Davis, E. H. (1980). Pile foundation analysis and design.
John Wiley and Sons, New York, 13-15, 52-66, 71-83.
References 89
Reese, L. C., and Welch, R. C. (1975). “Lateral loading of deep founcations in
stiff clay,” Journal, Geotechnical Engineering Division, American Society of
Civil Engineering 101(GT7), 633-649.
Reese, L. C., Cox, W. R., and Koop, F. D. (1974). “Analysis of laterally loaded
piles in sand.” Proceedings, Fifth Annual Offshore Technology Conference,
Paper No. OTC 2080, Houston, TX.
__________. (1975). “Field testing and analysis of laterally loaded piles in stiff
clay.” Proceedings, Seventh Offshore Technology Conference, Paper
No. OTFC 2312. Houston, TX.
Seed, H. B., and Reese, L. C. (1957). “The action of soft clay along friction
piles,” Transactions, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol 122.
Sullivan, W. R., Reese, L. C., and Fenske, C. W. (1979). “Unified method for
analysis of laterally loaded piles in clay.” Proceedings, Numerical Methods
in Offshore Piling, Institution of Civil Engineers, London, 107-118.
Terzaghi, K. (1943). Theoretical soil mechanics. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.,
New York.
90 References
Terzaghi, K. (1955). “Evaluation of coefficients of subgrade reaction,”
Geotechnique, Vol 5.
References 91
Bibliography
Bogard, D., and Matlock, H. (1980). “Simplified calculations of p-y curves for
laterally loaded piles in sand,” (unpublished report), The Earth Technology
Corporation, Inc., Houston, TX.
Department of the Army. “User guide: Computer program for analysis of pile
groups - CPGA,” in preparation, CASE Task Group on Pile Foundations,
Headquarters, U.S Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC.
Meyer, B., and Reese, L. C. (1979). “Analysis of single piles under lateral load
ing,” Research Report No. 244-1, Center for Transportation Research, The
University of Texas at Austin.
O'Neill, M. W., and Tsai, C-N. (1984). “An investigation of soil nonlinearity
and pile-soil-pile interaction in pile group analysis,” Report No. UHCE 84-9,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Houston, University Park,
TX.
Puech, A., Boulton, M., and Meimon, Y. (1982). “Tension piles: Field data and
numerical modeling,” Proceedings, Second International Conference on
Numerical Methods in Offshore Piling, I.C.E. and The University of Texas,
April, 293-312.
92 Bibliography
Appendix A
Linear Approximations for
Load Deformation of Axial
Piles
where Ez(z) is the stiffness of the axial load-transfer mechanism. A typical f-w
curve is shown in Figure A1. At any displacement w the nonlinear f-w curve
may be replaced by a linear secant kf(z) . The total stiffness of the load-transfer
mechanism appearing in Equation A1 is given by
' (A2)
where
Tz = EA/E
' (A5)
%
' (A6)
%
where
r = Kt/EzTz
Zmax = L/Tz
' (A7)
where
a. Pile tip free
' (A8)
'
(A9)
%
'
% (A10)
ao is plotted for various values of Zmax in Figure A2. It is observed that for
values of Zmax greater than 2, conditions at the tip have a negligible effect on the
pile head force-displacement relationship. As will be discussed later, the pile
head axial force-displacement relationship forms a part of the elastic pile head
stiffness matrix used in the analysis of pile groups. The axial pile head stiffness
coefficient is given by
' (A11)
Nondimensional Analysis
for Variable Soil Stiffness
As discussed earlier, the stiffness of the side friction displacement
relationship increases with depth. For axial head loads in the working load range
(e.g., one-half of the ultimate load), it has been found that the equivalent elastic
' % (A12)
where
Kf = elastic stiffness coefficient of the side friction effect in units of force per
unit length of pile per unit deflection
Because the stiffness of the side friction effect is a function of the strength of the
soil, Ko will be zero for sands. Some adhesion of clay soil may occur at the
ground surface and K for clays may not be zero. However, it is likely that
installation effects will minimize adhesion near the ground surface and a
conservative estimate is obtained for Ko = 0 . For the general variation with Ko =
0, the governing differential equation is
' (A14)
' (A15)
' (A16)
'
% (A17)
Equation A19 may be solved for a(Z) by any numerical technique (e.g., finite
differences). From the solution of Equation A19, the relationship between pile
head force and head displacement is obtained as a(Z=0) , whence
' (A20)
' (A21)
' (A22)
%
where
C=2
' (A23)
& <
b. For a medium in which shear modulus varies from zero at the ground
surface to Gt at the pile tip, a linearly varying side friction stiffness equal
to
' (A24)
& <
Kraft, Ray, and Kagawa (1981) suggest that the same procedures used for
sand may be used for piles in clay with the shear moduli appearing in
Equations A23 and A24 being modified to account for magnitude and time of
loading, as shown in Table A1.
