381

ARTICLE
Experimental and theoretical studies of laterally loaded finned
piles in sand
Ahmed M.A. Nasr

Abstract: Large lateral loads may act on pile foundation supporting structures, such as bridge abutments, retaining walls, and
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14

structures subjected to wind–earthquake loads. A pile with fins is a newly developed type of pile foundation that is capable of
supporting large lateral loads. In the present study an attempt is made to evaluate the improvement in lateral capacity of a pile
with fins mounted close to the pile head. Small-scale model tests and a numerical study using finite element analysis were
performed on regular piles without (fins) and piles with fins. These piles were installed in sand of different relative densities (Dr =
35% and 78%). The investigations were carried out by varying the length, width, and shape of the fins, and type of pile. Results
reveal that there is a significant increase in lateral resistance of the piles after mounting the fins close to the pile head. The
increase in lateral resistance gained by placing fins on a pile varies with geometries of the pile and fins. The lateral resistance
increases with the increase in length of the fins until the fin’s length is equal to 0.4 of the pile length. Based on the results of the
laboratory model and numerical analysis, critical values of fin parameters for maximum improvement are suggested. The
agreement between observed and computed results is found to be reasonably good in terms of ultimate lateral load and fin
efficiency. A comparison between the model results and the prototype-scale results is also studied.

Key words: fin piles, lateral loading, sand, model tests, three-dimensional (3D) numerical analysis.

Résumé : Des charges latérales importantes peuvent agir sur des fondations sur pieux supportant des structures comme les
For personal use only.

points d’appui des ponts, les murs de soutènement et les structures soumises aux vents et séismes. Le pieu avec ailette est un type
de pieu nouvellement développé qui est capable de supporter des charges latérales importantes. La présente étude tente
d’évaluer l’amélioration de la capacité latérale d’un pieu avec ailettes montées près de la tête du pieu. Des essais sur des modèles
à petite échelle et une étude numérique avec l’analyse des éléments finis ont été réalisés sur des pieux réguliers sans ailettes et
sur des pieux avec ailettes. Ces pieux ont été installés dans du sable ayant différentes densités relatives (Dr = 35 et 78 %). Les
paramètres variés lors des investigations sont la longueur des ailettes, la largeur des ailettes, la forme des ailettes et le type de
pieu. Les résultats ont révélé qu’il y a une augmentation significative de la résistance latérale des pieux dont les ailettes sont
montées près de la tête du pieu. L’augmentation de la résistance latérale obtenue par le positionnement d’ailettes sur le pieu
varie selon la géométrie du pieu et des ailettes. La résistance latérale augmente avec l’augmentation de la longueur des ailettes
jusqu’à ce que la longueur des ailettes soit égale à 0,4 fois la longueur du pieu. Basé sur les résultats du modèle de laboratoire et
de l’analyse numérique, des valeurs critiques des paramètres des ailettes pour obtenir une amélioration maximale sont sug-
gérées. La concordance entre les résultats observés et ceux calculés est raisonnablement bonne en termes de charge latérale
ultime et d’efficacité des ailettes. Une comparaison entre les résultats du modèle et ceux d’un essai à l’échelle de prototype est
aussi étudiée. [Traduit par la Rédaction]

Mots-clés : pieux avec ailettes, chargement latéral, sable, essais sur modèles, analyse numérique en trois dimensions (3D).

Introduction load has been investigated by many researchers, the methods

Many transmission towers, high-rise buildings, and bridges are
supported by piles. These structures may be subjected to large
lateral loads such as violent winds and earthquakes. Under these
loads, the lateral resistances of piles will be small and thus need
improvement. Ramakrishna and Rao (1999) showed that these
environmental loads can cause a reduction in the lateral resis-
tance of widely used pile foundations. Therefore, the lateral load
capacity of piles is an important design consideration for the
construction of deep foundations.
There have been model tests on single piles, to investigate the
lateral capacity (e.g., Broms 1964a, 1964b; Reese et al. 1974), effect
of rigidity, and innovative pile foundations such as tapered piles
and fin piles (El Naggar and Wei 1999; Peng et al. 2004; Grabe and
Dührkop 2007). While the analysis of a single pile under lateral
available for improvement in lateral pile capacity are increasing
and need to be more applicable. Peng et al. (2004) stated that the
lateral load capacity of model tests on a monopile increased sig-
nificantly if fins were introduced. According to Trochanis et al.
(1991), Yang and Jeremić (2002), and Rollins et al. (2005), finite
element methods computer codes, such as LPILE, PLAXIS, and
ABAQUS, have been used successfully in the study of laterally
loaded circular piles. Developments in interface elements, consti-
tutive models for soils including nonlinearity, and pile geome-
tries and loading conditions now enable real environmental
conditions and nonstandard pile geometries to be modeled more
accurately. Peng et al. (2010) presented a three-dimensional anal-
ysis of laterally loaded fin piles. The increase in lateral resistance
by placing fins on a pile is illustrated by plotting the lateral resis-
tance against displacement of the pile head. The numerical anal-

Received 10 January 2013. Accepted 19 December 2013.

A.M.A. Nasr.* Structural Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.
E-mail for correspondence: amanasrg@hotmail.com.
*Present address: 4 Dr. Borgy Street from Wingat Street, Bolkly, Alexandria City, Egypt.

Can. Geotech. J. 51: 381–393 (2014) dx.doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2013-0012 Published at www.nrcresearchpress.com/cgj on 19 December 2013.
 382 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 51, 2014

ysis shows that the lateral resistance increases with the increase Fig. 1. Schematic elevation view of test configuration (not to scale).
in fin length. A fin pile has the optimum fin efficiency when the
fin length equals half the pile length. Peng et al. (2011) studied the
behavior of monopile and fin piles with different fin lengths un-
der cyclic lateral loading. Variables including frequency, direc-
tion, and magnitude of load and the type of pile tip were studied.
The results show that the fins reduce lateral displacement by at
least 50% providing they are at least half the length of the pile.
The concept of piles with wings attached close to the pile
head to increase lateral stiffness and capacity was developed by
Duhrkop and Grabe (2008). The effectiveness of the wings de-
pends mainly on the combination of the stiffness of the pile shaft,
wings, and soil. In the case of stiff soil, the stiffness of the wings
has to be higher than that in weak soil to achieve the same benefit
from the addition to the pile section. Grabe and Dührkop (2009)
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14

developed a procedure to account for wings in common design

methods, which includes guidance on the location and design of
wings.
Bienen et al. (2012) presented results from a series of model tests
maintaining stress similitude with the prototype, in which the
performance of a pile with wings was evaluated and compared
with that of regular monopiles. Increasing the effective pile cross
section through wings close to the pile head is shown to reduce
pile head deflections by approximately 50% compared with a reg-
ular monopile without wings for the same load level. The stiffer
initial response of the winged pile also leads to smaller pile head
deflections under cyclic loading, although the relative rate of ac- record the correct lateral deflection of the pile for each load in-
cumulation is similar to that of a monopile. crement applied, two sensitive dial gauges with a measurement of
In the present study, the lateral load responses and load capac- at least 0.01 mm were used, and their average was taken. The dial
For personal use only.

