Numerical Analysis of Existing Foundations Underpinned

by Micropiles
Walid El Kamash1 and Jie Han, F.ASCE2

Abstract: Micropiles of small diameter have been used in practice to increase load capacities of existing foundations on soft soil, which may
resist additional loads from the vertical expansion of structures. Load transfer from the existing foundation to the micropiles is an impor-
tant mechanism to consider when designing an existing foundation underpinned by micropiles. However, this mechanism has not been well
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

investigated or understood. This paper presents a numerical study on an existing foundation underpinned by micropiles using three-
dimensional (3D) finite-difference software. Verification of the numerical model was first achieved by comparing the results of the numerical
model to those obtained from the full-scale loading test. In this verification, the numerical model was used to simulate an existing footing ini-
tially constructed on a natural soil to support a structure and later subjected to additional loads under two different conditions. Under the first
condition, micropiles were installed without connection with the existing foundation. The existing foundation was subjected to initial loads,
and then the micropiles were connected to the existing foundation for additional loads. Under the second condition, the foundation was first
subjected to initial loads. Micropiles were installed and then connected to the foundation for additional loads. These two conditions were
investigated further in a parametric study to understand the behavior of micropiles in the underpinned foundation under additional loading,
including the load transfer between the existing foundation and the micropiles. This parametric study revealed that the installation sequence
of micropiles had obvious effects on the vertical displacement of the footing, the percent load on the micropile, and the skin friction along the
micropile. This study also revealed that the initial pressure ratio for underpinning and the length of micropiles had more effects on the
behavior of the existing foundation underpinned by micropiles than the modulus of micropiles. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-
5622.0000833. © 2016 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Authors keywords: Underpinning; Micropile; Load transfer; Skin friction; Tip resistance; Piled raft.

Introduction angle under a low-headroom condition; therefore, they are suitable

Shallow foundations are often used to support structures. Most of
them are properly designed and constructed. However, some foun-
dations can face problems of bearing capacity, settlement, or stabil-
ity because of improper design or construction and/or unpredicted
changes of foundation or loading conditions (Han 2015). Under
these conditions, remedial measures are needed to restore or ensure
performance of the existing foundation. A number of technologies
are available for this purpose. Mitigating or improving the perform-
ance of existing foundations is often referred to as underpinning of
foundations. Thorburn and Hutchison (1985) and Ye et al. (1994)
described various underpinning technologies, among which micro-
piles can be considered one of the most common. Micropiles origi-
nated from root piles and are also called minipiles. Armour et al.
(2000), Lizzi (1980), and Bruce (1988, 1989) defined micropiles as
drilled and grouted concrete piles with a typical diameter smaller
than 300 mm. Micropiles can be installed vertically or in an inclined
1
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Faculty of
Engineering, Suez Canal Univ., Ismailia 41522, Egypt; formerly,
Visiting Scholar, Univ. of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045. E-mail:
waleed_el_kamash@hotmail.com
2
Professor, Dept. of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering,
Univ. of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045 (corresponding author). E-mail:
jiehan@ku.edu
Note. This manuscript was submitted on May 3, 2016; approved on
September 13, 2016; published online on October 20, 2016. Discussion
period open until March 20, 2017; separate discussions must be submitted
for individual papers. This paper is part of the International Journal of
Geomechanics, © ASCE, ISSN 1532-3641.
for underpinning. Gutierrez (2004) reported the strengthening of
existing foundations by micropiles for the Arts and Science
Museum in the United States, which was torn down completely by a
hurricane. In China, the first trial for micropiles was made in 1980
through a laboratory model test to simulate the underpinning of a
leaning tower, the Hu-Qiu Tower, which was built more than 1000
years ago. Although micropiles were not actually used to underpin
the Hu-Qiu Tower, a series of field tests and applications followed
this initiative, including a comprehensive experimental study by Ye
et al. (1993). The first documented application of micropiles in
China was underpinning existing shallow footings to resist addi-
tional loads caused by the addition of two more stories to a 50-year-
old three-story building. Adding stories to existing buildings is con-
sidered a feasible way to increase working space for an organiza-
tion. However, the installation of micropiles to existing footings
makes pile–soil–structure interactions more complicated. The
design of micropiles to support stories added to an existing building
is based mostly on personal experience or judgment. Makarchian
and Poulos (1996) provided a simplified method for the design of
underpinning piles. However, very limited field data were available
to verify this design. Han and Ye (2006a, b) reported the results of
field tests of micropiles and an existing foundation underpinned by
micropiles. From that study, they proposed a simplified design pro-
cedure. Pearlman (2001) stated that micropiles are ideal for building
foundations on sites with poor ground conditions to control ground
movements. Esmaeili et al. (2013) used micropiles at a railway
embankment toe to transmit applied loads to the firm underlying
layers and prevent deep sliding of the loose foundation soil. They
used the PLAXIS 3D code based on the finite-element method to de-
velop three numerical models, in which the embankment was

