See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/264445911

INFLUENCE OF PILE HEAD RESTRAIN LEVEL ON LATERAL RESPONSE OF PILES

SUBJECTED TO GROUND MOTION

Conference Paper · July 2014

DOI: 10.13140/2.1.4613.4405

CITATIONS READS
0 326

2 authors:

Luciano Fernandez-Sola Gadiel Martínez Galindo

Metropolitan Autonomous University Metropolitan Autonomous University
34 PUBLICATIONS   29 CITATIONS    4 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

attenuation California Gulf View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Luciano Fernandez-Sola on 04 August 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Tenth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering
Frontiers of Earthquake Engineering
July 21-25, 2014
10NCEE Anchorage, Alaska

INFLUENCE OF PILE HEAD RESTRAIN

LEVEL ON LATERAL RESPONSE OF PILES
SUBJECTED TO GROUND MOTION

L. R. Fernandez-Sola1 and G. Martínez-Galindo2

ABSTRACT

In this work, a parametric study of the bending moment distribution in concrete piles produced
by kinematic interaction due to seismic excitation is presented. A finite layer method is used, that
considers partially or fully constrains against rotation of pile ends (head and tip). In addition,
different levels of pile head rotational restriction are considered. First, a parametric analysis of
the rotational stiffness needed to produce a fixed head condition in the pile is developed. An
equation to define this stiffness is proposed. Then, the distribution and magnitude of bending
moments with partial rotation at pile head is studied. Finally, a comparison between numerical
transient pile response and the proposed equations is presented.

1Professor,Dept. de Materiales, Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana-Azcapotzalco, Av. San Pablo No. 180 Col.
Reynosa Tamaulipas , C.P. 02200, Distrito Federal ,Mexico
2Graduate Student, Dept. de Materiales, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Azcapotzalco, Av. San Pablo No. 180

Col. Reynosa Tamaulipas , C.P. 02200, Distrito Federal ,Mexico

Fernandez-Sola LR, Martinez-Galindo G. Influence of pile head restrain level on lateral response of piles subjected
to ground motion. Proceedings of the 10th National Conference in Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute, Anchorage, AK, 2014.
 Tenth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering
Frontiers of Earthquake Engineering
July 21-25, 2014
10NCEE Anchorage, Alaska

Influence of Pile Head Restrain Level on Lateral Response of Piles

Subjected to Ground Motion

L. R. Fernandez-Sola1 and G. Martinez-Galindo2

ABSTRACT

In this work, a parametric study of bending moment distribution in concrete piles produced by
kinematic interaction due to seismic excitation is presented. A finite layer method is used, that
considers partially or fully constrains against rotation of pile ends (head and tip). In addition,
different levels of pile head rotational restriction are considered. First, a parametric analysis of the
rotational stiffness needed to produce a fixed head condition in the pile is developed. An equation
to define this stiffness is proposed. Then, the distribution and magnitude of bending moments with
partial rotation at pile head is studied. Finally, a comparison between numerical transient pile
response and the proposed equations is presented.

Introduction

Structural design of foundation elements requires understanding of both: structural and

geotechnical engineering. Structure and soil response, and soil properties influence the
magnitude and characteristics of the force elements on the foundation. Generally, these effects
are considered separately. This consideration neglects the influence of the foundation in the
response of either structure or soil. Since the 50’s the influence of soil-foundation flexibility on
structural behavior is recognized [1] by introducing Soil Structure Interaction (SSI) on dynamic
analysis of buildings.

Several codes around the world acknowledge the importance of consider the variation
that SSI produces on structural dynamic properties (period lengthening and damping
modification). These modifications (known as inertial interaction) may produce changes on loads
introduced on the foundation due to structural response. Designers in general consider
exclusively these loads on structural design of the elements, sometimes even neglecting SSI
influence.

1Professor,Dept. de Materiales, Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana-Azcapotzalco, Av. San Pablo No. 180 Col.
Reynosa Tamaulipas , C.P. 02200, Distrito Federal ,Mexico
2Graduate Student, Dept. de Materiales, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Azcapotzalco, Av. San Pablo No. 180

Col. Reynosa Tamaulipas , C.P. 02200, Distrito Federal ,Mexico

Fernandez-Sola LR, Martinez-Galindo G. Influence of pile head restrain level on lateral response of piles subjected
to ground motion. Proceedings of the 10th National Conference in Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute, Anchorage, AK, 2014.
 In case of deep foundations such as piles, there is experimental [2-4] and analytical [5-11]
evidence that they are also subject to forces produced by wave passage. These forces arises from
the incompatibility of soil and pile strains (kinematic interaction), and are considered on the
design of underground structures [12-16]. Distribution and magnitude of element forces
produced by kinematic and inertial interaction are completely different [17]. In general design
codes does not consider kinematic forces on foundation structural design.