ities of fin piles embedded in sand were investigated in compari-
son to regular piles without fins. The investigations were carried
out by varying the length of fins, width of fins, shape of fins, and
type of pile. Furthermore, model piles were installed in sand of
different relative densities. Numerical analysis was conducted by
using the commercial finite element program PLAXIS 3D Founda-
tion (Plaxis Inc. 2008). The advantage of developing such a finite
element model is that it can be used to examine various configu-
rations that have not been modeled experimentally in the study.
Subsequently, the behavior of these fin piles under lateral loading
is discussed.
Experimental investigation
Loading frame and test tank
A series of laboratory model tests was conducted in a test tank
made of mild steel with inside dimensions of 1000 mm long ×
500 mm wide × 1000 mm height. These tank dimensions were
chosen to ensure that the failure wedge around the models did
not extend up to the walls. The longer front side of the tank was
provided with a removable glass plate of 20 mm thickness not
only because of its relatively high deformation modulus and low
friction coefficiency, but also to allow the soil to be observed
during the preparation process. The vertical edges of the tank
were strengthened by using steel angles at the middle and at the
top of the sides. The inner faces of the tank had graduated mark-
ings at 10 mm intervals to facilitate an accurate preparation of the
sand bed in layers. Balachandran (1996) stated that the peak fric-
tion angle between sand and treated surfaces decreases by about
65% compared to the case of untreated surfaces. Therefore, the
test tank was polished smoothly to minimize any possible friction
between the sides and the soil. A raining device consisting of an
upper steel box (raining box) was designed and constructed in the
loading frame to obtain the desired density for sand. A schematic
elevation view of the test configuration is illustrated in Fig. 1.
Lateral loads were applied to the model pile in increments by
using a 2.0 mm diameter high-tension steel wire connected to the
pile cap using an eye bolt. The other side of the wire ran over a
smooth adjustable pulley and supported a load plate form. To
gauges were mounted on rigid steel angles fixed at the upper
edges of the tank.
Soil preparation and characterization
The experiments were carried out on dry, commercially avail-
able sand; the grain size distribution is shown in Fig. 2. The sand
used had round grains that helped minimize friction between the
soil and the tank walls. The sand is described as poorly graded
sand (SP) according to the Unified Soil Classification System
(ASTM 2010). The sand was placed to achieve two relative densi-
ties, Dr — a loose state (Dr = 35%) and a dense state (Dr = 78%) — and
experiments were conducted at two unit weights: 17.54 and
18.44 kN/m3 for loose and dense conditions, respectively. The
drained triaxial compression tests of sand in loose and dense
conditions were performed to evaluate the shear strength prop-
erties. The estimated friction angles (␾) were 34.5° and 40.3° for
the loose and dense states, respectively. Other physical properties
of the sand are summarized in Table 1.
The raining technique through air at a controlled discharge
height and rate were employed to achieve homogeneous sand
beds, which were placed in 100 mm thick layers. Turner and
Kulhawy (1987) stated that the unit weight of the sand deposited
using the raining method depends primarily on the drop height of
the sand. Therefore, to simulate loose and dense conditions, the
sand was allowed to free-fall at heights of approximately 380 and
600 mm, respectively, from the raining device to the sand surface
in the tank. The relative densities achieved during the tests were
evaluated using small cans of known volume placed at different
locations in the test tank. The relative densities obtained using
the cans lie in the range of Dr = 35% ± 2.0% in the loose state and
Dr = 78% ± 1.25% in the dense state.
Model piles, pile cap, and fins
In this study, the model piles were made of smooth steel pipe.
The model piles’ outer diameter and wall thickness were 21 and
1.8 mm, respectively, which were used for all tests. Embedment
lengths (LP) of the piles were 315 and 777 mm. The length to
diameter ratios of the piles were 15 and 37 to represent short rigid
piles and long flexible piles, respectively. To verify this, the pile

Published by NRC Research Press

 Nasr 383

Fig. 2. Grain size distribution curve of the sand. Table 2. Relative flexibility of model piles.
Soil type Dr (%) nh (MN/m3) ␩ (m−1) LP (m) Pile flexibility
Loose sand 35 2.47 5.28 0.315 Short pile
0.777 Long pile
Dense sand 78 19.80 8.00 0.315 Intermediate pile
0.777 Long pile

Fig. 3. Schematic dimensions of finned piles: (a) triangular fin pile;

(b) rectangular fin pile.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14

Table 1. Physical properties of sand used in the model

tests.
Property Value
Effective grain size, D10 (mm) 0.33
Average grain size, D50 (mm) 0.60
Uniformity coefficient, Cu 1.97
Coefficient of curvature, Cc 1.17
For personal use only.

Maximum dry unit weight, ␥d max (kN/m3) 18.94

Minimum dry unit weight, ␥d min (kN/m3) 16.87
Maximum void ratio, emax 0.571
Minimum void ratio, emin 0.399
Specific gravity, Gs 2.65
Coarse to medium sand (%) 80.0 Lateral loads were applied to the pile head through a flexible
Fine sand (%) 20.0 cap to represent free-head tests on piles. To achieve this, the cap
Classification (USCS, ASTM 2010) SP was designed to be thin, made of 2.0 mm thick steel sheets. One
Water content, Wc (%) 0.00 edge of the cap was bent up to allow horizontal dial gauges to be
mounted. At the other side of the cap, a hook was welded exactly
at the center of this side.
rigidity was also related to the dimensionless embedment length As shown in Fig. 3, two different shapes of fins were used in the
(␩LP) for short and long piles (Broms 1964b). The coefficient ␩ is experiments. Triangular and rectangular fins with different sizes
calculated from: were made of 2.0 mm thick steel sheets. For all pile sections, two
fins were welded perpendicular to the lateral loading direction

冪
nh
(1) ␩⫽ 5
EPIP
where EP is modulus of elasticity of the pile material (21 × 107 kN/m2),
IP is moment of inertia of the pile cross section (2.875 × 10−9 m4), and
nh is the constant of subgrade reaction at the pile tip. According to
Terzaghi (1955), the ranges of values for the coefficient nh appear-
ing in eq. (1) are 2.47 and 19.8 MN/m3 for loose and dense sand,
respectively. The dimensionless embedment length (␩LP) has to be
less than 2 to be considered as a short rigid pile and greater than
4 for behavior as a long elastic pile (Broms 1964b; Chari and
Meyerhof 1983). The estimated value of ␩LP indicates that the
model piles used in the experimental study satisfy the criterion
for short rigid piles and intermediate and long flexible piles.
Table 2 gives the relative flexibility of the model piles. For piles
used in the experimental study, the surface roughness was mea-
sured using a perthometer. The surface roughness of the pile had
a maximum roughness, Rmax, of 1.23 ␮m.
The pile was instrumented with five-coupled strain gauges at-
tached to the model pile (with the strain gauge axis parallel to the
pile axis) at five levels along the model pile shaft. The main pur-
pose of using strain gauges was that bending moments could be
computed directly from the measured data.
and were located just below the soil surface of the embedded pile.
Preparation of experimental setup
At the beginning of testing, the raining device box was posi-
tioned directly above the model tank and was followed by depo-
sition of the sand by the raining technique. Leveling of the sand
surface was then completed with a straight edge. On reaching the
level of the pile base, the pile was placed in position and was held
vertical using a special clamp and the next layer of sand was
deposited up to the desired height. The pile clamp was then re-
moved carefully. The pile installation method used in this study
was adopted to simulate nondisplacement piles. This method rep-
resents no displacement in the soil around the pile during instal-
lation to maintain the sand relative density at limited values
during the experimental tests. It may be considered figuratively as
bored or auger piles, which cause low displacement in the soil
around the pile during installation.
Finally, two dial gauges were placed on the bent edge of the pile
cap and corrected at zero lateral displacement. Then the lateral
load was applied incrementally until failure was reached. The
lateral load was applied to the pile cap through a pulley arrange-
ment with a flexible wire attached to the pile cap. The other end
was attached to the loading pan. A lateral load was applied at
approximately the soil surface. For each load increment, the

Published by NRC Research Press

 384 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 51, 2014

Table 3. Model tests program.

