Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering 12(1) 2012

Statical Analysis of Pile Groups Containing Batter Piles

J. Kent Hsiao*
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale,
Carbondale, IL 62901, USA
*
Corresponding author. Email address: hsiao@engr.siu.edu

ABSTRACT: The traditional statical method uses two approaches for the analysis of a loaded pile group con-
taining batter piles. The first approach uses batter piles to resist a partial lateral load; the residual lateral load
is then equally distributed between each pile in the pile group; the distributed residual lateral load in each pile
then results in the shear force in that pile. The second approach adjusts the slopes of the batter piles in order to
resist the complete lateral load and as a result, there are no shear forces in the piles. Three examples are pre-
sented in this paper to demonstrate the use of the two approaches. The results of these three examples are
then compared to the “exact” results obtained by using either computer software or a hand calculation. The
study presented in this paper has concluded the following: (1) The first approach may result in significant er-
rors; therefore, its accuracy is questionable. (2) The results obtained from the second approach are quite close
to the “exact” results; therefore, the second approach is quite an accurate approximate approach for the ana-
lyses of pile groups containing batter piles.

1 TRADITIONAL STATICAL METHOD

1. Assume the pile cap is rigid and the piles are
The traditional statical method (Teng 1962; Poulos elastic.
and Davis 1990) for the analysis of a pile group con- 2. Treating the pile group as if all piles were vertic-
taining batter piles is described step by step, using al results in
the example shown in Fig. 1, as follows:
P M
Vi   (1)
n x 2 
x
N.A. of pile group

P where Vi = the axial force in a vertical pile or the

vertical component of the axial force in a batter
M
pile, P = a vertical load, n = the total number of
H piles, M = an overturning moment, and x = the
distance of a pile to the neutral axis of a pile
group.
3. Determine the slopes of the batter piles. The axi-
al force Ri in each batter pile may thus be deter-
R1 V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 R5 (a) Pile group
mined.
4. Compute the net horizontal component of the
H'
axial forces in batter piles.
5. Subtract the net horizontal component of the axi-
R1
al forces in batter piles from the horizontal load
H to obtain the residual horizontal force H' (re-
ferring to the force polygon presented in Fig.
V2 P
1(b)).
6. The traditional statical method uses two ap-
V3 proaches to resolve the residual horizontal force
V4 H'. Approach I: the residual horizontal force H'
R5 (b) Force polygon is equally distributed between each pile in the
H pile group. Approach II: the residual horizontal
Figure 1. Traditional statical method for the analysis of a pile force H' is eliminated by amending the slopes of
group containing batter piles the batter piles.

74
 Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering 12(1) 2012

The axial force in Pile 1,

2 APPLICATION OF THE TRADITIONAL STAT-
ICAL METHOD  8 2
 1 
2

R1 = (160.1 kN)  = 161.3 kN, and

 8 
The following three examples illustrate the applica-  
tion of the traditional statical method. Example 1 il-
lustrates Approach I. Examples 2 and 3 illustrate The axial force in Pile 5,
Approach II.
 8 2
 1 
2

Example 1: Analysis of the offshore pile group R5 = (17.8kN)  = 17.9 kN.

 8 
shown in Fig. 2 using the traditional statical method  
Approach I. The pile group is acted upon by a ver-
tical force P = 444.8 kN (100 kips), a moment M = The net horizontal component of the axial forces in
325.4 kN·m (240 ft-kips), and a horizontal force H = batter Piles 1 and 5 with a slope of 1:8 thus can be
35.6 kN (8 kips). The vertical equivalent free- computed as
standing lengths of the piles are assumed to be 11 m
(36 ft). Batter piles for Piles 1 and 5 are used. (V1 – V5) (1/8) = (160.1 kN – 17.8 kN) (1/8)
= 17.8 kN
N.A. of pile group
The residual horizontal force H' can then be com-
P puted as

M
H' = 35.6 kN – 17.8 kN = 17.8 kN
H
Thus, the residual horizontal force, which is distri-
buted to each pile = (17.8 kN)/(5) = 3.6 kN. There-
fore, the shear force in each pile is 3.6 kN.

