The Effect of Surcharge Loading Adjacent To Piles, TRL

d
The effect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles

by S M Springman and M D Bolton (Cambridge University)
Contractor Report 196
The Transport Research Laboratory is the largest and most comprehensive centre for the study of road transport in the United Kingdom. For more than 60 years it has provided information that has helped frame transport policy, set standards and save lives. TRL provides research-based technical help which enables its Government Customers to set standards for highway and vehicle design, formulate policies on road safety, transport and the environment, and encourage good traffic engineering practice.
As a national research laboratory TRL has developed close working links with many other international transport centres.
It also sells its services to other customers in the UK and overseas, providing fundamental and applied research, workmg as a contractor, consultant or providing facilities and staff. TRL's customers include local and regional authorities, major civil engineering contractors, transport consultants, industry, foreign governments and international aid agencies. TRL employs around 300 technical specialists - among them mathematicians, physicists, psychologists, engineers, geologists, computer experts, statisticians - most of whom are based at Crowthorne, Berkshire. Facilities include a state of the art driving simulator, a new indoor impact test facility, a 3.8km test track, a separate self-contained road network, a structures hall, an indoor facility that can dynamically test roads and advanced computer programs which are used to develop sophisticated traffic control systems. TRL also has a facility in Scotland, based in Edinburgh, that looks after the special needs of road transport in Scotland. The laboratory's primary objective is to carry out commissioned research, investigations, studies and tests to the highest levels of quality, reliability and impartiality. TRL carries out its work in such a way as to ensure that customers receive results that not only meet the project specification or requirement but are also geared to rapid and effective implementation. In doing this, TRL recognises the need of the customer to be able to generate maximum value from the investment it has placed with the laboratory. TRL covers all major aspects of road transport, and is able to offer a wide range of expertise ranging from detailed specialist analysis to complex multi-disciplinary programmes and from basic research to advanced consultancy. TRL with its breadth of expertise and facilities can provide customers with a research and consultancy capability matched to the complex problems arising across the whole transport field. Areas such as safety, congestion, environment and the infrastructure require a multi-disciplinary approach and TRL is ideally structured to deliver effective solutions. TRL prides itself on its record for delivering projects that meet customers' quality, delivery and cost targets. The laboratory has, however, instigated a programme of continuous improvement and continually reviews customers satisfaction to ensure that its performance stays in line with the increasing expectations of its customers. TRL operates a quality management'system which is certificated as complying with BS EN 9001.
Transport Research Foundation Group of Companies Transport Research Foundation (a company limited by guarantee) trading as Transport Research Laboratory. Registered in England, Number 301 1746. TRL Limited. Registered in England, Number 3 142272. Registered Oftice: Old Wokingham Road, Crowthorne, Berkshire. RG45 6AU
TRANSPORT AND ROAD RESEARCH LABORATORY Department of Transport
6 " "
Contractor Report 196

~
by S M Springman and M D Bolton

(Cambridge University)
Th work reportedhereinwas carried out under a mtract placedon Cambridge University by the Transport and Road ResearchLaboratoiy.The researchcustomer for this work is BridgesEngineeringDivision, DTp.
This report, like others in the series, is reproducedwith the authors' own text and illustrations. No attempt has been made to prepare a standardised format or s t y l e of presentation. copyright & m l l e of rHMSO 1990. Reproduced by permission of the Controller of HMSO. The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of the Department of Transport. The Transport Research Laboratory is
no longer an Executive Agency of the Department of Transport as ownership was transferred to a subsidiary of the Transport Research Foundation on 1st April 1996.
Ground Engineering Division Structures Group Transport and Road Research Laboratory Old Wokingham Road Crowthorne, Berkshire RG11 6AU
1990
ISSN 0266-7045
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4
1 1 2 2
The problem T y p e s of bridge support Structural idealisation for analysis of lateral loading effect Loading cases
2
3 3 3
4 4 6
SMPLEIED MECHANISM OF BEHAVIOUR

2.1 2.2 2.3
2.4
2.5
3
Introduction Pile response Lateral pressure exerted on a pile in the soft stratum 2.3.1 Working load case 2.3.2 Ultimate lateral pile capacity 2.3.3 Upper bound mechanism for bearing capacity failure 2.3.4 Elasto-plastic interaction diagram for lateral pressure 2.3.5 Adjusting the lateral pressure profile 2.3.5.1 Top of soft layer 2.3.5.2 Base of soft layer 2.3.5.3 Pile cap effects 2.3.5.4 Refined lateral pressure profile 2.3.6 Net effect of lateral pressure Behaviour of the pile i n the stiff substratum 2.4.1 Theory 2.4.2 Interaction effects on pile movement Deepstifflayer
6 7
9
9
' .
10 11 13
13
13
13
15
17
18
18 18 19 19 19 20 21
PILE BENDING MOMENTS AND DEFORMATION PROFILES

3.1 3.2 3.3
Bending moment Deformation Comparison with centrifuge model tests 3.3.1 Scaling factors 3.3.2 Working load case 3.3.3 Ultimate load case
PILE GROUP ANALYSIS

4.1 4.2
Introduction Comparison with centrifuge model tests 4.2.1 Working load case 4.2.2 Ultimate load case
.21
21
22 22
DESIGNPROCEDURE
5.1 5.2
23 23 24 24 25 26 26 26 26 27 27 28 28 29 29 31 31 31 33 33 34 34 35 35 38 39 39
40
~
5 . 3
5.4
5.5
5.6 5.7
5.8
5.9
Introduction Foundation characteristics 5.2.1 Clay 5.2.2 Determination of shear modulus in the stiffer substratum Pile geometry Embankment 5.4.1 Equivalent surcharge load 5.4.2 Embankment stability Lateral pressure on a pile in the soft layer 5.5.1 Preparation of the elasto-plastic interaction diagram Ideal design zone: working load case 5.5.2 Plastic failure: ultimate pile pressure 5.5.3 5.5.4 Input for SIMPLE 5.5.5 Design charts for free headed piles Behaviour of stiff substratum Results of the analysis 5.7.1 Calculation of pile bending moment, rotation and deflection 5.7.2 Improving the design Example 5.8.1 Problem geometry and foundation properties 5.8.2 Working load case: parabolic distribution 5.8.3 Ultimate load case: linear distribution 5.8.4 Calculation of pile bending moment, rotation and deflection 5.8.5 Equivalent pile group Other design aspects and concluding remarks
1
1
1
~
,
~
6
7
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERFiNW
APPENDIX 1: DETERMINATION OF SHEAR MODULUS I N THE STIFFER SUBSTRATUM

A.1 A.2 A.3 A.4 AS
Introduction Choice of shear modulus profile Laboratory determination Self boring pressuremeter Empirical considerations
42 42 42 43 44
TABLES
FIG=
@ CROWN COPYRIGHT 1990 Extracts f r o m the text may be reproduced, except for commercial purposes, provided the source is acknowledged.
The Gect of surcharge loading adjacent t o piles
S.M. Springman & M.D. Bolton
ABSTRArn.
The objective of this report is to present an approach to designing pile foundations, embedded at
I
depth in a stiff substratum and influenced by adjacent loads applied on the surface of soft
I
I
I
superficial soils. The effect of lateral thrust on the piles in an upper soft clay layer due to simulated embankment construction is examined, and soil-pile interaction mechanisms are identified herein for behaviour both at working load and at ultimate lateral capacity.
lI
A combination of cenmfuge model testing and three dimensional finite element analysis was used
to investigate the performance of a row of free headed piles and of a pile group, for different pile and foundation geometries, in terms of changes of bending moment, deflection and lateral pressure due to a uniform surcharge. An approximate formula for lateral thrust in the soft clay layer is developed, based on the differential movement between the piles and the surroundin,o soil, which accounts for pile spacing, relative pile-soil stiffness and the degree of soil strength mobilisation. This loading function has been incorporated in a computer program, SIMPLE, which calculates the pile bending moment and deflection profiles for long piles and pile groups.
The algorithm has been calibrated against the experimental and numerical results, and design
charts are produced for the free headed pile case.
A design procedure is recommended, and illustrated by a worked example, for piled full-height
bridge abutments and other facilities which feature passive lateral loading of piles by a nearby surcharge.
Keywords: piles, surcharge loading, lateral thrust, bridge abutment, soil-pile interaction, soft clay
SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
English 'mob
C
: mobilised value of undrained shear strength : undrained shear strength

I
I
'U0
: undrained shear strength at surface of clay layer, y = 0 : external pile diameter

: Young's Modulus of pile material
I
~
E
EP e
I1
: equivalent Young's Modulus of pile : freestanding length of pile above mudline

: ratio of lateral pressure acting on front and rear piles in a group
P G
GC
: shear modulus at depth, y : characteristic shear modulus of stiff layer where, : shear modulus at y = N2 : shear modulus at top of stiff layer
G,= f (Go,m, v, e,)
Gm
GO
Gm G
: shear modulus at top of clay layer

: shear modulus via self boring pressuremeter tests at 0, 2, 5% volumemc strain
PO9295
Gr
: reduced shear modulus in the annulus around the pile : shear modulus adapted to account for Poisson's ratio, G(1 + 3/4v)
: total shear force distribution in pile
G*
H
Hh
HPC
: shear force at y = h
: additional shear force applied to pile at pile cap level
HS
: shear force in pile at top of stiff layer

: depth of lateral pressure applied to pile in the soft layer : height of embankment
h he
hS
hU
: depth of soft layer

: unloaded length of pile in soft layer, hU = hs
-h
I
k
: second moment of area of a single pile, diameter d
: stiffness : length of pile in stiffer substratum
eC
critical length of pile in stiffer substratum for lateral loading, $= f (G,, r, EP) equivalent length of unsupported pile below soft-stiff interface, le = f
(t,, p,)
M Mh
bending moment distribution bending moment at y = h plastic pile bending moment bending moment at top of stiff layer gradient of shear modulus with depth, m = dG/dy number of piles number of rows of piles overconsolidation ratio net lateral pressure acting on pile mean effective smss atmospheric pressure characteristic lateral pressure acting on a pile component of lateral pressure due to the i'th load lateral pressure on the front pile in a group average and maximum (parabolic) values of applied lateral pressure lateral pressure on the rear pile in a group ultimate lateral pile pressure plasticity index equivalent vertical uniform load for embankment simulation measured cone resistance maximum simulated embankment load external radius of pile pile spacing spacing between front and rear rows of piles lateral deflection corrected value of
U
MP
MS
m
n
"r
OCR
P
P' Pa
PC
Pci Pf Pm, Pm' Pr

PU
PI
q
9c
qmax r
S
sX
U U' U. U
1
after pile group interaction effects accounted for
component i, of deflection deflection at ground surface, y = 0
U
PC
U
X
: deflection at pile cap level
: deflection at the top of the stiff layer : coordinate defining longitudinal horizontal geometry
: depth measured vertically downwards f r o m top surface of the soil
zP
Z
: plastic section modulus of pile : coordinate defining transverse horizontal geometry
Greek
a.-
: pile group interaction factors between i'th and j'th piles : adhesion factors along soil boundaries : pile group interaction factor for increase in deflection due to
ao' "s
"UH
neighbouring piles for a free headed pile under lateral load

: pile group interaction factor for increase in deflection due to
neighbouring piles for a free headed pile under moment loading

aX8H
: pile group interaction factor for increase in rotation due to
neighbouring piles for a free headed pile under lateral load
"0M
: pile group interaction factor for increase in rotation due to
neighbouring piles for a free headed pile under moment loading

%f
: pile group interaction factor for increase in deflection due to
neighbouring piles for a fixed headed pile due to lateral load

PC
: load description factor : vertical stress increment at any appropriate depth
" m
: additional pile rotation in soft layer due to integration of bending moment
: additional pile rotation in 'unloaded' section of soft layer due to integration of M

: additional pile displacement in soft layer due to double integration of M
: additional pile displacement in 'unloaded' section of soft layer due to double
integration of bending moment

: additional pile displacement in soft layer due to rigid body rotation at the y = hs
6U
6uS
: lateral pile displacement : lateral soil displacement at centreline of piles w i t h no pile present
angle of departure of pile loading from orientation to neighbouring pile shear strain bulk unit weight of embankment Poisson's ratio rotation profile corrected value of 8 after pile group interaction effects accounted for rotation of pile due to component i, of the loading in the soft layer rotation of pile at ground surface, y = 0 rotation of pile at pile cap level rotation of pile at the top of the stiff layer factor relating homogeneity of stiffer substratum shear modulus total and effective horizontal stress total and effective vertical stress maximum past effective vertical stress yield strength of pile material
(applicable when abbreviations have not been defined elsewhere)

f
h
front value at depth y = h or factor due to shear force i'th or j'th variables factor due to bending moment maximum minimum aty=O pile at pile cap rear soil or interface between soft and stiff layer unloaded section of pile at base of clay layer or factor due to deflection
i, j
m, M
max
min
0
P
PC
r
S
U
. factor due to rotation