Series Constant parameters Variable parameters
I Tests on regular pile (without fins), pile with (LP/DP = 15) Dr = 35%, 78%
Tests on regular pile (without fins), pile with (LP/DP = 37) Dr = 35%, 78%
II Dr = 35%, short pile (LP/DP = 15), WF = DP, triangular fin LF/LP = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5
Dr = 35%, short pile (LP/DP = 15), WF = DP, rectangular fin LF/LP = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5
Dr = 35%, long pile (LP/DP = 37), WF = DP, triangular fin LF/LP = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5
Dr = 35%, long pile (LP/DP = 37), WF = DP, rectangular fin LF/LP = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5
III Pile with (LP/DP = 15), WF = DP, rectangular fin, LF/LP = 0.4 Dr = 35%, 78%
Pile with (LP/DP = 37), WF = DP, rectangular fin, LF/LP = 0.4 Dr = 35%, 78%
IV Dr = 35 %, short pile (LP/DP = 15), LF/LP = 0.4, rectangular fin WF/DP = 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0
Dr = 35 %, long pile (LP/DP = 37), LF/LP = 0.4, rectangular fin WF/DP = 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14

lateral displacements of the two dial gauges were recorded and the Fig. 4. Variable parameters used in the experimental study (not to
average reading was taken for plotting the load–displacement scale).
graphs. Furthermore, each load increment was maintained con-
stant until the pile lateral deflection had stabilized. Then the pile
lateral deflections and strain gauge readings were recorded.

Test program
The testing program presented in this paper is a parametric
study that investigated different variables. Table 3 shows a sum-
mary of constant and variable test and their values. To study the
effect of fins on the lateral behavior of piles, regular piles (without
fins) were also tested under lateral load as a reference. The total of
32 tests was conducted to study the behavior of finned piles under
lateral loads at different relative densities. In addition to these
For personal use only.

tests, a few tests were repeated to check the repeatability of the

test results and a close agreement was found.
Initially, the behavior of model piles (LP/DP = 15 and 37) without
fins at two relative densities was determined (series I). In series II,
an investigation on the effect of fin length on the lateral behavior
of finned piles was conducted by using two shapes of fins and two
types of piles (short and long piles). In series III, the finned piles
were tested at two relative densities to study the influence of
relative density on the behavior of finned piles under lateral
loads. Series IV involved investigation of the effect of the fin width
on the lateral capacity of rectangular finned piles. All parameters
and their notations are shown in Fig. 4.
Three-dimensional finite element analysis and
procedure
Recently, Chik et al. (2009), Taha et al. (2009), and Kim and Jeong
(2011) presented a three-dimensional (3D) finite element analysis
to simulate a lateral load test using the PLAXIS program. The
numerical modeling techniques based on the finite element (FE)
provide versatile tools that are capable of modeling soil continu-
ity, soil nonlinearity, soil–pile interface behavior, and 3D bound-
ary conditions. Therefore, a series of FE analyses on model-scale
and prototype-scale piles subjected to lateral loading and soil con-
ditions as in the model tests were carried out using the 3D non-
linear computer program PLAXIS 3D Foundation (PLAXIS Inc.
2008).
Finite element mesh and boundary conditions
To perform the finite element calculations, the geometry has to
be divided into elements. A composition of finite elements is
called a finite element mesh. PLAXIS 3D Foundation (PLAXIS Inc.
2008) incorporates a fully automated mesh-generation procedure
to create the 3D FE mesh. The 3D mesh was generated in two
stages. Firstly, a two-dimensional (2D) mesh consisting of six-
noded triangular elements was automatically created. Then, the
2D mesh was refined around the pile. In the second stage, this
2D mesh was extended into a 3D mesh composed of 15-noded wedge
elements. The 15-noded wedge element is composed of 6-noded
triangles in the horizontal direction and 8-noded quadrilaterals in
the vertical direction. According to Zienkiewicz and Taylor (1994)
for the above type of 3D elements, three nodes are located along
each edge, which provide a quadratic approximation of the dis-
placement field within the volume of the element. The mesh was
automatically generated from the software package and consisted
of 2178 elements and 6474 nodes for a regular pile. The typical 3D
FE mesh used to analyze a pile subjected to lateral load is shown in
Fig. 5.
According to Karthigeyan et al. (2006, 2007), the soil mass di-
mensions depend on the pile diameter and length. Therefore, the
boundary is a cube with sides 26 times the diameter of the pile and
a height equal to the pile length (LP) plus a further 0.7LP below the
pile-toe level. It is well known that the zone in front of a laterally
loaded pile is the most affected by soil movement and resistance.
Therefore, the zone in front of the pile was 15 times the pile
diameter and the zone behind the pile was 10 times the pile diam-
eter as shown in Fig. 5. These dimensions were considered ade-
quate to eliminate the influence of boundary effects on the pile
performance (Wallace et al. 2002).
The bottom boundary was fixed (x–z bottom plane) against
movements in all directions (x, y, and z), whereas the ground
surface was free to move in all directions. All the nodes on the
model’s vertical boundaries, i.e., the nodes on the end of the x–y
and y–z planes, were restrained in the z and x directions, respec-
tively.
Material parameters and interface modeling
The soil and pile were modeled with finite elements, which
allowed for rigorous treatment of the soil–structure interaction.

Published by NRC Research Press

 Nasr
Fig. 5. Finite element used to model the laterally loaded pile
showing (a) three-dimensional mesh and (b) plan of the mesh.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14
For personal use only.
The Mohr–Coulomb (MC) material model was used to simulate the
nonlinear sand behavior because of its simplicity, reasonable
number of model parameters, and reasonable accuracy in model-
ing the behavior of laterally loaded pile problems. The MC model
has a fixed yield surface and the yield surface is not affected by
plastic straining. For MC-type yield function f (eq. (2)), the theory
of associated plasticity overestimates the dilatancy. Therefore,
in addition to the yield function, a plastic potential function g
(eq. (3)) is introduced. The plastic potential function contains the
dilatancy angle parameter that is required to model positive plas-
tic volumetric strain increments.
385
(2) f ⫽ p  sin␾  ⫹ 兹J2 cos␪ ⫺ 兹J2 /3 sin␾ sin␪ ⫺ c