Pile 1 Pile 2 Pile 3 Pile 4 Pile 5 Example 2: Using the traditional statical method
Approach II by amending the slopes of the batter
0.914 m (3 ft) piles in Example 1 so that the residual horizontal
force can be eliminated.
Figure 2. Pile group illustrating Examples 1 and 2
The slope of the batter piles is amended from 1 hori-
zontal : 8 vertical to 1 horizontal : 4 vertical. Thus,
Using Eq. (1), one has the residual horizontal force can be eliminated as
shown below:
∑(x2) = (1.828)2 + (0.914)2 + (0.914)2 + (1.828)2
= 8.354 m2, and H' = 35.6 kN – (160.1 kN – 17.8 kN) (1/4) = 0
444 .8kN 325 .4kN  m
Vi   x  Referring to Example 1, the final pile axial forces
5 8.354 m 2 are then computed as

From which, the vertical component of the axial  4 

2
 1 
2

force in Pile 1, V1 = 160.1 kN, the axial force in Pile R1 = (160.1 kN)  = 165.0 kN,
 4 
2, V2 = 124.5 kN, the axial force in Pile 3, V3 = 89.0  
kN, the axial force in Pile 4, V4 = 53.4 kN, and the
vertical component of the axial force in Pile 5, V5 = V2 = 124.5 kN,
17.8 kN.
V3 = 89.0 kN,
Using a 1:8 slope for the batter piles (Piles 1 and 5)
results in V4 = 53.4 kN, and

75
 Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering 12(1) 2012

The axial force in Pile 2,

 8 2
 1 
2

R5 = (17.8kN)  = 18.3 kN  8 2

 1 
2
 

8
 R2 = (124.5 kN)  = 125.5 kN,
 8 
 
Note that since H' = 0, there is no residual horizontal
force to be distributed to each pile. Therefore, there The axial force in Pile 4,
is no shear force in each pile.
 8 2
 1 
2

R4 = (53.4 kN)  = 53.8 kN, and

 8 
Example 3: Analysis of the offshore pile group  
shown in Fig. 3 using the traditional statical method
Approach II. The pile group is acted upon by a ver- The axial force in Pile 5,
tical force P = 444.8 kN (100 kips), a moment M =
325.4 kN·m (240 ft-kips), and a horizontal force H =  8 2
 1 
2

26.7 kN (6 kips). The vertical equivalent free- R5 = (17.8kN)  = 17.9 kN.

 8 
standing lengths of the piles are assumed to be 11 m  
(36 ft). Batter piles for Piles 1, 2, 4, and 5 are used.
Also, the residual horizontal force can be computed
as shown below:
N.A. of pile group
H' = 26.7 kN – (160.1 kN + 124.5 kN – 53.4 kN
P – 17.8 kN) (1/8) = 0

M Since H' = 0, there is no residual horizontal force to

H
be distributed to each pile. Therefore, there is no
shear force in each pile.

Pile 1 Pile 2 Pile 3 Pile 4 Pile 5 3 EVALUATION OF THE ACCURACY OF THE

0.914 m (3 ft)
Figure 3. Pile group illustrating Example 3
Referring to Example 1, the vertical component of
the axial force in Pile 1, V1 = 160.1 kN, the vertical
component of the axial force in Pile 2, V2 = 124.5
kN, the axial force in Pile 3, V3 = 89.0 kN, the ver-
tical component of the axial force in Pile 4, V4 =
53.4 kN, and the vertical component of the axial
force in Pile 5, V5 = 17.8 kN.
Using a 1:8 slope for the batter piles (Piles 1, 2, 4,
and 5) results in
The axial force in Pile 1,
 82
 1 
2
TRADITIONAL STATICAL METHOD
The computer software SAP2000 (SAP2000 Educa-
tional 1997) is used to evaluate the accuracy of the
results obtained by using the traditional statical me-
thod presented in Examples 1, 2, and 3. Two com-
puter models for two cases (one is assumed to have a
pinned condition at the top and bottom of the
equivalent free-standing pile length, the other is as-
sumed to have a fixed condition at the top and bot-
tom of the equivalent free-standing pile length) have
been considered for each example, as shown in Figs.
4, 5, and 6. The pile caps are assumed to be rigid.
Also, HP12×74 steel piles (AISC 2005) are assumed
to be used for the pile groups. The vertical equiva-
lent free-standing length of the piles is h = 11 m for
each model. The spacing between each pile is s =
0.914 m.