1 INTRODUCIION
page: 1
The construction of approach embankments to bridges on compressible subsoil can induce lateral loading on the piled foundations, which causes bending and shear in the piles together with rotations and translations of the abutments. This problem is compounded where the piles pass
i t h i n a stiffer substratum. At present, the approaches to the through a soft layer and are founded w
design of piled abutments under these conditions are largely empirical (De Beer 8c Wallays, 1972; Frank, 1981) and there is a need for a straightforward design procedure based on a fundamental understanding of soil-pile interaction.
A programme of research on this topic comprising centrifuge model tests and numerical analyses
has been carried out by the Engineering Department of Cambridge University for the Transport and Road Research Laboratory. Centrifuge model tests were conducted on both a single row of free headed piles and a pile group, which were pre-driven through a soft layer of clay into a stiffer substratum and loaded by lateral thrust due to an adjacent surcharge. Finite element analyses of the model configuration were also carried out and the results verified by the experimental data. The findings from the research are fully described by Springman (1989).
This report recommends a design approach for full-height piled abutments, based on these studies. Both ultimate and working load conditions are considered. The form of the soil-pile interaction is described briefly, leading to an introduction to an interactive computer program,
I
SIMPLE, which calculates pile bending moments and deflections for a single free headed pile and
a simple pile group. Alternative design charts are also given for the single pile case.
1.1 The m b l e m
Generally, the piles are installed before the embankment loading is applied. In consequence, the
soft soil deforms further than the piles, causing passive lateral thrust on them, which is resisted by
the lower section of pile embedded in the stiff substratum. The magnitude of this thrust is largely dependent upon the differential soil-pile displacements and the stiffness of the soft soil.
The eflect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles
page: 2
1.2 Tvpes of bridge suDprt

The analyses were designed to model the performance of a piled full-height bridge abutment. Three different configurations were considered: i) ii)
iii)
single row of piles (Fig: 1.la) full-height abutment wall founded on two rows of vemcal piles in a group (Fig: 1.1b) full-height abutment wall founded on a raked pile group (Fig: 1.lc).
1 . 3 Structural idealisation for analvsis of lateral loadin~ effect

These were simplified in plane idealisations as follows: i) ii) a row of free headed piles (Fig: 1.2a), two rows of vertical piles, fully fixed into a rigid pile cap, which is free to displace horizontally with zero rotation and equal deflection of each pile at the cap (Fig: 1.2b), iii) two rows of vertical piles, fully fixed into a rigid pile cap, which is not permitted either to move horizontally or rotate at pile cap level (Fig: 1.2~). In all cases the embankment was replaced by an equivalent normal load, to simplify the analysis. In cases (ii) and (iii), the lateral thrust of the embankment can be carried by the abutment wall, so there need be no shear stress applied to the surface of the soft clay. In case (i) there would be additional outward shear stress at the junction of the fill and the clay, which would tend to cause additional soil displacements unless the embankment were reinforced (Jewell, 1987). The raking pile was represented by a vertical one because the rake was not expected to alter the soil displacement field signrficantly, so the lateral thrust/unit depth of soft clay would be the same.
I
~
1.4 Loadinpcases
It is considered an advantage to be able to analyse soil constructions either at collapse under extraordinary load conditions with the development of ultimate soil strengths, or in operation under projected design loadings, mobilising permissible deformations and stresses. These two cases are therefore considered explicitly below, so that the engineer can not only predict pile bending moments and s o i l and structural displacements f r o m an interaction analysis, but can also form a judgement on the margin of safety against complete shear failure in the s o f t clay.

I
page: 3
2 SIMPLIFIEDMECHANISM OF BEHAVIOUR
I
I
2 . 1 Introduction
Design guidelines are set out which allow prediction of the bending moments and deflections of piles subjected to passive lateral loading by soil. Initially, a single vertical pile is considered,
driven through a soft layer of s o i l and embedded in a stiffer substratum so that the essentials of
soil-pile interaction can be appreciated.
Vertical loading on the abutment structure is not dealt w i t h . This is consistent with most analyses of pile behaviour, which treat the lateral and axial loading cases for a vertical pile separately, and superimpose the results to give the complete picture. This approach was followed here and so it
was only necessary to predict lateral deformations in response to vertical soil loading.
2.2 Pile response
When a soft soil foundation is surcharged by an embankment, noticeable horizontal displacements are observed under the edge of the load. If there are any piles in the vicinity, these will also tend to deflect horizontally, but less than the soil, causing a lateral thrust to be applied to them. From a prediction of these lateral pressures, the designer will evaluate the magnitude of the pile bending moments and deflections.
The pile response is considered, initially, in two complementary parts:

i)
The upper section (AB in Fig: 2.la) of the pile in the soft soil is assumed to cantilever out of the soft-stiff soil interface at depth
y = hs, while receiving horizontal thrust from the clay, which
has a greater lateral deformation than the pile, ii)
The lower section (BC in Fig: 2.la) of the pile embedded in the
stiff substratum resists the lateral loading from the upper layer
and deflects further than the surrounding soil.
page: 4
Where there is no sharp and obvious demarcation between "soft" and "stiff' strata, the initial decision on the location of an interface will be somewhat arbitrary. The intention is that any soil which comes to plastic failure due either to embankment loading or pile displacement should be treated as in the upper "soft" layer, so that the lower "stiff' layer can be treated as a quasi-lastic material described solely in terms of its shear modulus profile. Essentially, the method set out below treats the upper layer as a loading system which generates pile bending moments and shear forces at the soft-stiff interface, below which the piles can be analysed by conventional methods.
2 . 3 Lateral pressure exerted on a pile in the soft s t r a t u m
2 . 3 . 1 Working load case

Springman (1989) describes a method by which the lateral pressure acting on the pile in the soft layer may be predicted for undrained conditions. In this, the soil displacement field &us
(Fig: 2.lb) is represented by a simplified geo-structural mechanism in which boundaries are rigid and frictionless and the soil is isotropic and homogeneous with constant shear strain .y. Pile deflection 6u (Fig: 2.1~)and 6us are calculated and compared and the thrust on the pile, with
diameter d, is taken to be proportional to the relative soil-pile displacement (Fig: 2.ld) multiplied
by the local shear modulus G (Baguelin er al, 1977; Fleming et al, 1985). For the pseudo-lastic
working load case under plane strain Conditions, the pressure on the pile at any depth is then given by (see Fig: 2.le): p = 5.33G(6us - 6Up)/d
Assume, initially that the pressure profile is constant, p ,
over some depth h, and that h is equal
to the total depth of soft layer hs (Fig: 2.10. For a surcharge load q, pile spacing s, pile bending
rigidity EI, this mean pressure will be, (following Bolton, Springman & Sun, 1990):
9
+0.71G dh3
1-
E1
The efect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles
page: 5
where allowance has been made for the increased shear strain in the region around the pile where
the secant shear modulus Gr, will be lower than that for the remainder of the soft layer Gm, with
I
both values taken at the mid-depth of the loaded section, y = h/2.
The first term in the
denominator may be thought of as representing relative soil stiffness, the second covers the pile-soil spacing and the third refers to pile-soil bending rigidity.
The shear modulus chosen for the area close to the pile is subject to two effects. The action of pile driving causes displacement of the surrounding soil, locally increased pore pressures and subsequent consolidation resulting in an increase in undrained shear strength. Randolph, Carter & Wroth (1979) predict this to be in excess of 33% for an annulus of 1 pile radius (1 I OCR I 32) based on the modified Cam Clay constitutive model. On the other hand, larger shear strains are then induced in the annulus up to 1 pile diameter wide around the pile. Both X-ray photographs (Fig: 2.2) and results from finite element analyses confirm this finding. In a typical analysis, the shear strains were up to 5 times greater in this annulus when the soil was taken to be linear elastic. An even greater disparity in strains would have been observed if the soil had been represented as elasto-plastic. Therefore, the secant shear modulus chosen to represent the
stiffness of the clay in this region will be lower. These two effects will offset each other to some extent but each case should be examined carefully. Values for Gm/Gr may be taken to lie between 1.5 and 2 for driven piles and around 2.5 to 3 for bored piles (Springman, 1989).
The G d G r term in the denominator of Eqn: 2.1 is typically that which has the greatest effect on p , for piles which are rigid with respect to the clay. Therefore, allowance for a zone of reduced
modulus will also have a noticeable impact on p . ,
An alternative design approach is to replace the soil around the pile by an annulus of bentonite mixed with cement. This is described by hlsfort (1989) as the buttonhole method. Clearly, the ultimate lateral pressure on the pile will be markedly reduced, provided that the lateral displacement of the soft cement-bentonite mixture around the pile does not bring the natural soil foundation into contact with the pile.
page: 6
2.32 Ultimate lateral pile capacity

The ultimate lateral pile pressure should be considered since this defines the absolute upper bound to the pile bending moments and deflections. As the surcharge loading increases with construction of the embankment, so will the lateral pressures approach the level at which yielding commences around the pile (p -2xcu, Springman, 1989), when it is no longer adequate to describe the foundation behaviour as pseudo-elastic. The plastic domain extends upwards and downwards from that critical depth as more embankment loading is applied. development, elastic analysis becomes increasingly invalid.
I
During this
At even greater surcharges, the s o i l will move plastically past the pile over the entire depth of the soft layer, and the pile will receive the maximum possible lateral thrust. If the pile is capable of sustaining such moments and shear forces, it will be invulnerable to any possible superimposed surcharge.
1
I
I
I
Randolph & Houlsby (1984) calculated the limiting load on cylindrical piles of differing roughness, moving through an infinite medium of homogeneous, perfectly plastic soil, using classical plasticity theory. At an intermediate roughness, the ultimate pressure agrees well with that quoted by Broms (1964) and Poulos & Davis (1980):
pu = 1 0 . 5 ~ ~
(2.2)
2.33 Upper bound m e c h a n i s m for bearing capacity failure

Considering the maximum embankment load qmax, required to create a bearing capacity failure, an upper bound calculation was made for a local undrained failure of a soil foundation with uniform cu, which allowed for some reinforcement by the piles due to the energy dissipated by the soil shearing past the pile. Fig: 2.3a shows the active and passive zones marked by two 45' isosceles mangles, w i t h a radial fan in between. For conservation of energy per unit width, with p/cU = 10.5:
i
~
I
I

qmax
= (2 + x)cU+ 1 0 . 5 d ~~
S
page: 7
2 ( 2 + x ) c u ( l + -2d ) qmax
S
(2.3)
For bearing capacity failure of the embankment with .no piles present, then p/cu = 0 and q/cu = (2 + x). The line joining these two points may be thought of as the maximum bearing capacity of the embankment-pile-foundation system and is given by:
Q = (2 + x ) +-d P
cU
(2.4)
cu
2.3.4 Elasto-plastic interaction diagram for lateral pressure
Fig: 2.4a, with ordinate pm/cu and abscissa q/cu displays the whole elasto-plastic interaction between mean lateral pressure pm and surcharge q. The elastic loading behaviour described by Eqn: 2.1 is shown for h/d values of approximately 4 and 10. As the line for low values of h/d approaches the intersection with Eqn: 2.4, the soil foundation begins to yield prior to bearing capacity failure. As displacements increase, further loading will induce fully plastic pressures on the piles. For larger values of Wd, as the embankment load is increased, the soil tends to yield
around the pile before general yield of the soil mass. This local yielding has no major drawbacks
as far as safety and serviceability of the facility is concerned, it merely marks the onset of non-linearity of the soil-pile interaction. Completely plastic flow around the pile occurs when ~ ~ 2.2) when the maximum embankment load, qmax (Eqn: 2.3) has been reached. Pm = 1 0 . 5 (Eqn: In every case, the loading line will eventually progress towards this intersection at F, when there will be ultimate plastic failure of the soil mass and the soil around the pile.
It is difficult to quantify the effect of the curved loading line as it veers towards point F'in Fig: 2.4% at which the lateral pressure reaches 1 0 . 5 over ~ ~ the entire depth of the soft stratum. In
I
I
some cases, the whole of the soft layer would not be involved in an embankment collapse, and it will be appropriate to restrict the effective depth of lateral loading on the pile (Fig: 2.lg).
page: 8
In general, the design values of pm/cu, q/cu describing the loading system should be prevented
from approaching too closely to the boundaries of the plastic zone, in view of the excessive deformations that would then result. The pre-requisite for any serviceability calculation is to restrict the state of the soft clay foundation, and hence the lateral pressures imposed on the pile, to a pseudo-elastic region. The limit to Eqn: 2.1 may be thought of as a serviceable bearing line at which the maximum bearing capacity defined by Eqn: 2.4 is factored by 1.5 (Fig: 2.4a). This
will imply that the mobilised shear strength cmodcu = 0 . 6 7 , which from Fig: 2.3b for kaolin
suggests that the shear strain w i l l be between 1 - 3 % for a range of overconsolidation ratios. Since the shear strain can be shown to be 26us/hs (Fig: 2.lb), for hs = 6 m, the vertical and horizontal displacements are then expected to lie between 30 - 90 mm.
Figs: 2.4b & c show the elasto-plastic interaction plot for pm/cu and q/cu together with the experimental data derived for specific surcharge loads between q = 53 to 189 kPa for model test
SMS7 conducted in the centrifuge. Two interpretations of the data are shown. Initially, @e value
assumed to represent the strength of the soil while loading was applied, cu, was taken as the best
fit to the data obtained from vane shear testing outside the area of influence of the surcharge.
The values of pm and q were divided by this initial cu. From Fig: 2.4b,this implies that both the bearing capacity criterion and the ultimate pile pressure were exceeded. However, the effective
stress had increased under the surcharge load as testing progressed, due to the observed
dissipation of pore pressure, during an equivalent test period of 1.1 years. In conjunction, soil strength must have increased throughout the test, and so revised values of pm/cu and q/cu have been suggested based on an expression relating cu, 0; max and OCR, and are plotted in Fig: 2.4~.
,
. 3 7 P I for normally consolidated clays, Skempton (1957)quoted a relationship cu/ov' = 0.11 + 0

