Ne seIsMIC a ios raiescee :Teves, Ali BARE BOOKS 1g M.D. 1908 “The Univers of Syney Copyright in relation to this thesis* Under the Copyright Act 1968 (several provision of which ace refered to below) this thesis must be used only under the ‘normal conditions of scholarly far dealing for dhe purposes of esearch, criticism o¢ review. In particular no results or Conchysons shouldbe extracted from icnor should «be copied for closely paraphrased in whole orn part without the written Consent of theautior Proper written acknowledgement should bemade for ay asistance obtained from thi thes Under Section 35@) of che Copyright Ace 1968 the author of 1 huerary. dramatic, musical or arestic work isthe owner of ny copyright subsitng nthe work’ By siewe of Section 32(1) Copynghe subsists an orga rary, dramatic, muskal or reste work thats unpublished and of which de author was sr Auseaban ctzen anAustraan protected person or person resident in Austral “The Act, by Section 36(1} provdes:"Subject to tis Act the Copyright in a Merary, dramatic, musical or artiste work irranged by 2 person who, nox being the owner ofthe copyege Ind withoue be ence ofthe owner of the copyright does in ‘Australla or authorises the dong in Australa of, any act ‘Compred inthe copyright Seedon (1) provider thar copyright includes the exchsve Tigh to'reproduce che work ina material form Thus. copyrig is infringed by a person who. not being the owner of the Copyright reproduces or auhorses the reproduction of work, for of more than 2 reasonable part of the workin a rate form urless the reproduction & a Yair dealing’ withthe work "for the porpare of research or study’ as further fine in Sections 40 and AI ofthe Ace ‘Section 5I(2) provides that "Where a manuscript or a copr of 2 thesis of other similar ierary work that has not Deen pablshed s kept iva lbary of a unverscy or other similar Institution orn anarchives, te copyright in Be thesis or other ‘work's not hiringed by the makang ofa copy ofthe thesis or ther work by oF on behalf of the ofcer in charge of the Trary or archives the copy is supplied to a person who ‘sass an authored officer ofthe Irary or archives that he requires the copy forthe purpose of research or study Thesis’ includes ‘treatise, dissertation’ and other similar productions.This thesis has been accepted for the award of the degree in the Faculty of EngineeringLateral Seismic Analysis of Piles Ali Tabesh BSc. in Civil Eng. MSc. in Geomechanics A thesis submitted to the Graduate School of Engineering of The University of Sydney in futfiment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August, 1997To1those who perished by ‘arthquakes throughout the world during the course ofthis research work, To some 2000 people who died during the Ghaen earthquake in the ‘North-East of Iran this year, and 10 ‘their survivors who are stil trying to cope with the disaster which has ‘ruined their lives.The quake When the earth is shaken by its strongest earthquake ‘And the earth throws up her burdens. And man cries: What is the matter with her?’ That day she will relate her chronicles, Because thy Lord inspired her. That day mankind will issue forth in scattered groups to be shown their deeds. Then anyone who has done an atom’s weight of good shall see it, And anyone who has done an atom’s weight of evil, shall see it. (ies Quen 99Table of contents Abstract Vv Preface WW Acknowledgment vill Chapter 1: Introduction 1-1, Aims and significance 1 1-2, Methodology and approach 3 1-3, Thesis sructure 5 Chapter 2: A Review of Dynamic Analysis of Pile Foundations 2-1. General 7 2-2 Statement of the problem 7 2-3. On jree field analysis 9 2-4, Linear approaches for pile foundation analysis nl 2- 4.1. Boundary element and finite element methods u 2-42. Simplified approaches mu 2-5, Nonlinear approaches 36 2-6, Experimental studies 50 2-7, Summary and discussion a7 Chapter 3: Methodology, and its Verification 3.1. General 60 3.2. The pseudo static formulation 61 3.2.1 Kinematic versus staic interaction of pile and soil él 3.2.2 Explanation of the methodology 63.2.2.1 Free-field analysis 66 (3.2.2.2 Lateral pile analysis a 3.2.3 Comparison with other methods 76 3.3. Including mass and radiation damping in the analysis 90 3.4. Implementation of the methodology 95 3.5. Comparison with Fourier analysis 100 3.6. A discussion on element size 102 3.7. Summary 105 (Chapter 4: Parametric Study of Seismic Pile Response in Linear Soll Medium 41, General 107 4.2. Pile mass (m,) 108 4-3. Pile modulus (E,) 16 4-4. Pile diameter (d) 120 4- 5. Soil modulus (E,) ‘124 4-6, Pile length (L) 17 4- 7. Nondimensional presentation 135 4.8 The effect of different earthquakes 137 4-9. Soil layering 12 410. Cap-mass 14 4 11. Summary and discussion ‘146 Chapter 5: The Effects of Soit Yielding 5-1. General 149 5.2. Methodology 1505-3. Parameric study 453 5-3, 1. Piles in clay ‘153 5-3.1.1. Pile with Massless cap 153 5-3.1, 2 Piles with cap-mass 157 5-3.2. Piles in sand 186 (5-4, Summary and discussion 185 “Appendix (5-1) 188 Chapter 6: Theory versus Measurement: ‘and Laboratory Case Studies 6-1. General (200 6-2, Seismic response of Ohba-Ohashi pile foundation 200 6-21, Free field response 205 6-22, Pile response 209 6 -2.3. Section conclusions 225 6-3. Laboratory tests on a single pile 227 63.1. Model specification 27 6-3.2. Computed vs. measured response 230 6 -3.3, Section conclusions (237 Chapter 7: Soil Movements and Inertial Effects on Piles - A Simplified Approach 7-1, General 239 7-2. Free-field movement vs. cap-mass 230 7-3.A pseudo static approach 249 7-4, Discussion and recommendations 268 ‘Chapter 8: Conclusions and recommendations 8-1. Conclusions am& 2, Recommendations for further research 278 al Appendix A: Earthquake records 230 = qm Appendix B: References 290Abstract In this thesis simple time-domain methodology for the lateral seismic analysis of pile foundations was developed and verified by comparisons with other methods and with certain laboratory tests and field observations. Based on the developed methodology, a computer program named "SEPAP" in Fortran-77 language was prepared. This simple methodology. which can approximately model soil yielding and the effects of the superstructure, was used to investigate the effects of different parameters on the intemal response of pile foundations. Important conclusions which will have practical benefits for the aseismic design of plies were reached. These conclusions have been summarised in Chapter 8. Based on the insight obtained, a simple static methodology, which on many occasions ‘appears to estimate the internal response of piles subjected to earthquakes adequately and ‘can be employed without undue computational effort was introduced and recommended in ‘Chapter 7.[ore Preface [comer The work described in this thesis was carried out by the candidate during the period from February 1994 to August 1997, All ofthe work was conducted within the Department of Civil Engineering, in the University of Sydney. During the entire period of the cancidature, the candidate was supervised by Professor H.G. Poulos, Professor of Civil Engineering. Coed ‘The By-Laws of The University of Sydney require a candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy to indicate which sections of the thesis are original. To this end, due references ‘and acknowledgments have been made to the information from other sources in the thesis, and the author claims originality for the followings: 1 the relatively simple time-domain elastic methodology developed in Chapter 3 for the seismic response analysis of pile foundations and the comparisons made with other methods and conclusions reached; the extension ofthe elastic methodology to the cases where soil yielding occurs, and development of an iterative procedure to account for the nonlinear soil behaviour in Chapter 5; the Fortran computer program "SEPAP* developed in the course of this thesis, ‘and explained briefly in chapters 3 and 5; the comparisons made between the elastic and elasto-plastic analysis of piles ‘and the effects of soil yielding on internal response of pile foundations, presented in Chapter 5; the parametric study performed in Chapter 4 on the effects of different factors on the internal response of pile foundations embedded in an elastic medium; ‘the comparisons and conclusions made in Chapter 6 between the developed ‘methodology and field observations and laboratory measurements;7. the extensive studies performed on a simple static methodology in Chapter 7, and conclusions and recommendations developed in this chapter; 8. the extensive iterature review presented in Chapter 2 in which the emphasis ‘was on the recently developed methods. The following papers have been published based on the research work conducted during the PhD candidature + Tabesh, A. & Poulos, H.G. (1996). “Response of piles to typical earthquakes", Proc. 7" ‘Australia New Zealand Cont. on Geomech., Adelaide, South Australia, pp. 349-354. * Poulos, H.G. & Tabesh A. (1996). “Seismic response of pile foundations - some important factors’, 11% World Cont. on Earthg. Eng., Mexico, Report No. 2085. wAcknowledgment ‘This work would not be possible without the close and constant supervision of Professor H.G. Poulos. | am indebted to him for his invaluable comments, guidance, encouragement ‘and enthusiasm. The first idea behind this thesis belonged to Professor Poulos and its development was made possible through his direct involvement, | have learned a lot from ‘him both from his command in the field of pile foundation design, and from his friendly and admirable personality. | am indebted to iranian Ministry of Culture and Higher Education that granted a scholarship 10 me during the course of this study. Without this scholarship this work would not be Possibie, lam grateful to Professor A.M. Kaynia, who helped me with his invaluable comments during different stages of this work. He made his computer program, PILE, available for this work and guided me patiently through difficult stages of understanding and running this program. ‘The help of officials of the Isfahan University of Technology and especially Dr. |, Hoshyari who made my access to the main-frame version of PILE possible is acknowledged Japan's Shimizu corporation made the valuable data gathered at the Ohba-Ohashi bridge pile foundation available, which was used extensively in Chapter 6. This, and especially the efforts of Dr. T. Tazoh in this regard, is highly acknowledged. Protessor W.0.L. Finn provided the invaluable resutts of tests performed on single and pile ‘groups in the California institute of Technology which is greatly appreciated. Professor B, Kutter of the University of California, Davis, also provided very useful information on Centrifuge testing. The help of Professor M.J. Pender who made his extremely useful personal notes available to me and introduced me to several important papers is gratefuly acknowledged. | acknowiadge the help of different members of the academic staff and postgraduate students at the department of Civil Engineering of the University of Sydney, especialy Dr. T. Hull, Mr. M. Jonaidi, Or. L. Chen, and Professor J. Small who provided their assistance whenever it was needed. ww‘Some financial support was received via grants from the Australian Research Committee for projects relating to pile foundations which is acknowledged. ‘And last not least, The support of my wite who patiently carried the burden of taking care of ‘our 3 children and shared the dificuities of a postgraduate student life is sincerely acknowiedged. | would like also to thank my mother for her patience and encouragement.‘The failure of pile foundations in the course of an earthquake may have far reaching consequences, and can result in loss of ile and extensive damage. This failure may occur due to different causes; one of them is the inadequacy of the piles to resist induced moments and shears. Several cases of such failures were observed in the 1995 Hyougoken-Nanbu (Kobe) earthquake (Mizuno et al (1996). Such failures, in contrast to the failures due to liquefaction, can often be prevented by the designer if correct estimates of the internal forces which may be developed in the pile were available. The seismic performance of pile foundations is the resutt of a complex dynamic interaction between the superstructure, the pile foundation and the soil. The dynamic response of the structure and the pile is to a large extent elastic, but the soil can easily undergo yielding, and its dynamic behaviour is very complicated and is, by itself, an active area of research However, if there is no computational and cost limitations, in principle, numerical methods are available to soe the problem adequately. One of these methods presented recently (Cai, et al (1995), for example, suggests the folowing approach to seismic analysis: ‘three dimensional modeling of the structure, using space frames ‘= three dimensional modeling of the soil and the pile foundation using isoparametric hexahedral elements + using appropriate constitutive laws forthe soil medium to account for its plasticity ‘© using dynamic three dimensional infinite elements as reported by Zhao and Valiappan (1999), at the boundary of the soil mesh to account for the radiation damping ‘© a step-by-step non-iinear dynamic analysis, utilizing a sub-structure technique, in which fat each time step the soil and foundation is analysed first and then the response calculated at the connections of the foundation and the structure is applied to the structure,For many real Ite cases, such an analysis will be very costly and beyond normal ‘computational capabilties. Kuhlemeyer and Lysmer (1973) have shown that for accurate tepresentation of wave transmission through a discrete model, the spatial element size must be smaller than approximately one-tenth to one-eighth of the wavelength associated with the highest frequency component of the input excitation. This means that, for example, for an ‘earthquake with the highest frequency of 20 Hz in a soil with a shear wave velocity of 100 (tnys), the element size should be smaller than half a metre. Modeling of a cubic region of ‘soil with a 30m dimension, based on this criteria would need about 216000 hexanecral ‘elements, Even if such a huge computational effort is justified, the analysis remains ‘approximate, A review of the state of the practice of pile design, shows that hand calculations stil play an important role in the design. Beside important huge projects, piles are used frequently in very ordinary buildings for which extensive computational efforts such as the one explained «arlier is beyond the budget and resources of the project. Thanks to the efforts of scores of researchers, many useful formulae, graphs, and tables are available, which are widely used in the static design of piles, even when they are in large groups. Similar efforts have been made with regard to dynamic analysis, but has not been as successful as in the static case. There is not a established wellaccepted procedure for the aseismic design of pile foundations, and a discrepancy exists among the available methods. Some of these ‘methods are to some extent arbitrary and are not supported by any research. For example, some designers obtain a static force by muipication of maximum ground surface acceleration and the mass of the superstructure, apply tas a static load at pile head, and then calculate the internal pile forces. Development of hand calculation procedures, and simple methods, similar to the available static methods for seismic design of pile foundations, is very desirable. That is why many researchers have invested enormous efforts in this direction and have obtained encouraging resuts. Quite a few researchers including Novak, Dobry, Gazetas, Nogami and Kaynia have developed simple dynamic Winkler methods, in the last two decades, and have shown that these methods are capable of modeling pile dynamic performance etfcionty. As noted by Pender (1994), these formulae, although only applicable to an elastic soll mecium, can be easily incorporated into a spread sheet program, and do not need considerable coding, One interesting point is thet in almost all of the methods developed, the primary concer has been the evaluation of dynamic response of the superstructure. The evaluation of internalPile response, i. pile moment and shear, has been a secondary issue. In fact, researchers have looked at pile foundations in the same way that they iook at surface foundations; they ‘focus on the pile head impedances and the pile head motions to be used in the subsequent dynamic analysis of the superstructure. Several extensive parametric studies reported in the literature have been almost entirely confined to the effects of different factors on pile head impedance and motion and rarely have the effects on pile internal response been examined. The reason for this appears to be the fact that the intemal pile response is heavily dependent upon the dynamic behaviour of the superstructure, and the superstructure is usually @ complex muitidegree of freedom system whose dynamic behaviour changes ftom. ‘case to case, Many pile failures during earthquakes have occured due to the inadequacy of the pile to withstand large induced moments and shears. The pile designer, who usually is different from the one who performs structural dynamic analysis, therefore needs to know approximately what the maximum seismically-induced internal moment and shear of the pile would be. Development of simple procedures which could enable the pile designer to obtain ‘such an insight is very much needed, This is one of the main objectives of this thesis. The main aim of this thesis is to analyse the response of single piles to earthquake ‘excitations. Contrary to many similar research efforts, in which the real aim of the seismic. analysis is to get the dynamic response of the superstructure, this work is primarily ‘concerned with the pile itself and the internal forces which would develop in it as a result of tne earthquake, As pies are cften installed in weak soils, one of the main factors which