© ASCE 04016126-1 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 modeled as an elastoplastic material with the Mohr-Coulomb fail-
ure criterion and micropiles were modeled as linearly elastic ele-
ments. Shu et al. (2011) used another numerical analysis program,
FLAC3D 3.0 (the Fast Lagrangian Analysis Continua), to evaluate
the performance of micropiles in which a state-dependent constitu-
tive model for sand formulated within the critical-state framework
was implemented. Górski et al. (2013) presented a numerical study
of the influence of implementation technology for underpinning the
footing on settlement using the finite-element method. They studied
the effect of the diameter of jet-grouted columns under three differ-
ent cases. They also showed that the rate of Young’s modulus
increase for grouted columns until their complete curing had a sig-
nificant effect on the settlement of the foundation.
Micropiles can be used for different applications. However, the
most common application is to increase bearing capacities and con-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
trol settlements of existing foundations. There are two scenarios for
this application: (1) micropiles are used for solving problems associ-
ated with existing foundations during the construction process or af-
ter the completion of structures, and (2) micropiles are used to carry
additional loads to the existing structures caused by adding stories to
existing buildings (Fig. 1). Tilting, differential settlement, and ex-
cessive total settlement are possible problems that pose challenges
for existing foundations. The foundation soil with a low bearing
capacity, high compressibility, and/or nonuniform soil layers or non-
uniform loading conditions can be considered the main reasons for
these problems. Additional loads to an existing structure might
require strengthening of the structure and more bearing capacity
from the foundation soil. Micropiles can be used in these scenarios
to resist most of the loads from the structure and to reduce the loads
transferred directly to the soil. However, the load-transfer mecha-
nisms and the deformation behavior of existing foundations under-
pinned by micropiles have not been well investigated or understood.
In this study, the results of experimental tests conducted on
micropiles and a foundation underpinned by micropiles in soft soil
Fig. 1. Micropiles used to support additional loads
Table 1. Soil Profile and Properties (Data from Han and Ye 2006a)
Layer H (m) w (%) g sat (kN/m3)
Top soil 1.0
CL 1.6 31.3 19.1
Soft lean clay 8.0 41.3–43.8 17.6
CH >3.0 50.8 17.1
Note: c = total cohesion determined by CU triaxial tests; D = constrained modulus; e = void ratio; H = thickness of soil layer; PI = plastic index; w = water
content; g sat = saturated unit weight; w = total friction angle determined by CU triaxial tests.
© ASCE
Int. J. Geomech., 04016126
(Ye et al. 1993; Han and Ye 2006a, b) were used to verify numerical
models. The three-dimensional (3D) finite-difference software
FLAC3D 3.0 was used to model full-scale field plate-loading tests
on natural ground and single micropiles. These models were first
verified by comparing the numerical results with the field data. The
numerical analysis was then extended to simulate a rigid concrete
plate initially constructed on a natural soil to support a structure and
later subjected to additional loads with micropiles under the plate.
In this study, the micropiles were installed in two different ways:
(1) four micropiles were preinstalled under the plate without any
connection to the concrete plate initially and then connected to the
plate after a certain load (Case A), and (2) the plate was first loaded
on the natural ground without any micropiles until a certain load,
and four micropiles were installed with a connection to the plate
(Case B). Case A was adopted by Han and Ye (2006a, b) for their
full-scale field tests. Case B is used more commonly in practice. For
both cases, the foundation underpinned by micropiles was loaded
by additional loads. The effect of the installation sequence of micro-
piles on the behavior of the underpinned foundation was investi-
gated in this study. A parametric study was conducted using 3D nu-
merical software to examine several key influence factors. The
objectives of this study were to investigate (1) load-transfer mecha-
nisms during the connection of micropiles to the concrete plate
under the initial load and additional load, (2) pile–soil–plate (raft)
interactions, and (3) load–displacement responses for both cases.
Verification of Numerical Model
Numerical models were first verified by using the field data
obtained by Han and Ye (2006a). A brief description of the field test
is described here.
Brief Description of Selected Tests
The test site was located in Shanghai, China, and consisted of typi-
cal Shanghai clays. From the ground surface to the depth of interest
in this study, the site had a topsoil, a lean clay (CL) crust, a soft lean
clay (CL), and a thick fat clay (CH), classified according to the
Unified Soil Classification System. The detailed soil profile and
properties are listed in Table 1. The water table was approximately
1.0 m below the existing ground surface. The cohesion and the fric-
tion angles of these clayey soils, in terms of a total stress concept,
were determined from consolidated undrained (CU) triaxial tests on
undisturbed samples without measurement of pore-water pressure.
It is a common practice in China to use the total strength parameters
of clays, determined from CU triaxial tests, and the undrained shear
strength determined from unconsolidated undrained (UU) triaxial
tests in the design. Field vane shear tests revealed that the undrained
shear strength of the clays below the crust layer increased with
depth and ranged from 25 to 35 kPa (average,
29 kPa).
Four micropiles were installed by a hydraulic reversible vibra-
tory drilling rig with a coring bit that had a 150-mm diameter.
e PI D (MPa) c (kPa) w (o)
0.86 20 5.2 10 15
1.18–1.22 31 2.8–3.1 7–9 12
1.42 29 2.4 10 9
04016126-2 Int. J. Geomech.
 Boring holes were formed first by jetting water into the soil. A steel
cage formed by rebars with a total cross-sectional area of 288 mm2
was placed into each hole. After the cage was placed, the hole was
filled with aggregate finer than 25 mm, and cement grout was
applied from the bottom of the hole at a pressure of 0.2–0.5 MPa
until the grout overflowed to the surface. The nominal length and
diameter of all micropiles installed were 8.0 m and 150 mm,
respectively. According to the micropile-classification method
(i.e., the type of grouting) recommended in the Federal Highway
Administration implementation manual (Armour et al. 2000),
these micropiles can be classified as Type B. The compressive
strength of the concrete used for the micropiles was 41.7 MPa,
and its corresponding tensile strength was 6.3 MPa.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Static plate-loading tests on natural ground and micropiles were
conducted first, followed by a plate-loading test on a foundation
underpinned by micropiles. A maintained-load test method was
adopted in the field test by applying load increments. The loading
plate or the pile was allowed to move under each maintained-load
increment until a certain rate of displacement was achieved. A
plate-loading test with a concrete plate size of 1.5 m long  1.5 m
wide  0.55 m thick was first performed on the natural ground af-
ter removing 1.0 m of topsoil. Each load increment of 40 kN was
selected except for the last two loads, which had a load increment
of 20 kN (approaching failure). The test was terminated after the
last load was maintained for 24 h. The ultimate bearing capacity
of the natural ground was determined to be 172 kPa, which corre-
sponded to the displacement equal to approximately 5% of the
plate width. Two loading tests on single micropiles (MP1 and