where PI (as a ratio) is the plasticity index. The application of this correction would have led to a similar improvement in matching the data t o theory.
The ultimate pressure on the piles was not reached, and this was borne out by inspection of the X-rays (Fig: 2.2) which showed soil bulging between rather than shearing past the piles. This
The efect of surcharge loading djacent to piles
page: 9
meant that the fully plastic point F was not reached. Observation of test SMS7 suggested a small
o i l collapse. reserve of safety against complete s
2-35 Adjusting the lateral pressure p f d e

Remembering that lateral pressure is a linear function of both shear modulus and differential soil-pile displacement, the initial assumption that the lateral pressure, p , is constant with depth
(Fig: 2.5a) is clearly unreasonable for many cases. Adaptations may be made for several reasons:
i)
lower s o i l stiffness at the top of the s o f t layer, in a deep soft layer, the pile may displace further than the soil below some level, restricting the effective depth of lateral loading,
ii)
iii)
i l l tend to reduce relative restraint on the soil from the pile cap w
soil-pile displacement at the top of the soft layer.
Data obtained f r o m centrifuge model tests and the results of finite element computations, have indicated that the lateral pressure profde is approximately parabolic. Comparisons sugsest that , while the average value of pressure may be taken as p profile should be adjusted as follows (Fig: 2.5). from Eqn: 2.1, the shape of the pressure
235.1 Top of sofr @er
Since the lateral pressure acting on the pile is proportional to the product of differential pile-soil displacement and the soil stiffness, a reduction in either of these values will likewise induce lower lateral pressures. For a free headed pile, some differential displacement would be expected at ground level and so the lateral pressure should be reduced simply by the ratio Goc/Gm, where
G , is the shear modulus at this horizon (Fig: 2.5d). However, both the model tests and the finite
element analyses suggest that the lateral pressure at the surface is even smaller, possibly due to the freedom of the soil to squeeze upwards rather than around the pile at the ground surface. For pile p u p s with a pile cap in contact with the ground surface, which is free to move at ground level (Fig: 1.2b), differential displacement could be prevented by friction on the underside of the pile cap, and in this case, the pressure would then be reduced to zero (Fig: 2.5b).
The effectof surcharge loading adjacent to piles
page: 10
2356 Base o f soft@er

Where the lateral extent of the embankment is less than the depth of the soft layer, it may be too conservative to assume that the increment in vertical stress is constant with depth. Elastic stress dismbutions (Poulos & Davis, 1974) may be used to derive a reduced value of pm by replacing q
with AoVat the mid-depth of the layer before substitution.into Eqn: 2.1.
In any event, forces and moments on the pile at the interface between soft and stiff layers will tend to drag the pile forwards through the stiffer s o i l . Since the soft soil of depth h, will tend to be prevented from moving by friction at the soft-stiff interface, there will be some zone of depth
hU at the base of the soft layer within which the pile displaces forwards relative to the soil, and
within which the pile can conservatively be treated as unloaded (Fig: 2.5b).
An iterative
approach which allows for a reduction in the lateral pressure is described.
Consider the section of pile below y = hs. Select an equivalent length of pile, le, (Fig: 2.6~)
which can be treated as unsupported by the soil in the stiffer substratum. This encastre beam
must give approximately the same value of rotation and deflection at y = hs under moment and force loading as the "long" pile which would be supported by the stiffer soil (Fig: 2.6b) over the critical length for lateral loading,
tC (Fig: 2.6a) (Randolph, 1981). It can be shown that
1, = 0.341/(,/pc) where pc and lCare fully defined in Section 2.4. Thus for constant shear
modulus with depth in the stiffer substratum, (p, = l.O), le z O.34lc; while for shear modulus
i t h depth from zero (pc = 0.5), leN 0.5tc. increasing linearly w
By equating expressions for pile deflection and s o i l displacement in the soft layer at a depth of
y = h = hs - hU, the following relation can be derived in terms of hu and hs:
The effect of surcharge loading aa'jacent to piles
page: 11
where Gm is taken as the shear modulus at mid-depth, y = W2. This is charted for specific values of the non-dimensional groups s/d, E /G , hdd, c$d in Figs: 2.7a, b & c to give values of P m h J h s , obviating the need for iteration.
I
Double differentiation of pile bending moments obtained from centrifuge model tests for a 6 m
depth of soft clay and with s/d = 3.15, E G ,
28000 (Fig: 2.7d) show that hU increases from Calculations yield h i d = 6/1.27 = 4.724,
t
I
0.2 to 1 m as surcharge load increases.
le/d = (0.34 x 8.4)/(&.523 x 1.27) = 3.11, which from Fig: 2.7a give hu/hs = 0.16 so that hU 2 1 m, which agrees quite well w i t h the experimental data.
If hu/hs e 0.2 then the additional work entailed in refining the calculation for a new value of h is
I
I I
not justified by the cost savings that would result from a more tailored design and h should be taken as equal to h,. However if hu/hs > 0.2 then pm should be re-calculated for the new value
of h and the value of G , adjusted likewise.
2353 P i l e cap e$ects

For undrained, constant volume behaviour of the soft layer, and a pile cap which is resting on the soil, then the pressure on both front and rear rows of piles may be assumed to be identical because the same volume of soil will flow past the rear piles as the front piles.
The elasto-plastic interaction diagram should be adapted to give an increased bearing capacity of the foundation. At failure (Fig: 2.8a) Eqn: 2.3 becomes:
I
qmax
= cu(2 + x
+ 10.5 nr )d ; +E 'x (ao + as)cu
where sx is the spacing between the front and rear rows of piles, nr is the number of rows of piles
a and asdefine the pile cap-soft and cu is assumed to be constant with depth while the factors .
page: 12
soil and soft-stiff soil adhesion. For the limit to the iesign zone, the 1 dues of cu are factored by
1.5 as before to give an effective Cmob = 0 . 6 7 ~ ~ .
The procedure detailed in section 2.3.1 is followec in detennining

with the following adjustment to the equation defining p,
tile
lateral pressure profile,
(Eqn: 2.1) according to the pile ,group
configuration and the fixity condition at the pile cap. For a lateral deflection at pile cap level equal to half that of an equivalent free headed pile under identical loading conditions:
4 3Gmd(4h + sXX) n,d 0.1354Gmdh2 (4h + sxX)
Pm =
4G,h2
+-
E1
(2.7a)
where X = (nr- l)(ao + as).For zero lateral deflection at pile cap level:
9 3Gmd( 4h + s,X) n,d 0.0104Grndh2 (4h + s,X) +-+ 4G,h2 S E1
=[
Both cases assume p,
(2.7b)
constant with depth, zero rotation and full fixity at tlle pile cap. If t1e
spacing between the rows of piles is less than 3d, then take nr = 1 because it is less likely that
full resistance has been developed at the soil-pile cap interface. These equations also assume
that there is friction along the interface between the soft and stiff layers between the rows of piles and also between the pile cap and the soft soil. A total pile cap shear load of aocusxs should be applied per double row of piles, (i.e. for nr = 2, additional shear load = aocusxs for each set of one front row and one rear row pile) together with the shear load imposed by the lateral earth pressure on the retaining wall. These loads, together with p, calculated from Eqn: 2.7, can be used to design adequately reinforced sections. Note that the shear force on the piles due to the pile cap should ideally have been permitted to increase the bending deflection of the pile represented as the third term in the denominator of Eqn: 2.7. deflections leads to a s m a l l ,safe, over-prediction of p , Neglect of these additional
so iteration is usually not necessary.
The eflect of surcharge loading djacent to piles

2.3 5.4 Refined lateral pressure profile
page: 13
I
I
~
The lateral pressure may be adjusted by reducing the rectangular profile as follows (Fig: 2.5b):
0
ii)
I
reduce the value of lateral pressure at the top of the soft layer (section 2.3J.I), reduce to zero the value of lateral pressure at the depth of either the base of the layer if hu 2 0 or at y = h, (section 2.352),
I
I
iii)
plot a new value of pm, pm' = 1 . 5 at ~ the ~ mid-depth of loading, y = h/2 and draw a parabola through these three points.
For example, for the centrifuge test with s/d = 3.15, d = 1.27 m, h = 6 m, E 1 = 5.13 106 him2,
Gm = 1400 kPa, G,/G, = 1.8, Eqn: 2.1 gives p,/q = 0.66. Assuming that there is no differential displacement between pile and soil at ground level, and calculating that hu/hs 2 0.16 c 0.2, the pressure may be reduced to zero at ground level and at the soft-stiff interface while pressure at the mid-depth is increased by 1.5 to pm'/q = 0.99. The adapted profile is shown in Fig: 2.8b and
I
this will be compared w i t h the appropriate centrifuge model test results in section 3.3.
2.3.6 Net effect of lateral pressure

I
Once the profile of the lateral pressure acting on the pile has been determined, the net effect on
the pile section in the stiffer substratum may be calculated. By integrating the lateral pressure to
I
I
give the shear forces, which are in turn integrated to yield the moment diagram for the upper section of the pile, the net bending moment Ms, and shear force Hs, which will be applied to the lower section of pile at the soft-stiff interface, may be determined.
2.4 Behaviour of the &le in the stiff s u b s t r a t u m

I
.1
~
2.4.1 Theay
The Randolph (1981) solutions for the deflection and rotation at the head of a pile, and pile bending moment and deflection due to either a head force or moment loading, are used to predict
1 I
the behaviour of the lower section of the pile in the stiffer substratum, where the pile length is greater than the critical length, tc over which lateral loading effects are relevant.
page: I4
~
Several parameters are defined, based on the shear modulus of the stiff layer, which was taken as Go at the top (y = hs), increasing by m per metre with depth. Thus for y > hs:
I
I
and the shear modulus is then adjusted to include the effects of Poisson's ratio so that:
G*= G (1 + 3 ~ / 4 )
(2.9)
and so a characteristic shear modulus is described as (Fig: 2.6b):
(2.10)
and a soil homogeneity factor, which lies between 0.5 and 1, as:
I
(2.1 1)
The critical slenderness ratio of the pile is determined f r o m :
After iteration between Eqns: 2.10 & 2.12 to obtain consistent values of Gc and
tC,values of us
and 8, can be determined at the soft-stiff interface, y = hs, of the soil, from the relations:
U
( E G )17 ' = &b.27H pc c
S(.$/2)l+
0.3Ms(!J2)7]
page: 15
The first of these equations has been incorporated into curves which showed non-dimensionalised deflection (Figs: 2.9a & 2.10a) versus depth, normalised by the critical pile length, for either a lateral force Hs, or a moment Ms, acting at the top of the stiff s u b s t r a t u m , y = h,, and for different values of soil homogeneity pc = 0.5, 0.75, 1.0 (Randolph, 1981). Figs: 2.9b & 2.10b give corresponding distributions for determining bending moments.
This approach gives a simple elastic solution for the behaviour of the pile in the suffer substratum, which is sufficiently accurate for the majority of engineering problems where soil working stresses are much lower than the ultimate load condition and an appropriate secant modulus can be selected. The main source of emor lies in allotting values to Go, m and v. However, the bending moment prome is far more sensitive to changes in the choice of lateral loading in the soft layer, and hence the values of Hs and Msat the top of this stiffer layer, than to variations in the shear modulus for the lower layer.
2.4.2 Interaction effects on pile movement
The interaction between adjacent piles, either as a row of free headed piles or as a pile group will have a cumulative effect on deformation and rotation and this should be added to results obtained from the algorithm.
Poulos (1971) pioneered the use of appropriate factors, and m t e the
expression for deflection within a group of n piles: P (2.15)
where a was the interaction between the i'th and j'th piles, k was the stiffness of a single isolated pile, and H was the lateral load. Thus, interaction factors were defined depending on the spacing, angle and type of loading, and pile head fixity (Fig: 2.1 1).
In this case, the factors will be applied to the section of pile in the stiff layer, which will behave
and as a free headed pile subjected to a lateral head load H, or moment M. The factors are auH for rotation. auM for deflection and aeHand aXBM
page: 16
Randolph (1981) conducted finite element analyses on laterally loaded fixed headed piles, which were prevented from rotating, and concluded that aufwas the only relevant factor and could be approximated by:
I
'
ad = 0.6pc@dGc)1'7(r/s)( 1 + cos2@
unless ad exceeded 0.33 at close pile spacings, when the value was replaced by:
I
(2.16)
auf= 1 - 2/(27a,)1'2
(2.17)
Poulos (1971) proposed that interaction factors for fixed headed piles were larger than for free
headed piles. Randolph (1983) suggested that for free headed piles, 0.6 should be replaced by 0.4 in Eqn: 2.16:
~ U= H0.4pc@dGc)1'7(r/s)( 1 + cos2q)
'
(2.18)
For axuH > 0.33, Eqn: 2.17 was adopted with the subscript 'uf replaced by 'U". The other interaction factors were considerably smaller than auH and were taken as (Randolph, 1983):
auM= aeH N auH2