appears to influence the pile internal response is the soll yielding, especially near the top where the superstructure is installed. It is therefore important to take this soil yield into account. However, most of the available simple Winkler methods are in frequency domain, {and are not capable of modeling soil non-linear behaviour conveniently See oer eur rake In the early stages of this work, it was decided that a special simple methodology which could be used for the estimation of the internal response of pile foundations should be developed. The available simple Winkler methods were mainly linear and in the frequency- domain, and were not capable of modeling the soil yielding straightforwardly. Certain nonlinear Winklor methods based on the static p-y curves were available, but it has been shown by Poulos (1982) that in static analysis a bilinear elasto-plastic model of the soil canive very close results to the methods using p-y curves. Therefore, as the main aim was to keep the analysis simple so that general conclusions may be made, it was decided that a special elasto-plastic method be developed. Prolminary analyses (explained in chapter 3) showed that the so-called kinematic response cof piles (the response of piles with mass-less caps) were rather insensitive to the pile inertia, ‘and as far as the internal pile response was concerned, the kinematic response was heavily dependent on a static interaction between the pile and the moving soil. Based on this and cther observations, the following methodology was devised + the earthquake, which is assumed to consist of vertically incident shear waves, is applied at a level below the pile tip and the response of the free-field (soil without the pite) along the pile is obtained. This may be done through a linear or nonlinear approach, + the pile is modelled as an Eulerian beam and is discretized and modelled by the finite difference method, ‘the soil is modelied as an elasto-plastic material; its elastic behaviour is modeled via the Mindin fundamental solution and the introduction of viscus dampers to account for radiation damping. The use of the Mindiin solution means that the influences of the adjacent elements along the pile on the deflection of a point at pile-soil interface are taken into account. This is more realistic than the Winkler models in which such influences are ignored. Although the Mindi solution is for static loads, dynamic Winkler models have revealed that a frequency independent static stifness can model the soll adequately. The effect of radiation damping, of course, needs to be taken into account separately. ‘the freefield motion obtained in the first step is applied to the pile as an external soi movement profile and displacement compatibility is enforced between the pile and soil as long as the soil is elastic. Whenever soll yielding occurs, the compatibilty condition is replaced by the condition that the pressure at all interface elements should remain below the utimate lateral pressure of the soil. This is ensured via an iterative process. A special computer program, named "SEPAP" (Seismic Elasto-Plastic Analysis of Pies) is developed and verified by performing comparisons with other available methods and with a ‘umber of field measurements and laboratory tests. This is then used to analyse the effects, of different factors on the internal response of pile foundations.‘The thesis is presented in 8 chapters and 3 appendices. One of the appendices is related to Chapter § and is presented at the end of this chapter. Appendix A. at the end of the thesis, depicts the time-histories and Fourier amplitudes of more than a dozen earthquakes used ‘throughout the thesis, and Appendix B presents the references. * Chapter 1 is this introduction in which the aims and objectives of the thesis, a bref statement of the method used, and the thesis structure, are explained. * Chapter 2 is a detailed review of some relevant research reported in the literature on the subject of pile dynamics. Those methods which are closer to the subject of this thesis and certain results which have been used in the subsequent chapters are explained in more detail * Chapter 3 explains the linear methodology used in this thesis and verifies It by comparisons with other available methods. + Chapter 4 is a parametric study of the effects of different parameters on the elastic response of pile foundations. The emphasis in this study is on the internal response of Piles. * Chapter 5 explains the extension of the elastic methodology developed in Chapier 3 to the case of soil yielding, and presents an extensive comparison between the internal pile response obtained in the elastic and elasto-plastic methods. * Chapter 6 presents the results of some field measurements on the response of the pile foundation of the Ohbe-Ohashi bridge in Japan and compares these measurements with the results of the methodology developed in this thesis. In the second part of this chapter the results of the developed method are compared with a number of laboratory ‘shaking table tests performed at the California Institute of Technology. ‘+ Chapter 7 concentrates on the development of a simple static method which can give viable estimates of the pile internal forces, Based on the analyses in this chapter and the experience obtained in the previous chapters, a simple approach is devised which can be used by practicing engineers. It is shown that as far as maximum internal response of 2 pile is concerned, this methodology gives reasonable estimates andcompares well with the dynamic methods. The shortcomings of the method are discussed at the end of the chapter. ‘Chapter 8 is a summary of the thesis and presents main conclusions reached during this ‘work, It also sets out certain recommendations for further research which may be carried ‘out on the important subject of seismic response of pile foundations,Chapter 2: A Review of Dynamic Analysis of Pile Foundations Pile foundations are used frequently to support structures on soft soils. Due mainly to the need for designing off shore platforms and massive and sensitive buildings such as nuclear power plants, and due to the frequent failure of piles during earthquakes, the dynamic analysis of pile foundations has attracted substantial research interest in the last few decades. The applied dynamic operational loads such as those caused by water waves have received attention as well as those due to earthquake excitation. However, especialy in the last 15 years, a significant amount of research has been conducted on the latter subject, and many methods of analysis have been proposed for both single piles and pile (groups. The salient assumption in these methods is that of linear behaviour of soi, although certain simplified methods for taking into account the soil nonlinearities have also been proposed. Very detailed mathematical methods, as well as some very simplified ones, for the dynamic design of pile foundations, can be found in the lerature. In this chapter, after a brief statement of the problem, and a comparison with static analysis, ‘review of some significant work carried on the dynamic analysis and design of piles will be presented. Those methods which are closer to the methodology developed in this thesis, or which have been referred to in the subsequent chapters, are explained in more detail, The ‘emphasis has been placed on more recent works, although some of the significant earlier research has also been reviewed. 2 ement of the probl From a mathematical point of view, a pile can be regarded as a sti, slender body embedded in a much sotter medium which is sol, When a load is applied to the pile it deforms and interacts with the soil, resuking in the development of interface pressure along the two media, the distribution of which depends on the applied load and the soi-pile properties. A rigorous mathematical solution for this problem needs to take into account the fact that any pressure or load applied at a point inside the soil (for example at a location at the pile-soil interface) will have an influence on other nearby points, including interfacepoints. By assuming that soil is a homogeneous elastic medium this problem has been solved numerically for the static case by Poulos and Davis (1980) who used the Minin solution. The Mindiin solution gives the response of any point in a half space as a result of application of a static load at any other point of that medium. For dynamic loads such a Closed form solution does not exist. In dynamic analysis the disturbance travels as a wave in the ground and, contrary to the static case, where the influence of the load is confined to a limited area around the ‘application point of the load, a very large area is affected. This makes conventional finite element analysis (which can be very efficient in the static case) impractical for dynamic analysis due to the sheer size of the affected area. The dynamic response analysis of pile foundations is a problem of wave propagation in soi. This has two important aspects; one is that the wave may be reflected or refracted and come back to the region of the pile-soil system when it encounters a relatively far boundary; ‘the other aspect is that, if the wave does not come back it attenuates in the ground, resuiting in loss of energy or radiation damping. However, what makes the dynamic analysis even more difficutt is the fact that under large ‘dynamic loading the soil in the vicinity of the ple undergoes plastic deformation, thus ‘changing the responsa pattern considerably. intial gaps may be developed between the pile and soil, and depending on the soil type, these gaps may be refiled by collapsing soll ‘around the pile, In the case of pile groups, other difficuties including pile to pile interaction and cifferent ‘modes of vibration, emerge. While a lateral vibration of the pile cap is resisted by lateral resistance of the soil, a rocking vibration is primariy resisted by vertical fiction between pile and sol, Considering that the behaviour of soil is diferent in these two modes of loading the anatysis becomes even more dificut. Seismic loading brings about even further difficulties. In principle the loading is three- dimensional and seismic waves may arrive from different directions with different angles of incidence. The three dimensional site ([ree-field) analysis in places where the site cannot be ‘assumed to be homogeneous or a horizontally layered medium, is by itself very aifficut and is an active area of research.With these difficulties, a comprehensive rigorous solution which could take into account all ‘aspects of the problem is likely to be out of the question. However, many methods of analysis which tackle certain important aspects of the problem have bean developed, and these will be outlined in the subsequent sections in this chapter What makes the seismic analysis of pile foundations different from the analysis of piles under dynamic head force is that the seismic waves are applied through the soil the load induced in the pile is due to the difference between its total motion and the free-field motion. ‘Therefore, any seismic analysis requires a free-field analysis. A brief discussion on the free- field analysis and a short review of relevant work carried on this subject is first presented. This is then followed by a review of research on dynamic analysis of pile foundations which will be presented under three titles: near approaches, nonlinear approaches and, finally, ‘experimental research. CEN: Any seismic analysis of piles requires the calculation of the free-field response which is the response of the soil mass in the absence of the pile. A strict adherence to the concept of ‘mathematical analysis and the interaction between pile and soil requires that the response of soil from which holes equal to the size of the piles have been excavated (the so-called scattered motion) be obtained. However, due to the complexities of such an analysis, the ‘ree-field response is usually taken equal to the response of the undisturbed soll. As the incident seismic waves are often assumed to be vertically incident SH waves, one of the ‘most well-established ways of obtaining the free-field response is via the application of wave Propagation principles in a horizontally layered and laterally infinite soil medium. The program SHAKE (Schnabel et al (1072)), which uses this concept, is widely used. it obtains the nonlinear response of the soll mass under strong seismic motions by an equivalent linear methodology. Other nonlinear methods in which the soil mass is modelled by a system of equivalent mass-spring-damper elements also exist. Such methods have been Implemented in the SPRANG (Kagawa (1980-b)) and ERCAP (Poulos (1982)) computer codes. However, one should be aware that all of such methods are based on the so-called “flat layer’ theory in which it is assumed that the soil layers are horizontal and laterally infinite, This situation is hardly valid in many circumstances; piles used near bridge abutments, alluvial layers, and natural slopes which are laterally bounded, are some examples.Fan(1992), who examined the performance of several approaches for the seismic response of pile foundations in predicting the observed response of a bridge site in Japan, found that ‘one-dimensional site analysis based on the flat layer theory failed to give any reasonable estimation of the measurements. This will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 6. ‘The effect of a natural slope on the seismic response of a nearby site is @ subject which has, attracted considerable attention amiong researchers. The presence of a lateral slope near a ste causes additional reflected and refracted waves which cannot be easily taken into account in the mathematical models, except for certain simple geometries. The work of Trifunac (1973) is one of the early organised efforts in the evaluation of effects of natural slopes on seismic excitation. He developed an analytical closed-form solution for the scattering of plane SH waves by a semi-cylindrical canyon. His primary concem was to interpret the observed seismographic data near a dam. His solution shows that the effect of cylindrical canyons on the ampification of an incident harmonic motion is greatest for horizontally incident waves. The maximum ampification which might occur is 100 percent, fe, the displacement can be as high as two times the magnitude which occurs at a site without a canyon. This however depends on the frequency content of the waves and, for waves with low frequencies, the amplification is much smaller. Using different formulations of the Boundary Element Method, many researchers investigated the effect of topographic irregularities with different shapes on the response of site. These studies have resulted in a wealth of information about the seismic effects of linear stopes with different incinations, as well as some curved slopes with different geometric shapes. They include mountains and canyons, cavities and inclusions in an ‘otherwise homogeneous or horizontally layered half space. These solutions are almost entirely in the frequency domain and two-dimensional, and are for incident SH, SV or P waves. ‘These solutions show that the angle of incidence of the seismic waves, the shape of the natural slope, and the frequency of the waves, have significant infuences on the response of the slope and the nearby site. An engineering observation common among the results of these studhes which nevertheless can be made is that the amplification is rarely greater than 100 percent. Another less common phenomenon is that for low frequencies the amplification is usually small, From an engineering point of view, the low frequencies are of immense importance because earthquakes usually contain very large amplitudes of low frequencies (ay less than 5 Hz.) 10The amplifcation may be much more when a soft soll medium is bounded laterally with a ‘much stiffer natural stope. The best example of such a situation is the case of alluvial layers Which have been extensively studied in iterature, Bard & Bouchon (1980-a) used the Aki- Lamer technique (Aki and Lamer (1970)) in the frequency domain and then, with special treatment, obtained the time domain response of alluvial layers with certain geometries for SH waves, using a Fast Fourier Transform algorithm. Their results suggested that ‘generation of Love waves in alluvial layers subjected to SH waves is a dominant feature, and that the displacement amplification at the surface of the alluvial layer can be as high as 555 times the surlace displacement that would occur in a horizontal and laterally infinite layer. Despite the limitations of the Aki-Lamer technique, Bard and Bouchon used it to extend their study to the vertically incident plane SV and P waves for low frequencies. In these studies they also found large amplifications at the surface of the alluvial layer. Similar conclusions have been made in other and more recent research. These studies are, however, almost entirely two-dimensional. Luco, Wong and Barros (1990) presented a method for the three dimensional response of a cylindrical canyon in a layered hall-space. In their mode! the assumption of an infinitely long canyon is retained but the incident P, SV, ‘and SH waves may form angles both with the vertical and horizontal canyon axis. They ‘employed the so called" moving Green functions” for a layered medium in their BEM formulation. They indicated that, if the excitation was not nearly verticaly incident, then the response of the canyon was, in general, fully three dimensional. In such a case, purely two dimensional mode's cannot give a full account of the seismic response of the canyon. It is shown that the effect of the horizontal angle of incidence is quite strong on both the ‘amplitude and the variation of the motion within and near the canyon. A three dimensional Rumerical analysis is very expensive and impractical, even ifthe Boundary Element Method, which reduces one dimension ofthe problem, is used. fen oe eed akeneuneco 2.4.1. Boundary element and finite element methods |m