R1 = (160.1 kN)  = 161.3 kN,

 8 
 

76
 Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering 12(1) 2012

P = 444.8 kN
M = 325.4 kN·m P = 444.8 kN
H = 35.6 kN M = 325.4 kN·m
1 1 H = 26.7 kN
8 h 1 1 1
8 1
1 2 3 4 5 8 8 8 8
h
1 2 3 4 5
s s s s Case 1(a): Pinned condition
s s s s Case 3(a): Pinned condition
P = 444.8 kN
M = 325.4 kN·m P = 444.8 kN
H = 35.6 kN
M = 325.4 kN·m
1 1 H = 26.7 kN

8 h 1 1 1
8 1
1 2 3 4 5 8 8 8 8
h
1 2 3 4 5
s s s s Case 1(b): Fixed condition
s s s s Case 3(b): Fixed condition
Figure 4. Computer models for the pile group illustrated in
Example 1 Figure 6. Computer models for the pile group illustrated
in Example 3
P = 444.8 kN
M = 325.4 kN·m Pile axial and shear forces obtained by using the tra-
H = 35.6 kN ditional statical method Approach I presented in Ex-
1 1 ample 1 (in which the residual horizontal force H' is
not eliminated) and by using SAP2000 are tabulated
4 1 2 3 4 5 4 h in Table 1.

Table 1. Pile axial and shear forces obtained by using the tradi-
s s s s Case 2(a): Pinned condition tional statical method Approach I presented in Example 1 and
by using SAP2000
Pile Approach I SAP2000
P = 444.8 kN
presented in Case 1(a): Case 1(b):
M = 325.4 kN·m Example 1 Pinned condi- Fixed condi-
H = 35.6 kN tion tion
1 1 Axial Shear Axial Shear Axial Shear
force (kN) force (kN) force (kN)
4 1 2 3 4 5 4 h (kN) (kN) (kN)
1 161.3 3.6 231.8 0 196.4 1.7
2 124.5 3.6 -17.0 0 80.8 1.8
3 89.0 3.6 89.8 0 89.8 1.8
s s s s Case 2(b): Fixed condition
4 53.4 3.6 196.6 0 98.8 1.8
5 17.9 3.6 -55.0 0 -19.6 1.7
Figure 5. Computer models for the pile group illustrated
Note: the negative sign indicates that the axial force is in ten-
in Example 2
sion.

77
 Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering 12(1) 2012

Table 1 indicates that the traditional statical method The results obtained from SAP2000 presented in
Approach I, which uses batter piles to resist a partial Tables 1 and 2 are further illustrated as the follow-
lateral force, may result in significant errors in com- ing:
puting the pile axial forces for either assuming a
pinned or fixed condition at the ends of the free- The results of the Case 1(a), shown in Table 1, are
standing pile length. the sum of the results obtained from the vertical
force P, the moment M, and the horizontal force H,
Pile axial and shear forces obtained by using the tra- respectively, as shown in Fig. 7. Note that the unit
ditional statical method Approach II presented in of the pile axial forces is kN.
Examples 2 and 3 (in which the residual horizontal
force H' is eliminated) and by using SAP2000 are
P = 444.8 kN
tabulated in Tables 2 and 3.
M = 325.4 kN·m
H = 35.6 kN
Table 2. Pile axial and shear forces obtained by using the tradi-
tional statical method Approach II presented in Example 2 and
by using SAP2000
Pile Approach II SAP2000
presented in Case 2(a): Case 2(b): 231.8 -17.0 89.8 196.6 -55.0
Example 2 Pinned condi- Fixed condi-
tion tion
Axial Shear Axial Shear Axial Shear Case 1(a)
force (kN) force (kN) force (kN)
(kN) (kN) (kN) P = 444.8 kN
1 165.0 0 160.2 0 161.7 0.2
2 124.5 0 127.8 0 121.1 0.1
3 89.0 0 92.2 0 92.2 0.1
4 53.4 0 56.6 0 63.3 0.1
5 18.3 0 13.4 0 11.9 0.1
88.4 89.8 89.8 89.8 88.4