aOM N
aUH3
Thus, the individual values of the interaction factors are deterrnined for each pile in relation to its
neighbours, and summed to give the total effect on the pile displacements. For plane strain cases
in which load, H and stiffness, k are also nominally equal, the deflections can simply be factored up to account for the interaction between the group or row of piles.
I
~
The eflect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles 2.5 Deep stifflaver
page: 17
There will be some situations for which it is difficult to define the interface between a notional
soft layer and a stiff substratum. For deep deposits of London Clay, with shear strength
increasing with depth, passive thrust will be experienced by the piles when a surcharge load is placed adjacent to them. However, the stiffer nature of this clay will mean that there is less relative displacement between the s o i l and the pile. The point at which the soil ceases to apply passive thrust to the pile will occur when the pile and soil displacements are equal and this would
be shallower than might be expected for a
softer clay.
Under these conditions, the suggested approach is to select an arbitrary value of hs and then calculate values of pc, Gc,
tc and le for the
stiff clay from below this depth. Using Figs: 2.7, If hubs is greater than 0.2, set the next estimate
calculate the ratio hJhs and hence h = hs
- hU.
of hs = h, and repeat the calculation until hJhs is less than 0.2 then make the final adjustment to
hs and define the soft-stiff interface at this depth. The remainder of the analysis follows the
same format as described above. Although there is no experimental data to support this approach,
it will provide some guidance. Clearly, for such s t i f f layers it will be unlikely that the ultimate
lateral load will be reached for typical embankment heights.
page: I8
3 PILE BENDING MOMENTS AND DEFORMATION PROFILES
3.1 Bendinv moment

The bending moment profile can now be determined for both sections of the pile (Fig: 3.la). For
r o m Figs: 2.9b & 2.10b will be the lower section in the stiff substratum, values obtained f
superimposed and summed for the appropriate 'head load, Hs, and moment, Ms at y = hs. For the upper section in the soft layer, double integration of the lateral pressure profile acting on the pile diameter will complete the bending moment diagram for the pile.
3.2 Deformation
0
d e m = ( M/EIdy
hS
I
I
(3.1)
0 Aum = (( M/EI dy dy
hS
(3.2)
Thus at the top of the pile, the critical design values of deflection and rotation are obtained from:
eo = e, + Aem
uo = U s +Aue +Aum
(3.3)
(3.4)
The maximum bending moment w i l l occur at 1-3 pile diameters below the interface between the
The egect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles
page: 19
soft and stiff layers. This value may be obtained by summation of the separate components of bending moment due to head load (Fig: 2.9b) and moment (Fig: 2.10b) at the interface.
The original calculation.of the effect of the pile displacement on the mean lateral pressure, p, was based on the conservative assumption that us and 8, were zero. This section has shown how
to use pm to calculate a safe estimate of pile displacement, taking us and 8 , into account. It was
found to be unnecessary to iterate on the initial value of pm.
3.3 Comparison with centrifuge model tests

The results of the centrifuge model tests were compared against predictions obtained f r o m this analysis for .both working and ultimate load cases. The general arrangement for test SMS7 is given in Fig: 3.2 for a row of five free headed piles at a spacing/diameter ratio of 3.15. The instrumentation and site investigation details are also shown. The upper section of the clay layer was slightly overconsolidated with an initial cu at ground surface of about 10 kPa. Loading was applied over a period of 1.1 years, which included some loading at reasonably short intervals interspersed with longer periods to allow for consolidation.
3.3.1 Scaling factors
Scaling factors should be applied to the experimental data shown in the figures to convert the
values to prototype equivalent:
Scale factor Bending moment Lateral pressure Deflection

1003
1
100
3.32 working load case Consider the bending moments, lateral pressure and deflections derived from the pile strain gauge
page: 20
data for surcharge loads q = 53, 72 & 93 kPa (Figs: 3.3a4). The predicted values of pm were calculated to give a corrected value of pm'/q = 0.99 reducing t o zero at the ground surface and 3t the soft-stiff interface. These pressure distributions were input into the analysis and the bending moment and deflection profiles were deduced. Interaction effects on pile deflection between adjacent piles were added, as described in section 2.4.2. In each case the predicted pressure and bending moments overestimated the values derived from experimental data. However the general form of agreement was good, with the exception of the pile deflection where pile tip rotations had increased these beyond predicted values.
~
3.3.3 Ultimate load case

Similarly, calculation of the ultimate pressure of 1 0 . 5 ~ has ~ given the maximum pressure exerted on the pile. The choice of a value of cu will depend on the judgement of the engineer. Two factors are relevant. Firstly the method of pile installation will affect the soil strength in the annulus around the pile before the embanlanent load is applied. Thereafter, the undrained shear
i t h time as drainage occurs and effective stresses become greater. An strength will increase w
estimate of this value prior to the application of the last loading step will be appropriate for the calculation of ultimate pressure. It has been observed (Springman, 1989) that there is little change i n pile bending moment with time as a particular loading increment has been maintained, implying that the analysis conducted for undrained soil conditions may be taken as the ultimate load case.
The predicted ultimate pressure, pile bending moments and deflections were compared with the data of test SMS7 as failure approached due to a surcharge of 189 kPa. Fig: 3.4 shows that although the pressure derived from the experimental data falls off over the bottom part of the soft layer, the bending moment profiles are in quite good agreement. Calculation of the pile
deflection assumed zero pile rotation at the base of the pile. If the tip rotation, back figured from integration of the experimental bending moment data combined with the head displacement measured by linear variable differential transfomers, is superimposed on the calculated profile, agreement would be excellent.
The effect of surcharge loading djacent to piles

4 PILE GROUP ANALYSIS
page: 21
4.1 Introduction
The analysis described above may be adapted to deal with a pile group containing two rows of long vertical piles which penetrate a soft soil layer overlying a stiffer substratum, and are fully fixed into a stiff pile cap, which is positioned at, or any height above, ground level. The single pile solution is used to solve the problem for two independent free headed piles, for appropriate values of lateral pressure on the front and rear piles, and the rotation and deflection at the top of
both of the piles are calculated (Fig: 4.la). It is also possible to apply an additional horizontal
shearing force at the pile cap. Finally, a stiffness matrix is constructed, relating moment and lateral load to rotation and deflection at pile cap level, for the piles embedded in the sand layer, with the following end conditions imposed by the pile cap (Fig:4.lb & c): i) ii) iii) deflection equal, zero rotation, equal and opposite shear forces.
This process is numerically complicated and it is recommended that the computer solution described in the next chapter is used. The algorithm is described in Springman (1989).
4.2 ComDarison w i t h centrifuge model tests

A comparison was made between the cenmfuge model test results and predictions based on this
analysis. The soil applied loading over the full depth of the soft clay layer, 6 m, and the other parameters were identical to those quoted in earlier sections.
By continuity for an undrained soil the same lateral movement would be anticipated for each pile, and the same lateral pressure would be expected to act on both the front and rear rows of piles (Fig: l.lb) so that if Pr = Fp Pf (4.1)
page: 22
then F = 1. In practice, this will not happen, but it will give the worst possible loading case for P the pile group and it is this case which is considered. If the soil is permitted either to move vertically or to consolidate as was the case in these tests, then F < 1. Looking at the X-ray of
the deformed lead threads taken following the test (Fig: 4.2), this shows that the rear row of piles experienced 20-3096 of the differential displacement of the front row, so F =0.3 could be P adopted for the fully drained case with a pile cap raised above ground level.
4.2.1 Working load case Figs: 4.3 & 4.4 show the results of the analysis on the pile group under working load conditions. Predictions of the lateral pressure, bending moment and deflection were quite good for both the front and rear piles for q = 100 kPa (Figs: 4.3a & b), although the lateral pressure is smaller and the mean thrust at a shallower depth for the rear pile. For q = 50 kPa (Figs: 4.4a & b) similar observations hold m e except that the predicted deflections were considerably larger than those measured in test SMS8. The pressure distribution on the rear pile was of a different shape and magnitude to that assumed ' for F = 1, because the soil was permitted to move vertically up between the piles, concentrating P the m a i n lateral thrust nearer to the surface. In view of this, it was expected that the rear pile
~
bending moments would be overpredicted by the analysis, but in the event the moments ageed very well (Fig: 4.3b & 4 . 4 b ) .
4.2.2 Ultimateloadcase
The lateral pressure distribution slightly exceeds the 1 0 . 5 ~ limit ~ at the mid-section of the soft layer for the front pile (Fig: 4.5a), whereas the freedom of movement in the vertical direction has affected the experimental pressure distribution for the rear pile (Fig: 4.5b). Nonetheless, the bending moments predicted as the ultimate values exceed the experimental measurements. If the implied drift at the pile tip was subtracted f r o m the experimental deflection profile, the net displacements would be similar to those predicted