cos␾ 
(3) g ⫽ p  sin␺ ⫹ 兹J2 cos␪ ⫺ 兹J2 /3 sin␺ sin␪
where p= = (1/3)␴ii is the mean pressure, ␴ii is the current state of
stress, ␾  is the effective friction angle, ␪ is the Lode’s angle, c= is
the effective cohesion, and ␺ is the dilatancy angle. In the above
expressions J2 = (1/2)sijsij is the second invariant of the deviator
stress with sij = ␴ij – p=␦ij, where ␦ij is the Kronecker delta.
The analysis of laterally loaded piles in sand is conducted under
drained conditions to model the prototype-scale piles. The elastic–
plastic MC model involves five basic input parameters: elasticity
modulus (E), Poisson’s ratio (␯), internal friction angle (␾ ), cohe-
sion (c=), and dilatancy (␺). The friction angles and elastic modulus
of the sand were calculated based on the drained triaxial compres-
sion test results for the loose and dense sands. The dilatancy angle
(␺) of the sand was evaluated according to the equation proposed
by PLAXIS for quartz sand (␺ = ␾ − 30°). The value of the secant
elastic modulus (E50) of the sand, in both loose and dense sand
conditions, was obtained from the drained triaxial compression
tests. To avoid complication in the analysis performed in dry sand
soils (c= = 0.0), PLAXIS offers to enter a small value that is bigger
than 0.20 kPa for c=. For that reason, a value of 0.30 kPa was used
for the c= in the analysis. The initial stress in the numerical mod-
eling was generated using Jaky’s formula, which gives the at rest
earth pressure coefficient Ko = 1 – sin␾  (Jaky 1944). Table 4 sum-
marizes the hyperbolic model parameters used in the analysis.
The piles and fins were assumed to be linear elastic mild steel
materials, which have typical properties of Young’s modulus EP
and Poisson’s ratio ␯P (see Table 4). The yield of steel was not
considered in the study. Shell elements were used to model the
thin-walled pile and the fins. The modeling of the pile installation
process is rather complicated, so the pile is assumed to be in a
stress-free state at the beginning of the analysis, and the effect of
the pile installation is ignored.
Finally, to model the interaction between the sand and pile an
interface element was created along the circumference of the pile.
Sixteen-noded interface elements with zero thickness were used
to simulate the soil–pile interaction. A decreased value of shear
modulus is assigned to the interface when a slip mode occurs in
the interface element. The decrease of strength for the interface
element is represented by a strength reduction factor (Rinter) in
PLAXIS. The strength reduction factor of the interface (Rinter) is set
to 0.65 for sand, which is typical of sand–steel interfaces. This
factor relates the interface properties to the strength properties of
a soil layer as follows:
(4) tan␾inter ⫽ Rinter tan␾soil
(5) Cinter ⫽ RinterCsoil
(6) ␺inter ⫽ 再0.0
␺soil
if Rinter ⬍ 1.0
otherwise
where ␾inter, Cinter, and ␺inter are the friction angle, cohesion, and
dilatancy angle of the interface, respectively.
In this study, numerical analysis was used to model regular and
rectangular finned piles only. The dimensions of the pile and fins
modeled in the numerical analysis are similar to the dimensions
used in the experimental model. For studying the scaling effects,
numerical analysis was used to simulate prototype-scale piles with
the same materials used in the experimental model for piles and
sand. The pile dimensions and soil thickness were increased
24 times to simulate a prototype-scale behavior.
Published by NRC Research Press
 386
Table 4. Material parameters used in the finite element analysis.
Parameter Loose sand
Material model Mohr–Coulomb soil model
Type of material behavior Drained
Secant elastic modulus, E50 (kPa) 19 500
Poisson’s ratio, ␯ 0.33
Cohesion, C (kPa) 0.30
Friction angle, ␾ (o) 34.50
Dilatancy angle, ␺ (o) 4.50
Interface reduction factor, Rint 0.65
Failure ratio, Rf 0.90
Interpretation and discussion of results
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14
Pile head lateral load and lateral displacement (P–Y) curves from
the results of the experimental model regular pile tests and nu-
merical analyses are shown in Fig. 6. Due to space limitation, only
some of (P–Y) curves are presented. From the above-mentioned
curves, the pile head lateral displacement (y) is expressed in non-
dimensional form in terms of the pile diameter (DP) as the ratio
(y/DP, %). In the discussion of the effect of the different parameters,
the ultimate lateral load (Hu) for different cases has been esti-
mated from (P–Y) curves. Different assumptions concerning the
ultimate lateral load capacity have been used by different re-
searchers. The assumptions made by researchers were generally
based on the excessive lateral displacement of the pile head or the
rotation of the pile (Hu et al. 2006). On the other hand, some
researchers defined the lateral load capacity of the pile from the
For personal use only.
load–displacement curve as the point where the curve becomes
linear or substantially linear (Prasad and Chari 1999; Dickin and
Laman 2003). In the present study and according to Peng et al.
(2010) and Erdal and Mustafa (2011), the lateral load corresponding
to the lateral displacement equal to 10% of the pile diameter at the
pile head was defined as the ultimate lateral load capacity, Hu.
According to Peng et al. (2010), the lateral resistance reduces as
the fins move down the pile. Therefore, in all tests on finned piles,
the fins were constructed at the top of the piles and perpendicular
to the load direction. The increase in pile resistance due to fins is
represented using a nondimensional factor: fin efficiency factor.
This factor is expressed as a ratio of the ultimate lateral load of a
finned pile to ultimate lateral load of a regular pile without fins
(fin efficiency = Hu finned pile/Hu regular pile).
Behavior of regular pile under lateral load
Initially, investigations of the behavior of regular piles with
LP/DP equal to 15 and 37 under lateral load were conducted to
provide the necessary reference data for the purpose of compari-
son. Figure 6 presents the variation of (y/DP, %) with lateral load for
the experimental model pile, FE laboratory scale, and FE proto-
type scale. As shown in Fig. 6, there is no observed peak load in the
results shown in this figure. Table 5 shows the results of ultimate
lateral load (Hu) for regular piles (without fins) embedded in loose
and dense sand.
From Figs. 6a and 6b, it is evident that the numerical analyses
using the FE method were carried out on laboratory-scale regular
piles to compare the results with those from laboratory tests to
demonstrate that the FE analysis gives acceptable results. The pile
head (P–Y) curves confirm that the numerical method imple-
mented in this study can be used to predict pile behavior under
lateral loads. From Table 5, it is clear that the ultimate lateral
loads obtained from numerical analyses (model scale) are in close
agreement with the results from experimental tests. The differ-
ence between the ultimate lateral loads obtained from experi-
mental results and numerical analyses varies from 6% to 11%.
Moreover, it is evident that when the lateral displacement at the
top of the pile is less than 10% of the pile diameter, the predicted
loads from numerical analyses are approximately similar to that
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 51, 2014
Dense sand Pile and fins
Mohr–Coulomb soil model Linear elastic
Drained Nonporous
29 250 2.10 × 108
0.33 0.20
0.30 —
40.30 —
10.30 —
0.65 —
0.90 —
predicted by the experimental model results. On the contrary,
when the lateral displacement is more than 10% of the pile diam-
eter, the difference between the predicted loads from numerical
analyses and the experimental model results increases signifi-
cantly. In practice, the lateral displacement of the pile head is not
going to move more than 10% of its diameter, which suggests that
the numerical analysis is an acceptable model of the pile behavior
under lateral load.
Effect of fin length relative to pile length
To investigate the effect of fin length on the behavior of later-
ally loaded finned piles, a series of tests was performed experi-
mentally and numerically for various fin length to pile length
ratios (LF/LP) of 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 by keeping the fin width
(WF/DP = 1.0) constant. The tests were carried out for finned piles
embedded in loose sand (Dr = 35%) and with two types of piles, i.e.,
short rigid and long flexible piles. A summary of the test results is
given in Table 6. The variations of ultimate lateral load (Hu) with
LF/LP are shown in Fig. 7. As expected, all piles with fins provided a
considerably higher resistance and a stiffer behavior compared
with those of the regular reference pile. At the same time this led
to a reduction of lateral pile head displacement at a given lateral
load. Consequently, from the results of Fig. 7, it is obvious that the
inclusion of fins at the top of the pile would improve the perfor-
mance of the pile by increasing the ultimate lateral load. It is clear
that for all piles with fins, increasing the length of fins (LF/LP) ratio
increases the ultimate lateral load to a normalized ratio of LF/LP =
0.4. At LF/LP > 0.4, the performance of the fin length becomes
rather minimal, as reflected by the ultimate lateral load especially
for long piles. The results obtained from the finite element anal-
ysis conducted on the laboratory-scale model are in close agree-
ment with those from the experimental model. The finite element
calculations are fairly accurate for the computed values of ulti-
mate lateral load (Hu obtained from FE analysis was defined in the
same way as that defined in the model tests).
To study the effect of fin length (LF/LP) on the lateral displace-
ment along a pile length, a series of theoretical tests (model scale)
was conducted at different (LF/LP) ratios, a lateral load equal to
60 N, and a relative density Dr = 35%. Piles with rectangular fins
and LP/DP = 37 were tested at a constant fin width (WF/DP = 1.0).
Figure 8 shows the lateral deflection of piles with depth at differ-
ent LF/LP ratios. The figure shows that the lateral deflection along
the pile length decreases with increasing fin length. The results
show that the horizontal deflection along the pile length strongly
depends on the fin length. Reduction in the lateral deflection
along the pile length can be explained as being a result of increasing
the passive area of soil pressure in front of the finned pile. In Fig. 8,
the maximum lateral deflection was at the upper part of the pile. At
LF/LP = 0.4 and 0.5, the lateral head deflection decreased by about
70% and 74%, respectively, from that of regular pile (LF/LP = 0.0).
Essentially, it is clear that for practical purposes, the maximum ben-
efit to reduce the lateral deflection at the pile head is obtained when
LF/LP = 0.4. The above results agree with Peng et al. (2010, 2011).
Published by NRC Research Press
 Nasr 387

Fig. 6. Pile head lateral deflection curves (P–Y curves) from experimental and FE models for regular piles: (a) pile with (Lp/Dp = 15); (b) long pile
(Lp/Dp = 37); (c) FE (prototype scale).
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14
For personal use only.