Method ECSF2
After Setup
'
% (A25)
where Ef and m are given by Equations 23 and 24 in the main text, respectively.
The variation of E2 along the pile depends on the distribution of soil modulus of
elasticity used in the evaluation of Ef from Equation 23.
Method ECSF2
' (A26)
As shown previously, the tip reaction only has a significant effect on the pile
head stiffness coefficient for piles having Zmax less than 2. If the value of Zmax
resulting from any of the assessments of side friction described above is less
than 2, the tip reaction stiffness may be omitted.
' B (A27)
The tip reaction stiffness may be obtained from any of the procedures
described previously for developing q-w curves by evaluating a secant stiffness
for a tip displacement representative of working load conditions. Typically in
the Corps of Engineers, failure at the tip is considered to occur at a tip
displacement of 0.25 in. Unless stated otherwise, working load conditions are
assumed to occur at one-tenth of the displacement corresponding to failure (i.e.,
0.025 in.).
The theory of elasticity solution for a rigid punch has been used by Kraft,
Ray, and Kagawa (1981) (see also Randolph and Wroth 1978) to estimate the tip
reaction stiffness as
' (A28)
& <
where the shear modulus G should be taken as an average in situ value between
6Rt above the pile tip to 6Rt below the tip. The factor It in Equation A28 is an
influence factor ranging from 0.5 to 0.78.
Method EST2
Mosher (1984) and Vijayvergiya (1977) express the tip reaction q-w curve as
a power function (see pages 24-26). Mosher recommends for working load
approximations a secant tip reaction stiffness corresponding to a tip
displacement of 0.025 in. The corresponding tip stiffnesses are:
where qmax is the ultimate unit tip reaction from Figure 17. For consistent units
in Equations A29 through A31, qmax must be in pounds per square inch, and At
must be in square inches, which yields Kt in pounds per inch.
Method EST3
A secant stiffness obtained from the work of Briaud and Tucker (1984),
which considers the effects of residual stresses due to installation for a tip
displacement 0.0.025 in., is
' (A32)
%
and
' (A33)
where N is the average uncorrected standard penetration count in blows per foot
from a distance of 8Rt above the pile tip to 8Rt below the tip. The units of kq in
Equation A33 are tsf/in. The required units of other terms in Equation A32 are
qmax in tons per square foot and At in square feet, which yields Kt in tons per inch.
The bilinear tip reaction curve used by Aschenbrener and Olson (1984)
produces
' (A34)
where su is the average undrained shear strength of the clay from 6Rt above the
pile tip to 6Rt below the tip.
Method ECT2
The tip stiffness developed by Kraft, Ray, and Kagawa (1981) described on
page A11 may be used for piles in clay.
' (A35)
,
where
Typical values of ,50 are 0.02 for a very soft clay, 0.01 for a soft clay, and 0.005
for a stiff clay.
Basic Equations
'
%
'
% '
'
'
' %
' %
' %
Z Au As Am Au As Am Au As Am
0.00 2.118 -1.741 0.000 1.597 -1.116 0.000 1.474 -1.032 0.000
0.10 1.944 -1.736 0.092 1.486 -1.111 0.094 1.371 -1.027 0.095
0.20 1.771 -1.723 0.164 1.375 -1.097 0.174 1.248 -1.009 0.192
0.30 1.600 -1.704 0.219 1.266 -1.076 0.240 1.168 -0.992 0.247
0.40 1.430 -1.680 0.257 1.160 -1.050 0.293 1.051 -0.958 0.315
0.50 1.264 -1.653 0.282 1.057 -1.018 0.335 0.976 -0.931 0.351
0.60 1.100 -1.624 0.294 0.956 -0.983 0.366 0.867 -0.886 0.395
0.70 0.939 -1.594 0.294 0.860 -0.945 0.388 0.797 -0.854 0.417
0.80 0.781 -1.565 0.286 0.767 -0.906 0.401 0.698 -0.802 0.441
0.90 0.626 -1.537 0.269 0.679 -0.865 0.406 0.635 -0.767 0.451
1.00 0.474 -1.512 0.246 0.594 -0.825 0.405 0.546 -0.712 0.458