boundary element analysis of pile foundations one needs to know the so called “Fundamental solution” which gives the response of a point at the interior of the soil mass as 4 result of the application of a harmonic or impulse load at another point of the soil, The problem of horizontal displacements caused by a horizontal static point load within the interior of a semi-infinite linearly elastic isotropic homogeneous mass (which from now on.will be simply called a half space) was obtained by Mindiin (1936). This solution was used by Poulos (1971, 1972) in his static analysis of laterally loaded socketed and floating piles. His ‘boundary element method explained in detail in Poulos and Davis (1980) consists of discretization of pile interface with soil into rectangular elements and enforcement of the ‘compatiity concition between soil and pile at the centre of these elements. In this process the soil displacements are obtained through the Mindlin solution. ‘An equivalent to Mindlin solution for the dynamic case is not available in closed form, but it exists for a full space and is known as Stoke's fundamental solution in classic ‘elastodynamics books (see for example Eringen and Suhubi (1975)). ‘The full space fundamental solutions in principle can be used in the dynamic anatysis of the half space, but the traction-ree boundary condition on the surface of the half space should be satisfied. This condition, especially in three-dimensional cases, is prohibitively difficult to implement, because the dynamic load affects a very vast area and therefore the discretization of the surface of the half space should extend to a very large area around the ‘pplication of the dynamic load. ‘Several researchers have tried to derive the dynamic fundamental solution for the hatf space ‘by numerical methods. The work of Kobayashi and Nishimura (1980) is notable in this regard. They used the Stoke's fundamental solution for a harmonic unit force inside the full ‘space and constructed the haif space solution by the so-called mirror imaging technique. An ‘approximate solution for the displacement field due to a point force f acting at a depth c below the surface of a half space was constructed by superposing the displacement fields due to two forces acting within an infinite solid: one acts at a depth c below the surface and the other acts at a distance ¢ above the surface. The problem however is that the rasutting stress field does not completely satisty the traction-free boundary condition at the ground surface. It is possible 10 add other fundamental solutions such as lines of force, doublets, moments, centres of compression, etc. on the negative side of the half space to cancel these residual tractions, but this requires some ingenious guesswork such as demonstrated by Mindi (Sen et al 1985). Kobayashi and Nishimura (1980) derived the exact solution to this problem by means of a boundary integral formulation and presented the component of a residual matrix which should be added to the fundamental solution ofthe full space used in the mirror imaging. 2‘The utilisation of the Kobayashi and Nishimura solution needs careful treatment of complex infinte numerical integration of functions involving oscillating Bessel functions. A methodology for such a treat ment has been presented by Davies and Banerjee (1989). The methodology was later used by Sen et al (1985) for anaiysis of piles and pile groups ‘embedded in homogeneous soil and subjected to head harmonic excitation. Muto et al (1963) also calculated the halt space fundamental solution by mirror imaging. Matsuoka and Yahata (1978) did the same thing by using the displacement potentials, while ‘Yoshida and Kawase (1988) calculated the half space fundamental solution by employment of the Hankel transformation, ‘The fundamental solution in all of the above cases are for a homogeneous half space and {for harmonic excitation. Mamoon (1980) and Mamoon and Banerjee (1982) constructed a transient methodology for the dynamic time domain analysis of the half space by mirror imaging of Stokes’ fundamental solution. This methodology was employed by Mamoon (1994) in the transient analysis of single piles embedded in homogeneous half space. ‘A homogeneous half space is not usually a reasonable assumption where piles are used. Pile foundations are used for founding on soft layers of soil which usually ie on a much siiffer sol layer or rock. These half space solutions will not be practical to use in the face of rnon-homogeneities, because the whole boundary of such a non-homogenetty must be discretized, compiicating the computations significantly. ‘A methodology for obtaining the fundamental solution of a layered half space for harmonic ‘excitation was outlined by Apsel (1979). This formulation was later used by Kaynia (1982) ‘and Kaynia and Kausel (1982) for the dynamic analysis of single piles and pile groups, and is stil considered to be one of the most rigorous available methods within the assumption of linear soil behaviour. In the method itis assumed that the piles are prismatic linearly elastic members embedded in a viscoelastic horizontally layered medium resting on a half space or € rigid bedrock. It is further assumed that no gap or slippage develops between the pile and the surrounding soil Kaynia (1982) solved the partial differential equations governing the sol-pile system in the frequency domain for a steady state harmonic excitation for barrel and disk loads which are Geveloped at the interface of a circular vertical pile and the surrounding soil. He used a boundary integral method which transfers the governing partial differential equations into ordinary differential equations by application of Hankel Transforms. In the transformed 3domain closed form formulae for the stiffness matrix of a system of horizontal layers on top Of an elastic half space or rigid bedrock are obtained and the response is calculated; an {averse Hankel Transform retums the response in the frequency domain. Kaynia (1982) successfully constructed @ numerical solution for tackling the highly oscilatory integrals in ‘Apsel's work, and found the response of pile groups to harmonic excitations. This work provided significant insight into the dynamic and seismic response of pile groups. A number ‘of analyses were performed on pile groups with diferent spacings which showed a very large interaction effect in the groups. This effect, which appears to be more pronounced for vertical vibration, is essentially due to the out-of phase vibration of piles. It was also ‘concluded that the behaviour of a pile group for very close spacings and up to a certain frequency was very similar to that of a rigid footing; stitnesses decrease with frequency and even become negative, indicating @ behaviour dominated by inertia effects, and radiation damping displays a frequency independent characteristic. The interaction effects among the piles start to dominate the overall behaviour of the group as frequency exceeds a certain limit. Ths limit is smaller for larger spacings. A hinged connection to the cap resulted in a smaller stifness and damping compared to a fixed cap. Typical results have been reproduced in Figures (2- 1) and (2- 2) 2x2 pile groups, Fixed-head piles Ld=18, E/E,=1000, P,0,=0.7 a8010 ‘lgue(z- 1): Honzontal dynamic stiness of 22 ple gfougsin aso so¥ medium. (Nis numb o! ples ks stthes, and G ands supersorits stand for group and single les respectively) aya 1982), “2x2 pile groups, Fixed-head piles NE(@5 =O) L4da15, € 601000, Pp? ya0.7 a sexo Figure 2-2): Honora amc damping of 2x2 ple groups in a sot so med. unbec tiles, cis dering, kis stiles and G ands supersers stand for group and singe pls respectively (Kay 1822 Some of the published results suggest thatthe interaction is less pronounced for stitfer sols. For low frequencies, the radiation damping increases as the width of the foundation (pile cap) is increased. Kaynia observed that compared to the single piles, in pile groups, deeper soil layers influence the response. This was attributed to the so called “pressure bulb” which is the zone in the neighbourhood of the foundation where stresses (and strains) are significant and extends to depths comparable to the size of the foundation. it also means that the pile groups are less influenced by the soil condition near the surface compared with the single piles. According to Kaynia this observation bears on the accuracy of the techniques which use the result of single-pile nonlinear analyses or field tests on single piles, along with the empirical group reduction factors to derive group stifinesses. Other important ‘conclusions in this study are: + Pile groups subjected to seismic excitations essentially folow the low-requency ‘components of the ground motion, while fering to a large extent its intermediate and high frequency components. The rotational component on the other hand, is negligible {or typical dimensions of the foundation. ‘+ The distribution of applied dynamic loads on the pile cap is different from that of static loads. For certain frequency intervals, the piles closest to the centre take the largest Portion of the load. Also, large dynamic amplification factors for the forces in these piles are expected. 6‘+ Quasithree-dimensional solutions, in which the pile-soil compatiblity conditions in @ siiven direction are relaxed and only the effect of pile-soil interface forces in the other directions are taken into account, compare very well with the full three-dimensional solution. ‘© The superposition scheme suggested first by Poulos gives reasonable results not only {or static loads, but for dynamic loads as well. Based on this relatively rigorous methodology Kaynia and his co-workers have since presented many useful non-dimensionalised charts including those which give the dynamic, interaction factors for pile groups with different spacings. Figure(2- 3) is a typical example. 16-15, E/E,=1000, py? pa <> Flgue(2- 3) ieracten cues fr the hatzantal displacement of ple 2 evo to the horizontal ross on ile 1, (Kayia 1982) Gazetas at al (1992) performed a parametric study on the effect of pile group configuration upon dynamic impedances of piles embedded in homogeneous as well as in inhomogeneous soils. In this investigation Kaynia’s program PILE and a simpitied methodology developed by Gazetas and his oo-workers were used. It was concluded that the cross-interaction between piles in different rows controlled the dynamic response of a ‘rectangular’ pile group; increasing the number of piles in a line group had a very litle effect ‘on the dynamic stiffness and damping factors. It was also concluded that predictions by the static-interaction-factor method were acceptable only for static and low frequency cases; they could be either very conservative or very unsafe at higher frequencies. The conclusion that static interaction factors lead to wrong results has however been contradicted by a umber of researchers who performed laboratory tests on piles. Finn and Gohl (1992), for‘example, performed a number of shaking table tests on small pile groups and concluded ‘thatthe static interaction factor methodology proposed by Randolph and Poulos can iead to reasonable predictions of pile group displacement during earthquake shaking, and by inference, a reasonable prediction of pile group stittess. They observed a tendency to overpredict the state of interaction for in-ine shaking using the Randolph-Poulos methodology at centre to centre pile spacings greater than six pile diameters. The tests indicated, however that, for design purposes, interaction between piles may be neglected for spacings of six pile diameters or more. Fan (1992) used Kaynia’s PILE program and presented several graphs of dynamic interaction factors for vertical and horizontal displacements and rotations of free head piles ‘embedded in homogeneous and linearly increasing modulus with depth soil. A typical graph is reproduced in Figure(2- 4). These results should be of practical value in seismic design of pile foundations for engineers who could use them in the same way that they use the static interaction factors in the design of pile groups. EplEs(L)=100, L/d=20, s/d=5, pup,=0.7, 0=0 Non-homogeneous 03- (aH = Iteration factor for oa - honzonta efacton of ton: hese pies uncer norzontl svt) head lading Figul2- 4): typical interaction factor presorid by Fan (198) Banerjee and Sen (1987) presented a boundary element solution for piles embedded in a ‘semi-infinite non-homogeneous soil in which the soil modulus, Es, varies linearly with depth. ‘AS explained by Novak (1990) their results suggest that, unike in layered soil, the frequency variations of the impedance functions, normalized by static stifiness, are quite smooth and are affected very litle by sol! nonhomogeneity. The actual magnitude of the stifiness and damping, however, diminishes with increasing Es(0). 7The works of Kobori et al. (1977), Sen et al. (1985), Pak and Jennings (1987), Rajapskse and Shah (1969), Banerjee (1978), and Banerjee and Sen (1987) are among other outstanding boundary element studies on pile dynamics. There are certain differences between these methods, both in the formulation and in the resutts; for example, published results in Sen et al's work for the analysis of pile groups show a considerable difference from Kaynia’s results in the high frequency range. For low and medium frequencies, however, the agreement is good (see Figure(2- §)). Lid=15, E,/E,=1000, s/t=2 ‘iguet2. 6) Nemralsed impedances of lateral loaded 3x 3 groups. Comparison cf Kayia and Sen etl results in most of these methods, when dealing with seismic analysis it is assumed that the seismic waves consist of vertically incident SH waves. Mamoon and Ahmad (1990) and Kaynia and Novak (1992) used boundary element solutions to examine the effect of other kinds of obliquely incident waves. Mamoon and Ahmad (1990), in order to study the response of piles to obliquely incident SH, ‘SV, and P waves, used a hybrid boundary element formulation (Banerjee and Butterfield (1981). Piles are modelled as beam-column elements, and the soil was represented as a hysteretic viscoeleastic half-space. For the soil domain, a fundamental solution corresponding to @ periodic dynamic point force in the interior of an elastic hatt-space, was implemented. In the case of SV and P waves, the horizontal and vertical displacements were coupled and dependent on both waves. This was simplifed by assuming the same ‘variation in the horizontal direction for all displacement components. They verified their method by comparing it with Kaynia's work, although this comparison showed rather poor 16‘agreement for the low and middle frequency range which is very important in seismic ‘analysis, They presented a limited number of dimensionless charts, which suggest that for all kinds of waves, the resonant peaks occur at a lower frequency for a vertically incident ‘wave compared with an obliquely incident one. In terms of the amplitude of the response there is an oscillation, but for low frequencies it appears that a decrease in angle of incidence of the wave from 45 degrees to 0 degrees (vertical) reduces the response slightly. Figure(2- 6) is an example. Figue(2- 6): The efi of engl ctncidence of seismic SH waves onthe ample of he response (Maroon and Atad 1990 ‘This reduction is contradicted in a later publication by Kaynia and Novak (1982) in which itis ‘said that for both stiff and flexible piles, the strongest kinematic interaction takes place for verticaly traveling waves (see the typical example in Figura(2- 7)). Kaynia and Novak, from this observation, concluded that for the seismic analysis of single piles, the widely used assumption of vertically incident SH waves is a conservative assumption. 1”E,fE.