5 DESIGN PROCEDURE
page: 23
5.1 Introduction
The engineer will design the sub/superstructure for a piled full-height bridge abutment as an integrated assembly. Following site investigation and field trials, geotechnical analyses will be implemented to consider bearing capacity and stability of the approach embankment, pile and pile group design including axial and lateral loading, long term total and differential settlement, lateral earth pressures, horizontal movements above and below ground level and retaining wall design.
This report is solely concerned with the prediction of bending moments in, and deflections of, either a row of free headed piles or a pile group when an embankment is consuucted adjacent to the piles. These piles are considered to be embedded in a stiff substratum overlain by a soft clay layer. Clearly the sequence of construction will affect the behaviour of the abutment. In most cases the piles will be installed first, followed by the abutment wall, bridge deck and finally the embankment.
A computer program, SIMPLE, has been written to assist with this analysis for both free headed
piles and a pile group which is permitted to move laterally at pile cap level (Figs: l.la & b). Alternatively, design charts are presented for calculation of the performance of a free headed pile.
Once the preliminary abutment design is completed, the effect on the bridge superstructure may be evaluated. Total and differential settlements, horizontal translation and differential
movements, tilting, longitudinal and transverse distortion, and displacements due to dynamic loading are considered. If these are within acceptable l i m i t s then the costs will be determined and the design refined only if a cheaper, serviceable alternative can be found. If the design is not within the sewiceability criteria, then the foundation system, structural design or foundation will
be adapted, and the optimising process continues.
The efSect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles
page: 24
Undrained behaviour of the foundation is generally more critical for the analyses described herein
than when drainage is permitted. In the cenmfuge model tests on long flexible piles, the bending
moments induced by undrained loading reduced only slightly during consolidation. For tests with short stiff piles, rotation about the tip allowed the pile displacement to increase marginally with time, decreasing the differential pile-soil movement and significantly reducing the measured bending moments. However the long tern foundation consolidation will affect the displacement of the abutment and may cause tilting. Drained conditions should therefore be considered in relation to tolerable movements and the serviceability of the abutment and bridge deck.
5.2 Foundation characteristics
The first step is to investigate the ground conditions.
A profile of the strata and the
accompanying foundation strength parameters will be determined.
5.2.1 Clay
In the soft upper stratum it is necessary to idealise the profile of cu with depth as linear:
(5.1)
Many factors influence the measured values of shear strength.
Installation disturbance may
combine with variability of the upper, weaker and more friable s o i l which lies in the critical zone for lateral resistance near the ground surface. Weathering, seasonal changes in moisture content and scour are common occurrences. In this instance, there is a requirement for two values of cu:
l
i)
, a lower bound strength, cu -
for bearing capacity calculations, for estimating
the embankment load at which it is inappropriate to describe the foundation behaviour as pseudo-elastic, and for examining the lateral pressure at which
soil starts to yield around the pile
I
I
ii)
an upper bound, cu max t o estimate the maximum lateral pressure which may be
applied to the pile by the soft soil.
page: 25
A secant shear modulus, G, must be chosen, which permits the foundation behaviour at or below
working loads, to be described as elastic (Fig:5.1).
For situations when the soil is
overconsolidated, this assumption is quite acceptable. The stiffness of the soft clay, although required in the calculation of the lateral pressure acting on the pile, does not greatly affect the result since the Gmdh3/EI term in Eqn: 2.1 is much smaller than the others. In consequence, the selection of G may be made by the usual empirical methods. For very soft clays, 75cu < G < 100cu and for soft clays, 100cu
G c 200cu. Far more influence is shown by the ratio of shear
modulus in the soil mass under the surcharge to the shear modulus in the area of high strain around the pile, Gm/Gr, where the method of pile installation is also crucial. For driven piles Gm/Gr may be approximately 1.5 to 2, whereas for bored piles the ratio lies between 2.5 and 3.
5.22 Determination of shear modulus in the stiffer substratum
The stiffness of the sand layer has been modelled using a linear profile of shear modulus which has been considered acceptable for engineering design (Randolph, 1981). Knowledge, of the variation of G with shear strain, y , will enable the designer to choose appropriate values of G for the deformations expected in the region around the pile. A conservatively small value of G will lead to a reduced value of maximum pile bending moment occurring at a greater depth in the stiffer substratum. Generally it is the choice of lateral pressure distribution in the soft layer which is the controlling factor. However, pile installation methods will be critical to the choice of stiffness in the substratum.
Determining the magnitude of G with depth is discussed in Appendix: 1, considering: i)

ii)
laboratory determination, in-situ testing using a pressuremeter, empirical relationships.
iii)
In stiff clay or soft rock, the effects of softening or weathering at the surface of the layer should
also be considered. Generally, G/p'
N
200 for overconsolidated clays (Fleming et al, 1985) where
The effectof surcharge loading adjacent to piles

p' is the mean effective stress.
page: 26
5 . 3 Pilegeometry
Once the pile material and shape have been chosen, a first estimate of pile size and stiffness may be made. Pile stiffness, E is calculated for an equivalent solid circular pile of either the same P diameter, d, (circular pile) or with d = b, (rectangular pile with b = width, c = breadth and
I = bc3112) so:
EP = 64EU(xd4)
(5.2)
The total length of pile required to ensure flexible behaviour under lateral loading may be decided once the critical pile length in the Stiffer substratum has been determined from Eqn: 2.12.
The spacing between the rows of piles in a group has been ignored because the lateral pressure profiles, pf and pr, for the front and rear piles are assumed to be equal. Since the pile cap is assumed to be sufficiently rigid to prevent bending, the pile cap rigidity and geometry are not required.
5.4 Embankment
5.4.1 Equivalent surcharge load
To represent the embankment loading, an equivalent surcharge must be determined. Although the
geometry and characteristics of each embankment are different (Figs: l.la & b), it is acceptable to assume plane strain conditions across the width of the embankment, and that the vertical stress due to the unit weight of the N1for the height of the embankment describes the surcharge load.
5.42 Embankment stability
It is well known that inclining the resultant load on a foundation by 15' f r o m the vertical
is^
enough to reduce the ultimate bearing capacity by 50% (Bolton, 1979). This effect can, similarly, reduce the bearing capacity of embankments. It may be necessary, therefore, to build
page: 27
the embankment on a geotextile mat or to place some reinforcement at the base, to carry the outward shear forces which could otherwise destabilise the underlying soil. It is possible that the embankment material or construction method may cause arching within the fill, either longitudinally or transversely. This will affect the magnitude and distribution of load carried by the foundation.
The stability and resistance to bearing capacity failure of the embankment structure should be considered separately, without allowing for additional strengthening resulting from the row of piles, which will only tend to prevent longitudinal, but not lateral movement. In this way, the embankment and foundation will be designed to avoid failure during their working life, whilst limiting lateral deformations to tolerable levels.
5.5 Lateral uressure on a uile in the s o f t laver
Clear recommendations are made on the choice of lateral pressure dismbution: i) parabolic profile for the pseudo-elastic working load case, such that the initial assumption that p , is constant with depth is adapted so that the parabolic pressure dismbution has a peak value 1 . 5 at ~ the ~ mid-depth of the soft stratum,
ii)
linear p f i l e for the plastic ultimate load case.
These will be calculated and adapted as described in section 2.3.
5.5.1 Reparation of the elasto-plastic i n t d o n diagram
The first stage considers the boundaries of pseudo-elastic and plastic behaviour, by preparing an elasto-plastic interaction diagram (Section 2.3.4, Fig: 2.4a). Plotting p/cu (ordinate) against q/cu (abscissa), the following lines and zones may be distinguished: i) the pseudo4asic performance line (Eqn: 2.1) which relates the average pressure, pm, acting on the pile in the s o f t layer to the surcharge load, q,
for the particular value of h/d.
The effect of surcharge loading aa'jacent to piles

ii) the elasto-plastic zone, which lies underneath the ultimate pile pressure defined by p/cu max = 10.5 and to the left of the complete bearing capacity
page: 28
failure line, (Eqn: 2.4) which defines the conditions for local failure
underneath the abutment wall in the direction of the road centreline, iii) the fully plastic failure intersection point at which the soil shears
o i l mass fails under plastically past the pile simultaneously as the s

the embankment (Eqn: 2.3).
The local yield of the soil around the pile, which occurs above p
2xcU does not detract f r o m the

I
safety or performance of the system provided that the serviceable bearing capacity is not exceeded. With these considerations in mind, it is possible to evaluate the lateral pressures acting on the pile in the soft clay layer due to the differential movement between the pile and the soil.
5.52 Ideal design zone: wurking load case
Once the surcharge load has been decided, and the position of pm has been added to the interaction diagram, it w i l l be clear whether this surcharge-soil-pile configuration may be described as falling in the ideal design zone. The shape of the lateral pressure profile in the soft layer, which was initially assumed constant with depth under plane strain conditions should then
be adjusted (section 2.3.5) to allow for three dimensional effects and to give a Darabolic Dressure
~
1
1
distribution.
5.5.3 P l a s t i c fail=: ultimate pile pressure

,
The ultimate lateral pressure which could act on the pile must also be considered. Defined as 1 0 . 5 over ~ ~ the entire depth of s o f t soil, a linear pressure distribution is usually adopted to give
~
an absolute upper bound in cases where accidental overloads are possible.
I I
In the case of a stiffer s o i l deposit, in which the projected surcharge loading w i l l be unable to
generate sufficient lateral pressure to reach the ultimate loading case, pu = 1 0 . 5 over ~ ~ any of the
The effect of surcharge loading djacent to piles
page: 29
depth of the "soft" layer, then this upper bound need not be considered. Reference ta the elastic loading line on the elasto-plastic interaction chart will help to indicate the safety margins.
5.5.4 Input for SIMPLE
The computer program a l l o w s the lateral pressure distribution to be either linear, parabolic or a cubic spline fitted to data points of lateral pressure versus depth. SIMPLE allows the input to be made using E3M GDDM graphics, an existing datafiile or interactive format. Figs: 5.2, 5.3, 5.4 show the screens displayed for the graphics input.
5.55 Design charts for free headed piles

An alternative to the use of the computer program for fiee headed piles is the use of design charts
given in Fig: 5.5 & 5.6. The lateral pressure profile can then be represented by any combination of the following: i) ii) iii) constant pressure with depth, pressure increasing or decreasing linearly with depth,
o t t o m parabolic loading, with zero pressure at the top and b

of the layer and the maximum value at the mid-depth,
iv)
any combination of the above loadings over depth, h, which

reduce to zero at hU above the soft-stiff interface, y = hs.
It is possible to fit a large number of likely lateral pressure profiles using these design charts, by combining and superimposing the distributions above.
When using the design charts with linear distributions of pressure with depth, the value of a
characteristic pressure, pc, and a load distribution factor, pc, must be determined (Fig: 5.5a). These are obtained f r o m :
(5.3)
page: 30
The charts are prepared for values of 0.5 5 pc 2 1.5. Parabolic loading cases are also included.
Non-dimensional p u p s are defined for the behaviour of the piles in the soft upper soil layer such that lateral pressure p, force H, moment M, rotation 8, and deflection U, and are presented as (Figs: 5.5a-c, 5.6a & b):
H M --P
Y
8EI
9
uEI
versus
Pc PC*
P c r h 2 Pcrh3 Pcrh4
for different values of
pc.
Having established the values of pc and
p,,
the pressure applied, the
bending moment dismbution and in particular Hsand Ms at the soft-stiff soil interface, y = h, may be determined from the charts (Figs: 5.5b & c) and summed for the components of pressure
I
I
I
(section 5.5.5 i-iv) to give the total values of Hsand Ms. These can then be applied to the bottom part of the pile which is embedded in the stiffer substratum. If, however, the pressure dismbution reduces to zero above the interface (loading case (iv), Fig: 5.7), then simple structural analysis w i l l determine the values of Hsand Ms at the top of the stiff layer based on moment,
Mh, and shear force, Hh, at a depth y = h:
Hs = Hh
Lateral forces H
Pc i l l tend to enhance the pile movements and reduce the differential pile-soil wall. These w
may be imposed on the pile cap because of the earth pressure on the abutment
displacement.
It is therefore conservative to ignore this effect while calculating the lateral
pressures in the soft layer, and to directly superimpose the pile head forces on M, and Hsso that Eqns: 5.5 & 5.6 become:
The d e c t of surcharge loading adjacent to piles

5.6 Behaviour of stiff substratum
page: 31
These are the steps in the analysis for the elastic behaviour of the lower section of the pile:
i)
assume the pile is flexible if it exceeds a critical length { .tc = f (Gc, r, Ep)), which is dependent on relative pile-soil stiffness (Eqn: 2.12),
ii)
calculate a characteristic shear modulus {Gc = f (Go, m, v,
e,))
(Eqns: 2.8-2.10),
iii)
iterate between i) and ii) (Eqns: 2.10, 2.12) to determine values of critical pile length, lc,and equivalent shear modulus, Gc; find pc, (Eqn: 2.1 l),
iv)
substitute these values into the algebraic expressions which relate deflection and rotation of the pile in response to a force or moment applied at the head of the pile (Eqns: 2.13,2.14), or apply them to the charts which give normalised profiles of deflection and moment against depth (Figs: 2.10), remembering to include the appropriate interaction factor from Eqns: 2.18-2.20.
5.7 Results of the analvsis

5.7.1 Calculation of pile bending moment, rotation and deflection
2.10b, 5%).
By reference to the charts of normalised moment versus depth for the stiffer
substratum, (Figs: 2.9b, 2.1Ob), the maximum value can be assessed, together with the deformation profile (Figs: 2.9% 2.10a) and the rotation of the pile at the soft-stiff soil interface can be determined f r o m Eqn: 2.14. The rotation and deflection components due to the loading in the top part of the pile may be found from Figs: 5.6a & b respectively. Furthermore, allowance can be made for a freestanding section of pile above ground level of length e, and also for
I
I
loading case (iv) when the pile is loaded over less than the full depth of s o f t clay (Fig: 5.7, 5.8).
In this latter case, the increments of rotation and deflection over length hU are given by:
A 9 , =
hS
ME1 dy N, (Mh + Ms)hu/2EI
(5.9)
AuU = (( M/(EI) dy dy N, (Mh + Ms)h;/4EI

hS
(5.10)
The effect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles and:
page: 32
(5.1 1)
If there is no 'unloaded section, hU = 0 ,and Auu = 0,A),, = 0 and e h = os. These effects can be
added to the values from the lower part of the pile such that (Fig: 5.8):
U
PC
= us + hutanes + Auu
+ htaneh + 2 ui + etan0
y=h
V=O
PC
(5.12)
(5.13)
pile head and the maximum bending moment carried by the pile, which generally occurs just
I
below the soft-stiff s o i l interface. The design charts may be used to find this information quite efficiently for simple distributions of lateral pressure in the soft layer.
I
I
From the program I