1.10 0.324 -1.488 0.219 0.514 -0.784 0.397 0.491 -0.675 0.459
1.20 0.176 -1.468 0.188 0.437 -0.745 0.385 0.413 -0.620 0.454
1.30 0.030 -1.451 0.156 0.365 -0.708 0.368 0.365 -0.584 0.447
1.40 -0.114 -1.437 0.123 0.296 -0.672 0.347 0.298 -0.532 0.433
1.50 -0.258 -1.426 0.091 0.230 -0.638 0.324 0.257 -0.497 0.421
1.60 -0.400 -1.418 0.062 0.168 -0.607 0.298 0.200 -0.448 0.400
1.70 -0.541 -1.413 0.037 0.109 -0.579 0.270 0.165 -0.417 0.385
1.80 -0.683 -1.411 0.017 0.052 -0.553 0.241 0.118 -0.372 0.359
1.90 -0.824 -1.410 0.005 -0.002 -0.531 0.212 0.089 -0.344 0.341
2.00 -0.965 -1.410 0.000 -0.054 -0.511 0.183 0.051 -0.305 0.314
(Continued)
Z Au As Am Au As Am Au As Am
Z Bu Bs Bm Bu Bs Bm Bu Bs Bm
0.00 -1.741 2.261 -1.000 -1.116 1.500 -1.000 -1.032 1.441 -1.000
0.10 -1.519 2.161 -0.993 -0.971 1.400 -0.996 -0.893 1.341 -0.997
0.20 -1.308 2.063 -0.972 -0.836 1.301 -0.983 -0.739 1.222 -0.982
0.30 -1.107 1.967 -0.937 -0.710 1.204 -0.961 -0.645 1.144 -0.966
0.40 -0.915 1.876 -0.891 -0.595 1.109 -0.932 -0.514 1.030 -0.934
0.50 -0.731 1.789 -0.836 -0.489 1.017 -0.897 -0.435 0.956 -0.909
0.60 -0.557 1.709 -0.773 -0.391 0.930 -0.858 -0.327 0.850 -0.865
0.70 -0.389 1.635 -0.705 -0.303 0.846 -0.814 -0.261 0.782 -0.834
0.80 -0.229 1.568 -0.633 -0.222 0.767 -0.767 -0.173 0.685 -0.784
0.90 -0.076 1.508 -0.559 -0.149 0.693 -0.719 -0.121 0.623 -0.749
1.00 0.072 1.456 -0.484 -0.083 0.623 -0.668 -0.052 0.537 -0.695
1.10 0.216 1.412 -0.410 -0.024 0.559 -0.617 -0.011 0.483 -0.658
1.20 0.355 1.374 -0.338 0.029 0.500 -0.565 0.042 0.407 -0.604
1.30 0.491 1.344 -0.269 0.076 0.446 -0.514 0.073 0.360 -0.568
1.40 0.624 1.320 -0.205 0.118 0.397 -0.464 0.112 0.295 -0.515
1.50 0.755 1.303 -0.148 0.156 0.353 -0.415 0.134 0.255 -0.480
1.60 0.885 1.290 -0.098 0.189 0.314 -0.367 0.162 0.201 -0.430
1.70 1.013 1.283 -0.057 0.218 0.280 -0.321 0.176 0.168 -0.397
1.80 1.141 1.279 -0.026 0.245 0.250 -0.277 0.194 0.123 -0.351
1.90 1.269 1.277 -0.007 0.269 0.224 -0.236 0.202 0.096 -0.322
2.00 1.397 1.277 0.000 0.290 0.202 -0.198 0.212 0.060 -0.280
(Continued)
Z Bu Bs Bm Bu Bs Bm Bu Bs Bm
Z Au As Am Au As Am Au As Am
0.00 4.738 -3.418 0.000 2.727 -1.758 0.000 2.442 -1.622 0.000
0.10 4.396 -3.413 0.099 2.552 -1.753 0.100 2.280 -1.616 0.100
0.20 4.055 -3.399 0.194 2.377 -1.738 0.197 2.087 -1.597 0.216
0.30 3.717 -3.375 0.281 2.204 -1.714 0.289 1.960 -1.577 0.290
0.40 3.381 -3.343 0.357 2.034 -1.680 0.375 1.773 -1.536 0.394
0.50 3.048 -3.304 0.419 1.868 -1.639 0.452 1.651 -1.502 0.458
0.60 2.720 -3.259 0.466 1.707 -1.590 0.521 1.474 -1.442 0.543
0.70 2.396 -3.211 0.497 1.551 -1.535 0.579 1.361 -1.396 0.592
0.80 2.078 -3.161 0.511 1.400 -1.475 0.626 1.198 -1.321 0.655
0.90 1.764 -3.109 0.509 1.256 -1.410 0.662 1.094 -1.268 0.689
1.00 1.456 -3.059 0.490 1.118 -1.343 0.687 0.947 -1.182 0.729
1.10 1.152 -3.012 0.458 0.987 -1.273 0.701 0.855 -1.123 0.747
1.20 0.853 -2.968 0.412 0.863 -1.203 0.703 0.725 -1.032 0.764
1.30 0.559 -2.930 0.357 0.747 -1.133 0.696 0.645 -0.971 0.768
1.40 0.267 -2.897 0.294 0.637 -1.064 0.679 0.534 -0.879 0.764
1.50 -0.021 -2.871 0.227 0.534 -0.998 0.653 0.466 -0.818 0.755
1.60 -0.307 -2.852 0.161 0.437 -0.934 0.618 0.374 -0.729 0.733
1.70 -0.592 -2.839 0.100 0.347 -0.874 0.577 0.318 -0.671 0.714
1.80 -0.875 -2.831 0.049 0.262 -0.819 0.530 0.242 -0.587 0.679
1.90 -1.158 -2.828 0.013 0.183 -0.768 0.479 0.197 -0.534 0.652
2.00 -1.441 -2.828 0.000 0.108 -0.723 0.423 0.138 -0.459 0.607
(Continued)
Z Au As Am Au As Am Au As Am
Z Bu Bs Bm Bu Bs Bm Bu Bs Bm
0.00 -3.418 3.213 -1.000 -1.758 1.819 -1.000 -1.622 1.751 -1.000
0.10 -3.102 3.113 -0.999 -1.581 1.719 -1.000 -1.452 1.651 -1.000
0.20 -2.796 3.013 -0.996 -1.414 1.619 -0.998 -1.261 1.531 -0.997
0.30 -2.499 2.914 -0.987 -1.257 1.519 -0.993 -1.141 1.452 -0.994