=100 v | 0 or ozs HR Grn 0d, displacement Flgue(2- 7: Tho eft of angle of nidence of seismic SH waves onthe aplitue ofhe response (Kayia and Norak 1992) In Mamoon and Ahmad’s work the horizontal displacements. for vertically incident P and SV ‘waves are almost identical to the displacements for SH waves. Kayria and Novak (1982), analysing the performance of piles under seismic SH waves, ‘concluded that for a given angle of incidence, stif piles interact more strongly with the ‘waves, resulting in a greater amplification of the horizontal pile displacement in the small to Intermediate frequency range. Their results for a 3x3 pile group show that, for a given frequency, as the angle of incidence of waves changes from vertical to horizontal, the horizontal motion of the pile group decreases. This phenomenon, seen only in pile groups, has been explained by the wave passage concept. It is argued that when travelling waves impinge on a foundation, the foundation tends to average the ground motions over the ‘contact area, which for a pile group consists of a number of discrete points. The significance cof the wave passage effect thus depends on the apparent wavelength at the ground surface, ‘The published results in that paper also indicate that stif ple groups fier out, 0 a greater ‘extont, the high frequency components of vertically incident shear waves. However, as the Incidence angle increases, the wave passage effect takes over and masks the sensitivity of ‘the foundation response to the rigidity of the piles. It is also shown that, contrary to single piles, pile groups show lite rocking response to SH waves, about two orders of magnitude ‘smaller. it was therefore concluded that in practical structure-foundation interaction analysis, one may ignore the rocking component of the foundation when examining the kinematic effects in pile groups. Obiiquely incident SH waves, however, can contribute in a different manner to the response of a structure-foundation system through induced torsionalvibrations. As the incidence angle of the waves increases, the torsional response of the ‘foundation at low frequencies increases as well. It is expected that, for a given angle of incidence, the maximum torsional response occurs around the frequency for which the {ground motion at the outermost piles reaches its maximum, while it is zero at the reference point, that is, when the apparent wavelength of the ground surface, 2m VJ) « sin8, is approximately twice the cap width. The torsional response is about 90 degrees out of phase with the reference ground motion. The significance of pile head rigidity was also examined and it wes concluded that, except for vertical or neatly vertical wave incidence, the horizontal and torsional response of the pile has litle sensitivity to pile cap fixity. Kaynia and Novak maintained that the characteristics of the responses of pile groups to obliquely incident SH waves are essentially similar to those of surface foundations. This can be helpful in inferring qualitatively the response of large pile groups from that of a surface foundation Kaynia and Novak's work also shows that for vertically incident SH waves, when the foundation width is relatively iarge, there are only negligible differences between the free- field and pile head kinematic horizontal displacements. Along with the observation that pile groups show little rocking response to SH waves, and that there is no torsional effect for this case, the above research suggests that the designer can apply the ground free-fiekd displacements directly to the superstructure. It is noted that the internal forces induced in the piles as a result of kinematic interaction are usually insignificant compared to those ‘stemming from inertial interaction. Therefore, the authors concluded that for practical purposes, it might often suffice to design the piles for the forces arising from inertial interaction only. Other studies, however, have shown that, for a soil mass consisting of layers with strong stiffness contrast, the pile internal forces caused in kinematic interaction analysis may be quite significant and cannot be ignored. This will be explained in more details in the following chapters. AAs for the SV waves the authors noted a significant interaction between the pile and soil for angles of incidence of 40 to 60 degrees to the vertical. They explained this phenomenon by the fact that as the angle of incidence increases from vertical to horizontal, the location of the maximum horizontal motion recedes from ground surface; this creates a sharp variation in the ground motion near the surface, leading to a strong kinematic interaction with the pile. ‘The displacement below the ground is higher than at the surface level, but the pile is much stiffer than the soil and cannot follow the ground movement. Therefore it ‘averages’ it, ‘ending up with a displacement at the surface larger than that of the soil (see Figure(2- 8)). This displacement is higher for stiffer piles. For angles of incidence between 40 and 60 atdegrees, strong rocking has been observed both for single piles and pile groups. The ‘amount of rocking decreases in the latter as the foundation width decreases. Little sensitivity of the response to pile-cap connection has been observed. Flexible piles, SV waves, Al Figr{2- 6): Tho reponse of fexle pesto oblqusy incident SV waves (Kayne and Novek 1992). ‘Thé published results for the incident Rayleigh waves are qualitatively simiar to those of oblique SV waves with an angle of incidence of 60 degrees to the vertical. For tow to intermediate frequency ranges a single pile closely follows the horizontal ground motion. However, as the frequency increases, the pile tends to have smaller displacements. This pile-wave interaction is manifested by pile groups to a greater extent. In fact, pile groups. significantly fiter out the intermediate and high frequency components of the ground motion. ‘The most important resuit of Rayleigh wave excitation, however, is the induced rocking vibration, which is similar to that of surface foundations. It appears as though the response Of pile groups to Rayleigh waves is insensitive to the pile rigidty as well as to the pile head ‘ty condition, Kaynia and Novak's results for obliquely incident P waves indicate that. they induce larger horizontal displacements in stiffer piles. The displacements are higher for smaller angles of incidence. In the case of pile groups, for all angles of incidence, the pile cap horizontal displacement is the same as the free-field in the low and intermediate frequency range, but is smaller in the high frequency range. Pile rigidity appears to have a minor effect on the horizontal response, but it reduces the rocking response significantly.It should be borne in mind that in Kaynia and Novak's work, the soil is modelled as homogeneous half space, and the freefield motions ere obtained from established ‘relationships for the propagation of harmonic waves in the half space. ‘The boundary element methods in dynamic analysis of piles are mathematically far more ‘complicated than other methods such as the finite element method. Their advantage is that they automatically satisfy the condition of radiation damping and mathematically are more exact, If the correct fundamental solution is used, they require far less discretization Compared to the finite element method, The discretization may even be restricted to the pile- soil interface. However, thay are by nature far less flexible. They can only be used in those situations where their fundamental solution is strictly valid. For example, if the formulation is based on the fundamental solution of a horizontally layered soil medium, the solution can only be used in areas where the layers are horizontally infinite, if one of these layers is laterally bounded, for example as a resuit of a slope, excavation or a nearby mountain, the whole formulation breaks down. More importantly, in principle, they cannot mode! nonlinear soil behaviour because the boundary element formulation is based on the principles of superposition and virtual work which are restricted to linear analysis. Their numerical application involves frequent transformations and integrations of often highly oscilatory functions, resulting in considerable approximations, Nevertheless, from a theoretical point of view. they have proved very useful and have Provided significant insight into the problem of soil-pile interaction and pile response to ‘seismic excitation. Contrary to the boundary element method, the finite element method is very versatile and flexible, and more importanty, it can easily take into account the soil nonlinear behaviour and its nonhomogeneity. However it often involves a very large three-cimensional mesh and requires special techniques to accurately simulate the radiation damping, Roesset and Angelides (1979) presented a finite element solution to the problem of pile dynamics. They used a formulation derived by Kausel et al. (1975) and placed a consistent {requency dependent boundary at the ends of the finite elerient mesh to account for the radiation damping. The location of the mesh boundary was at an arbitrary distance from the pile.Blaney et al. (1976), Kuhlemeyer (1976,1979-2.1979-b), Wolf and Von Arx (1978), Was ‘and Hartmann (1981), and Sanchez-Salinero (1982) are among others who presented finite ‘element solutions to the dynamic response of single piles or pile groups. The work of Wolf ‘and Von Arx is considered one of the earliest works on the dynamic response of pile groups with vertical or battered piles. They used an axisymmetric finite element formulation and obtained the dynamic displacement field due to ring loads which were coupled with the pile ffexbility equations. They studied both axial and laterally loaded pile groups. Wolf and Von ‘Arx (1982) extended their methodology to examine the performance of pile groups under horizontally traveling seismic waves, and also took pile to pile interaction into account In is finite element methodology, Kuhlemeyer (1976) employed axisymmetric elements and used a boundary matrix similar to the one described by Blaney et al. in order to absorb ‘energy at the boundary of the finite element mesh and model the raciation damping. Sen et al (1985) compared Kuhlemeyer’s result with their 3D boundary element methodology and found good agreement between the two methods for the stiftess, but rather poor ‘agreement for the damping. This has been attributed to the approximations involved in the finite element methodology for tacking radiation damping. Kuhlemeyer’s method undsrestimates the radiation damping. ‘A few other methods suitable for linear generally layered media use a semi-analytical finte ‘element approach. As explained by Novak (1990), these methods treat the wave Propagation in the honzontal direction analytically, while in the vertical direction they employ finite element idealisation including auxiiary sublayers. The pile is modelled by beam elements. Solutions of this type were formulated by Tajimi and Shimomura (1976), Simizu etal (1977), Waas and Hartmann (1981, 1984) and Mizuhata and Kusakabe (1984). Talim (1969), in what may be the first analysis ofits kind, found a closed form soluton for the horizontal response of an end bearing pile embedded in a homogeneous soil layer, neglecting the vertical component of the motion. Talim’ solution gives the response of the points along the pile when its tip is excited by a harmonic acceleration: the tip boundary condition is a pinned one. This condition was relaxed in a more recent contribution by Tazoh et.al. (1988), where the response of a fixed tip pile was obtained. In this work the solution \was also extendad to pile groups in an approximate way, by assuming that the group effect could be modelled as a lateral load acting at the head of the pile.2-42. Simplified approaches ‘The previous section explained in some detail the complexity of the problem of dynamic behaviour of pile foundations, and also explained some outstanding work done on the modeling of the problem by boundary element and finite element methods. It was shown that the presented mathematical methods are cumbersome and need a great deal of ‘computational effort. While this could be justified for very important installations and large projects, in most cases, resort to them may be economically unjustified. This has pushed many researchers to find simpler solutions to the problem. Novak (1974) formulated a solution by assuming a plane strain soil reaction. which could be interpreted as a Winkler model with frequency dependent complex coefficients which represent the stiffness and damping of the soil. This solution yielded a number of design charts and tables for the head dynamic stitess and damping of single piles. Material ‘damping was later included in closed form expressions for the soil reactions in Novak et al. (1978). This work was an attempt to eliminate some of the jimitations of the discrete spring and dashpot models and to model the radiation damping more rigorously and in a consistent manner. By application of the same approach to vertical response of floating pites, Novak (1977) indicated great sensitivity of the pile behaviour to tip condition under head loading and showed that floating piles generated more radiation damping but less stifness than end bearing piles. Novak concluded that pile head dynamic stitiness varied slightly with frequency, except for very heavy piles or very weak soils for which it diminished with frequency in a parabolic manner and could even become negative. For end-bearing piles vibrating bolow the fundamental frequency ofthe soil layer, the radiation damping was found to be absent because no progressive waves were generated in the elastic medium, (ust as with shallow foundations), leaving soil and pile material damping as the only source of ‘energy dissipation. Apart from this low frequency region, a fully embedded slender pie. not ‘supporting any additional mass, is usually overdamped and consequently does not exhibit any marked resonance peak in dynamic tests. Novak's plane strain solution has been primarily developed for a pile embedded in a homogeneous soil and under dynamic head force. Its generalisation to a layered soil medium is only approximately valid for high frequency vibrations, because only in high‘frequency vibrations do the waves travel primarily in the horizontal direction, which is the ‘assumption behind the plane strain hypothesis. Extension of this solution to seismic analysis in which the response is dominated by low frequency content, is prone to a greater degree of approximation. Novak and Aboul-Eila (1978) nevertheless extended Novak's plane strain approach to layered soll and confirmed satisfactory results for high frequencies. This approach was incorporated in the code PILAY and was later used by Novak and EI Shamouby (1983). Novak extended the PILAY program and created @ program named DYNA4 which is currently used extensively for the design of surface and pile foundations subjected to dynamic leading, The program does not support seismic joading, but transient irregular leading at the foundation ievel is modelled with the help of the Fast Fourier Transformation, ‘The plane strain solution of Novak actually means that the soll resistance at each point along the pile depends on the pile deflection of that very point, which is the back-bone ‘assumption behind Winkler hypothesis, More recently Gazetas and his co-workers (see, for example, Gazetes et al (1993) proposed a Winkler model with much simpler stitfness and damping coefficients. They are as follows: «= 12E, @ 1) va een 2) +2p, @ 2) - a E,, ps, V, and B, are modulus, mass density, shear wave velocity and hysteretic material damping ratio of the soil respectively, d is pile diameter and cw is angular frequency of the excitation. These coefficients are much simpler than the coefficients in Novak's work which involve rather complicated expressions with Bessel functions of a complex argument. It is instructive to see how these simple expressions for the Winkler model have evolved: this is. explained in some detail below. Dobry, et al.(1982) performed a parametric study of the stitiness and damping of single piles. subjected to pile head dynamic loading, The study was performed through both a Winkler model and finite element analysis. The parameters of the Winkler model were then adjusted to give the closest possible pile head response to those obtained in the finite element analysis.‘The parameters of Winkier stitiness were calculated by solving the differential equation: @ 3) in which 8 is to be determined, The general solution of Equation (2-3) for the boundary Conditions of a fixed head and infinitely long pile, resuits in the following approximation : te 2 - Ku-dEtige, 24) which is the equivalent static spring coefficient at the pile head, Figae(2- 9: Tho Winkior model of Dory to juivalent pile head damping was defined as: Cy = efy*aydz @5) 2 in which c is defined in Figure(2- 9) as the sum of the material damping, c,, and the radiation damping, c,. y(2) is the dynamic displaced shape of the pile which was taken approximatelyequal to the shape of a pile of infinite length under static head force and moment. With these 5000, NK, depends somewhat on slendemess ratio, and tends to increase with frequency for high values of fn. The dimensionless head damping, D,, was found to be independent of ff, Lid., EyE,, and s0il Poisson's ratio v, for frequencies below 0.75f,. This is expected because for frequencies less than natural frequency of the soil layer, there are no surface waves which are the "carriers" of the radiation damping. Therefore the damping is only hysteretic. For frequencies above 2f,,D,. varies linearly with ft, In this work, by equating the pile head stiiness in the Winkler and finite element analyses, the value of 5 was obtained as:2 8) E/E, is changed between 100 to 50,000, the value of 6 is changed only between 1.3 to 0.94, Therefore, the value of 1.2 used in (2- 1) is @ selection in this range. This parameter was the subject of close examination in a more recent publication by Kawadas and Gazetas (1983). In this work the sensitivity of the pile moment to the Parameter 5 was examined and it was concluded that, contrary to pile displacements, the pile moment shows some sensitivity to a change in 8. A range of 1S 8S4 was proposed Which is much larger than the range of 0.9 10 1.4 proposed by Dobry et al. In Kawadas and Gazetas (1993), 8 was calculated by matching the resutts of the finite element and Winkler analyses for the maximum bending moment at the natural frequency of the deposit. Based con this analysis an approximate expression for estimation of 8 in a homogeneous soil layer was obtained as: male) em in which v, is soil Poisson's ratio. In Dobry et al (1982) the Winkler model damping factor c was obtained as axa e Ee prrssav/ 2 | peed @ 10) ‘The first term in this equation is c,,, the material damping and the second term is c, the radiation damping. The radiation damping is a viscous damping independent of frequency. It is similar to the Winkler mode! proposed by Kaynia and Kause! (1980), which will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 3, where a comparison with the Winkler radiation damping coefficient proposed by Gazetas will be made. ‘Comparison of (2- 10) with (2- 2) shows that the material damping is identical in the two ‘equations (note that =8,, and k,=8E,), but the radiation camping partis different. This subject was more closely examined in a publication by Gazetas and Dobry (1984) in which the problem of a floating or end-bearing fixed-head flexible pile embedded in a layeredsoil deposit was considered. The pile is subjected to harmonic lateral excitation at the top. tt ‘was stated that the assumption of a frequency-independent radiation damping, as in the model proposed by Berger et al and utlized by Kagawa and Kraft (1960), might be oversimplified. It was argued that in the work by Berger et al, it is assumed that a horizontally-moving pile cross section, generates solely one dimensional P-waves travelling in the direction of shaking and one dimensional SH-waves traveling in the direction Perpendicular to shaking. Taking advantage of the fact that a viscous dashpot with a coefficient c=pVA fully absorbs the energy of a wave travelling with velocty V in one dimension along an elastic medium with cross-section A, the radiation damping per unit length of the pile was calculated as Vp 6, = 2dp.V,|1+ > @ 1) inwhich V, is the velocity of P-waves. Fque(2. 