Table 5. Test results of regular piles (without fins), series I. Table 6. Test results of finned piles with different LF/LP ratios and Dr =
35%, series II.
Ultimate lateral load, Hu (N)
Triangular fin shape Rectangular fin shape
Relative FE FE
density, Experimental (model (prototype LF/LP Hu (N) Fin efficiency Hu (N) Fin efficiency
Dr (%) Pile type model test scale) scale) Short pile
35.0 Short pile 30.0 27.0 20 000 0.1 31 1.03 34 1.13
Long pile 58.0 52.0 52 500 0.2 34 1.13 42 1.40
78.0 Intermediate pile 64.0 58.0 32 000 0.3 37 1.23 49 1.63
Long pile 126 118 60 000 0.4 41 1.37 53 1.77
0.5 43 1.43 57 1.90
Long pile
For regular and finned piles (LF/LP = 0.4), the moment of the pile 0.1 64 1.10 66 1.14
at corresponding strain gauge locations was calculated from the 0.2 78 1.34 82 1.41
strain gauge readings using eqs. (7) and (8). From the measured 0.3 88 1.52 99 1.71
bending strains, the bending moments were determined using 0.4 95 1.64 108 1.86
the assumption of a linear strain distribution on a cross section 0.5 97 1.67 112 1.93
perpendicular to the pile axis (Welch and Reese 1972; Nirro et al.
1992; Rollins et al. 1998; Ismael 2010). This approach cancels out
M
any contribution due to axial strain, leaving only strains due to (8) ⌿⫽
bending and making it possible to accurately compute the bend- EPIP
ing moment in the pile. The pile head is free to rotate; therefore
bending moment values should be zero at the pile head. The where ␧t is tensile strain, ␧c is compressive strain, h is the horizon-
relation between curvature (⌿) and bending strains is as follows: tal distance between the strain gauges (i.e., diameter of pile), EP is
modulus of elasticity of the pile material (steel), IP is moment of
(␧t ⫺ ␧c) inertia of the pile cross section, and M is bending moment. Ac-
(7) ⌿⫽
h cording to eqs. (7) and (8), the bending moment at any point can be

Published by NRC Research Press

 388
Fig. 7. Variation of ultimate lateral load Hu with LF/LP for
model-scale piles.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14
Fig. 8. Lateral deflection along the pile length at different LF/LP
ratios.
For personal use only.
obtained if the strain reading was measured. Variation of the
bending moments along the pile length from experimental and
numerical analysis is shown in Fig. 9 at lateral load equal to 60 N
and Dr = 35%. From Fig. 9, it is clear that when the finned pile had
LF/LP = 0.4, the maximum bending moment decreased by about
39% of the value for the regular pile. Obviously, for the finned pile
(LF/LP = 0.4), the bending moment along the pile length vanished
early when compared with the regular pile. It is evident from
Fig. 9 that the depth of the point of maximum bending moment or
the point of zero shear decreases by using fins. As shown in the
case of finned pile, the zone of significant moments extends to a
depth of 0.3LP only with the maximum moment at a depth of
0.15LP below the ground level.
A comparison between the bending moment distribution calcu-
lated using the finite element analyses (model scale) and the re-
sults obtained from relevant experimental model test for regular
and finned piles is shown in Fig. 9. The finite element results
provide a reasonable fit with the experimental data. The differ-
ence in maximum bending moment along the pile length be-
tween regular and finned piles (LF/LP = 0.4) was about 10% to 12%.
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 51, 2014
Fig. 9. Variation of bending moment (B.M.) along pile length for
regular and finned piles.
Effect of fin width relative to pile diameter
The upper part of the soil around the pile is the most critical
part in the case of a laterally loaded pile (Zhang et al. 2005) be-
cause of its greater deflection than that of the lower part. There-
fore, a series of tests was performed for various rectangular fin
width to pile diameter ratios WF/DP of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0, by
keeping LF/LP = 0.4 and Dr = 35%. A summary of the test results is
given in Table 7. The variations of fin efficiency with WF/DP for
long and short piles are shown in Fig. 10. The results clearly indi-
cate that for both long and short piles, the fin efficiency increases
with increasing WF/DP ratios (at constant fin length). It is evident
that at WF/DP = 1.0, the fin efficiency increased by about 75% and
90% for short and long piles, respectively. This can be explained as
follows: as shown in Figs. 11a and 11b, increasing the fin width will
provide a considerably higher soil resistance and a stiffer behavior
due to an increase of the passive area of earth pressure in front of
the pile compared with regular piles (reference piles). This leads to
an increase in the ultimate lateral load for finned piles, which
increases the fin efficiency. Furthermore, by increasing the fin
width, the effect of the fins can be observed directly at the ground
surface. While the soil flowed around the regular pile, the fins
caused the appearance of a passive wedge in front of the pile.
Further increase in the width of the fins in excess of DP will im-
prove the fin efficiency with a reduced rate. This can be attributed
to the range of influence of the horizontal resistance of the pile.
According to Stewart (1999), the necessary range around the pile
to resist lateral loads can be set as a three-dimensional inverted
cone shape centered on the pile and formed near the soil surface.
The lateral resistance of the pile depends significantly on the
deformation of soil within the inverted cone shape. In the case of
WF/DP < 1.0, the fin width was located within the range of the
inverted cone shape (soil resistance zone). On the contrary, by
increasing the fin width WF/DP < 1.0, the fin width was located out
of the zone of soil resistance. Hence the fin efficiency increased by
a small rate. For practical reasons, the fin width equal to pile
diameter (WF/DP = 1.0) can be considered the best fin width for
several reasons, such as when the fin width increases, it becomes
less rigid. Thus for larger fins, the fin’s thickness has to be in-
creased to provide the required stiffness. Consequently it will cost
more and perhaps reduces the benefit of using such fins. On the
other hand, increasing the size without maintaining the stiffness
within reasonable limits causes larger deformation of the fins,
Published by NRC Research Press
 Nasr 389

Table 7. Test results of finned piles with different WF/DP ratios, series IV. (10) Fin efficiency ⫽ 0.84 ⫹ 1.55 (LF /LP) ⫹ 0.275 (WF /DP)
Short pile Long pile R2 ⫽ 92.0%
WF/DP Hu (N) Fin efficiency Hu (N) Fin efficiency
Experimental model From the results of the regression model shown in eqs. (9) and
0.5 47 1.56 81 1.40 (10), it is clear that the ultimate lateral load HU and fin efficiency
1.0 53 1.77 108 1.86 depends on the variables (LF/LP), (WF/DP), and (LP/DP) with the de-
1.5 57 1.90 115 1.98 gree of confidence reaching 93.8% and 92.0%, respectively, for
2.0 62 2.06 122 2.10 finned piles with rectangular fins. Therefore, the calculated val-
FE model scale ues of HU and fin efficiency from these equations are comparable
0.5 40 1.48 86 1.66 to the measured values from tests. However, the above equations
1.0 49 1.81 103 1.98 are valid only for finned piles with LP/DP equal to 15 and 37 with
1.5 55 2.04 112 2.15 different fin lengths and widths. Nevertheless, the equations are
2.0 58 2.15 115 2.21 considered to have provided a useful basis for further research
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14

leading to an increased understanding of the application of fins to

Fig. 10. Variation of fin efficiency with WF/DP for model-scale piles improve the lateral resistance for vertical piles. It was evident that
(experimental and FE results). these equations were based on the results of sand with 35% rela-
tive density.