0.40 -2.213 2.816 -0.970 -1.110 1.420 -0.985 -0.974 1.333 -0.984
0.50 -1.936 2.720 -0.945 -0.973 1.322 -0.972 -0.871 1.254 -0.975
0.60 -1.668 2.628 -0.910 -0.846 1.226 -0.955 -0.727 1.139 -0.955
0.70 -1.410 2.539 -0.865 -0.728 1.132 -0.932 -0.639 1.063 -0.938
0.80 -1.161 2.455 -0.810 -0.619 1.040 -0.904 -0.518 0.952 -0.908
0.90 -0.919 2.377 -0.746 -0.520 0.951 -0.871 -0.445 0.880 -0.884
1.00 -0.685 2.306 -0.674 -0.429 0.866 -0.834 -0.346 0.777 -0.844
1.10 -0.458 2.243 -0.594 -0.347 0.784 -0.792 -0.286 0.710 -0.814
1.20 -0.236 2.187 -0.510 -0.272 0.707 -0.747 -0.207 0.615 -0.766
1.30 -0.020 2.141 -0.423 -0.205 0.635 -0.698 -0.160 0.555 -0.732
1.40 0.192 2.103 -0.336 -0.145 0.568 -0.647 -0.099 0.471 -0.678
1.50 0.401 2.073 -0.252 -0.091 0.506 -0.593 -0.063 0.418 -0.641
1.60 0.607 2.052 -0.173 -0.044 0.449 -0.538 -0.017 0.345 -0.584
1.70 0.812 2.038 -0.105 -0.001 0.398 -0.483 0.008 0.299 -0.546
1.80 1.015 2.031 -0.050 0.036 0.353 -0.427 0.040 0.237 -0.490
1.90 1.218 2.028 -0.013 0.070 0.313 -0.373 0.058 0.199 -0.452
2.00 1.421 2.027 0.000 0.099 0.278 -0.319 0.079 0.148 -0.398
(Continued)
Z Bu Bs Bm Bu Bs Bm Bu Bs Bm
Z Au As Am Au As Am Au As Am
0.00 6.418 -4.348 0.000 3.039 -1.970 0.000 2.820 -1.884 0.000
0.10 5.983 -4.343 0.100 2.842 -1.965 0.100 2.631 -1.879 0.100
0.20 5.550 -4.328 0.199 2.647 -1.950 0.200 2.407 -1.859 0.219
0.30 5.118 -4.303 0.296 2.453 -1.925 0.298 2.259 -1.839 0.298
0.40 4.689 -4.269 0.389 2.262 -1.890 0.395 2.041 -1.796 0.414
0.50 4.265 -4.225 0.473 2.075 -1.846 0.487 1.898 -1.760 0.488
0.60 3.845 -4.174 0.548 1.893 -1.793 0.575 1.691 -1.695 0.594
0.70 3.430 -4.116 0.608 1.717 -1.732 0.655 1.557 -1.645 0.659
0.80 3.022 -4.053 0.651 1.547 -1.662 0.728 1.365 -1.560 0.748
0.90 2.619 -3.987 0.676 1.384 -1.586 0.790 1.243 -1.498 0.800
1.00 2.224 -3.919 0.679 1.230 -1.505 0.841 1.069 -1.398 0.865
1.10 1.836 -3.852 0.660 1.083 -1.418 0.880 0.960 -1.328 0.900
1.20 1.454 -3.788 0.619 0.946 -1.329 0.906 0.807 -1.217 0.938
1.30 1.078 -3.729 0.557 0.818 -1.238 0.918 0.712 -1.141 0.955
1.40 0.708 -3.677 0.477 0.699 -1.146 0.917 0.582 -1.026 0.964
1.50 0.342 -3.634 0.383 0.588 -1.055 0.902 0.503 -0.949 0.961
1.60 -0.019 -3.601 0.282 0.488 -0.966 0.873 0.396 -0.835 0.943
1.70 -0.378 -3.578 0.181 0.395 -0.881 0.832 0.333 -0.760 0.923
1.80 -0.735 -3.564 0.091 0.311 -0.800 0.780 0.248 -0.652 0.881
1.90 -1.091 -3.559 0.026 0.235 -0.725 0.718 0.199 -0.582 0.847
2.00 -1.447 -3.558 0.000 0.166 -0.657 0.647 0.135 -0.484 0.786
(Continued)
Z Au As Am Au As Am Au As Am
Z Bu Bs Bm Bu Bs Bm Bu Bs Bm
0.00 -4.348 3.624 -1.000 -1.970 1.925 -1.000 -1.884 1.888 -1.000
0.10 -3.990 3.524 -1.000 -1.783 1.825 -1.000 -1.700 1.788 -1.000
0.20 -3.643 3.424 -0.999 -1.605 1.725 -1.000 -1.493 1.668 -1.000
0.30 -3.306 3.324 -0.998 -1.438 1.625 -0.999 -1.362 1.589 -0.999
0.40 -2.978 3.224 -0.993 -1.280 1.525 -0.997 -1.179 1.469 -0.996
0.50 -2.661 3.125 -0.983 -1.133 1.425 -0.992 -1.065 1.389 -0.993
0.60 -2.353 3.028 -0.966 -0.995 1.326 -0.985 -0.905 1.271 -0.984
0.70 -2.055 2.932 -0.942 -0.867 1.228 -0.975 -0.807 1.192 -0.976
0.80 -1.767 2.840 -0.907 -0.749 1.132 -0.960 0.670 1.076 -0.959
0.90 -1.487 2.751 -0.860 -0.641 1.037 -0.940 -0.587 1.000 -0.944
1.00 -1.216 2.668 -0.802 -0.542 0.944 -0.915 -0.474 0.888 -0.916
1.10 -0.953 2.591 -0.732 -0.452 0.854 -0.885 -0.406 0.816 -0.893
1.20 -0.698 2.522 -0.650 -0.371 0.767 -0.850 -0.315 0.711 -0.853
1.30 -0.449 2.462 -0.559 -0.299 0.684 -0.808 -0.260 0.644 -0.822
1.40 -0.205 2.411 -0.460 -0.234 0.605 -0.762 -0.189 0.548 -0.771
1.50 0.034 2.370 -0.356 -0.177 0.532 -0.712 -0.147 0.488 -0.734
1.60 0.269 2.339 -0.254 -0.128 0.463 -0.657 -0.094 0.404 -0.675
1.70 0.502 2.319 -0.159 -0.085 0.400 -0.599 -0.064 0.351 -0.633
1.80 0.733 2.307 -0.078 -0.047 0.343 -0.539 -0.026 0.279 -0.569