10} Horontal propagation of waves axay from a vbraing pil: Gazeta and Db (1984) model, bi Barger a. rode It was argued by Gazetas and Dobry that the assumption of waves propagating only within two narrow zones of constant cross section (d) in the model Figure(2- 10b) is inaccurate as the waves will be traveling in all directions. Furthermore the use of V, as the appropriate wave velocity in the compression-extension zone implies perfect lateral constraints, and ‘means that with v equal 0.5, V, willbe infinite, which is not observed in realty. Without much.theoretical reasoning, the authors therefore have proposed three alternatives for wave velocity to be used in place of \V,. One of these candidates is the Lysmer's analog “wave velocity.” (V4=3.4V,/x(1-¥)) which has proven useful for the understanding of surface foundations behaviour subjected to vertical oscillations, Basad on the ‘intuitive assumption" that compression-extension waves propagate in the two querter-planes along the direction of loading, while shear waves are generated in the two quarter-planes perpendicular to the direction of loading (Figure(2- 10-2), the authors developed an approximate plane strain solution to the probiem. It was assumed that each of the quarter planes shown vibrated independently of the three others. By assuming that S waves propagate with velocity V, in ‘wo quarter planes and compression-extension waves propagate with velocity of V, in the ther two, and by adding up the energies radiated away in the four quarter planes, the ‘ollowing expression was derived for the radiation dashpot coefficient associated with a circular cross section with diameter ¢: ne, fefeatsl Ie)" ‘This was compared with the plane strain solution of Novak for a number of frequencies and close agreement was found between them. Equation (2- 12) is likely to overestimate the ‘damping at shallow depths, as the presence of the stress-free ground surface faciltates the @ 12) generation of surface-type waves with velocities smaller than Vj, and closer to V,. The authors propose the use of V, instead of V, at depths up 10 2.54, These studies were later extended to seismic analysis by Gazetas and his co-workers (for example, Gazetas (1984). These works culminated in the proposal of a concrete simplified Winkler procedure for the seismic response analysis of soi-pile-superstructure interaction, This procedure was outlined by Gazetas et al (1992) as follows: * obtain the motion (translational and rotational components) of the foundation in the absence of the superstructure; ‘* obtain the dynamic impendances (spring and dashpot coefficients) of the oscillations in all directions of the foundation; '* obtain the seismic response of the superstructure on the springs and dashpots of step 2, and subjected at its base to the motion of step 1. a‘The motion of the step 1 can be calculated by a Winkler assumption for the pile whose spring and dashpot coefficients are the same as in (2- 1) and (2- 2). With this assumption the following ordinary differential equation needs to be solved for U.(2), the response of the pile, to be calculated: : Pua 54, (2) = ote (2) ew in which tac, Esl, (@ 14) Uris the free-ield soil movement and m, is the mass per unit length of the pile. The same coefficients are used for the case of a layered soil medium. In such a case the differential ‘equation (2-13) needs to be discretised along the pile in a way which is outlined in more tail in the next chapter. This formulation was later extended to pile groups by Makris and Gazetas (1992). They ‘assumed that in the case of pile groups, additional motions were applied to the pile which were caused by the reflection of waves ftom adjacent piles. Such a motion caused by pile 2, for example, has been estimated as the difference between the displacement of that pile and the free-field motion (Uzz(2)-Ux(2)), multiplied by an attenuation function which depends Con the location of the two piles and the elastic properties of the soll (see Figure(2- 11). ‘These secondary motions arising from all other piles in a pile group around the pile 1 are applied to this pile in the same way as Us in equation (2- 13). Several simple formulae for the calculation of the attenuation factors have been proposed by Dobry and Gazetas (1988) which could be used in this process. The attenuation functions have been given for the cases of 8 equal to zero and 90 degrees, with @ being the angle between the direction of loading and the line which connects the two interacting piles. For all other values of @ the attenuation can be estimated from the values for zero and 90 degrees. These functions are as folows:vce)- [Fonl-(-ie | y((,90)= iF on) wong] e15 v(r.0)=y(t,0)cos? 6+y(r,90)sin29 ‘where r is the radial distance between the two piles, d is pile diameter, and B is hysteretic damping. > —> Uy Us puis AU,=(U UP) ya uy, v Figre(2- 11): Proposed Winkler model for ple goups (Maks and Ganstas (1862). ‘Simple expressions for pile head impedances have been developed by a number of researchers. These expressions are available for a homogeneous stratum, an inhomogeneous stratum with modulus increasing nearly with depth, and an inhomogeneous stratum with modulus increasing parabolically with depth (Gazetas (1991). ‘As an example, these expressions for a homogeneous stratum have been reproduced in Table (2- 1).Table (2- 1): Dynamic stifiness and dashpot coefficients for flexible piles (L>t,) embedded in a homogeneous soil: Dynamic stiffness = K +iaC (after Fan(1992). ‘Active length Natural shear frequency of deposit ‘Swaying stifiness coefficient ‘Swaying dashpot coefficient Rocking stifness coefficient Rocking dashpot coefficient bern, 1 rome byt! rece, Cross swaying-rocking Ken K, ~-azee Ee)" siifness coeficient very * Kary le Cross swaying-rocking dashpot coefficient B Cay" AAR 28 aoe (Fe) )toro>e, Kae for ase,‘When the impedances and the foundation input motion are known, the superstructure response can be calculated via established dynamic analysis procedures. For the simplified model shown in Figure(2- 12), which is a viable model for a bridge foundation, the following 3 equations reported by Fan (1992) may be used: Figue(2- 12) A smpliled mode of sole supesrctre K, [Uo - x-ry[00-95]=02[Mouy +my(Up +hO, +u;)] 16) Ky-ny[U0— us] + Kyy[2o - 85] = ©7[lo8o + myh(Up +hBy +U,)+1,9](2- 17) myo" (Uy +h0p + U4) + yt +Hoc,u, = 0 @ 18) ‘The Winkler model proposed by Gazetas and his coworkers has found considerable appeal and application in last few years, mainly because itis relatively simple to use, However, one should be aware that there are many simpitied assumptions behind these simple formulae. (One shouid also bear in mind that the methods for dynamic analysis of pile foundations outlined above have been primarily developed with the aim of obtaining the response of the ‘superstructure, in fact, researchers have looked at the pile foundations in the same way that they view shaliow foundations. They aimed at obtaining the pile head dynamic stifnesses {and the input motion which would be fet by the superstructure, so that the pile foundation could be replaced by a number of springs and dashpots in the same way that the shallow foundations are treated in the dynamic analysis. The question of the intemal forcesdeveloped in the piles has been a secondary issue. The study by Kawadas and Gazetas (1999) which was discussed earlier, is a very good example which shows how important this Point Is. This study showed that if for example the aim was to obtain a correct estimate of the maximum moment developed in the pile, the stiffness coefficient in the Winkler model of Gazetas may be several times higher than the one which was obtained based on getting a correct estimate of the maximum head deflection, Pender (1994), who used some of the available simple expressions in his dynamic analysis, of a muttistory building on top of a pile group maintained that simple spreadsheet calculations were adequate in such analyses. A valuable collection of the main simplified ‘approaches, along with extensive examples and explanations, was prepared by Pender (1993). This collection also includes the results of several field observations during Elasikereud Elastic methods are rather crude for the modelling of the soi, especially when the inertial effects of the structure are to be taken info account. A pile head defiection results in development of passive soil pressure in front of the pile. Contrary to the assumption made in elastic analysis, the soil resistance and modulus may both depend on the amount of strain and force applied by the pile. Parmelee et al. (1964) and Penzien (1870), who developed the earliest organised methods for dynamic analysis of pile foundations, employed a non-linear discrete model and assumed that static stress-strain relationships were adequate to explain pile dynamics. Penzien used the Minclin solution and determined the nonlinear spring constants of a Winkler model. The pile inertial effects were modelled by lumped masses and the radiation damping was accounted for by viscous damping, The major advantage of this method was Its abilty to model nonlinear behaviour of a homogeneous or non-homogeneous soil mass. ‘This methodology was later extended by Matlock, Reese, Prakash and their co-workers ‘and resulted in the development of the so called p-y curves. These curves relate the applied pressure to the soll at different depths along the pile to the soil deformation at those depths. Matlock (1970) developed methods for the estimation of the p-y curves for soft clay for both static and cyclic loading, Similar curves have been presented by Reese and his co-workers for sand and stiff clay (Reese et al (1974), Reese et al. (1975), Reese and Welch (1975). Computer programs COM622 (Reese (1977-2)), COM624 (Reese et al (1984)) and LPILE1(Reese (1985)) have been presented by Reese and his co-workers which make the use of P-y curves in different situations possible. However, as noted by Norris (1994), the p-y curves are not meant to be particularly accurate in the small deflection range nor are they appropriate for an embedded pile cap, which often ‘occurs in practice. To tackle these problems Norris (1994) presented an “equivalent linear ‘subgrade modulus profile approach’. In this method one assesses the “design level” subgrade modulus E,(=ply) profile as characterised in the iterature. There are graphs and charts available, for example, which give the vertical subgrade modulus as a function of relative density for cohesioniess soils and as a function of the unconfined compressive strength , for clays, The “design lever” modulus profile applies at a given value of strain in the soll in the developing passive wedge in front of the pile which reflects a pile head deflection, yp of 0.25 cm per 0.3m width of the pile (B). This “design level’ value of pile head deflection was established using the program COM622, Reese (1977-a) and nonlinear p-y curves for sand and clay after Matlock and Reese (e.g. see Reese (1977-b)), modified to have inital straight tine slopes equal to the design level modulus. A parametric study was Undertaken to assess the level of pile head deflection, ys, at which the pile head stifness (k=py¥), deviated from a constant value with increasing the pile head load p. this value was, taken to be the design level pile head deflection. In this procedure if the design level ple head deflection is equal to 0.25 cm per 0.3m width of the pile, the same soil modulus as ‘obtained from published charts in soi! mechanics books is used, but i this design level deflection is smaller, the modulus is multiplied by an amplification factor which even can reach to 7.2 for very small values of design level deflection. If this design level defection is, larger than 0.25 em per 0.3m width of the pile ordinary p-y curves should be used. Ready-to- Use charts have been given in Norris (1994). With the soil modulus known, Norris used the available closed form formulae, or static methods, o obtain the lateral pile head stifiness. ‘As for pile groups, Norris used reduction factors for the stifesses calculated for a single pile, These reduction factors depend on the pile spacing and are based on rather old experimental resutts (Davisson (1970), US Navy (1982)). For a pile spacing of 3 times pile diameter a reduction factor equal to 0.354 is used and if the spacing is 8 times or more no reduction factor is applied. Norris maintains that there are disagreement about the group effect, with elastic continuum solutions (Poulos (1979)) suggesting that the superposition of elastic strains is the main cause of group interference. However, tests by Brown et al (1987) and Brown et al (1988) indicate that the overlap of the mobilizing passive wedges are the main cause of group action. a‘The contribution of the embedded cap to pile lateral stiffness in this formulation is obtainec from the simple formula Keap = Et JE seugntt2 (2 19) oan in Which Ean is the subgrade modulus, and E, is the modulus for the approximate amount of deflection. The ratio E/Exeaxgy iS actually an amplification factor which depends on pile head deflection and pile width, and is obtained from provided graphs. The integration is over the height of the cap. No account has been taken of shear resistance between the cap and the soil underneath it. This is in keeping with the widespread opinion that the soil eventually settles away from the cap, and even fit remains in contact with the cap, hardly any relative dispacement occurs between the cap and the soil, because the soil within the passive wedge ofthe soll atthe pile top is moving with the cap. The total pile group stiffness is taken tobe the sum ofthe stitinesses of the individual piles and Kx. Norris has used this formulation for several real highway bridge foundations subjected to earthquakes and has found excellent agreement between the measured and computed response, This is a static methodology, however, and litle justification has been given as to why it can be used for the seismic response of pile foundations, except for some limited ‘comparisons with field responses. It is a simple methodology, which treats complexities such ‘as nonlinear soil response, soil layering, embedment, cap contribution to the stiffress and ‘group interference, but all these matters have been addressed in an approximate way. ‘Static reduction factors for the pile group effects are used, despite certain research which has concluded that dynamic pile group effects generally cannot be captured by static models (see e.g. Kaynia (1982), and Fan (1992). Norris (1995) maintains that during lateral pile foundation excitation two regions of soll strain ‘around the pile are distinguishable, One is a far-field strain region , which is caused by the soil free-field movement and the other is the near-field strain region caused by the inertial effects of the superstructure, The latter region is around the pile head at shallow depths while the former is deeper inside the soll and away from the superstructure. In a full-scale bridge test, only the soll in the near-field region is strained, and therefore, the back- calculated stitfnesses for the pile foundation reflect the modulus and strain values of the soil {rom this region. Applied Technology Council of America (ATC) (1878) maintaing that the ‘foundation stifnesses. should be assessed based on the free-field strain associated with the ‘magnitude of the earthquake. The US Federal Highway Authority (FHWA) procedures, however, yield stitress variations due to relative strain in the near field region. Norrissuggests that whenever the total strain in the near-field is less than the free-field strain for the magnitude of the earthquake outlined by ATC, the ATC stifness value be used, and Whenever the relative strain in the near-field is higher than that of the ATC, the FHWA value be taken. Kagawa (1980-a) studied soll-pile-structute interaction via a finite element method which could represent a nonlinear sol response. The finite element program PLUSH, which was a modification of the axisymmetric finite element code ALUSH (Berger et al (1975)), was used in this study. He examined the effect of pile, soil and loading conditions on the p-y curves. ‘These studies were expanded by Kagawa and Kraft (1980, 1981) and the results were incorporated into a Winkler model in which the pile is discretized into elements. These elements are connected to the soil through other discrete elements which represent nonlinear behaviour of soll and even the generation of pore-water pressure. For seismic analysis a nonlinear ste response program SRANG (Kagawa (1980-b)) was used and the result ofthis program was applied to the base of the Winkler model as the input motion. The pile response was obtained from program NONSPS developed by Kagawa (1983). According to the Kagawa and Kraft method, the lateral soil reaction on a unit length of the pile in a linearly elastic soil medium can be written as: p=E,5y+2p,B(V, + V,) @ 20) in which y is pile lateral displacement, E., pw Ve and V, are soil modulus, mass density, ‘shear wave velocity, and compressional wave velocity respectively; B is pile diameter and Fis the average soil-reaction coefficient which is constant with depth and depends on soil- pile flexibility coefficient, K=EV/E,“, and the soil profile. Typical values of this coefficient are between 0.8 to 1.5. The first part of this equation represents soil stiffness and the second part, which is identical to equation (2-11), is the damping. This damping was discussed eartier in this chapter. The authors extended equation (2-20) to include the soil nonlinear stress-strain behaviour. To that end, the pile displacement was related to the “representative” soil shear strain via the expression: (i+vjy 1B @ 21) in which v is Poisson's ratio of soll and fis a factor with a typical value of 3 to § and which depends on pile and soil conditions. Soil shear stress can be written as t=G, y, with G, beingthe representative shear modulus of soil. G, can be defined as G.