Table 3. Pile axial and shear forces obtained by using the tradi-
tional statical method Approach II presented in Example 3 and Case 1(a.1)
by using SAP2000
Pile Approach II SAP2000
M = 325.4 kN·m
presented in Case 3(a): Case 3(b):
Example 3 Pinned condition Fixed condi-
tion
Axial Shear Axial Shear Axial Shear
force (kN) force (kN) force (kN) 0 177.9 0 -177.9 0
(kN) (kN) (kN)
1 161.3 0 161.0 0 156.9 0.1
2 125.5 0 125.1 0 130.6 0.1 Case 1(a.2)
3 89.0 0 90.6 0 90.6 0.1
4 53.8 0 53.4 0 47.9 0.1
5 17.9 0 17.5 0 21.5 0.1
H = 35.6 kN

Tables 2 and 3 indicate that the results obtained from

the traditional statical method Approach II, which
143.4 -284.7 0 284.7 -143.4
uses batter piles to resist the complete lateral force,
are quite close to that obtained by using SAP2000
for both pinned and fixed conditions at the ends of Case 1(a.3)
the free-standing pile length.
Figure 7. Results of Case 1(a)

78
 Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering 12(1) 2012

The results of the Case 1(b), shown in Table 1, are
the sum of the results obtained from the vertical
force P, the moment M, and the horizontal force H,
respectively, as shown in Fig. 8. Note that the unit
of the pile axial and shear forces is kN.
The results of the Case 2(a), shown in Table 2, are
the sum of the results obtained from the vertical
force P, the moment M, and the horizontal force H,
respectively, as shown in Fig. 9. Note that the unit
of the pile axial forces is kN.

P = 444.8 kN P = 444.8 kN
M = 325.4 kN·m M = 325.4 kN·m
H = 35.6 kN H = 35.6 kN

1.7 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.7

196.4 80.8 89.8 98.8 -19.6 160.2 127.8 92.2 56.6 13.4

1.7 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.7

Case 2(a)
Case 1(b)

P = 444.8 kN P = 444.8 kN

≈0 ≈0

88.4 89.8 89.8 89.8 88.4

86.8 92.2 92.2 92.2 86.8

≈0 ≈0
Case 1(b.1) Case 2(a.1)

M = 325.4 kN·m M = 325.4 kN·m

1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9

38.9 67.7 0 -67.7 -38.9

0 177.9 0 -177.9 0
P =
444.8
1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9
kN
Case 1(b.2) Case 2(a.2)

H = 35.6 kN
H = 35.6 kN
3.6 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.6

69.1 -76.7 0 76.7 -69.1

73.4 -142.3 0 142.3 -73.4

3.6 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.6

Case 1(b.3)
Case 2(a.3)

Figure 8. Results of Case 1(b)

Figure 9. Results of Case 2(a)