1.90 0.964 2.302 -0.022 -0.016 0.293 -0.477 -0.006 0.235 -0.525
2.00 1.194 2.302 0.000 0.011 0.248 -0.415 0.019 0.176 -0.459
(Continued)
Z Bu Bs Bm Bu Bs B B Bs Bm
Title Date
Technical Report K-78-1 List of Computer Programs for Computer-Aided Structural Engineering Feb 1978
Instruction Report 0-79-2 User's Guide: Computer Program with Interactive Graphics for Mar 1979
Analysis of Plane Frame Structures (CFRAME)
Technical Report K-80-2 Evaluation of Computer Programs for the Design/Analysis of Highway Jan 1980
and Railway Bridges
Instruction Report K-80-1 User's Guide: Computer Program for Design/Review of Curvi-linear Feb 1980
Conduits/Culveris (CURCON)
Instruction Report K-80-3 A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Data Edit Program Mar 1980
Instruction Report K-80-6 Basic User's Guide: Computer Program for Design and Analysis of Dec 1980
Inverted-T Retaining Walls and Floodwalls (TWDA)
Instruction Report K-80-7 User's Reference Manual: Computer Program for Design and Analysis Dec 1980
of Inverted-T Retaining Walls and Floodwalls (TWDA)
Instruction Report K-81-2 User's Guide: Computer Program for Design and Analysis of Sheet Pile
Walls by Classical Methods (CSHTWAL)
Report 1: Computational Processes Feb 1981
Report 2: Interactive Graphics Options Mar 1981
Instruction Report K-81-3 Validation Report: Computer Program for Design and Analysis of Feb 1981
Inverted-T Retaining Walls and Floodwalls (TWDA)
Instruction Report K-81-4 User's Guide: Computer Program for Design and Analysis of Cast-in- Mar 1981
Place Tunnel Linings (NEWTUN)
Instruction Report K-81-6 User's Guide: Computer Program for Optimum Nonlinear Dynamic Mar 1981
Design of Reinforced Concrete Slabs Under Blast Loading (CBARCS)
Instruction Report K-81-7 User's Guide: Computer Program for Design or Investigation of Mar 1981
Orthogonal Culverts (CORTCUL)
Instruction Report K-81-9 User's Guide: Computer Program for Three-Dimensional Analysis of Aug 1981
Building Systems (CTABS80)
Technical Report K-81-2 Theoretical Basis for CTABS80: A Computer Program for Sep 1981
Three-Dimensional Analysis of Building Systems
(Continued)
1
REPORTS PUBLISHED UNDER THE COMPUTER-AIDED
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING (CASE) PROJECT
Title Date
Instruction Report K-82-6 User's Guide: Computer Program for Analysis of Beam-Column Jun 1982
Structures with Nonlinear Supports (CBEAMC)
Instruction Report K-82-7 User's Guide: Computer Program for Bearing Capacity Analysis of Jun 1982
Shallow Foundations (CBEAR)
Instruction Report K-83-1 User's Guide: Computer Program with Interactive Graphics for Jan 1983
Analysis of Plane Frame Structures (CFRAME)
Instruction Report K-83-2 User's Guide: Computer Program for Generation of Engineering Jun 1983
Geometry (SKETCH)
Instruction Report K-83-5 User's Guide: Computer Program to Calculate Shear, Moment, and Jul 1983
Thrust (CSMT) from Stress Results of a Two-Dimensional Finite
Element Analysis
Technical Report K-83-3 Reference Manual: Computer Graphics Program for Generation of Sep 1983
Engineering Geometry (SKETCH)
Technical Report K-83-4 Case Study of Six Major General-Purpose Finite Element Programs Oct 1983
Instruction Report K-84-2 User's Guide: Computer Program for Optimum Dynamic Design of Jan 1984
Nonlinear Metal Plates Under Blast Loading (CSDOOR)
Instruction Report K-84-7 User's Guide: Computer Program for Determining Induced Stresses Aug 1984
and Consolidation Settlements (CSETT)
Instruction Report K-84-8 Seepage Analysis of Confined Flow Problems by the Method of Sep 1984
Fragments (CFRAG)
Instruction Report K-84-11 User's Guide for Computer Program CGFAG, Concrete General Sep 1984
Flexure Analysis with Graphics