=GruF (yy), in Which Gre 's the elastic small strain modulus, and F is a degradation strain-dependent function. One ‘such function can be @ hyperbolic model such as F=t/(1+y'y), where y= ta/Goe, with ty bbeing determined by assuming a passive failure of the soil adjacent to the pile as ‘a= A@,Sindscon3)/1-sing) in which A is an empirical adjustment factor. With these definitons, and noting that E,=2(14vJG, the equation (2- 20) may be written for the nonlinear soil as: 21+ VG macd¥ oo (ty {By, (2 22) +2p,B(V, +V, 14 ‘AS can be seen in this equation the radiation damping has been assumed to be the same as inthe elastic case. ‘This formulation and the computer codes developed by Kagawa were extensively examined by Chacko (1995) who performed a number of centrifuge tests on single piles and compared the test resutts with the analytical model of Kagawa. He observed that the pile accelerations were heavily dependent on the free-field accelerations, and thus the overall accuracy and ‘eliablity of any analytical method was strongly dependent on the accuracy of the free-field site response analysis. it was concluded that while the Kagawa method may have been suitable at low displacement levels, it lead to excessive dashpot forces when nonlinearity developed in the soiFpile springs. The variation of p-y curves had very litle effect on the pile ‘response because this response was dominated by the dashpot forces. Kagawa (1992) extended his formulation to approximately account for possible liquefaction. ‘The excess pore pressures which are developed in the soll around the pile were included in the model by successively modifying the stitiness and strength of the near-field and tree-field soils. This was accomplished by applying a factor (1-1)" on the stitiness and the strength of the soil-pile element. ris the pore pressure ratio, given as the ratio between the excess pore Pressure and the intial effective overburden stress, and c (with a typical value of 0.5 for sands) is an empirical coeficient that depends on soil type. The fact that a liquefied soil may regain its stifness and strength due to its dilatant behaviour for large and rapid pile movements was not taken into account. Excess pore pressure can develop in soil around, the pile cue both to free-field ground movements and to the relative movement between the soil and the pile. The former part of the pore pressure rectstributes in the vertical direction.‘The latter type, on the other hand, redistributes mainly in the radial direction away form the pile, but also in the vertical direction. Kagawa (1992) used an axisymmetric, finite-element cconsolidation model for the coupled radial and vertical flow of excess pore pressure. in the ‘model at each time step, inctements of generated excess pore pressure around the pile were evaluated and added to the finite-element consolidation model and redistribution of excess pore pressure during the time step was computed in the model. Using this model, Kagawa performed a number of analyses on a 33 metre long pile whose lower 20m length was assumed to be embedded in clay and the rest was embedded in loose sand or a combination of loose sand and clay. The result of these analyses suggest that liquefaction during earthquake may result in @ lower frequency content of the pile ‘acceleration and in a smaller or higher pile head deflection. The deviation from the no liquefaction cases appears to be larger at higher free-field acceleration levels. The ‘magnitude of the deviation seems to be dependent on various factors such as the frequency Content of the earthquake motion, the level of acceleration, the resonant frequency of the soll-pie system with complete liquefaction in the sand layer, and on the liquetaction susceptibility of the sand layer. It is more likely that liquefaction causes an increase in pile deflection and pile moment due to the loss of lateral pile support. Yao and Kobayashi (1992), who studied the effect of liquefaction on pile response by performing @ number of shaking table tests, also concluded that liquefaction may resutt in much higher bending moments in a pile, They observed large bending moments in the middle of a Iquefled sand layer. It was also observed that while low frequency vibration results in an almost simutaneous liquefaction along the sand iayer, the liquefaction occurs eartier at the top of the sof layer in high frequency exctations. EI Naggar and Novak (1996, 1995) developed a nonlinear Winkler model for dynamic lateral ‘analysis of pile response. In this model the soil has been divided into two parts; the first part is an inner nonlinear field, and the second par is a linear far fleld which accounts for wave propagation away from the pile. The inner fleid is assumed to be a homogeneous, isotropic Viscoelastic medium, which is modelled by a nonlinear spring. The stitiness of this spring is the same as reported by Novak and Sheta (1980): 8x61 v}3- 40} (9 /1,)* +1] (2 23) (ost) +(3-4v)'[(to its) “ain which fo and r, are the inner and outer radii of the inner field respectively, v is the soll Poisson's ratio, and G,, is a shear modulus which depends on the strain level as G,=Gna(1- 1), Where Gn is the small strain shear modulus, and n=P/P, in which P is the horizontal load at the spring and P, is the ultimate resistance of the spring. The latter value can be ‘obtained based on the API recommendations (API (1991)). For cay, the resistance is given ‘as a strength per unit length of the sol layer by: Py =3¢,d+7Xd+Jo,X XSXq (2- 24) Py=Seyd X>Xp (2 25) in which ¢, is undrained shrar strength, d is pile diameter, y is soil effective unit weight, J is ‘an empirical coefficient ranging from 0.25 to 0.5, X is depth below the surface and X; is the depth of the reduced resistance zone, which can be calculated by solving the specified two ‘equations. In the case of sands for shallow depths I (tangsinf tang Je. foal etna URE (a xtenptne KektnDtanesind tone) a} ® 28) and for large depths: Py = AIXd|K, (tan? B - 1) +K, tangtan® B] ean In these equations, A is an empirical adjustment factor dependent on the depth which can be found in API (1991), Ky is the coefficient of earth pressure at rest, ¢ is the effective friction angie of sand, B=0/2+45, a=0/2, and K, is the Rankine active lateral earth pressure coefficient. “The outer linear field is modelled by a spring and a dashpot whose constants are derived ‘rom the plane strain solution given by Novak et al (1978). This solution, as explained earlier, ives the horizontal stiffness of a unit length of a cylinder embedded in a linear viscoelastic soit as: K=nGagT (2- 28)in which G is the maximum shear modulus of the soil, a;=wr/V, is a dimensionless frequency and T is a complex dimensionless function which depends on ay, Poisson's ratio y, and_material damping D. This complex frequency-dependent stiffness is not suitable for nonlinear time domain analysis, but it can be written as K=G[S,,(a9,v,D) +189 0:¥,D)] @ 29) in which 8, and 8,2 are both real. It is argued by EI Nagar and Novak that S,, is fairly frequency independent, while Sz increases monotonically with a, for the range of 0.05 is the pile deflection that initiates yielding, and ¢ is a hysteretic dimensionless quantity thet is govemed by the following equation vob + Wve” - A= (2 43) where 8, 7,n'and A are dimensionless quantities that control the shape of the hysteretic loop and a dot represents differentiation with time. it can easily be shown (Constantinou, et al. - 1987) that when A=1 parameter K in (2- 42) becomes the smaltampitude elastic distributed stiffness, and parameter a becomes the ratio of the posto pre-yielding stitfness, By setting ‘A equal to 1 and eliminating the time variable in (2- 43), one obtains (2 4a) (2 45) It is @ widely used assumption (Constantinou, et al. - 1987) that B+y=1. In that case the ‘maximum value of [t| is equal to 1. Furthermore, for plastic soil behaviour, a is equal to zero. Therefore the equation (2- 42) is reduced to F, = Kyol 2 46) in which the maximum value is when £ is equal to 1. This value may be related to the ultimate lateral soil pressure, P,, which resutts in F,=P,.dt 47) where d is pile diameter. Equations (2- 43) and (2- 47) can be used to obtain the nonlinear ‘spring force. This formulation was used by Badoni and Maktis in their investigation of nonlinear pile response. Besides the nonlinear spring, they used Gazetas’ Winker ‘coefficients. As for the radiation damping, they used the elastic radiation damping coefficientproposed by Gazetas. The only modification to this value for the noniinear case is that the damping force at post-yield level remains constant and equal to the value at the start of the yield. This treatment is rather arbitrary, and means that when a gap is developed between the pile and the soil due to the yielding, the radiation damping is stil equal to the value which was calculated with the assumation of no separation between soil and pile. Badoni and Makris have concluded that, based on theit approximate method at low frequencies, the nonlinear pile response prevails. but as frequency increases the component of the soil reaction due to radiation damping increases and the nonlinear characteristic of the response ‘becomes less pronounced. Makoto et al (1896) proposed a dynamic nonlinear analysis method of a ground:-pile-mass system. In this method the soil is modelled through several p-y curves and differentiation is made between the clay and sand behaviours in the event of strong motions. It is argued that in the case of clay, gaps are developed at pile-soil interface near the cap-mass, but in the case of sand these gaps are rafiled by the collapsing surrounding soil. This method was compared by Hideto et al (1996) with the results of several laboratory tests and very good agreement was found. These results show that the resonant frequency of pile vibration is much lower than the one predicted by the linear approaches. Fa or a Hassini (1990) performed a number of dynamic tests on model piles, and reported that at that time, only a handful of full scale and laboratory tests had been performed on dynamic behaviour of single and group piles. He reported as follows: ‘+ Gaui (1858) performed one of the earliest dynamic lateral tests with low frequencies on ‘model piles. He observed no significant phase difference between the excitations and the signals obtained from strain gauges installed along the piles. ‘+ Alpan (1973) conducted free oscillation field tests on a prestressed concrete pile driven into a highly plestic clay. ‘+ Novak and Grigg (1976) conducted dynamic tests on single and small groups of model piles made of hollow steel which were hydraulically driven into a 2-2.5 metre thick layer of sity sand. The main aim of the tests was to check the performance of the Novak (1974) analytical approach. However the inevitable pile-soil separation which occurreduring the tests made this comparison difficult. It was nevertheless concluded that the theory qualitatively predicts the experimental results. ‘+ Chon (1977) performed steady-state and plucking tests on a number of free-nead model steel piles embedded in a large quicksand tank. The sand conditions as well as parameters such as embedment length, pile diameter and cross section shape, were ‘changed and their effects on the response were monitored. It was concluded that an increase in the embedment length of the pile causes an increase in the horizontal stiffness of the foundation, but the limit of this effect, the so called “effective length’, was ‘not investigated. It was also found that the presence of the water in the sand medium increased the damping. + Gle (1981) performed dynamic tests on full-scale piles driven into cohesive and cohesionless soils. The resutis were compared with Novak and Abou-Ella’s (1977) PILAY program. The experimental values of the dynamic stiffness were only 40 to 70 percent of the predicted theoretical values for cohesionless soils, and in the range of as low as 5 to 10 percent for cohesive soils. Stablisation of the top 3 to 4 pile diameter length of the soil greatly increased the stiffness, but reduced damping. + Scott and Tsai (1981) performed dynamic lateral tests on a full-scale instrumented stee! Pipe pile driven into saturated sity sand. It was observed that an increase in the exctation level resulted in the build-up of excess pore water pressure, reducing the natural frequency of the system. The damping ratio increased with the ampltude of shaking; partial liquefaction occurred around the pile head; the excess pore water pressure was attributed to the rapid increase of the vibrations, + El-Shamouby (1984) and EbShamouby and Novak (1984) conducted harmonic vertical, horizontal and torsional excitations on a closely spaced 102 pile group. The hollow stest plies were 1.0m long with a diameter of 2.67 om and they had a spacing to diameter ratio of 3, The results were compared with the theories based on Poulos's static interaction and Kayria's dynamic interaction factors. The agreement was not satisfactory. One observation was the increase of damping due to interaction ‘A number of laboratory tests were performed on groups of 2 and 4 piles with different ‘spacings by Hassini (1990). The hollow steel piles used in these tests were 198 cm long and ‘were made of hollow steel with an outside diameter of 6 cm and an inside diameter of 5.24 ‘om. The soil was fine to medium, poorly graded sand, and the excitation was via the pile ahhead. No appreciable interaction effect on horizontal damping for spacing to diameter ratios, (greater or equal to 10 was found, but these effects appeared to be particularly important for ‘spacing to diameter ratios less than 4. The value of vertical damping was found t0 be 4 10 6 times the horizontal damping for groups of 2 and 1.5 to 2.5 times for groups of 4. It is calmed that some 60 to 75 percent of total foundation damping in the horzontal direction, and 70 to 81 percent in the vertical direction, was due to radiation damping. For the groups of four piles, the superposition of the experimental static interaction factors gave excellent prediction of the dynamic interaction effects, while the superposition of the experimental dynamic interaction factors largely over-estimated the interaction effects. Wison et al (1995) conducted several centrifuge tests on single piles and pile groups, using 14 earthquakes as the input motion. The earthquakes were scalar multiples of the Japan's Hyougoken-Nanbu (Kobe) (1995) earthquake. The soil consisted of two sand layers with the ‘op layer being loose and the bottom layer being dense. It was found that the development of excess pote water pressure affected the shape of acceleration record at the soil surface, ‘making it sharper in nature. Repeat of two events resulted in 23 to 39% lower peak excess pore pressure development compared fo the previous events, which was attributed to the effect of seismic history. Three single pile models were constructed which were the same but with different superstructure masses. However the elevation of the masses in these models was changed so that all the models had the same natural period of 1 sec. ‘Acceleration at the superstructure showed that it responded at its fundamental period. ‘Acceleration of the pile head always showed a component that closely followed the ‘superstructure motion, but it also contained higher frequency components which were attributed to the soil-pile interaction. Bending moments showed a strong correlation to the ‘column displacement (middie of the column between the superstructure mass and the ground surface) and to the superstructure aocelerations, The location of peak bending ‘moment remained above a depth of 5 pile diameters. Peak column displacements were ‘approximately linearly related to peak surface accelerations up to 0.59. Peak bending moments show a very similar relationship to peak surface acceleration. Peak column displacements and peak bending moments plotted very nearly linearly versus peak base accelerations for ali earthquake events.Figur(2- 15}Schemaic crowing othe mode! ies tste by Wison et (185) In the case of pile groups (see Figure(2- 15)), pile cap motions did not show significant simizarity to the superstructure motion for any earthquake events, but they did show a strong similarity to the base and surface motions for events with small excess pore water pressure ratio. The pile cap motions more closely resembled the base motion than the ground surface ‘motion for the events with the ratio of the excess pore water pressure above 90 percent. Similar to single piles, the peak bending moments plotted almost linearly versus peak base accelerations for all earthquake events. Compared to PG1, PG2 showed greater peak superstructure, but smaller peak pile cap, accelerations. This was attributed to the embedment of the pile cap in PG2, Kagawa et al (1994) conducted shaking table tests on model gilefoundation systems in loose saturated sand, The input mation was a random wave with uniform power amplitudes over the frequency range up to about 25 Hz. The acceleration levels were sufficiently large {0 produce liquefaction over the entire depth of the sand layers on the shaking table. It was ‘observed that acceleration at shallow depths decreases dramatically as pore pressures build Up, and it tends to increase again with time. Excess pore pressures at deeper depths increase frst and then decrease steadily with time, while those at shallower depths tend to be constant or even increase during shaking. A preliminary conclusion was that the p-y relation for the initial stage of shaking appeared to be a softening type. It became mainly a Viscous type when the surrounding sands underwent iquefaction, and then the p-y relation‘gradually transformed back to the initial softening type as excess pore pressures dissipated ‘rom the sand layer. Also the dilatancy tendency of liquefied sands was seen in the p-y relations. it was found that the lateral soil reaction along the model ple does not vanish even after the liquefaction of