I
SIMPLE, output is given in plot format (Fig: 5.9) or in numerical format (Table: 5.1), the mode
depending on the hardware available.
I
Increased pile deflection and rotation due to the proximity of other piles have been allowed for in the stiff layer. However, the interaction caused by the passive thrust of the soil in the soft layer has not been considered and further research is required in this area. The additional movement
o i l on a row of piles is likely to be only a fraction of that due to lateral thrust from the soft s
caused by the rotation and deflection in the stiff layer.
The egect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles

5.72 Improving the design
page: 33
If it is not possible to design the piles and abutment to fulfil1 safety and serviceability criteria, additional measures will have to be taken. These could include:
i)
ground improvement techniques pre-loading, embankment piling, excavation of
selected soft material, installation of stone columns or wick drains, reinforcement, ii) embankment load reduction: reduce embankment height, use lightweight fill,
minimise earth pressure on abutment w a l l and hence pile head load,
iii)
redesign of pile foundation:alter pile spacing, material, size, shape or use
buttonhole construction method. It is preferable to keep the design solution within the pseudo-elastic region to minimise yielding a s s or the soil around the pile, to ensure that the structure remains serviceable. of either the soil m It is also necessary to check that the plastic moment of the pile:
M = Z O P P Y
is greater than the maximum design moment imposed either by the ultimate loading case or by some reduction of this, where o is the yield strength of the pile material, 2 is the section Y P modulus. A different failure criterion is required for a reinforced concrete pile.
5.8 Exam~le
It may be helpful to work through an example which illustrates the use of the design charts and procedures to predict ground level pile deflections and maximum pile bending moments. Consider an idealisation of Fig: 1.1%in which a rectangular block of fill, 8 m high, is placed adjacent to a row of five free headed piles which penetrate a 6 m layer of soft clay and are embedded in a stiffer sand substratum. These piles may be, as a preliminary choice, of minimum
i t h E = 40. 106 kPa, length 16 m below ground, 1.27 m diameter reinforced concrete, w
I = 0.1277 m4,installed at a spacing of 4.0 m, with s/d = 3.15. There will be no freestanding
l s o that the piles are to be driven. length of pile above ground level, y = 0 m. Assume a
The erect o f surcharge loading adjacent to piles

5.8.1 Problem geometry and foundation properties
page: 34
Embankment: Soft clay:

(0 Iy I 6 rn)
specify lightweight fill, ye = 15.4 kN/m3, he= 8 m, q = 123 @a. take cu min = 22 kPa (for bearing capacity calculations),
= 22 + 2y kPa (for calculation of p,, Eqns: 2.2, 5.1), take max if G/cu N 75, Gm = 2100 kPa at y = 3 m, Grn/Gr = 1.5 (driven piles),
Ep/G,2 19O00, hs/d = 4.72

Take G = 2 + 10 (y - 6) MPa (Eqn: 2.8) with v = 0.3, G = (1 + 0.3 x 0.75) G = 1.225 G (Eqn: 2.9), assume lc= 10 m, Gc = 1.225 x 52 = 63.7 MPa (Eqn: 2.10),
lc= 1.27 (40. 1@/63.7)2/7 = 8 m (Eqn: 2.12),

iterate so that lc= 8.4 m, Gc = 53.9 MPa,
PC
= (1.225 x 23)/(1.225 x 44) = 0.523 (Eqn: 2.11),
le = 0.34 x 8.4/(Jo.523) = 3.95 (section 2.3.5.2),
e,ld = 3.1 1.
Then, determine the lateral pressures acting on the pile in the clay layer, assuming that the pile
will be laterally loaded over the entire 6 m depth of clay.
5.82 Working load case: parabolic distribution
o f t layer s o hU = 0 and h = hs. From Assume that the soil is loaded over the entire depth of s
Eqn: 2.1:
192
3 x 1.5 x 1.27.1.27 6
123 ILJ +0.458 x 2100 x 63 x 1.27 40 106 x 0.1277
= 93.0 kPa
where the first term in the denominator reflects the relative soil stiffness, the second term refers
to the pile-soil spacing and the third to the pile-soil bending rigidity.
page: 35
Check the elasto-plastic interaction diagram (Fig: 2.4a), to ensure that this loading case will plot inside the ideal design area with pm/cu min = 93/22 = 4.22, and q/cu = 123/22 = 5.59. For s/d = 3.15, h = 6 m, (Fig: 2.4b), this working load case will plot outside the boundary of the ideal design zone for which cmo,.jcu = 0.67, and will have a cmo,.jcu
N
0.85. However, if an
allowance is made for the increase in cu during construction of the embankment to this height, this reduced factor of safety may be acceptable. Although this loading case is perhaps too severe for a single row of piles, a pile group would be able to support the lateral pressures applied due to this embankment load.
Failure under the abutment end wall at the complete plastic failure intersection point (Eqn: 2.3)
will occur at q/cu N 8.4, so the lowest possible value of qmax N 185 kPa, which is >> 123 Wa.
Out of plane bearing capacity collapse would also require investigation.
Checking to see whether the loading can be reduced due to the depth of the soft layer, hu/hs may be obtained from Fig: 2.7a. For E Gm
19O00, hdd = 4.72, le/d = 3.1 1, hu/hs
0.18.
Since this is less than 0.2 then this may be ignored and hU taken to be zero with h = hs = 6 m. Now the parabolic distribution is redefined to be zero at y = 0 and 6 m, with
~
Pm' = 1.5 x 93.0 = 139.5 kPa at y = 3 m.

5.8.3 Ultimate load case: hear distribution
From Eqns: 2.2 and 5.1:

PU
=10.5= ~ 231 ~ + 21y (Wa)
5.8.4 Calculation of pile bending moment, mtation and deflection
Using the design charts (Figs: 5.5 & 5.6) and the equations defined above, the example follows overleaf. Firstly, establish characteristic lateral pressure and load description factor:
I I
page: 36
Working load case pc (Eqn: 5.3, Fig: 5.5a) 139.5
Ultimate load case 294.0 kPa 262.51294.0 = 0.892
Pc (Eqn: 5.4)
Hs/<pcrh)(Fig: 5.5b)
Ms/(PC
HS
1.333 0.667 0.71 MN 2.13 MNm
Refer to design charts to find shear force and moment at the top of the sand layer: 2 0.93 2.24 MN 6.25 MNm
rh2) (Fig: 5 3 )
MS
Establish the deflection at the top of the sand layer:
0.5 1
0.5 1
0.575
0.575
The rotation at the top of the sand layer must also be determined from Eqn: 2.14. Allowance must be made for the interaction between piles (Section 2.4.2). Factors for increasing calculated rotations and deflections are listed in Table: 5.2 for a row of 5 piles at s/d = 3.15, with the pile-soil stiffness (E Gc) for the centrifuge model tests which are identical to E /G from this
p/
example. The loading was assumed to be applied equally at the top of each free headed pile by
I
means of a shear force, H ,or a moment, M. For the most critical (middle) pile, aUH = 0.32,
auM = a8H = 0.102, aeM= 0.033. Therefore, corrected deflections and rotations for this pile in the stiffer layer:
8,' = 8, (1 + a)
2.78 107rads
8.426 107rads
U, 8
in the soft layer:
page: 37
Working load case ABEU(pcrh3) (Fig: 5.6a) AuEV(pcrh4) (Fig: 5.6b) A0 0.2 0.156 7.469 10-4rads 3.5 mm
Ultimate load case 0.30 0.23 2.37 103rads 10.89 mm
Au
and due to the rotation, Os, at the base of the soft layer (Fig: 5.8):
h tanes
16.68 mm
50.56 mm
so rotation and deflection at the ground surface will be:
e0 = e,+ '
uo/d
A0 eqn: 5.13)
3.527 107rads 29.26 mm 2.3%
1.08 l 0 7 a d s 89.28 mm
7.0%
uo = us' + Au
+ h tane,
Therefore the total lateral displacements for a free headed pile exceed a 25 mm serviceability criterion for differential lateral displacement, assuming that up to 100 mm vertical displacement may also be tolerated (US Department of Transportation, 1985). But, since the pile
configurations used for a bridge abutment generally have a fixed pile cap, this would reduce the deflections. By inspection (Figs: 2.9b, 2.10b), to find the maximum bending moment:
Working load case

(Y -hs)/$
Y
Ultimate load case 0.25 8.1 m 0.17

0.84
0.25 8.1 m 0.17 0.84 2.80 MNm
Mh/HslC (Fig: 2.9b)
M e s (Fig: 2.10b)
Mmax = Mm + Mh
8.45 MNm
Check Mmax is less than the plastic moment for the pile. If not, redesign reinforcement, increase concrete strength, or increase size of pile since it is unlikely that s/d c 3 will be used in practice. Table: 5.3 summarises the calculation at working load.

5.8.5 Equivalent pile group
page: 38
The analysis was repeated using the SIMPLE program for a group of two rows of piles with the same atmbutes, and spacing between the rows sx = 5 m, with an identical parabolic working load case pm' = 139.5 kPa, acting on both front and rear piles. The intention was to investigate the effect of pile cap fixity on the displacements, to see whether the pile group displaced roughly half as much as a single pile, and it was found that uo was reduced by 52%. after interaction between piles (Table: 5.2) was allowed for, to
2
14 mm (uo/d = l.l%),with 8 , =0
(which is a pre-condition of the program). While the effect of the pile cap had been to limit the pile movement to about 10 mm, the proximity of a second row of piles had increased the additional displacement due to interaction. This magnitude of displacement is acceptable under
US DOT criteria, and it would seem that analysis of the problem using the single pile algorithm
and halving the displacement will give reasonable results.
Similar values of pile displacement were obtained when an additional working load analysis was conducted for a pile group for which the pile cap was permitted to deflect horizontally, for identical embankment load and foundation conditions to those described above for the single free headed pile example. Eqn: 2.7a would be used to define the pressure on each pile, giving
' = 89.9 Wa, 64% of the original value of the single pile. In this instance, a pile cap load Pm equal to aocusxs (= 22 x 5 x 4 = 440 lcN) per pair of piles or 44O/s = 110 kN/m length, would
be applied at pile cap level, where a . and ashave been taken as unity.
The maximum moments for the working load, pm' = 89.9 kPa, were -2.18 MNm at y = 0 m, and +1.27 MNm at y = 8.01 m which are 78% and 45% of IMmaxI for the single free headed
I
pile at working load respectively. Similar reductions obtain for the ultimate load case when the maximum moments were -6.34 MNm at y = 0, and +4.15 MNm at y = 9.01 m. These
~
improvements in lateral pile performance, under both serviceability and collapse conditions,
I
i t h a fixed pile cap. demonstrate the advantages of using a pile group w
The effectof surchurge loading djacent to piles