Technical Report K-84-3 Computer-Aided Drafting and Design for Corps Structural Engineers Oct 1984
Technical Report ATC-86-5 Decision Logic Table Formulation of ACI 318-77, Building Code Jun 1986
Requirements for Reinforced Concrete for Automated Constraint
Processing, Volumes I and 11
Technical Report ITL-87-2 A Case Committee Study of Finite Element Analysis of Concrete Flat Jan 1987
Slabs
Instruction Report ITL-87-2 User's Guide for Concrete Strength Investigation and Design Mar 1992
(Revised) (CASTR) in Accordance with ACI 318-89
Instruction Report ITL-87-1 User's Guide: Computer Program for Two-Dimensional Analysis of Apr 1987
U-Frame Structures (CUFRAM)
Instruction Report ITL-87-2 User's Guide: For Concrete Strength Investigation and Design May 1987
(CASTR) in Accordance with ACI 318-83
Technical Report ITL-87-6 Finite-Element Method Package for Solving Steady-State Seepage May 1987
Problems
(Continued)
2
REPORTS PUBLISHED UNDER THE COMPUTER-AIDED
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING (CASE) PROJECT
Title Date
Instruction Report ITL-87-3 User's Guide: A Three-Dimensional Stability Analysis/Design Program Jun 1987
(3DSAD) Module
Report 1: Revision 1: General Geometry Jun 1987
Report 2: General Loads Module Sep 1989
Report 6: Free-Body Module Sep 1989
Instruction Report ITL-87-4 User's Guide: 2-D Frame Analysis Link Program (LINK2D) Jun 1987
Technical Report ITL-87-4 Finite Element Studies of a Horizontally Framed Miter Gate Aug 1987
Report 1: Initial and Refined Finite Element Models (Phases A,
B, and C), Volumes I and 11
Report 2: Simplified Frame Model (Phase D)
Report 3: Alternate Configuration Miter Gate Finite Element
Studies-Open Section
Report 4: Alternate Configuration Miter Gate Finite Element
Studies-Closed Sections
Report 5: Alternate Configuration Miter Gate Finite Element
Studies-Additional Closed Sections
Report 6: Elastic Buckling of Girders in Horizontally Framed
Miter Gates
Report 7: Application and Summary
Instruction Report GL-87-1 User's Guide: UTEXAS2 Slope-Stability Package; Volume 1, User's Aug 1987
Manual
Instruction Report ITL-87-5 Sliding Stability of Concrete Structures (CSLIDE) Oct 1987
Instruction Report ITL-87-6 Criteria Specifications for and Validation of a Computer Program for Dec 1987
the Design or Investigation of Horizontally Framed Miter Gates
(CMITER)
Technical Report ITL-87-8 Procedure for Static Analysis of Gravity Dams Using the Finite Jan 1988
Element Method - Phase la
Instruction Report ITL-88-1 User's Guide: Computer Program for Analysis of Planar Grid Feb 1988
Structures (CGRID)
Technical Report ITL-88-1 Development of Design Formulas for Ribbed Mat Foundations on Apr 1988
Expansive Soils
Technical Report ITL-88-2 User's Guide: Pile Group Graphics Display (CPGG) Postprocessor to Apr 1988
CPGA Program
Instruction Report ITL-88-2 User's Guide for Design and Investigation of Horizontally Framed Jun 1988
Miter Gates (CMITER)
Instruction Report ITL-88-4 User's Guide for Revised Computer Program to Calculate Shear, Sep 1988
Moment, and Thrust (CSMT)
Instruction Report GL-87-1 User's Guide: UTEXAS2 Slope-Stability Package; Volume 11, Feb 1989
Theory
Technical Report ITL-89-3 User's Guide: Pile Group Analysis (CPGA) Computer Group Jul 1989
(Continued)
3
REPORTS PUBLISHED UNDER THE COMPUTER-AIDED
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING (CASE) PROJECT
Title Date
Technical Report ITL-89-4 CBASIN-Structural Design of Saint Anthony Falls Stilling Basins Aug 1989
According to Corps of Engineers Criteria for Hydraulic Structures;
Computer Program X0098
Technical Report ITL-89-5 CCHAN-Structural Design of Rectangular Channels According to Aug 1989
Corps of Engineers Criteria for Hydraulic Structures; Computer
