Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
For
Geo-Technical Engineering
Presented by:
E. Omar Ahmed El-Kadi
• Pile modeling.
• Piled-raft systems.
• Capacity analysis in FE
• Case studies
2
Analysis of a Geotechnical problem
Geotechnical analysis
Generally a geotechnical analysis counts for the soil mechanics to ensure that the
sub soil can stand the load transmitted by the supporting system and use the
reaction on that supporting system to design it, there are many applications as:
• Shallow foundations.
• Deep foundations.
• Tunneling.
• Seepage analysis.
• Slope stability.
• Retaining structures.
• Brace cuts
And more,….
3
Analysis of a Geotechnical problem
There are many well developed theories and approaches based on soil mechanics to
solve a geo-tech. problems that can be simply applied when considering the
assumption of the theory or approach.
But remember !!
Rankin theory Coulomb theory
4
Analysis of a Geotechnical problem
Geotechnical report
Soil profiles
Lab (e.g. Triaxial tests)
Field (e.g. CPT, SPT,..)
Problem Definition
Model Simulation
Structural Design
5
Why would we use Numerical Analysis?
Numerical analysis is preferred when:
6
What is Finite elements analysis?
Basics of FE:
Finite elements method divides the problem into small elements that fulfill continuum,
compatibility , stability.
Loading and
analysis cases
FE elements
Model boundaries
Element type
• Depends on the Model Geometry.
• High Order elements enhance results by
increasing nodes and integration points but
computational expensive.
Constitutive model
• Simulates material behavior.
• It can be Elastic , Elasto-plastic , or Visco-
elasto-plastic.
8
What is Finite elements analysis?
Basics of FE:
Finite elements method divides the problem into small elements that fulfill continuum,
compatibility , stability.
9
What is Finite elements analysis?
Constitutive model:
Failure Envelope
Failure (Plastic-deformation)
Elastic deformation
1
0
What is Finite elements analysis?
Constitutive model:
12
Numerical Analysis
Geotechnical report Pile Tests
Soil profiles
SLT, DLT, RLT, PDA
Lab (e.g. Triaxial tests)
Field (e.g. CPT, SPT,..) Numerical Model
Analytical
Solution
Foundation Design
• Serviceability Limit State
• Ultimate Limit State
Determine the required structural parameters
14
Pile modeling
Solid pile model
Surface interface elements for solid-to-solid connection:
Advantages Cons
• Interface behavior: elastic, nonlinear elastic, • Many elements Large computation.
coulomb friction, and user-supplied material.
• Pile forces and moments are not directly
• Total stress dependency in nonlinear available in post-processing.
analysis.
• Model definition and mesh-generation could
be elaborative for large number of piles.
14 15
Pile modeling
Embedded pile model
16
Pile modeling
Embedded pile model
Line-to-solid interface elements for beam-to-solid connection:
x
Elementary Coordinate y
• Advantages • Cons
• No nodal connectivity is required between • Predefined capacity
pile and solid meshes.
• Concentration of stress.
• Nonlinear friction-slip properties for line-solid
interface elements.
• Less elements Less computation
• Pile forces and moments are directly
available in post-processing.
17
Pile modeling
Embedded pile model
Point-to-solid interface elements for beam-to-solid connection:
y x
z
tn = qn/length = kn * (Du)
Force
tt = qt/length = kt * (Du)
Relative
displacement
qb = kb * (Du) ≤ qbult
Displacement
Tip
capacity
Relative
displacement
20
A.S.El-Kadi 2015
Single pile calibration
Single pile analysis of the Alzey Bridge pile loading test
The pile load test was conducted by Sommer & Hammabach in 1974 to optimize the
foundation design of Alzey Highway Bridge in Germany (El-Mossallamy 1999)
21
Single pile calibration
Modeling
22
Single pile calibration
Modeling
23
Single pile calibration
Assessment of pile-soil interface stiffness
24
Single pile calibration
Assessment of pile-soil interface stiffness
25
Single pile calibration
Load transfer mechanism and straining actions
26
Embedded pile elements
Concentration of stresses
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
0
-10
-50
-60
27
Embedded pile elements
Tz and Qz Curves
T-z and Q-z curves are pile-soil load transfer curves, which are implemented
as nonlinear interface properties for the embedded type pile elements in 3D
finite element analyses of both single pile and pile group.
The load transfer curves are relation between the ratio of shear stress to the
maximum shear stress and the corresponding relative displacements caused
by load transferred through pile shaft, and the same for pile base.