Effect of fin shape on lateral behavior of finned pile

Stewart (1999) assumed that the range of influence of horizontal
resistance of piles under lateral loads can be set as a three-
dimensional inverted cone shape centered on the pile. However, it
is difficult to construct fins in a cone shape. Therefore, in this
study inverted triangular–shaped fins were used at the top of the
pile to resist the deflection of the conical wedge around the pile.
Peng et al. (2010, 2011) and Bienen et al. (2012) used rectangular fins
to improve the lateral behavior of piles. Hence, a series of tests
For personal use only.

was conducted to study the effect of fin shape on the lateral be-

Fig. 11. Distribution of lateral soil resistance for (a) regular and
(b) finned piles.
which reduces the advantages of their behavior. In this study, for
steel fins and at WF/DP ≤ 1.0, it is recommended that the fin’s
thickness be larger or equal to the wall thickness of the steel pile
to insure attainment of a sufficient level of rigidity to allow mo-
bilization of the soil’s passive resistance. The effect of fin defor-
mation is not taken into account in this study as it is assumed to
be rigid. Thus, there is a certain value of deformation that affects
the ultimate lateral load of the pile, which can be an important
factor for future studies.
Based on the results from experimental model (series II and IV)
and by using the statistical program SPSS 14 (Levesque 2007), a
linear regression model was developed that correlates the ulti-
mate lateral load (HU) and the fin efficiency with fin length (LF/LP),
fin width (WF/DP), and pile length to diameter ratio (LP/DP) as follows:
(9) HU(N) ⫽ ⫺17.21 ⫹ 67.79 (LF /LP) ⫹ 12.75 (WF /DP)
⫹ 2.12 (LP /DP) R2 ⫽ 93.8%
havior of long piles. Figure 12 shows the variations of lateral load
versus lateral deflection for different fin shapes. It is clearly
shown that using any shape of fins significantly improves the
ultimate lateral load of the pile, as including fins in the top of the
pile provides additional passive soil resistance in front of the pile.
Consequently, it is evident that the ultimate lateral load (Hu) of
piles finned with triangular and rectangular fins increased by
about 64% and 86%, respectively, over that of a regular pile. Thus,
when the pile was finned with rectangular fins, the ultimate lat-
eral load increased by about 14% over that of a pile with triangular
fins. This can be attributed to the increased passive area of soil
resistance in the case of a rectangular finned pile, which thereaf-
ter causes the increase in the ultimate lateral load.
To study the effect of fin shape on lateral displacement at the
ground surface, tests were carried out on triangular and rectan-
gular fins with different LF/LP ratios. Figure 13 shows the variation
of lateral displacement of a fin pile to a regular pile against the
LF/LP ratios for different fin shapes. The curves clearly show good
agreement in the general trend of behavior of both experimental
and numerical analysis. It is obvious that the lateral displacement
decreased significantly when the rectangular fins were used. From
Fig. 13, at LF/LP = 0.4, it can be seen that the lateral displacement at
the ground surface for piles with rectangular and triangular fins
decreased by about 70% and 37%, respectively, than that of a reg-
ular pile. Hence, using rectangular fins for laterally loaded piles is
more effective in reducing the lateral pile head deflection and
increasing the ultimate lateral load of the pile. Figure 14 shows the
variation of maximum bending moment along the pile length
with LF/LP when useing different fin shapes. When the pile was
finned with rectangular and triangular fins, at LF/LP = 0.4, the
maximum bending moment along the pile length decreased by
about 37% and 25%, respectively, than that of a regular pile. Obvi-
ously, the effect of fin shape on maximum bending moment in-
creased when LF/LP ratio increased. However, when LF/LP < 0.4, the
decrease in maximum bending moment for rectangular and tri-
angular fins piles decreased and can be neglected.