Pile toe and head boundary conditions control the magnitude and distribution of
kinematic forces [5,10 y 11]. Many authors have used Beam-on-Winkler-Foundation models to
study these forces [5,9 y 10]. In such models, piles are modeled as Euler-Bernoulli beams
considering either fixed or stress free conditions for head and toe. In fact, fixity conditions are
neither completely fixed nor stress free. Pile tip fixity depends on soil stiffness and pile diameter.
For the case of head, fixity depends on the relation between flexural stiffness of the shallow
foundation element that is supported by the pile (e.g. footing, foundation slab or beam, etc.) and
flexural stiffness of the pile (Fig.1).

Figure 1. Scheme of kinematic soil-structure interaction problem.

On steel structures, the type of beam-to-column connection depend on the rotation

restrain developed by the connection. AISC [18] classify connections on three types: Fully
restrained, semi-rigid and simple framing or shear connections (Fig. 2). Connection-to-beam
relative flexural stiffness (Krel=Kconnection/Kbeam) is the governing parameter of the restrain level.

For piles, there are not recommendations about which values of Krel produce fully
restrained connections between pile head and the shallow foundation element. Definition of this
parameter is fundamental to consider appropriate boundary conditions.

A model based on the finite layer method for seismic analysis of piles embedded in
layered soil deposits is used. This model has been proposed by Fernadez-Sola et al. [17]. The
pile-soil system is discretized vertically in thin layers. Response to vertically propagating shear
waves is directly expressed as wave mode expansions (Fig.1). The expansion factors are obtained
by satisfying rigorously the soil-pile boundary conditions. The wave modes fulfilling the free-
surface and rigid bedrock conditions are obtained by the thin-layer method [20]. The pile head is
elastically constrained against rotation by vertical springs. Details of numerical model
formulation and validation can be consulted on [20]. With this model an analysis of the influence
of head restrain level on bending moments distribution along the pile is performed in the present
paper. Connection stiffness required to consider fully fixed condition is computed.

Figure 2. Connection types on steel structures (adapted from Cruz-Mendoza 2011[20]).

Computation of fully fixed stiffness

To determine the values of Krel that ensure a fully restrained pile-shallow foundation
connection, a parametrical analysis is performed. The parameters that control lateral pile
behavior subjected to ground motion are [11]:

• Pile slenderness ratio (L/r)

• Soil-pile shear wave velocity ratio (Vs/V0)
• Soil-pile Poisson coefficient ratio (νs/ν0)
• Soil-pile density ratio (ρs/ρ0)
• Soil and pile damping ratio (ζs, ζ0)

Circular concrete piles with radius r are considered with the following properties
V0=2,000.0 m/s, ν0=0.3, ρ0=2,000.0 kg/m3 and ζ0=0.05. Homogeneous soil profiles with values of
ρs/ρ0 =0.75, νs=0.5 and ζs =0.05 are used.

Taking in to account common practical dimensions of piles, five slenderness ratios (L/r
=10, 20, 30, 60 y 90) are considered. To cover a wide range of soil types, eight soil-pile shear
wave velocity ratios (Vs/V0 =0.025, 0.035, 0.045, 0.050, 0.100, 0.150, 0.200, 0.250) are used,
producing 40 different models.
 Connection stiffness needed to ensure head full fixity (K0) is computed by iterative
analysis of piles with increasing values of Kconnection. The threshold value at which the moment at
pile head remains almost constant (variation less than 10%) is established. As mentioned above,
for steel beams values, fully restrained connection condition is fulfilled with values of Krel ≈ 25.

Once K0 is computed for each model, Krel considering Kconnection = K0 is defined (K’rel).
Since actual pile flexural stiffness depends on boundary conditions, a stiffness factor EI/L is used
to represent pile stiffness. So K’rel is expressed as (Eq. 1)

K0
K 'rel = !
EI
L (1)

Variation of K’rel with Vs/V0 for different slenderness ratios is shown in Fig. 3. Unlike
steel beams, K’rel value for piles is not constant. In fact, a nearly linear dependence with Vs/V0 is
observed. In addition, it can be seen that this dependence is sensitive to slenderness ratio. As pile
becomes more slender, K’rel values are larger. On the other hand, as Vs/V0 increases (which means
that soil is stiffer) an increment on K’rel values can be observed.