The in-situ measured pile head displacement is the pile total displacement
which is the sum of following
Pile total settlement = Pile elastic def. + settlement due to load transferred by skin
friction + settlement due to load transferred by end bearing
Pile total settlement = Pile elastic def. + settlement due to load transferred by skin
friction + settlement due to load transferred by end bearing (Zb )
Qwp +∈QWS L
Pile elastic deformation (S) = Ap Ec
Where:
QWP: pile base load , QWS: Skin Friction , L: Pile length ,
AP: pile's cross sectional area , ϵ: Factor based on skin friction distribution
𝜂
1 − 𝜇2
𝑍𝑏 = 𝑄𝑏
2𝑟𝑜 𝐸𝑠
Where:
𝑍𝑏 : Pile tip displacement, 𝑄𝑏 : stress at pile tip ,𝜇 ∶ Poisson’s ratio
𝑟𝑜 : Pile radius, 𝜂: empirical factor = 1 for long piles ,𝐸𝑠 : Soil elastic modulus
29
Embedded pile elements
Tz and Qz Curves
Relative displacement is defined as the difference between both pile's mass displacement
and displacement of adjacent soil elements.To calculate the relative displacement at
different load increments, the outputs of the FE 3D model were used together with the ratio
of relative displacement to total displacement extracted for both pile's shaft and pile's base
by using element at the middle of the pile's length and element adjacent to pile's base
respectively
1.2 1.2
Relative dis./displaacement
1 1
Relative dis/displacement
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
T (KN) Qb (KN)
30
Embedded pile elements
Tz and Qz Curves
0 1 2 3 4
0 Load (MN)
1.2 1.2
-5
1 1 -10
displacement (mm)
Qb/Qb max
Measured Skin
T/Tmax
-20
0.6 0.6
Measured Base
-25
0.4 0.4 Total
-30 Base
0.2 0.2
-35 Skin friction
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 -40
31
Embedded pile elements
Tz and Qz Curves
32
Embedded pile elements
Tz and Qz Curves
33
Embedded pile elements
Tz and Qz Curves
Implementing load transfer curves with 3D finite element analysis showed good
results as compared to that measured in the field increasing the confidence in the
analysis results.
T-z and Q-z curves simulated in-situ pile measured performance, which considers
different factors as construction technique,…etc.
Load transfer curves also overcomes the problems of soil sampling and parameters
assessment as this technique doesn't only count on the soil shear parameters as
ordinary FE analysis.
This technique can be used in primary analysis for PRs prior to SLT by calibrating
using single pile solid model, then updated after SLT.
34
Piled-raft systems
35
Piled-raft systems
Advantages of PR system
36
Piled-raft systems
Soil-Structure interaction of PR system
Interaction influences:
• Pile-Soil interaction
• Pile-Pile interaction
• Raft-Soil interaction
• Pile-Raft interaction
37
O.Elkadi 2011 - A.S.El-Kadi 2015
Piled-raft systems
Desirable characteristics for the analysis of piled rafts
38
A.S.El-Kadi 2015
Parametric Study
Alzey bridge pile
D = 1.3m
S/D = 2, 3 & 4
L/D = 5 & 20
O. Elkadi (2011):
M.Sc. Thesis “Performance of Piled Raft Systems”
39
Parametric Study
30MM 15MM
40
Parametric Study
S/D = 2, 3 & 4
41
Parametric Study
80
70
60
αr %
50
L/D=5
40
L/D=20
30
30MM 15MM
20
1 2 3 4 5 S/D
42
Parametric Study
30MM 15MM
Group behavior and pile-raft interaction reduce on the one hand the stiffness
of the piles and increase on the other hand their bearing capacity
43
Parametric Study
30MM 15MM
44
Capacity analysis in FE
Strength reduction method (SRM) and/or Stress analysis method (SAM) are
commonly used for slope stability analysis.
45
Capacity analysis in FE
46
Capacity analysis in FE
Challenges in foundation capacity analysis
Numerical in-stability.
48
Capacity analysis in FE
Capacity of shallow foundations
Deformed shape for Vl. displacement at failure Vl. stress at last converged step ( failure)
49
Capacity analysis in FE
Capacity of shallow foundations
Hollow square raft of 9.1x9.1 with inner Deformed shape for Vl. displacement at failure
dim 6.5x6.5
50
Capacity analysis in FE
Capacity of deep foundations Load (MN)
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0
-0.5
-1
Displacement (m)
-1.5
-2
-2.5
-3
-3.5
51
Capacity analysis in FE
Capacity of deep foundations
Piledraft of 9.1x9.1 with 9 piles L/D = 20 Vl. Stress Vl. displacement Strain
Delivery Tunnel
53
Case study
Tunnel at Silo complex Bucket elevator
54
Case study
Tunnel at Silo complex
55
Case study
Tunnel at Silo complex
56
Case study
Tunnel at Silo complex
Load(tons)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
0
2 Total
Settlement (mm)
Skin
3
Base
Measured
4
57
Case study
Tunnel at Silo complex
58
Case study
Tunnel at Silo complex
59
Case study
Tunnel at Silo complex
60
What is takes for Successful analysis?
For Good analysis results remember to:
Use representing soil parameters ( extracted from tests), and make site calibration if
possible ( as pile loading tests).
Design model’s mesh well, to have small mesh size at zones of expected
concentration of stresses and always make gradual change in mesh size (aspect ratio
of successive meshes).
Use enough boundary for your analysis, and check that is satisfactory form your
outputs ( values recommended by Midas developers found to be satisfactory) .
Always make stress initialization (initial stage analysis with zero displacement).
Select suitable constitutive model for your soil type and analysis type.
Select suitable element type and don’t waste your time in un-needed sophistications.
Consider iterative method (convergence criteria) and geometric non-linearity when
needed.
61