surrounding sand. It was also found that bending moment in the ‘mode! ple increased significantly due to liquefaction of the sand layer. Carrubba and Maugeri (1996) investigated the dynamic behaviour of a large diameter bored pile by means of low and high strain loading tests. They concluded that the pile head ‘impedance at small strain levels could be well predicted by a frequency-independent Constant stiffness and damping. In such a case, a linear elastic theory such as the one proposed by Novak and E-Sharouby (1963) was found to give good estimation of the pile head stifness and damping. in the case of larger pile displacements, nontinear effects ‘appeared and the authors proposed that a mass be included in the pile head impedance to account for what they observed to be a reduction in the pile response with the increase in frequency. Huaren and Byme (1996) studied the dynamic behaviour of a single pile under simulated ‘earthquake ground shaking using the hydraulic gradient similtude method. A series of free and forced vibration tests were carried out to study the nature of ple response and soi-pile interaction. On the basis of extensive tree vibration tests on different piles, the authors found that the dynamic modulus of sand was proportional to the square root of the confining stress, The soil-pile system was found to be nonlinear with higher sttiness at small strain or deflection. A stiffer pile yielded a higher stifness of the soil-pile system, When the soit-pie system frequencies were normalized with respect to the fundamental traquoncy of the soil layer, the normalized frequency of the system appeared to be constant, regardless of soil stress level. The equivalent viscous damping of the soi-pile system was nearly independent of soll stress levels, but depended upon the vibration amplitude {or strain level). It was observed that the damping ratio decreased with the number of cycles in free vibration tests, due to the decay of vibration ampitude. For ples subjected to simulated earthquake ground motions, the authors concluded that pile deflection and bending moment responses were reasonably symmetric and significant soil densification had not occurred. The number of loading cycies did not affect the pile reponses during steady state shaking. The maximum bending moment in the model pile was substantially greater for the test in which the input frequency was close to resonance (see Figure(2- 16)). This occurs because resonance induces higher accelerations and‘eonsequently higher inertial forces or pile head loads. The depth at which the maximum bending occurred increased with increased pile head load. Forced vibration tests on model piles Sr Input tog 17-4 He ut tog et4 He Input frag 20 Hz Moment (N-enm) go 888888E8 Figur(2- 18): The ft frequency of excaton on pile moment. (The resonant fequency ofthe scl ple syst is 17.4 Hz) ‘Huan and Bye (1886) ‘Soitpile interaction under lateral dynamic base shaking was evaluated in terms of dynamic By curves. The dynamic p-y curves were found to be highly nonlinear and hysteretic under strong shaking but independent of the number of loading cycles in dense sand. The p-y response under low-level shaking was more linearly elastic. Stiffer p-y curves were observed at large depths and were nearly linear elastic below a depth of about five pile diameters. The ‘API recommended p-y curves for sand were compared with test data. In general, the API procedure underpredictad the lateral soll stifiness or soll resistance under strong shaking intensities, especialy at shallower depths. in the range of linear p-y response (e.g., below ‘the five pile diameter depth), the API curves appeared to agree well with experimental curves, At low levels of shaking, the API procedure for p-y curves gave values that were in teasonable agreement with the test data. A prediction of the response of the prototype pile oad system was made using the API procedure, and the results compared with the observed response. It was found that the API approach overestimated bending moments, pile deflections, and shear foross by at least 15-20%. ‘Anandarajah ot al (1995) performed a series of centrifuge model tests with the objective of ‘studying the response of a pile-supported, two-story structure under earthquake base shaking. The results of the tests were compared with a two-dimensional finite element ‘analysis in which the soil was modelled as an elasto-plastic material and an effective stressbased elasto-plastic bounding suriace model was used to describe iis stress-strain behaviour. The authors found “reasonable” agreement between the measured and calculated results. in this work the computed permanent horizontal displacements are in the ‘same order of magnitude as those observed in the tests, Wang et al, (1997) performed a number of shaking table tests on a single model pile and compared the results of the test with several available nonlinear Winkier methods. They Concluded that the damping force in the Matlock p-y model can exceed the ultimate capacity ‘of the p-y spring, and thus did not capture the lengthening of the system’s fundamental Period observed in the centrifuge tests. In fact, the calculated response of the superstructure was insensitive to large changes in the py curves. The method proposed by Nogami, in which the soll region is decomposed into a nonlinear near field and a linear far field and damping is modelled as a nonlinear hysteretic element in series with a linear visco-elastic ‘element, was found to show promise. The authors maintained that in this model, the calculations were sensibly dependent on the stiness and strength of the p-y curves, and predictions of the pile head and superstructure response were in reasonable agreement with the centrifuge results. Several researchers have reported their observations on failure of the piles during earthquakes. The work of Mizuno (1987), in which about 30 pile damage cases during earthquakes in Japan in the period 1923-1983 are categorised, is an outstanding contribution. He noticed that lateral displacement of cohesive or organic soil, failure and movement of embankments, liquefaction and movement of sandy soil, vibration of the ‘ground, and vibration of the superstructure, may cause pile damage. Four damage patterns were used in the categorisation which are: damage with subsidence ofthe pile head (shear and compressive failure) + ting-type crack due to bending moment without subsidence of pile head + separation from pile cap * bucking falure of welding joint. It was noted that, compared with steel piles, the damage of precast concrete piles was significant,Mizuno et al. (1996) investigated some thity cases of pile damage in the 1985 Hyougoken- Nanbu (Kobe) earthquake and observed the following tendencies: * pile damage cases due to lateral soil flow with liquefaction is found in reciaimed areas, ‘especially near quays. In such situations, piles, even castin-sity concrate piles were damaged in deeper parts * pile damage due to inertial forces is found in alluvial fan areas ‘+ pile damnage due to soil movement without liquefaction is found in mountainous areas, Several other researchers have studied the pile damage in the Hyougoken-Nanbu earthquake. A number of these works, which show large ground motions due to liquefaction, have been responsible for the damage, are summarised by Tazoh and Gazetas (1996). The authors emphasise the need for developing methods to include the effect of liquefaction and large ground movement in dynamic analysis of pile foundations, developing preventative measures, and finding ways to repair damaged piles, PA ue a) A review of some of the outstanding research carried on the dynamic analysis of pile foundations was presented. After a brief statement of the problem and a short discussion on the effects of the tree-field on the response, the linear and nonlinear approaches available were reviewed in some detail. The resuts of several laboratory tests and field observations were also outlined. Based on this review the following general comments may be made. Under the assumption of a linear behaviour of soil, sophisticated numerical approaches based both on the boundary element method and finite element method have been developed. These methods, in principle, can evaluate the response of single and pile groups to earthquake excitation. These methods are almost entirely in the frequency domain and {give the response to a single harmonic excitation. Their application to earthquake motion therefore requires a kind of Fourier Transformation. They are mathematically cumbersome and involve many numerical approximations. They requite enormous computational effort Wich is justified oniy for very large projects. Not all of these methods yield identical results and there are certain, sometimes considerable, differences between them even when the fundamental assumptions are the same.‘The laboratory and field tests for verification of these methods have been far from compiete, and they rely primariy on their mathematical soundness. In fact, in several attempted laboratory tests, the creation of the assumed conditions for the soil in these methods has been the stumbling block. ‘Several simplified approaches for the analysis of single piles have also been developed ‘which, in contrast to the mathematical methods, can be used with litle computational effort ‘Some of these methods which are based on a Winkler hypothesis have given results. which are often in remarkable agreement with the mathematical models. These methods, however, have been constructed with certain simplifying assumptions. Novak, for example, ‘assumed a plane-strain condition at the pile soil interface, and Gazetas, Dobry, Kaynia and others obtained the coefficients of their Winkler models by equating the head displacement of the pile with the displacement obtained in the fine element analysis. These simplifying ‘assumptions should be bore in mind when using these methods. For example, ifinstead of the pile head deflection the aim is the calculation of the maximum moment in @ pile these Winkler models may give inaccurate results. Gazetas and his co-workers have expanded their Winkler model to the case of pile groups and accounted for the effect of pile to pile interaction with the help of the Poulos’ static superposition approach, and by employing certain simplifed attenuation factors for the motion of waves in an elastic medium. Several analyses were performed on pile groups in a homogeneous soil and it was conoluded that pile to pile interaction for seismic excitation was negligible. This appears to be in contradiction with the results presented by Kaynia (1982), Apart from several noniinear finite element approaches which require a lot of computational efforts, in recent years, certain simplified nonlinear Winkler methods have been developed. In these methods é is assumed that the soil in the immediate vicinity of the pile (the near field) s nonlinear, but beyond this region whose dimensions are defined arbitrarily, the soil is Jinear. These methods are physically more accurate than linear aporoaches for modeling the behaviour of soils under strong earthquakes. However, few laboratory tests have been carried out to examine theit behaviour and these models do not enjoy the simplicity of the linear Winkler models. Winker models whose stiffness coefficients are defined based on the wellknown py curves, and whose damping is assumed viscus are the simplest nonlinear approaches available, Several researchers have checked these models (which have been incorporated into several computer programs) with laboratory tests and have reported mixedassessments. In general, however, they appear to give more reasonable results compared to purely linear analyses. (One interesting point is that in almost all of the methods developed, the primary concem has been the evaluation of dynamic response of the superstructure, The evaluation of internal pile response i.e. pile moment and shear has been a secondary issue. In fact, researchers have looked at pile foundations in the same way that they look at surface foundations; they have been looking for the pile head impedances and the pile head motions to be used in the ‘subsequent dynamic analysis of the superstructure. Several extensive parametric studies ‘reported in the Iterature have been almost entirely confined to effects of different factors on pile head impedance and motion and rarely the effects on pile internal response have been examined. The reason for this appears to be the fact that the internal pile response is heavily dependent upon the dynamic behaviour of the superstructure, and superstructure is usually fa complex mutti-degree of freedom system whose dynamic behaviour changes ftom case to case. Many pile failures during earthquakes have occurred due to the inadequacy of the pile to withstand large induced moments and shears. The pile designer, who usually is different from the one who performs structural dynamic analysis, therefore needs to know approximately what the maximum seismically induced internal moment and shear of the pile would be. Development of simple procedures which could enable the pile designer with such an insight is very much needed. This is one of the main objectives ofthis thesis.Chapter 3: Methodology, and its Verification ‘twas indicated in chapter 2 that many methods for dynamic analysis of single piles and pile ‘groups have been developed. The majority of these methods are in the frequency domain, ‘and their application to cases of dynamic, time-dependent excitations requires some type of Fourier analysis. In such an analysis the excitation is decomposed into its frequency components, for each of which the response is calculated using the frequency domain ‘methods, and then by inverse Fourier analysis, the response is obtained in the time domain. ‘Such an analysis cannot be used for nontinear time domain problems because itis based on the principle of superposition, which is restricted to linear cases. Furthermore, most of the dynamic methods available are for dynamic pile head loads, and cannot be readily used for earthquake excttation, because the latter is applied to the pile through the soil, ‘The aim in this thesis is to develop a versatile simple time domain methodology, which can be readily used in the analysis of earthquakes. There are several encouraging signs which show such an aim is viable. One such sign is the fact that very simple Winker models, for ‘example the ones developed by Kaynia or Gazetas (which will be explained later in this chapter), compare well wth far more involved numerical methods. It is the more surprising to note that some of the coefficients used in these Winkler models, es will be explained later, are very simple and frequency independent. On the other hand it has been shown that pile inertia plays a rather insignificant role in the response. This means that a static analysis can ‘approximate the response to a large extent. This is a bold statement, which needs to be justified further. Hence in the first part of this chapter, the pile inertia is ignored, and a quasi- static analysis is developed and compared with other dynamic methods, namely the Winkler ‘method of Gazetas. In the second part of this chapter the formulation is extended to include pile inertia and cag-mass. In most of the methods available, the emphasis is on obtaining the dynamic response of the superstructure. Therefore, the developed methods mainly concentrate on calculation of pile hhead stifnesses and displacement. The pile designer, however, is more concemed with the internal pile loads. These loads may control the size, settlement and the performance of a pile foundation. The emphasis in this work is therefore on calculation of internal pile response, namely moment and shear, although pile head displacement is also considered.Like most of the methods available, and in order to keep the analysis simple, the vertical response ofthe pile is not considered here. The earthquake excitation is applied as verticaly incident horizontal shear waves. This does not cause any major problem for the analysis of single piles, and as explained by Kayria (1993), in most cases appears to be the crtcal situation. However, as will be showm later, such an assumption causes errors in estimation Of foads in pile groups, which experience axial loading, due to the rocking of the pile head, even in the case of a purely horizontal applied excitation. The pseudo static formulation 3.2.1 Kinematic versus static interaction of pile and soll tt is @ fact that a moving soil interacts with an embedded pile, and its displacement in the Vicinity ofthe pile is different from that which would occur f there were no piles. The problem of @ moving soil near a pile is important both in the static and dynamic analysis of piles. In the static analysis, for example, the Australian piling code requites that a pile installed near a ‘slope should be designed to resist potential movements in the surrounding soll mass. |tis instructive to draw comparisons between the static and dynamic interaction of piles with ‘@ moving soll, To that effect, a single end-bearing pile embedded in a homogeneous soil, ‘and carrying a mass-less cap is considered (Figure (3- 1)). The pile is assumed to be rigidly fixed to tha cap. ‘As the pile has no cap-mass, the dynamic response is called kinematic response. A steady state harmonic excitation with an amplitude of unity is applied at the base level and the pile head and ground surface responses are calculated. Epfs=1000, 10000 Ud=20 Figure (3-1): Willer mode o sing ent bearng plo embacod ns honogeneous si eIf the pile-soil-system in Figure (3- 1) is excited by the base motion u = u,e", the free field displacement along the pile can be written as Un @1) yy cosé =U, eS 2) and the governing differential equation can be written as: Ip — (Ky +100, )(Uy Up @3) or ay, : : cos Eh Gott he +iae, -mo* Uy (kx +ie, JU, coun G4) in which k, and , are the spring and damping coefficients of the Winkler model, « is the frequency of vibration, m is pile mass per unit length of the pile and S=ayV, with V, being the shear wave velocity. The governing differential equation can be written as Makris and Gazetas (1992) showed that the general solution of this differential equation is egigible and the particular solution is ) qpesseteseL rua ieeeeeeeay © E64 +k, +100, - ma? r 6 T's also the ratio of the pile displacement to tree field cispiacement, the so-called transfer function. In order to verity their Winkler methodology, Makris and Gazetas compared the absolute value of T with the corresponding value from the rigorous dynamic method of Kaynia and‘observed excellent agreement between the two methods. Figure (3- 2) shows this ‘compariosn. 