5.9 Otherdesien aspects and concludinP r e m a r k s
page: 39
Analysis of the behaviour of piles and pile groups subjected to passive lateral thrust has been introduced. Design methods accounting for both serviceability and ultimate collapse were
considered with appropriate recommendations, and a computer program, SIMPLE, was developed to carry out the numerical analysis.
In parallel, other local considerations such as axial loading capacity, total or differential settlement, must be investigated together with the impact on the rest of the structure of the pile behaviour.
US Department of Transportation (1985) comment that horizontal differential
movements are far more damaging to abutments and bridge decks than differential vertical settlements. They recommend that the combined tolerable movement criteria are 100 mm vertical and 25 mm lateral movement.
Short rigid piles driven through a deep soft layer into a stiffer substratum will rotate abqut the tip as the surrounding soil consolidates under a constant load. The pile bending moments will then reduce significantly and be accompanied by a slight increase in pile displacement. For long flexible piles such as those considered in this report, only minimal changes in either pile bending moment or displacement with time were observed in the centrifuge model tests.
Retaining wall and pile cap design, settlement, embankment bearing capacity and stability must
also be examined. A complete breakdown of costs, availability of materials, site conditions and
location, transportation and environmental impact will all be factors in the final design choice.
6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The work described in this report forms part of the research programme of the Ground Engineering Division (Division Head D r M.P.OReilly) of the Structures Group of TRRL. The
a s Mr I . F . Symons and the Report is published by permission of the Project Officer at TRRL w
Director.
page: 40
7 REFERENCES Baguelin, F.J., Frank, R.A., Said, Y., (1977). Theoretical study of lateral reaction mechanism of piles. Geotechnique 27, No. 3, pp. 405434. Baguelin, F.J., Bustamante, M.G., Frank, R.A., (1986). The pressuremeter for foundations: French Experience. Proc. In Situ '86, GT Div., ASCE. Bolton, M.D., (1979). A Guide t o Soil Mechanics. Macmillan. Bolton, M.D., SpMgman, S . M . , Sun, H.W., (1990). The behavior of bridge abutments on clay. Design and perfomance of earth retaining structures. Geotech. Eng. Div. of ASCE Specialty Conference, Cornell University, Ithaca, USA. Broms, B., (1964). Lateral resistance of piles in cohesive soils. JSMFD, ASCE, Vol. 90, No. S M 2 , pp. 27-63. De Beer, E.E., Wallays, M., (1972). Forces induced in piles by unsymmemcal surcharges on the soil around the piles. Proc. V European Conf. on SMFE, Madrid, Vol. 1, pp. 325-332. Duncan, J.M., Chang, C.Y., (1970). Non-linear analysis of stress and strain in soils. JSMFD, ASCE, Vol. 96, NO. S M , pp. 1629-1653. Fleming, W.G.K., Weltman, A.J., Randolph, M.F., Elson, W.K., (1985). Engineering. Surrey University Press. Piling
I
Frank, R.A., (1981). Design of piles subjected to lateral pressures in soft soils. Colloquy of Jablonna, Gdansk, Poland.
Frank, R.A., (1988). Private communication: Pressuremeter test results for sites at Provins and Plancoet, France.
Frydman, S . , (1970). Discussion. Geotechnique 20, No.4, pp. 454 & 455.
Jewell, R.A., (1987). The mechanics of reinforced embankments on soft soils. Report OUEL/1694/87.
Mair, R.J., Wood, D.M., (1987).
pressuremeter testing.
CIRIA/Butterworths.
Marchetti, S., (1980). In-situ test by flat dilatorneter. Proc. ASCE, JGED, Vol. 106, No. GT3, pp. 299-321. Meigh, A.C., (1987). Cone penetration testing. CIRIA/Buttenvorth. Meyerhof, G.G., (1976). Bearing capacity and settlement of pile foundations. Terzaghi Lecture, Pile Foundations, GT3, pp. 197-227. Poulos, H.G., (1971). Behaviour of laterally loaded piles: I groups. JSMFD, ASCE 97, NO. SM5,pp. 711-731,733-751.
11th
I
I
I
- single piles, and II - pile
!
I
Poulos, H.G., Davis, E . H . , (1974). Elastic solutions for soil and rock mechanics. John Wiley & Sons.
The efect of surcharge loading djacent to piles
page: 41
Poulos, H.G., Davis, E H , (1980). Pile foundation analysis and design. John Wiley & Sons. Powie, W., (1986). The behaviour of diaphragm walls in clay. PhD. thesis. Cambridge University. Price, G., Wardle, LF., Frank, R, Jezequel, J.F., (1987). Monitoring the below ground performance of laterally loaded piles. Ground Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 5, pp. 11-15. Pulsfort, M., Walz, B., Steinhoff, J., (1989). Slightly stabilised bentonite suspension sheltering piles against lateral passive earth pressure in soft cohesive soils. IC Piles and Foundations, London Randolph, M.F., Carter, J.P., Wroth, C.P., (1979). Driven piles in clay - the effects of installation and subsequent consolidation. Geotechnique 29, No. 4, pp. 361-393. Randolph, MF., (1981). The response of flexible piles to lateral loads. Geotechnique 31, NO. 2, pp. 247-259. Randolph, M.F., (1983). PIGLET - A computer program for the analysis and design of pile groups under general loading conditions. Randolph, M.F., Houlsby, G.T., (1984). The limiting pressure on a circular pile loaded laterally in cohesive soil. Geotechnique 34, No. 4, pp. 613-623. Robertson, P.K., Campanella, R.G., (1983). Interpretation of cone penetration tests: Pan i and 2. Canadian Geotech. J. 20, pp. 718-745. Seed, H.B, Tokimatsu, K., Harder, L.F., Chung, R.M., (1985). Influence of SPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations. Proc. ASCE, JGED, Vol. III(GT12), pp. 1425-1445. Skempton, A.W., (1957). Discussion on planning and design of the new Hong Kong airport. Proc. ICE, Vol. 7, pp. 305-307. Springman, S.M., (1989). Lateral loading on piles due to simulated embankment construction. PhD. thesis, Cambridge University. U.S. Department of Transportation, (1985). Tolerable movement criteria for highway bridges. Final Report FHWA/RD-85/107, Federal Highway Administration, USA. Wroth, C.P., Hughes, J.M.O., (1973). An instrument for the in-situ measurement of the properties of soft clays. Rot. 8th ICSMFE, Moscow,Vol. 1.2, pp. 487494. Wroth, C.P., Randolph, M . F . , Houlsby, G.T., Fahey, M., (1979). A review of the o i l s with particular reference to the shear modulus. Cambridge engineering properties of s University Engineering Department Technical Report, CUEDD TR 75.

APPENDIX: 1
page: 42
Detemination of shear modulus in the stiffer substratum
A1 Introduction
Most granular soil deposits will have experienced sufficient cycles of loading to have reached a stable hysteretic state, although this process takes longer for increasing amplitudes of stress and for looser soils (Bolton, 1988). However for completely virgin soil, the initial loading cycle will show plastic shear strains and a lower value of shear modulus. Duncan & Chang (1970), Bolton (1988) estimate that this reduction is of the order of 2 for dense and 5 for loose deposits.
A2 Choice of shear m o d u l u s prome

Two options are available for the analysis described in earlier chapters. If soil homogeneity
i l l be a linear variation of G with depth and for pc = 1.0, G will be factor, pc = 0.5 then there w
constant with depth. Large lateral strains are expected in the soil at the ground surface around a laterally loaded pile, and a smaller secant shear modulus is appropriate at this horizon. Lareral
strains will decrease to zero at depths below the critical pile length, where a higher value of
,
1
shear modulus should be selected, and some interpolation between 0.5 e p, e 1.0 is realistic.
A.3 Laboratory determination
In the past, it w a s common practice to measure the G-y relationship from small scale laboratory tests in the triaxial or simple shear apparatuses after restoring the sample to the presumed in-situ stress state. However, there are inherent problems in ensuring that the sample remains undisturbed during insertion of the sampling tube, transportation and subsequent storage, and
finally during extrusion and preparation for testing. Choosing a small volume of soil to depict
I
i
1
the behaviour of the whole mass,once outside the confines of controlled sample preparation for centrifugal modelling, may also lead to misinterpretation of properties if the presence of fissures in stiffer clays, larger fragments and soil anisotropy are ignored.
The efect o f surcharge loading adjacent to piles
page: 43
Nowadays, laboratory determination of parameters may be combined with in-situ testing, which has become more popular through the development of the self boring pressuremeter (Wroth & Hughes, 1973; Mair 8z Wood, 1987), other types of cone penetrometer (Meigh, 1987) and flat plate dilatometers (Marchem, 1980). Of these options, the self boring pressuremeter is thought
to offer the least disturbance to the s o i l fabric and the in-situ stress state (Wroth & Hughes,
1973), and it is used to measure G = f(y) directly without recourse to empirical correlations.
A.4 Self boring pressuremeter
In-situ testing using a self boring pressuremeter offers horizontal pressure-defonnation characteristics from which the appropriate secant shear modulus may be evaluated, at a variety of depths, and for the range of stresses and strains that will be experienced during the life of the foundation. French research was summarised by Baguelin, Bustamante & Frank (1986), who defied values of shear modulus at 0,2%and 5 % volumetric strain as G G and G P O P2 PS Lateral loading effects are likely to dissipate over the critical pile length, with zero lateral strain below this, so G would be an appropriate value at y = $. At the surface, where larger strains P O are expected, a smaller modulus, perhaps G would be applicable. However, the disturbance
Ps caused by pile installation may indicate that G
P2
is a better choice at y = .,e
Results from a
French full scale laterally loaded pile test with nearby self boring pressuremeter tests were analysed.
A combination of extensometers (E-Ls) and strain gauges (ERS) were used to provide data
from which pile bending moments were determined (Fig: A.lb) for the site arrangement at
Plancoet (Price, Wardle, F r a n k & Jezequel, 1987) (Fig: A.la). Using Eqn: 2.8 to define G,
values of Go and m were applied to the analysis from section 2.4 to give best fit data to these profiles of bending moment and deflection (Fig: A.lc). predicted and experimental data agreed
well for Go = 0 MPa, m = 0.8 MPa/m. This prome is plotted on results from a pressuremeter
test which was conducted near the pile (Fig: A.2, Frank, 1988).
page: 44
With greater strains expected at the surface than at depth, it was not surprising that Go was closer to the value of G
P5
and the shear modulus was between G
PO
and G
P2
at depth. Fleming
et a1 (1985) recommended that Go was either half the value taken for axial loading at ground
level, or zero, increasing to the full value taken for axial loading, at the critical depth.
A5 Empirical considerations
Robertson & Campanella (1983) obtained correlations between dynamic shear modulus, cone resistance and vertical effective stress for uncemented, normally consolidated sands under small
strains for standard cone penetration tests Fig: A.3). For the mid-depth of the 10 m sand layer
in the centrifuge model tests, where a lower bound

N ,
9~
= 3 MPa, their estimate of
50 MPa compared with the a s s u m e d value of 52 MPa based on Eqns: A.1 8z A.2 below
(Table: A.l).
Wroth er a1 (1979) conducted a literature survey investigating ways of estimating G. Often G may be proportional to p', and it is usually realistic to allow a linear dismbution of G with depth for sands under high strains. However, the following expression based on curve fitting dynamic laboratory test data on sands accounted for the effect of strain:
G Pa
710
(0.765433 exp3000Y)
0.9 +
1.23 5 J :
(A. 1)
These equations were valid for a range of 10-6 < y > 107; 0.25 < p'/pa > 2; 20 < Dr > 100, and imply that 300 c G/p' > 600, which is generally applicable for lateral loading at working levels.
Relationships between standard penetration test (SPT)data and G for sands were also reviewed by Wroth et aZ(1979) who recommended:
The eflect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles'

based on data between 60 N
I
page: 45
c GmJpa
> 300 N O'*. For 9~ = 3 MPa, a loose deposit with
7 is indicated leading to an estimate of Gmax = 54 MPa. However, the value of blow
count, N determined by SPT depends on the type of hammer and method of initiating its fall.
Frydman (1970)conducted field trials which showed variations in N of up to 40%. More recent
work by Seed et a1 (1985)compared international testing methods and recommended correction factors to align these with a standard
Tables
page T . I
TABLE: 5.1
'otal C z ' i e C t i T ? +ytb of p i l e for l a t e r a l Loadin; Zotal 1 3 0 4 t h o f p r l e (a) 17.020 iac1.d in.:.
..
I : (
17.033
l3000. JS 3
>apt5
a
3andinq Eoacn t kYa

0.030
3ef lee :Lan a
-1,000 0.009
o.ao3
1.603
3.003
0 . x 2.182
7. i ~ ?
0.02033
3.803 1.200
2.000
0 . 3 i a 13 0.0 113s
2.oOJ
2.aoo
16.3'32 3l.Jt3 52.9;9

90.:21
a.ooo
,
3.200 3.600
0.100
a.ioo
5.200
116.963 160.j16 212.3ar 273.130 30 7 . 2 2
J. 0 16Sf 3.01590 0.0 1502 0. o 1a2a 0.0 1196 0.0 1269 3-01191
0.01115 0.0 1038
0.00962
0.00589
5.600 i, 000
6.900
a 19.575
6 95.0f8 798.929 9 07.096 10 in.3 i a
1131,105
5OO.SS6 s96. E as
6.300
7.200
a.ooo
9.000
7.603
0.00810 0.0070 i 3 006 70 0.40601 0.0351a 0.00a7o

. .
10.090 11.000
12.000
13.300
1295.111 1291.7~~ 1 I17.:51
o.ooao9 0.001s0 9.0 0 2 a 2
9.031a8
'
a 09 .a an
3.00075
ia.ooo 15.000
16oOOO
556.317 300.a63 1 16.308

0.000 0.000
0.00521 ~.OOO02 0 00 0 6
16.000
-3.0 3003 0.00300

0.00000 3.001 987 r r d i m s
Rotation a t to? o f p i l e
Tables
TABLE? 5.2
page T:
Interaction factors for a single r o w of piles

No. of piles in row:
5 (s/d = 3 . 1 5 )
Designation:
LlH
middle
offside
outer
uM = a8H
8M
0.320 0.102 0 . 0 3 3
0.302 0 . 0 91 0.028
0.222 0.049 0.011
Interaction factors for a pile group Pile group containing 2 rows of 5 piles at s/d = 3 . 1 5 : Designation:
UH
middle
offside
outer
uM = OH
8M
0.657 0.432 0.284
0.598 0.358 0.214
0.499 0.249 0.062
Loading is normal to the front and rear r o w of piles
Tables
page T.3
TABLE:5.9
Determination of pile maximum bending moment, rotation & deflection
Case: Test example: Working load
Ref No: 21/1
Date: 1/2/88 Go = 3 M P a m =lOMPa/m p, = 0.523 lc = 8.4 m