Figure 3. K’rel variation with respect of Vs/V0 for L/r =10, 20, 30, 60 and 90.

These effects may be associated to active pile length. Active pile length is defined as the
upper portion of the pile that bends when a force (or moment) is applied at pile head. It can be
expressed with L/r as a fraction of total length (Eq. 2 [11]).

0.25
La ⎛E ⎞ 1
≈ 3.0 ⎜ 0 ⎟ !
L ⎝ Es ⎠ L r (2)
 First, it can be seen from Eq. 2 that the fraction of pile that may bend is inversely
proportional to L/r. Taking this fact in to account, it is to be expected that as the pile is more
slender, the actual pile flexural stiffness is greater than the one computed with the total length L
instead of active length La. On the other hand, the dependence of pile active length with Vs/V0
ratio is similar. Given that shear wave velocity (Vs and V0) is directly proportional to elastic
modulus (Es and E0), as Vs/V0 is larger, E0/Es is reduced, and therefore active pile length is
reduced too. The use of a value of pile flexural stiffness smaller than the actual one, produces an
increment of K’rel value.

In addition, as mentioned above, boundary conditions of the pile ends (head and toe)
influence its flexure stiffness. The stiffness of fixed-fixed beam is larger than the stiffness of the
case fixed-pinned. Piles toes are neither pinned nor fixed. Actual toe restrain level depends on
soil stiffness and pile diameter. This fact produces pile flexure stiffness to be dependent on soil
stiffness and pile dimensions due to boundary conditions too.

A linear trendline of K’re-Vs/V0 relation can be established for each slenderness ratio.
General equation of these trendlines is (Eq. 3):

⎛V ⎞
K 'rel = m ⎜ s ⎟ + b !
⎝ V0 ⎠ (3)

Different values of m and b parameters are needed to match trendlines for each
slenderness ratio. Variation of these parameters with slenderness ratio are plotted in Fig. 4.

Figure 4. Trendline parameters m and b variation with L/r.

It can be seen from Fig. 4 that variation of parameters m and b with L/r follow a steady
trend. Nearly quadratic and linear trend can be stablished for m and b respectively. Equations that
match these trends are (Eq. 4):

2
⎛ L⎞ ⎛ L⎞ ⎛ L⎞
m = 0.3 ⎜ ⎟ + 7.9 ⎜ ⎟ ! b = 1.4 ⎜ ⎟ − 10.0 !
⎝ r⎠ ⎝ r⎠ ⎝ r⎠
(4)
 With Eqs. 3 and 4 connection stiffness needed to ensure full fixity of the head of a pile
with specific L/r and Vs/V0 can be computed. Knowledge of this parameter is useful to define
shallow foundation elements properties or for evaluation of actual restrain level of pile head.

Piles with partially restrained head

As mentioned before, the connection stiffness, given by the shallow foundation element,
required to achieve a fully restrained condition (K0) is function of soil stiffness, and pile flexural
rigidity. In some cases this condition is not achieved. One example is when shallow foundation
elements supported by the pile are not stiff enough to provide an appropriate restrain level.
Additionally, if there is some damage on the connection zone, pile head restrain level may
decrease.

To study the influence of partially restrain condition at pile head, the variation of
normalized bending moment (M’0) distribution of piles with different restrain level is presented.
The moment is normalized with respect to πρ0rügL3, where üg corresponds to the soil acceleration
at the base of the model. Five different connection stiffness are used (Kconnection=K0, 0.75K0,
0.5K0, 0.25K0 and 0 (free head)) for each slenderness ratio considered on previous section. It has
been shown that moment distribution is very similar for pseudo-static and transient excitation
[11], so in this work pseudo-static excitation is considered.

Results are presented with M’0 distribution along normalized pile depth (z/L). Just with
demonstrative objectives, in Fig. 5 these distributions are shown for models with L/r=30 and Vs/
V0=0.025 and 0.050. Results for other models are similar, and not shown here due to lack of
space. They can be consulted on [21]. It can be seen that head boundary condition effect is
limited to active pile length, as proved on early studies [11], so M’0 on the bottom portion of
piles is the same independently on head restrain level.