12. os Irios - 04 EpiEs=1000 02 On = Figure (3-2): The abeoine value of he taser function for 2 ple embeded in ahamogenecus sl This figure shows that, as the frequency of vibration is increased, the maximum amplitude of the pile head response is decreased significantly with respect to the amplitude of surface vibration. One, however, should realise that this significant frequency dependence which is seen in Figure (3- 2) is largely due to a static interaction between the pile and soll, and the fact that pile cannot follow just any kind of soll movement and tends to smooth and average this movement. A change in @ means a change in the profile of soil movement which is ‘being applied to the pile. Such profiles for a homogeneous soil layer can be obtained from (- 2). The movement profie for several nondimensional frequencies and for U, equal to 1 are drawn in Figure (3-3).Figure (3-3): Several sl movement profs rested fm base excitation by cferent vais of rencimerscnal teasency ara. The static case can be derived from equation (2- 7), which is equivalent to equation (3- 3) when mass and damping coefficients are set equal to zero. atu, Eh Gr —k, (Uy -U,)=0 @7) Ignoring the general solution of equation (3- 7), as recommended by Makris and Gazetas, yields the following solution to this equation: Treaicn 8) coe tee wate Bd! +k, G9) Tze i$ the ratio of pile head displacement to the ground surface displacement, when the pile is subjected to static soil movement with a profile equal to the one obtained from one cimensional wave propagation with an angular velocty equal to w. Figure (3- 4) compares the kinematic and static solutions. It clearly shows that if static interaction between the pile and soil is taken into account the ratio of pile head stifiness to that of the surface displacement is very similar to the kinematic analysis for ail values of «in the important frequency range for seismic analysis. This means that the static interaction‘between pile and soil during earthquakes plays a dominant role in determining the pile maximum displacement and internal forces. Kinematic, Mohr & Gazetas 12 Kinematic, ngorous os Irlos oa 02 - Fgute (3-4) The absote value othe vans uncon fr ape anbeccedn @ homogenous slayer. Compansn a Kremate ‘00 stat reaction. Further analysis has shown that even when the soil profile is strongly layered, the static interaction continued to play a significant role in determining the pile response. Itis noted that in a kinematic analysis, the pile response is determined both by the amplitude ‘and the phase difference, but in static analysis there is no damping and the load is applied instantaneously. It could be concluded that an approximate solution scheme for seismic analysis of pile foundations may be designed in which a dynamic free-field analysis is first performed and then the computed free-field response is applied to the pile statically ‘Another point thet needs to be specified here is that equation (3- 4) used by Makris and Gazetas contains a simplification, and from a strict mathematical point of view overestimates the inertial effects of the pile. The free-field motion (u.) in equation (3- 3) needs to be the response of a soll mass from which a hole equal to the pile has been excavated (the so- called scattered motion (Wolf 1985)) . The up used in equation (3- 4), however, is for @ uniform site without any excavation. The evaluation of the scattered motion is much more diffcuit than the free-field displacement. Kaynia (1982), has shown that one can use Us and ‘approximately account for the presence of the hole by subtracting the soll modulus andmass from the corresponding values of the pile. Soll modulus is usually much smaller than Pile modulus and one can ignore such a subtraction. However, the soil mass is usually comparable with pile mass and cannot be ignored. The sesuis illustrated in Figure (- 2) have been obtained by Makris and Gazetas based on the assumption that soil mass density 's 0.7 times pile mass density. They have not subtracted the mass density of the soi from the pile and therefore have overestimated the pile mass effects. In fact, in this example, itis ‘sounder mathematically i the pile mass is totally ignored. Nevertheless, due to the fact that pile inertia has a very minor effect on the response, this overestimation of mass effects has had only @ minor effect on the response. 3.2.2 Explanation of the methodology In what folows a special pseudo static analysis is developed for the design of pile foundations, in which the dynamic lateral response of a site before the installation of the pile 's calculated first, and then this response is applied to the pile statically, ignoring pile inertia. The first part is completely dynamic, while the second part is actually an analysis of static interaction between the soil and pile. This is motivated by the discussion in the previous ‘section and the fact that in ordinary cases, pile inertia plays a rather insignificant role in the response, Ignoring the generated waves at the pile-soll interface greatly simplifies the analysis and makes any effort for modeling radiation damping unnecessary. In dynamic models, itis required that the generated interaction waves be damped out from the model, as usually happens in realty, where the waves travel outwards towards infinity and are not reflected ‘back to the soi-pile interface. 32.21 Freefield analysis ‘The seismic response of a site depends on many factors, including the geometry, the layering of the soil, and the angle of incidence of the seismic waves. A seismic record is the result of site excitation by a combination of different P, S, and surface waves. It is very ifficult to. model the complicated combined effect of these waves, and usually the earthquake is assumed to consist of only one of these kinds. In order to obtain the most critical situation the analysis should be repeated with the assumption of different kinds of waves. In the three dimensional analysis, the SH component of the wave front could be decoupled from SV and P waves, Therefore the widely accepted assumption that the earthquakerecord consists of vertically incident SH waves simpities the analysis to a large extent. For single piles, Kaynia (1983) has shown that this assumption is also conservative. ‘The response of a layered soll medium to earthquakes consisting of SH waves, can be analysed by the well known SHAKE program. This program which is based on the principles, ct wave propagation in an elastic medium is however limited to linear cases, and the nonlinear situation is simulated through a special inear hysteresis analysis. In the current work another method which can directly take into account the soll non- linearities is used. In this method which has been incorporated in the program ERLS (Poulos (1991)), the soil layers are modelled as a multi degree of freedom system of mass- spring-dashpots (Figure (3- 5)). This system is excited at the bottom level by the earthquake record and the response is calculated. It is a time-domain analysis in which the soil layers are discretised into small sub-layers, the length of which could be different in each layer, but should be small enough to prevent instabilty of the numerical analysis. AS an ‘example, for a soil with a typical stifness, when the time increment, At is one milfsecond, the sublayer depth, Al should be less than 30 centimetres. ‘The govening equations for the model can be written in the following form: (MI{y} + [e]{y} + [y} = [MJ @- 10) where [M], [C], [K] are mass, damping and stitiness matrices respectively; {y} is the vector of 80 S.6x107 005 | 265 Gravelly sois [~7.33xi0" 0 16 | + swesset (1977) has demostrated that the presence of an elastic rock stratum beneath the Soil profile results in an additional equivalent radiation damping which is frequency dependent. For uniform harmonic excitation of a homogeneous layer, the equivalent damping ratio can be expressed as: (8-20) @-21) in which p, and G, are mass density and shear modulus of the soil, and p, and G, are the corresponding values for the underlying rock.Equation (3- 21) has been incorporated into the ERLS analysis by making the following ‘assumptions: ‘The period of excitation T isthe average petiod over the duration ofthe excitation, ‘+The natural period T, is computed approximately from the initial shear modulus values for the soil layers, and is assumed to remain constant during the analysis. Figur (3-5: The sa mel inthe food ana, ‘The free-feld seismic analysis generates lateral soil movement profiles at each time step \Which are stored on a file and are used in subsequent pile analysis. The number and size of layers used in the seismic ste analysis are dictated by the pile discretisation in the ensuing analysis. 3.2.22 Lateral plle analysis ‘The pile is assumed to be a thin vertical strip of width d, length L, and constant flexibility E,J,. and is divided into n+1 elements, ait elements being of equal length 8, except those at the ‘op and tip, which are of length 8/2 (Poulos and Davis 1960). The soil is assumed to be an ideal isotropic, elastic material, having a Young's modulus E, and Poisson's ratio v, that are nUnatfected by the presence of the pile, The stresses developed between the pile and the soil ‘are assumed to act normal o the face of the pile and no account is taken of possible shear stresses developed between the soil and the sides of the pile. Each pile element is acted upon by a uniform horizontal stress P, which is assumed constant across the width of the pile, It is also assumed that the soil at the back of the pile near the surface adheres to the pile. If purely elastic conditions prevail within the soil, the horizontal displacements of the soil and the pile are equal. In this analysis, these displacements are equated at the element centres, ‘except for the two extreme elements for which displacements are calculated at the top and the tip of the pile. In determining the pile displacements, use is made of the differential equation for bending of a thin beam, equation (3- 22) This equation can be written in fnite-difference form as in equation (3- 23): a E,l, pro =-pd (3-22) ~<.fp}= “2 Difp,} om ‘n which {p} is the vector of pressure . d is the width of the pile ( for a circular pile equal to diameter.) {p,} is the vector of pile displacements and [D] is the matrix of finite difference coefficients.f | ae E C Figure (3-6): Ale elorants nto ateral setnic analysis of ingles, In the static analysis the soll displacements can be calculated based on the Mindlin equation which gives the displacements within a semi-infinite elastic isotropic homogeneous mass caused by a horizontal point ioad. Douglas and Davis (1964) integrated this equation over a ‘rectangular area. Their result can be directly used in the discretization scheme of the current analysis. The soil displacements for all points along the pile, which arise both from the external source of movement and the pressure caused by the soitpile interaction, may be expressed as fp. Ello} 6. oa ‘Where {p,} is the column vector of horizontal sail displacement, {p,}is the vector of extemal ‘soll movement and [lJ is the n+1 by n+1 matrix of soi-displacement-infuence factors,elements of which are evaluated by integration over a rectangular area of the Mindilin equation for the horizontal displacement of a point load within a semi-infinite mass. A solution to the problem is obtained by imposing displacement compatibility between the pile and the adjacent soil, by combining equations (3- 23) and (3- 24) which, leads to the following incremental equation: Li tu) [+s fs Kan? Pet (25) where [ll] is [[|°, the inversed soil-displacement-factor matrix, n=L/5, Ke=E,|JEzL*, is pile flexibility factor, {Ap} is the incremental displacement at soil pile interface, and {Ap,} is the incremental external soil movement. Equation (3- 25) leads to n+-1 equations for n+1 unknown displacements. Application of this ‘equation o the end nodes, however, requires 2 auxiliary points beyond the each of two ends of the pile; the total unknowns are therefore n+5. Four other equations can be obtained from 4 boundary conditions at the pile ends. Equation (3- 25) is valid only for the homogeneous case, as the Mindlin equation is strictly {for @ homogeneous soil mass. In the static analysis, it has been shown, however that for rnon-homogengous soll by assuming that the deflection at a point is given by the Mindiin equation, using the average value of E, at the influencing and influenced points, has given satisfactory resutts (Poulos and Davis 1980). In effect t means that the stress distribution in ‘a non-homogeneous mass is assumed to be the same as that in a homiogeneous soil. {in general, the Mindlin equation is not valid for dynamic loading, and as explained earlier its ‘dynamic equivalent does not exist in closed form. However, if the characteristic wave length (in the current analysis, the shear wave) in the soil medium is iong compared with the horizontal distance across the zone of major influence resulting from interaction, the elastic displacement and stress fields can stil be adequately defined by Mindiin’s theory (Penzien 1970). ‘There are 2 boundary conditions at each end of the pile, One of these conditions is related to the curvature of the ends. If the pile is rigidly attached to the cap, or ifthe pile tip is built in to rock, the pile rotation should be zero, i.e. ™(3- 26) In the case of a tree head or free tip pile the moment should be set equal to zero, or equal to any external moment (Mom.) applied to the ends of the pile: (3-27) For end bearing piles, the other tip boundary equation comes from equating the tip isplacement with that of the free-field. For friction piles, assuming a free end condition, the shear at the tip level is set equal to zero. In cases where the end contact condition cannot be assumed to be free, an imaginary soil ple may be assumed to connect the pile tip to the rock level where the displacement is known and is set equal to that of the free field. ‘Subsequent analysis has revealed that this is a rather unnecessary complication, and for ‘almost all practical cases , where the diameter of the pile is not large, and as long as the excitation is purely from the sol ree-fied, the assumption of a free tip condition is adequate, ‘The last boundary condition comes from shear equilibrium at the top of the pile. In the so- called kinematic pile analysis it is usually assumed that the pile has a cap-ree head Condition for which the shear is zero, In this kind of analysis the response of the pile head is calculated and its stiffness is obtained. In the ensuing analysis the superstructure, sitting on a medium with the stifness calculated in the previous step, is excited by the head , 43) ky +1, = 3.5G +i(78)G Oa —— Eeet00MPa pos al 03- goa. Bos o Seer eter 1000 1000 s00000 000009 Ep (pa) Figue (4-12) Te tect of pe modus on its knemate response Figure (4- 13) and Figure (4- 14) show the absolute value of the transfer function (1) ‘obtained by PILES, for soil Young modulus values of 100 MPa and 25 MPa, for the same pile configurations studied by SEPAP. As can be seen, the increase in pile modulus has not changed the natural frequencies of the soil-pile system. The amplitudes of the transfer ‘function are virtually the same for different pile modulus values when the frequency is less than 5 Hz. In the case of E.=100MPa, and less than 2.5 Hz. in the E,=25MPa case. This ‘means that the kinematic pile displacement in a seismic analysis should not be significantly influenced by the values of the pile moduius. .7L<20m, d=1.5m, Es=100MPa 3) Fue 4-13] Theat of ia maduus cn the abedue value ofthe wansler function (Ese f00MPa), ‘The absolute value of the transter function L=20m, d=1.5m, Es=25MPa Figure (4-14) The ee of ple modules on he absolute value othe tans con (E:=25MPa) ‘This is not of course the case for inertial response of the pile, because a cap-mass on top of the piles with different values of pile modulus will receive different levels of resistance. This can be seen in Figure (4- 15) which shows the variations of head lateral stifness and damping for piles with different values of pile modulus. 18L=20m, d=1.5m, Ea=25MPa Esx25MPa —Epes000 a — Ep99,000 p=900.000 : CCxnextattteEp=30,000) Seep ete atest 129 Es=100MPa Es=100MPa ts . ie 7 aus E25. Baa Bo. § ~~ ba Lo i got Sos a +f sateen ed Re _ poe eretete sine eteit etre sy vey Figure (4 15) Te eel ple modulus cn re rea ana imagnary pars fhe ple heat siiess ‘The same can be seen in the inertial response analysis of the piles by SEPAP. The same Piles whose kinematic head displacements were depicted in Figure (4- 12) were considered, ‘and it was assumed that the piles were carrying a 400 tonne cap-mass. The inertial response of the piles, namely the response with cap-mass minus the response without cap- mass, is depicted in Figure (4- 16). The strong influence of the pile modulus on the relative head displacement can be seen. This figure also shows that for the soft soll with a Young's modulus of 25MPa, the variation of relative displacement with E, is rather oscillatory. Such ‘an oscilation is not seen in the stifer soil with a modulus of 100MPa. This oscillation may be ‘explained by the effect of resonance, bearing in mind that the softer soi! has several resonant frequencies below 5 Hz, in contrast to the stiffer soll which has only one resonant frequency below 5 Hz (see Figure (4- 13) and Figure (4- 14). 19