Published by NRC Research Press

 390
Fig. 12. Lateral load–deflection curves for regular and
different-shaped finned piles.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14
Fig. 13. Effect of fin shape on lateral displacement expressed in
relation to displacement of a regular pile.
For personal use only.
Fig. 14. Variation of maximum bending moment with LF/LP for
rectangular and triangular finned piles.
Relationship between coefficient of horizontal subgrade
reaction and deflection for fin piles
According to Matlock and Reese (1960), the subgrade reaction
approach treats a laterally loaded pile as a beam on an elastic
foundation. When a long pile is loaded laterally at the ground
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 51, 2014
surface, the deflection in the free-head pile at the ground surface
(yg) can be determined by eq. (11)
(11) yg ⫽ 2.435Hg 冉 冊
T3
EPIP
冪
EPIP
(12) T⫽ 5
nh
where Hg is the lateral load at ground surface.
Based on the lateral load–displacement curves shown in Fig. 12
and (EPIP) of the pile, the relative stiffness factor, T, can be calcu-
lated from eq. (11). Hence, the coefficient of horizontal subgrade
reaction (nh) can be calculated from eq. (12). It is clear from Fig. 14
that elastic deformation of soil is observed at very low deflections
(y/D ≤ 5%, where D is the pile diameter. Subsequent plastic defor-
mation of soil was noted in all experimental tests. Therefore, the
values of lateral deflections used in eq. (11) were obtained at very
low deflections to imitate the elastic behavior of soil.
Figure 15 shows nh versus deflection in the free head case for a
pile with LP/DP = 37. It is clear that the coefficient of horizontal
modulus of subgrade reaction decreases with the deflection in-
crease. From this observation, the design values of nh should be
compatible with the anticipated deflections. At low head deflec-
tions (yg ≤ 5% pile diameter), the dependency of the coefficient nh
on the deflection and fin shape is most pronounced. But for high
deflections (plastic deformation soil), the values of nh are rela-
tively insensitive to deflection and fin shape. It has been argued
that plasticity of the soil near the ground surface is the primary
cause of this phenomenon (Davisson and Salley 1970). Further-
more, at any lateral deflection, the values of nh are higher for
finned piles when compared with a regular pile, which increases
the lateral resistance of piles due to a increase in the passive area
of the soil resistance wedge in front of the pile. From Fig. 15, it is
clear that at a lateral deflection equal to 2.6 mm (12.4% pile diameter),
the effect of fin shape on nh values can be neglected. Also, the
relationship between nh and lateral deflection (yg) at the ground
surface is represented in Fig. 15 by using the equations. These
equations help in estimating (nh) values at any anticipated deflec-
tions.
Effect of pile length on fin efficiency
In this study, the fin efficiency was observed by varying the
length of the pile for rectangular and triangular fins. The length of
the pile varied from LP/DP = 15 to 37 so that both short pile (rigid
pile) and long pile (flexible pile) behavior, respectively, could be
captured. The variations of fin efficiency with LF/LP for short and
long piles are shown in Fig. 16. The results clearly indicate that the
fin efficiency depends on rigidity of the pile and pile length. From
Fig. 16, for piles finned with rectangular fins (LF/LP = 0.1 and 0.2),
pile length has no appreciable effect on the fin efficiency. At
LF/LP = 0.4 (rectangular fins), the maximum difference in fin effi-
ciency between short and long piles is about 5%. These results
agree with the findings of Peng et al. 2004 and Peng 2006. On the
contrary, for piles finned with triangular fins, the pile length has
more effect on the fin efficiency, where the maximum difference
in fin efficiency between short and long piles is about 20%. This
can be explained as follows: for long piles, the piles will get the
fixation to resist lateral movement and thus increase the ultimate
lateral load. Furthermore, the passive resistance is mobilized on
increased embedment of the pile, i.e., when the embedment
length of the pile increases. Thus, the embedded length for short
piles is not sufficient to create a full fixation of the piles to resist
lateral loads. Obviously, for long piles with any fin shape, increas-
ing the fin length more than 0.4 of the pile length has no appre-
Published by NRC Research Press
 Nasr
Fig. 15. nh–deflection relationship for regular and finned piles.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14
Fig. 16. Variation of fin efficiency with LF/LP for model-scale piles
(experimental results).
For personal use only.
ciable effect on fin efficiency. However, for short piles with
LF/LP > 0.4, a significant increase in fin efficiency is obtained.
From the results summarized in Tables 5 and 6, it is clear that
the fins increased the lateral resistance of finned piles relative to
that of regular piles. Then it follows that it should be possible to
reduce the length of a finned pile. From Tables 5 and 6, it is clear
that the ultimate lateral load (Hu) of a short pile finned with
rectangular fins (LF/LP = 0.5) and a long regular pile is approxi-
mately equal. The results indicate that the pile length can be
reduced and still manage to gain resistance with the application
of fins. These results agree with the findings of Peng et al. (2010).
Effect of sand relative density on behavior of finned piles
Variations of the ultimate lateral load (Hu) with sand relative
densities are shown in Fig. 17. Results confirm that the ultimate
lateral load increases with an increase in density of the sand bed
for both regular and finned piles (LF/LP = 0.4). When the sand
density increased, the shear strength and stiffness of the sand
increased as well. Therefore, the lateral deflection of the pile de-
creased and at the same time, the ultimate lateral load increased.
For short finned piles, the increase in the ultimate lateral load was
69% when the sand relative density changed from 35% to 78%.
Thus for long finned piles, the ultimate lateral load increased by
391
Fig. 17. Ultimate lateral load versus relative densities for regular
and finned piles.
about 43% when the sand relative density increased to the same
values.
In general, Hu increases by increasing the relative density of
sand. This increase contributes to the increase of mobilization of
shearing resistance on the pile surface through the interface fric-
tion between the pile and sand. These resisting shearing forces
will be mobilized, allowing for a higher ultimate lateral load (Hu)
at the pile head. Figure 17 clearly shows that the fins are very
effective in improving the ultimate lateral load of piles embedded
in loose sand (Dr = 35%), while in dense sand (Dr = 78%), fins cause
a minor amount of improvement on Hu.
Scale effects and limitations
Laboratory tests using small-scale models are a widely used
technique because a full-scale loading test is not economical due
to the high cost, time, and many requirements for construction,
instrumentation, and loading. Hence, scaling effects must be min-
imized to ensure that the behavior observed at a reduced scale can
be extrapolated to predict full-scale behavior (Muir Wood 2004).
For such small-scale models, the soil particle size, construction
techniques, and boundary conditions are the important factors
that are to be considered. Franke and Muth (1985) suggested that
the scale error can be neglected when the ratio of the pile diam-
eter (DP) to mean grain size (D50) is greater than 30. Therefore, the
effect of the particle size in this research should be smaller, as the
ratio DP/D50 used in the model was 35. Bransby and Smith (1975)
stated that with smooth side walls and a relatively wide tank, side
friction and boundary conditions do not have any significant ef-
fect on the results of the small-scale models. For this study, the
inside walls were polished smoothly to reduce friction as much as
possible. Furthermore, the length and depth of the tank were
48 times the pile diameter and the soil layer between the base of
the tank and the pile end of long pile was 11 times the pile diam-
eter. Given the above precautions, the friction between the sand
and tank sides can be neglected. Regarding the rigidity of the
model tank and prevention of any lateral movement of the tank
walls, its sides and top were strengthened by fitted steel angles.
The construction techniques used to build the small-scale model in
the laboratory were approximately similar to the field requirements.
In this investigation the ability of using the finite element pro-
gram to solve a prototype-scale is highlighted. Computer model-
ing was carried out using a full-scale fin pile subjected to a static
lateral load. The additional series of finite element analyses were
conducted to examine the scaling effects of the experimental
Published by NRC Research Press
 392
Table 8. Summary of results as predicted by FEM with
various scaling.
Fin efficiency
Experimental FEM FEM
LF/LP model test (model scale) (prototype scale)
0.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.1 1.14 1.34 1.39
0.2 1.41 1.65 1.63
0.3 1.71 1.82 1.91
0.4 1.86 1.98 2.02
0.5 1.93 2.07 2.12
model size results. It should be noted that this prediction was
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14
carried out to illustrate the potential benefit of using fin piles as a
foundation at full scale. The size of the pile, rectangular fin di-
mensions, soil thickness, and mesh boundary dimensions were
increased approximately 24 times to simulate a prototype-scale
behavior (i.e., pile diameter DP = 0.5 m, pile length LP = 18.0 m, fin
width WF = 0.5 m, fin thickness tF = 0.05 m, and mesh depth =
30 m). The properties of the pile material and sand fill (Dr = 35%)
remained the same as in the original experimental model test. But
for this series of analyses, LF/LP = 0.0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5. The
results of fin efficiency for this series of analyses are summarized
in Table 8. It is clear that the fin efficiency obtained from the
prototype-scale results increased from 10% at LF/LP = 0.5% to 22% at
LF/LP = 0.1 compared to that of the experimental model results.
This result approaches the results from FE model-scale (maximum
For personal use only.
difference about 5%).
From the above results, the model and prototype study indicate
the benefits for the ultimate lateral load and fin efficiency of the
pile that could be achieved when using fins to improve the lateral
response of piles. Despite the involvement of scale effects, this
study provides a useful basis for further research using centrifu-
gal and full-scale models, leading to an increased understanding
of real finned pile behavior under lateral loads.
Conclusions
The behavior of finned piles subjected to a lateral load in sand
deposits of different densities was investigated through model
test studies and three-dimensional nonlinear FE analyses. The re-
sults obtained from model test studies and numerical analyses
were compared. Based on the investigations the following main
conclusions can be drawn:
1. Piles with fins provide considerably higher ultimate lateral