Moment distribution curves for different restrain levels come closer for deeper zones
along the pile, getting almost equal at pile active length depth. Besides in pile head moment, no
significant differences are noted.

At pile head, M’0 values increase as restrain level gets bigger, as expected. For free head
case M’0 is zero. For the pile with Kconnection=K0 moment is maximum. Moments at pile head,
expressed as a fraction of the moment developed for a fully restrain condition (M0),(Eq. 5), for
each Kconnection are computed for all models.

M '0
M rel =
M0 (5)
 Relation between restrain level reduction and the decrease of moment developed at pile
head is the same regardless soil-pile stiffness contrast. On figure 6, variation of Mrel is plotted as
function of relative restrain level (Kconnection/K0). Moment decrease at pile head does not keep a
linear relation with restrain reduction. This relation can be approximated by Eq. 6:

connection K 0 ) + 0.09(1− ( K connection K 0 ) if K connection > 0

⎧ 1+ 0.205 ln(K
⎪
M rel ⎨
⎪ 0 if K connection = 0
⎩ (6)

Vs/V0=0.025 Vs/V0=0.050

!
K0 0.75K 0 0.5K 0 0.25K 0 Free!head!
! ! ! !

Figure 5. Normalized bending moment (M’0) for piles with different head restrain level, for
Vs/V0=0.025 (left) and Vs/V0=0.050 (right) for L/r=30.

Figure 6. Fraction of fully restrain moment (Mrel) variation with restrain level (Kconnection/K0)
 With Eq. 6, the moment developed at pile head partially restrained can be defined as a
fraction of moment developed when the pile is fully fixed. This equation is useful to compute the
moment at pile head when either shallow footing element is not stiff enough to fully fix pile head
or some damage is expected at the connection.

Numerical example

To show the applicability of the described procedure, a demonstrative example is

presented. A frictional concrete pile with V0=2,000.0 m/s, ν0=0.3, ρ0=2,000.00 kg/m3 and ζ0=0.03
is considered. Pile geometrical properties are L=20.0 m and r=0.50 m, so pile slenderness ratio
yields to L/r=40. A very soft clay layer is used with Vs =70.0 m/s, νs=0.5, ρs=1,500.00 kg/m3 and
ζ0=0.05. These soil properties are representative of clay in Mexico City [22]. With these
properties of soil and pile materials, values of Vs /V0 =0.035 and ρs/ρ0=0.75 are established.

Transient response of soil-pile model to time-history acceleration recorded on deep rock

deposits of Mexico City is computed. The time-history acceleration used as excitation is shown
on Fig. 7.

Substituting L/r=40 on Eq. 4 values for m=796 and b=46 are computed. With these values
and using Vs/V0=0.035 on Eq. 4 yields to K’rel=73.86. From Eq. 1 with flexural pile stiffness
factor EI/L, connection rigidity to ensure fully fixation K0 is defined.

Response of three models were computed. One model with Kconnection =K0, other with
Kconnection =1000K0 and a third one with Kconnection =0.3K0. The first two models are considered to
confirm that a connection with K0 is indeed enough to consider fully fixation. Third model is
used to demonstrate usage and validation of Eq. 6.

Figure 7. Time-history acceleration recorded on deep rock deposits in Mexico City.

On Fig. 8, envelopes of maximum bending moments of three models are presented. Pile
head moment of models with Kconnection=K0 and 1000K0 are very close, the difference is less than
10%. This result confirms that increments of Kconnection above K0 value yields in a very small
increment on pile head moment, so it can be said that K0 ensures a fully fixed condition.
 Pile head moment for fully fixed condition is M0 = 58.01 kN-m. Third model considers a
connection stiffness reduction of 70% (Kconnection/K0=0.3). Using Eq. 6, a value of Mrel=0.816 is
computed, so reduced pile head moment will be M0=(58.01)(0.816)=47.37 kN-m. Moment
computed from time-history analysis of third model is equal to the one calculated with Eq. 6.
(Fig. 7).

K0 1000K 0 0.3K 0 !
! !

Figure 8. Envelopes of maximum bending moment of piles with different restrain level
(Kconnection={K0, 1000K0 and 0.3K0}).