= 14.4 r n
Pile Prouexties Radius,
r E I e EP
= = =
0.635 40 l@ 0.1277 0 40 l@ 6.0
G at top of layer
Stiff Swbsadtun:
Youngs modulus, 2nd moment of area Freestanding length Equivalent modulus, soft uoprr soil Lavcr, Depth of layer,
=
=
MPa m4 m
h4Pa
Shearmodulusgdt Homogeneityconstant Critical pile length
h, =
T o t a l pile length, e+hs+$ Poissonsratio,

Characteristic G,
v = 0.3 G, =53.9 W a
Establish us & 8, by taking Hs& M , , & using charts (Figs: 2.9 & 2.10) or equations (adapting to U; and e; for pile interaction by multiplying appropriate components by (1 + a)): (E G )17 (E G = H,(t$?)l+ 0.3 Ms(t$?)l], 8, = ~ 4 k . Hs(t$?)7 3 + 0.8 4iCMs(lp)7] us pc c pc c u m r 2 G , EpIGc# 2 0.575, us = uh+ urn For lateral force. H , , hr Gc(E Gc)d7 IL 0.51, moment, M , ,
-+[027
HS
pI
MS
Then, using charts (Figs: 5.63 & b ) , calculate rotation & deflection:
Y (m)
stiff
Unloaded soft Loaded soft
h, h 0
ui= 5.42 U&= 3.66 Au = hu tang, = 0

Au=htaneS+Z Y=o= A U = leltane =
: U S
Freestanding At pile cap
+
-e
(mm) 9.08 0 :A8 = 0 20.18 :A9 = By& 0 :A8 = 0

U
8 (rads) 0.00278 0 0.00075 0
!$=
2226
q-
o.00353
Determination of maximum moment by inspection, M
e 2 0.84 Mm;o(Hslc 2 0.17 so Y=hs 2 2.8 MNa at depth, y = Ic (yllc) + h, = 8.4 (.25) + 6 = Saan
Tables
page T.4
TABLE: A.1
Determination of shear m o d u l u s in the sand substratum Depth
G (mal
Assumed 2 52 82 102
m
0 5 8 10
N=7
54
Dr=50%
75
126
(reduce to nearly 0)
U e,
..
. I I
9 M
c)
n n
m
. I
W U
L
Q)
c)
P cr
m
P
0 m aJ
p 1
1 rl
Y
!L a
ta
c)
3 U
e,
P cr
5
* I
aJ
0 5: 0 . I
c)
U .%t
. II
3 = .-. E a
c)
U
L
f ;
.s8 a9
cn
U
. I
E a
CT
m
c
00
ep
i-
--
II
Fig: 2.2 Photograph from X-ray (taken vertically downwards through sample) showing post-flight deformation of lead threads around five piles at s/d = 3.15. The sample was loaded on the right hand side of the piles
Maximum embankment load,
qmau
Stiff layer
Pile
Fig: 2.3a Increase in bearing capacity allowing for reinforcement by a single pile
6
vole
1 0
shear strain
Fig: 2.3b Mobilisation of undrained shear strength of kaolin (Powrie, 1986)
"
I:I
40
00
1. I I
F'
c )
I
*
I
- E
.-
Q)
a n
m
c
II
I n
-A c
c "
II
h/h
u s
Determination of 'unloaded' length of pile, h,
Fig: 2.7a
I Id
e
1.o
0.8
h /h
u s
0 . 6
0.4
Fig: 2.7b
0.2
0.0 0 2 4 6 8 1 0 1 2
I Id
e
dd=4;h i d = 5
s
1.0 I
h/h
u s
Fig: 27c
*
+
5000 E P m = loo00
Ep/G,=
*
0
2
4
* -P-m
E/G =2oooO P m EIG = 50000 E~G~=ICIOOOO
10
12
I Id
e
4 c
).c
0.2
0.4
U ,
n1.l -1
0.6
+-
. - -cs
?
----
0.8
1 . 0
1.2
1.6
.-A,=
o!
I
I
w
c
U
v)
9 <
:j
4
c)
?I
* =\ + O h
.
0
W
t
c
Q
m
0 c3
W W
a10
Maximum embankment load,

S
qmax
Stiff
layer
Pile
Fig: 2.8a Increase in bearing capacity allowing for reinforcement by two piles
Soft
layer
hs
h =O
U
Fig: 2 . 8 b Adjusted profile of lateral pressure
F 3 1 '
0.1
0.2
0.a
0.4 " 8 0.8
0.a
0.2
00
0.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
01
o a
9
1
Fig: 2.9 Generalized w e s o f lamal deflection and bending moment profile for force loading
4.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.0
0)
0.0
0)
02
0.4
0.4
0.8
01
y
1
01
01
Ag: 2.10 Gtnaalizedc u n m d l a w deflection and knding moment profile for moment
OIRECTIGN OF
-0
LATERAL L O A D I N G
PlLE.
O.OlltV.
Fig: 2.11 Pile group interaction
Aum A u B
U
.I-4
A e + e L&
m,si
T'
4
soft . soil
hs
Stiffer substratum
Fig: 3.la Pile bending moment diagram
Fig: 3.lb Pile deflection
water table
12.7mrn. dia.instrumented pile
Legend. Dimensions in millimetres Lead thread oPore pressure transducer 4 LVDT xStrain gauge
Vane test
% Penetrometer test
Fig: 3.2 Centrifuge model test general arrangement, Test 7
UTERAL P R E S w l i CPA
OEFLECTION m
do
I I
i!
!
i
M
I
!
wmn
CENTRIFUGE TEST
BENDING MOMENT,
KPISMS 7 8 DEFLECTION
LATERAL PRESSURE
[ X i
CENTRIFUGE TEST KP/SMS 7

BENDING MOMENT, LATERAL PRESSURE
8 DEFLECTION
= I
oomn
LEGENO
OOln n
0.051
0.02) 6
BENDING MOMENT, LATERAL PRESSURE 8 DEFLECTION

T I C 10*
3.4
Equivalent
free
Moments
d forces
P I le gr,oup
behov i our
headed
opplled t o ~ l v e
pi les
equal 6 o p p o s i t e
r o t o t Ions
d oorometers
(01
(b)
(C)
Fig: 4.1 Parameters used in the analysis of pile group behaviour
Fig: 4.2 Photograph from X-ray (taken vertically downwards through sample) showing post-flight deformation of lead threads around a pile group with 2 rows of three piles, sdd = 3.94 apart, and at s/d = 5.25 within each row. The sample was loaded on right hand side of the piles
CENTRIFUGE TEST KP/SMS 8 BENDING MOMENT, LATERAL PRESSURE
P I L E AF 8 DEFLECTION
f /
CENTRIFUGE TEST KP/SMS 8 BENDING MOMENT, LATERAL PRESSURE
P I L E AR 8 DEFLECTION
BDOtrCiumT
l m
.l.t
-1.0
,
-0.1
4.6
4.9 .
a +-C o *
0
a.
0.4
0.4
0.8
1.0
YrQ
mmn
LEGEND
Lllrnlu Lolo
LllC
SfHPLE
U
s . 0 50.0 40 0.017 0.012 6 C
ANALYSIS ON
PILE GROUP
-- -
/-
m
-1
CENTRIFUGE TEST KP/SMS 8 SENDING MOMENT, LATERAL PRESSURE
FRONT P I L E 8 DEFLECTION
CK
m.4.4a
BOOIKrO.*T
DQuLlim m
WO
arm n
arm n
CENTRIFUGE TEST KPISMS 8 BENDING MOMENT, LATERAL PRESSURE
REAR P I L E
8 DEFLECTION
TIC
m4.4b
Qrmr
li
Shear
Shearstrain Y
Fig: 5.1 Relationship between shear stress, shear strain and secant modulus
tratum
Stratum
- ?
Fig: 5 2 Screen 1: Foundation 8s geometry input
Please mtcItyp of loading dismition
E u a
LatcralprrssunutopoflayP.
scREp(2
? ' b p
Lataalprrsntrru~oflayer. ph=?
fig33
Lateral pressure (x scale factor) kPa 8 1 2 3 4 5 b 7 8
10
A CUBIC SPLINE HAS BEENTO YOUR DATA Poms
sazEEN2A
Fig: 5.4
'
PLEASE--
PRESSURE SCALING FAclroR = ? NO OFPTS DEFINING PRESSURE (<18) = ?
PRESSUkATTOP=? PRESSURE ATBUITOM = ?
U
0
0 U
a
\
E .r (
#
0
.c
3
L Q
0
>
U
A
* a
c LL
cn
0
z U
U3
W
W
e
e'
*
na
E E
W
n
LL 0 W d
n u! VI
8 E
iz
b6
E
W
W
LL
P
d
Y / d
a;
v )
d
q / h
a;
Ground surface
I
Deep
soft
layer Unloaded
section
0 9 9 -
--
Fig: 5.7 Lateral pressure on a pile in a deep soft layer at working load (parabolic distribution)
PILE - O f W I N G
COMPONENTS OF DEFLECTION
Fig: 5.8 Relationship between pile loading & deflection components
.0
bC3a
0
LL
= 0
II
II
It
(a) Soil p f i l e data
\
0.-
?-
1 1
2
(b) Derails of test pile
(c) Comparison of soil reaction, bending moment and deflection profiles (at 30kN applied lateral load)
Fig: A.l Plancoct pile tcst (after Price, Wade, Frank & Jczquel, 1987)
PLANCOET LATERAL PILE TEST PRESSUREMETER RESULTS

(Frank, 19881
LEGEND
analysis 1981
F i g A.3 Dynamic shear modulus for uncemtnted, ncnmaUy-comdidatcd, predominantly quartz sands smaU strains (after Robatson & Campanclla, 1983)

The Effect of Surcharge Loading Adjacent To Piles, TRL

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

The Effect of Surcharge Loading Adjacent To Piles, TRL

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

d

The effect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles

Contractor Report 196

TRANSPORT AND ROAD RESEARCH LABORATORY Department of Transport

Contractor Report 196

The effect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles

by S M Springman and M D Bolton

SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

SMPLEIED MECHANISM OF BEHAVIOUR

PILE BENDING MOMENTS AND DEFORMATION PROFILES

PILE GROUP ANALYSIS

APPENDIX 1: DETERMINATION OF SHEAR MODULUS I N THE STIFFER SUBSTRATUM

The Gect of surcharge loading adjacent t o piles

S.M. Springman & M.D. Bolton

SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

: mobilised value of undrained shear strength : undrained shear strength

: undrained shear strength at surface of clay layer, y = 0 : external pile diameter

: equivalent Young's Modulus of pile : freestanding length of pile above mudline

G,= f (Go,m, v, e,)

: shear modulus at top of clay layer

: shear force in pile at top of stiff layer

: depth of soft layer

: second moment of area of a single pile, diameter d

: stiffness : length of pile in stiffer substratum

Pci Pf Pm, Pm' Pr

after pile group interaction effects accounted for

component i, of deflection deflection at ground surface, y = 0

: deflection at pile cap level

: plastic section modulus of pile : coordinate defining transverse horizontal geometry

neighbouring piles for a free headed pile under lateral load

neighbouring piles for a free headed pile under moment loading

neighbouring piles for a free headed pile under lateral load

: pile group interaction factor for increase in rotation due to

neighbouring piles for a free headed pile under moment loading

neighbouring piles for a fixed headed pile due to lateral load

: load description factor : vertical stress increment at any appropriate depth

: additional pile rotation in soft layer due to integration of bending moment

: additional pile rotation in 'unloaded' section of soft layer due to integration of M

: additional pile displacement in 'unloaded' section of soft layer due to double

integration of bending moment

(applicable when abbreviations have not been defined elsewhere)

. factor due to rotation

The effect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles

The eflect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles

1.2 Tvpes of bridge suDprt

1 . 3 Structural idealisation for analvsis of lateral loadin~ effect

The effect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles

2.2 Pile response

The pile response is considered, initially, in two complementary parts:

has a greater lateral deformation than the pile, ii)

The effect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles

2 . 3 Lateral pressure exerted on a pile in the soft s t r a t u m

2 . 3 . 1 Working load case

Assume, initially that the pressure profile is constant, p ,

over some depth h, and that h is equal

The efect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles

both values taken at the mid-depth of the loaded section, y = h/2.

The first term in the

modulus will also have a noticeable impact on p . ,

The effect of surcharge loading adjacent to piles

2.32 Ultimate lateral pile capacity

2.33 Upper bound m e c h a n i s m for bearing capacity failure