loads and lateral resistance behavior compared with a regular
reference pile.
2. Ultimate lateral load improvement depends greatly on length
of the fins and increases significantly to the value of LF/LP = 0.4.
Any further increase in the fin length does not show any note-
worthy contribution to the pile capacity.
3. Lateral head deflection decreases with the increase in length
of the fins. At LF/LP = 0.4 and 0.5, the lateral head deflection
decreased by about 70% and 74%, respectively, than that of a
regular pile (LF/LP = 0.0). For practical purposes, the maximum
benefit of reduction in the lateral head deflection is obtained
when LF/LP = 0.4.
4. For both short and long piles, the fin efficiency increases with
the increase in fin width. When fin width equals the pile di-
ameter (WF/DP = 1.0), the fin efficiency increased by about 75%
and 90% for short and long piles, respectively. Therefore, to
maintain the rigidity and stiffness of the fins within reason-
able limits, a fin width equal to the pile diameter can be con-
sidered as the best fin width.
5. When a pile is finned with triangular and rectangular fins, the
ultimate lateral load of the pile increases by about 64% and
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 51, 2014
86%, respectively, than that of a regular pile. At the same time,
the lateral head deflection decreases by about 37% and 70%,
respectively. Hence, using rectangular fins is more effective in
improving the lateral behavior of piles.
6. At low head deflections (≤10% pile diameter), the coefficient of
horizontal subgrade reaction (nh) values depends on the fin
shape. Furthermore, the values of (nh) are higher for finned
piles when compared with regular piles.
7. With the application of fins, the length of a finned pile can be
reduced relative to a regular pile and still manage to gain
lateral resistance.
8. There is close agreement between the experimental and nu-
merical results in terms of the fin length (LF/LP) and fin width
(WF/DP). However, the numerical results show that the fin ef-
ficiency for the prototype-scale has a more significant increase
(about 9% to 22%) than the experimental model results.
Acknowledgement
The author would like to thank Marwa I. El-Sokary for her valu-
able suggestions and assistance.
References
ASTM. 2010. Standard practice for classification of soils for engineering purposes
(Unified Soil Classification System). ASTM standard D2487. American Society
for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, Pa.
Balachandran, S.B. 1996. Modeling of geosynthetic reinforced soil walls. Ph.D.
thesis, University of Cambridge.
Bransby, P.L., and Smith, I.A.A. 1975. Side friction in model retaining wall exper-
iments. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 101(GT7): 615–632.
Bienen, B., Dührkop, J., Grabe, J., Randolph, M.F., and White, D. 2012. Response
of piles with wings to monotonic and cyclic lateral loading in sand. Journal of
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 138(3): 364–375. doi:10.
1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000592.
Broms, B.B. 1964a. Lateral resistance of piles in cohesive soils. Journal of the Soil
Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, 90(2): 27–64.
Broms, B.B. 1964b. Lateral resistance of piles in cohesionless soils. Journal of the
Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, 90(3):123–156.
Chari, T.R., and Meyerhof, G.G. 1983. Ultimate capacity of rigid single piles under
inclined loads in sand. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 20(4): 849–854. doi:
10.1139/t83-091.
Chik, Z., Abbas, J., Taha, M., and Shafiqu, M. 2009. Lateral behavior of single pile
in cohesionless soil subjected to both vertical and horizontal loads. European
Journal of Science Research, 29(2):194–205.
Davisson, T., and Salley, R. 1970. Model study of laterally loaded piles. Journal of
the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, 96(SM5).
Dickin, E.A., and Laman, M. 2003. Moment response of short rectangular piers
in sand. Computers & Structures, 81(30–31): 2717–2729. doi:10.1016/S0045-
7949(03)00337-7.
Duhrkop, J., and Grabe, J. 2008. Improving of lateral bearing capacity of mono-
piles by welded wings. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on
Foundations. HIS BRE Press, Garston, UK. pp. 849–860.
El Naggar, M.H., and Wei, J.Q. 1999. Response of tapered piles subjected to lateral
loading. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 36(1): 52–71. doi:10.1139/t98-094.
Erdal, U., and Mustafa, L. 2011. Lateral resistance of a short rigid pile in a two-
layer cohesionless soil. Acta Geotechnical Slovenica, 2: 19–43.
Franke, E., and Muth, G. 1985. Scale effect in 1g model tests on horizontally
loaded piles. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of Soil
Mechanics and Foundations, San Francisco. Vol. 2, pp. 1011–1014.
Grabe, J., and Dührkop, J. 2007. Laterally loaded piles with bulge. In Proceedings
of the 26th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic
Engineering. [CD-ROM]. ASME, New York. No. OMAE2007-29046.
Grabe, J., and Dührkop, J. 2009. Design of laterally loaded piles with bulge. In
Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics
and Arctic Engineering (OMAE). ASME, New York.
Hu, Z., McVay, M., Bloomquist, D., Herrera, R., and Lai, P. 2006. Influence of
torque on lateral capacity of drilled shafts in sands. Journal of Geotechnical
and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 132(4): 456–464. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)
1090-0241(2006)132:4(456).
Ismael, N.F. 2010. Behavior of step tapered bored piles in sand under static
lateral loading. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
136(5): 669–676. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000265.
Jaky, J. 1944. The coefficient of earth pressure at rest. Journal of the Society of
Hungarian Architects and Engineers, 78: 355–358.
Karthigeyan, S., Ramakrishna, V.V.G.S.T., and Rajagopal, K. 2006. Influence of
vertical load on the lateral response of piles in sand. Computers and Geotech-
nics, 33: 121–131. doi:10.1016/j.compgeo.2005.12.002.
Karthigeyan, S., Ramakrishna, V.V.G.S.T., and Rajagopal, K. 2007. Numerical
Published by NRC Research Press
 Nasr
investigation of the effect of vertical load on the lateral response of piles.
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 133(5): 512–521.
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)133:5(512).
Kim, Y., and Jeong, S. 2011. Analysis of soil resistance on laterally loaded piles
based on 3D soil-pile interaction. Computers and Geotechnics, 38: 248–257.
doi:10.1016/j.compgeo.2010.12.001.
Levesque, R. 2007. SPSS programming and data management: a guide for SPSS
and SAS users. 4th ed. SPSS Inc., Chicago.
Matlock, H., and Reese, L.C. 1960. Generalized solutions of laterally loaded piles.
Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, 86(SM5):
63–91.
Muir Wood, D. 2004. Geotechnical modelling. Spon Press, London.
Nirro, T., Kuribayashi, E., and Komatsa, H. 1992. Lateral resistance of standing
pipes. In Proceedings of the Tenth World Conference, Earthquake Engineer-
ing. Balkema, Rotterdam.
Peng, J. 2006. Behavior of finned piles in sand under lateral loading. Ph.D. thesis,
Newcastle University.
Peng, J., Rouainia, M., Clarke, B., Allan, P., and Irvine, J. 2004. Lateral resistance
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by YORK UNIV on 07/04/14
of finned piles established from model tests. In Proceedings of the Interna-
tional Conference on Geotechnical Engineering - Beirut, CFMS, Lebanon.
pp. 565–571.
Peng, J., Rouainia, M., and Clarke, B. 2010. Finite element analysis of laterally
loaded fin piles. Computer & Structures, 88(21–22):1239–1247. doi:10.1016/j.
compstruc.2010.07.002.
Peng, J., Clarke, B., and Rouainia, M. 2011. Increasing the resistance of piles
subject to cyclic lateral loading. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviron-
mental Engineering, 137(10): 977–982. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.
0000504.
PLAXIS Inc. 2008. PLAXIS 3D foundation user manual. Version 1.6. Edited by R. B.,
Brinkgreve and W.M. Swolfs. PLAXIS Inc.
Prasad, Y.V.S.N., and Chari, T.R. 1999. Lateral capacity of model rigid piles in
cohesionless soils. Soils and Foundations, 39(2): 21–29. doi:10.3208/sandf.39.
2_21.
Ramakrishna, V.G.S.T., and Rao, S.N. 1999. Critical cyclic load levels for laterally
loaded piles in soft clays. In Proceedings of the International Conference on
Offshore and Nearshore Geotechnical Engineering. Balkema, the Nether-
For personal use only.
lands. pp. 301–307.
393
Reese, L.C., Cox, W.R., and Koop, F.D. 1974. Analysis of laterally loaded piles in
sand. In Proceedings of the VI Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Hous-
ton, Tex. Offshore Technology Conference, Houston. Vol. 2, pp. 473–485.
Rollins, K.M., Peterson, K.T., and Weaver, J.T. 1998. Lateral load behavior of
full-scale pile group in clay. Journal of Geotechnical Geoenvironmental En-
gineering, 124(6):468–478. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1998)124:6(468).
Rollins, K.M., Lane, J.D., and Gerber, T.M. 2005. Measured and computed lateral
response of a pile group in sand. Journal of Geotechnical Geoenvironmental
Engineering, 131(1): 103–114. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:1(103).
Stewart, D.P. 1999. Reduction of undrained lateral pile capacity in clay due to an
adjacent slope. Australian Geomechanics Journal, December: 17–23.
Taha, M.R., Abbas, J.M., Shafiqu, M., and Chik, Z.H. 2009. The performance of
laterally loaded single pile embedded in cohesionless soil with different
water level elevation. Journal of Applied Science, 9: 909–916. doi:10.3923/jas.
2009.909.916.
Terzaghi, K. 1955. Evaluation of coefficients of subgrade reaction. Géotechnique,
5: 297–325. doi:10.1680/geot.1955.5.4.297.
Trochanis, A.M., Bielak, J., and Christiano, P. 1991. Three-dimensional nonlinear
study of piles. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 117: 429–47. doi:10.1061/
(ASCE)0733-9410(1991)117:3(429).
Turner, J.P., and Kulhawy, F.H. 1987. Experimental analysis of drilled founda-
tions subjected to repeated axial loads under drained conditions. Electric
Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, Calif. Report EL-5325.
Wallace, J.W., Fox, P.J., and Stewart, J.P. 2002. Cyclic large deflection testing of
shaft bridges. Part II: Analytical studies. California Dept. of Transportation,
Calif. Report No. 59A0183.
Welch, R.C., and Reese, L.C. 1972. Lateral load behavior of drilled shafts.Univer-
sity of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex. Research Rep. No. 89-10.
Yang, Z., and Jeremić, B. 2002. Numerical analysis of pile behavior under lateral
loads in layered elastic–plastic soils. International Journal for Numerical and
Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 26: 1385–1406. doi:10.1002/nag.250.
Zhang, L., Silva, F., and Grismala, R. 2005. Ultimate lateral resistance to piles in
cohesionless soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineer-
ing, 131(1): 78–83 doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:1(78).
Zienkiewicz, R.F. and Taylor, R.L. 1994. The finite element method. 4th ed.
McGraw-Hill, London, UK.
Published by NRC Research Press