Conclusions

Analysis of partially restrained head piles is presented. First, the stiffness to ensure fully
fixed condition on pile head is computed (K0). This stiffness is defined in terms of relative
connection-pile flexural rigidity (K’rel=K0/(EI/L)). It is found that, besides pile flexural stiffness,
soil-pile stiffness contrast affects this parameter. An equation to compute K’rel in terms of pile
slenderness ratio and soil-pile shear wave ratio is proposed.

It is found that partially restrain head condition affects only above pile active length. The
main difference is magnitude of the moment at pile head. Moment variation for piles with
different restrain levels is independent of soil-pile shear wave velocity ratio. An equation to
compute moment reduction in terms of restrain level reduction is also proposed.

Comparative analysis between proposed equations and numerical transient pile response
shows that computations with proposed equations agrees with numerical results. All
computations showed in this work are for elastic and homogeneous materials and single piles.
Soil heterogeneity, material no-linear behavior and group effects must be studied.
 References

1. Housner GW. Interaction of building and ground during an earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 1957; 47 (3): 179-186.
2. Mizuno H. Pile damage Turing earthquakes in Japan (1923-1983). Dynamic Response of Pile Foundations,
ASCE, Geotechnical Special Publication 1987, 11: 53-78.
3. Tazoh T, Shimizu K, Wakahara T. Seismic observations and analysis of grouped piles. Dynamic Response of
Pile Foundations, ASCE, Geotechnical Special Publication 1987, 11: 1-20.
4. Luo XY, Murono Y. Seismic analysis of pile foundations damaged in the January 17, 1995 South Hyogo
earthquake by using the seismic deformation method. 4th Int. Conf. On Recent Advances in Geotechnical
Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics 2001.
5. Nikolau S, Mylonakys G, Gazetas G, Tazoh T. Kinematic piles bending Turing earthquakes: analysis and field
measurements. Geotechnique 2001, 51 (5): 425-440.
6. Milonakis G. Simplified model for seismic pile bending at soil layer interfaces. Soils and Foundations 2001, 41
(4): 47-58.
7. Tabesh A, Poulos HG. Pseudostatic approach for seismic analysis of single piles. Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenviromental Engineering 2001, 127 (9): 757-765.
8. Luo X, Murono Y, Nishimura A. Verifying adequacy of the seismic deformation method by using real examples
of earthquake damage. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 2002, 22: 17-28.
9. Poulos HG. Ground movements – a hidden source of loading on deep foundations. Deep Foundations Institute
Journal 2007, 1 (1): 37-52.
10. Dezi F, Carbonari S, Leoni G. Kinematic bending moments in pile foundations. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake
Engineering 2010, 30: 119-132.
11. Fernandez-Sola LR, Aviles J, Muria-Vila D. Fully and partially toe restrained piles subjected to ground motion
excitation. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 2012, 39: 1-10.
12. Kuesel TR. Earthquake design criteria for subways. Journal of the Structural Division 1969, ST6.
13. Zeevaert L. Foundation engineering. Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York, 1983.
14. St John CM, Zahrah TF. Aseismic design of underground structures. Tunneling and Underground Space
Technology 1987, 2 (2): 165-197.
15. Wang J. Seismic design tunnels. Parsosn Brinckerhoff inc: New York, 1993.
16. Hashash Y, Hook J, Schmidt B, Yao J. Seismic design and analysis of underground structures. Tunneling and
Underground Space Technology 2001, 16 (4): 247-293.
17. Fernandez-Sola LR, Aviles J, Muria-Vila D. Distribución de elementos mecánicos en pilas sujetas a fuerzas en
la cabeza y ante la incidencia de ondas sísmicas. Revista de Ingeniería Sísmica 2012, 87: 1-23. (in spanish).
18. AISC. Prequalified connections for special and intermediate steel moment frames for seismic applications.
AISC 358-05, 2005.
19. Cruz-Mendoza E. Influencia de las conexiones semirrígidas e la respuesta de marcos de acero. Master Thesis,
Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana-Azc: México, 2011. (in spanish)
20. Lysmer J, Drake L. A Finite Element Method for Seismology. Methods in Comp. Physics. 1972, 11: 181 - 216
21. Martinez-Galindo G. Analisis del comportamiento dinamico en pilas de cimentacion ante cargas sismicas con
distintas restricciones al giro en la cabeza. Master Thesis, Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana-Azc: Mexico,
2011. (in spanish).
22. Ovando E. Initial dynamic stiffness of Mexico city clay from field test. 11th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering 1996, Article No. 1031.

View publication stats