Program X0097
Technical Report ITL-89-6 The Response-Spectrum Dynamic Analysis of Gravity Dams Using Aug 1989
the Finite Element Method; Phase 11
Contract Report ITL-89-1 State of the Art on Expert Systems Applications in Design, Sep 1989
Construction, and Maintenance of Structures
Instruction Report ITL-90-1 User's Guide: Computer Program for Design and Analysis of Sheet Feb 1990
Pile Walls by Classical Methods (CWALSHT)
Instruction Report ITL-90-2 User's Guide: Pile Group-Concrete Pile Analysis Program (CPGC) Jun 1990
Preprocessor to CPGA Program
Instruction Report ITL-90-3 Investigation and Design of U-Frame Structures Using Program
CUFRBC
Volume A: Program Criteria and Documentation May 1990
Volume B: User's Guide for Basins May 1990
Volume C: User's Guide for Channels May 1990
Instruction Report ITL-90-6 User's Guide: Computer Program for Two-Dimensional Analysis of Sep 1990
U-Frame or W-Frame Structures (CWFRAM)
Technical Report ITL-91-3 Application of Finite Element, Grid Generation, and Scientific Sep 1990
Visualization Techniques to 2-D and 3-D Seepage and
Groundwater Modeling
Instruction Report ITL-91-1 User's Guide: Computer Program for Design and Analysis of Sheet- Oct 1991
Pile Walls by Classical Methods (CWALSHT) Including Rowe's
Moment Reduction
Technical Report ITL-92-2 Finite Element Modeling of Welded Thick Plates for Bonneville May 1992
Navigation Lock
Technical Report ITL-92-4 Introduction to the Computation of Response Spectrum for Earthquake Jun 1992
Loading
Instruction Report ITL-92-4 User's Guide: Computer-Aided Structural Modeling (CASM) – Apr 1992
Version 3.00
Instruction Report ITL-92-5 Tutorial Guide: Computer-Aided Structural Modeling (CASM) - Apr 1992
Version 3.00
(Continued)
4
REPORTS PUBLISHED UNDER THE COMPUTER-AIDED
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING (CASE) PROJECT
Title Date
Contract Report ITL-92-1 Optimization of Steel Pile Foundations Using Optimality Criteria Jun 1992
Technical Report ITL-92-7 Refined Stress Analysis of Melvin Price Locks and Dam Sep 1992
Contract Report ITL-92-2 Knowledge-Based Expert System for Selection and Design of Sep 1992
Retaining Structures
Contract Report ITL-92-3 Evaluation of Thermal and Incremental Construction Effects for Sep 1992
Monoliths AL-3 and AL-5 of the Melvin Price Locks and Dam
Instruction Report GL-87-1 User's Guide: UTEXAS3 Slope-Stability Package; Volume IV, User's Nov 1992
Manual
Technical Report ITL-92-11 The Seismic Design of Waterfront Retaining Structures Nov 1992
Instruction Report GL-87-1 Users Guide: UTEXAS3 Slope-Stability Package; Volume III, Dec 1992
Example Problems
Technical Report ITL-93-1 Theoretical Manual for Analysis of Arch Dams Jul 1993
Technical Report ITL-93-2 Steel Structures for Civil Works, General Considerations for Design Aug 1993
and Rehabilitation
Technical Report ITL-93-3 Soil-Structure Interaction Study of Red River Lock and Dam No. 1 Sep 1993
Subjected to Sediment Loading
Instruction Report ITL-93-3 User's Manual-ADAP, Graphics-Based Dam Analysis Program Aug 1993
Instruction Report ITL-93-4 Load and Resistance Factor Design for Steel Miter Gates Oct 1993
Technical Report ITL-94-2 User's Guide for the Incremental Construction, Soil-Structure Mar 1994
Interaction Program SOILSTRUCT with Far-Field Boundary
Elements
Instruction Report ITL-94-1 Tutorial Guide: Computer-Aided Structural Modeling (CASM); Apr 1994
Version 5.00
Instruction Report ITL-94-2 User's Guide: Computer-Aided Structural Modeling (CASM); Apr 1994
Version 5.00
Technical Report ITL-94-4 Dynamics of Intake Towers and Other MDOF Structures Under Jul 1994
Earthquake Loads: A Computer-Aided Approach