79
 Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering 12(1) 2012

The results of the Case 2(b), shown in Table 2, are Furthermore, since the structural systems shown in
the sum of the results obtained from the vertical Figs. 7 and 9 are statically determinate, the pile axial
force P, the moment M, and the horizontal force H, forces presented in these figures computed by using
respectively, as shown in Fig. 10. Note that the unit SAP2000 can be validated by using a simple hand-
of the pile axial and shear forces is kN. calculated approach. The following example de-
monstrates the computation of the pile axial forces
shown in Fig. 9 Case 2(a.3) by using a hand-
P = 444.8 kN
calculated approach:
M = 325.4 kN·m
H = 35.6 kN
Referring to Fig. 11, one has
0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
The sum of the moments about the point o, ∑Mo = 0.
161.7 121.1 92.2 63.3 11.9
Thus, (V2 + V4) (0.914 m) – 35.6 kN (7.31 m) = 0.
0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
From which and due to the symmetry of the structur-
Case 2(b)
al system, one has

P = 444.8 kN V2 = V4 = 142.3 kN.

≈0 ≈0 Note that the axial force V2 in Pile 2 is in tension

while the axial force V4 in Pile 4 is in compression.

86.8 92.2 92.2 92.2 86.8

V2 V4
o
≈0
≈0
Case 2(b.1)

M = 325.4 kN·m

2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.0

21.4 98.8 0 -98.8 -21.4 7.31 m

P =
444.8
2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.0
kN
Case 2(b.2)
0.914 m 0.914 m

H = 35.6 kN

2.0 1.9 H = 35.6 kN

1.9 2.0 2.0

53.5 -69.9 0 69.9 -53.5 1 1

4 4
1.9 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.9
Case 2(b.3) V1 H5
H1
Figure 10. Results of Case 2(b) V2 V5
V4
R1 R5

Figure 11. Computation of pile forces for Case 2(a.3)

80
 Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering 12(1) 2012

Also, the sum of the horizontal forces, ∑H = 0. Poulos, H. G., and Davis, E. H., Pile foundation
analysis and design, Robert E. Krieger Publish-
Thus, H1 + H5 – 35.6 kN = 0. ing Company, Inc., Malabar, FL, 1990.
SAP2000 Educational, SAP2000 Manuals, Comput-
From which and due to the symmetry of the structur- ers and Structures, Inc., Berkeley, CA, 1997.
al system, one has Teng, W. C., Foundation Design, Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1962.
H1 = H5 = 17.8 kN.

From which, one has NOTATION

H = horizontal force
 4 
2
 1 
2

R1 = R5 = (17.8 kN)  = 73.4 kN. h = the vertical equivalent free-standing length

 1  of a pile
  H' = residual horizontal force
M = overturning moment
Note that the axial force R1 in Pile 1 is in compres- n = the total number of piles
sion while the axial force R5 in Pile 5 is in tension. P = vertical load
Ri = the axial force in a batter pile
The above results agree with that shown in Fig. 9 s = center-to-center spacing of piles
Case 2(a.3). Vi = the axial force in a vertical pile or the vertical
component of the axial force in a batter pile
x = the distance of a pile to the neutral axis of a pile
4 CONCLUSIONS group
The traditional statical method has two approaches
for the analysis of a loaded pile group containing
batter piles: Approach I uses batter piles to resist a
partial lateral load while Approach II uses batter
piles to resist the complete lateral load. Based on
the study presented in this paper, Approach I may re-
sult in significant errors in computing the pile axial
forces. Therefore, the accuracy of Approach I is
questionable. The study in this paper also concludes
that the results obtained from the traditional statical
method Approach II are quite close to the “exact” re-
sults obtained by using either computer software or a
hand calculation. Therefore, Approach II is quite an
accurate approximate approach for the analyses of
pile groups containing batter piles.
The following are the assumptions used for each
pile group in this study: (1) the pile cap is rigid and
the piles are elastic; (2) all piles in the pile group
have equal vertical equivalent free-standing lengths;
(3) the top and bottom of the equivalent free-
standing pile length are either all pinned or all fixed;
and (4) the pile group is symmetric.

REFERENCES

American Institute of Steel Construction, Steel Con-

struction Manual, 13th ed., American Institute of
Steel Construction, Inc., Chicago, IL, 2005.

81