Technical Report ITL-94-5 Procedure for Static Analysis of Gravity Dams Including Foundation Jul 1994
Effects Using the Finite Element Method - Phase 1 B
(Continued)
5
REPORTS PUBLISHED UNDER THE COMPUTER-AIDED
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING (CASE) PROJECT
Title Date
Instruction Report ITL-94-5 User's Guide: Computer Program for Winkler Soil-Structure Nov 1994
Interaction Analysis of Sheet-Pile Walls (CWALSSI)
Instruction Report ITL-94-6 User's Guide: Computer Program for Analysis of Beam-Column Nov 1994
Structures with Nonlinear Supports (CBEAMC)
Instruction Report ITL-94-7 User's Guide to CTWALL - A Microcomputer Program for the Dec 1994
Analysis of Retaining and Flood Walls
Contract Report ITL-95-1 Comparison of Barge Impact Experimental and Finite Element Results Jun 1995
for the Lower Miter Gate of Lock and Dam 26
Technical Report ITL-95-5 Soil-Structure Interaction Parameters for Structured/Cemented Silts Aug 1995
Instruction Report ITL-95-1 User's Guide: Computer Program for the Design and Investigation of Aug 1995
Horizontally Framed Miter Gates Using the Load and Resistance Factor
Criteria (CMITER-LRFD)
Technical Report ITL-95-8 Constitutive Modeling of Concrete for Massive Concrete Structures, A Sep 1995
Simplified Overview
Instruction Report ITL-96-1 Use’s Guide: Computer Program for Two-Dimensional Dynamic Analysis Jun 1996
of U-Frame or W-Frame Structures (CDWFRM)
Instruction Report ITL-96-2 Computer-Aided Structural Modeling (CASM), Version 6.00 Jun 1996
Report 1: Tutorial Guide
Report 2: User's Guide
Report 3: Scheme A
Report 4: Scheme B
Report 5: Scheme C
Technical Report ITL-96-8 Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Parameters for Structured/Cemented Silts Aug 1996
Instruction Report ITL-96-3 User's Guide: Computer Program for the Design and Investigation of Sep 1996
Horizontally Framed Miter Gates Using the Load and Resistance
Factor Criteria (CMITERW-LRFD) Windows Version
Instruction Report ITL-97-1 User's Guide: Computer Aided Inspection Forms for Hydraulic Steel Sep 1996
Structures (CAIF-HSS), Windows Version
Instruction Report ITL-97-2 User's Guide: Arch Dam Stress Analysis System (ADSAS) Aug 1996
Instruction Report ITL-98-1 User's Guide for the Three-Dimensional Stability Analysis/Design Sep 1998
(3DSAD) Program
Technical Report ITL-98-4 Investigation of At-Rest Soil Pressures due to Irregular Sloping Soil Sep 1998
Surfaces and CSOILP User’s Guide
Technical Report ITL-98-5 The Shear Ring Method and the Program Ring Wall Sep 1998
Technical Report ITL-98-6 Reliability and Stability Assessment of Concrete Gravity Structures Dec 1998
(RCSLIDE): Theoretical Manual
(Continued)
6
REPORTS PUBLISHED UNDER THE COMPUTER-AIDED
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING (CASE) PROJECT
(Concluded)
Title Page
ERDC/ITL TR-00-1 Evaluation and Comparison of Stability Analysis and Uplift Criteria for Jan 2000
Concrete Gravity Dams by Three Federal Agencies
ERDC/ITL TR-00-2 Reliability and Stability Assessment of Concrete Gravity Structures Jul 2000
(RCSLIDE): User's Guide
7
Form Approved
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining
the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions
for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the
Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.
1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED
November 2000 Final report
6. AUTHOR(S)
Reed L. Mosher, William P. Dawkins
17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT
OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT
UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED
NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)
Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18
298-102