MP3) under compression and another two loading tests on single

micropiles (MP2 and MP4) under tension were conducted before
the beginning of the loading test on the underpinned foundation.
MP4 MP3 Both slow and quick maintained-load methods were adopted for
the tests on micropiles. Among four loading tests for single piles,
375
the quick maintained-load test method was used to test MP2,
1500
375 375
375
MP1 MP2

200
250

1500
Not to scale, unit: mm
(a)

150 Void for single pile test or

Load plate concrete grout for underpinning test

550
50
100
Sand cushion

2600

Strain gauge

8000
2600
750

2600

100
MP1 or MP4 MP2 or MP3
(b)

Fig. 2. Test setup and instrumentation: (a) plan view; (b) cross-sec-
tional view [adapted from Han and Ye, “A field study on the behavior
of a foundation underpinned by micropiles,” Canadian Geotechnical
Journal, 43(1), 10.1139/t05-087, © 2008 Canadian Science Publishing
or its licensors; reproduced with permission]
Fig. 3. Discretization of a 3D numerical model using FLAC3D 3.0: (a)
loading plate on natural ground or underpinning foundation; (b)
loading test of a micropile under compression

© ASCE 04016126-3 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 MP3, and MP4, whereas the slow maintained-load test method was ultimate bearing capacity of the natural ground) without any connec-
used to test MP1. For all the single-pile loading tests, each load in- tion of the plate to the micropiles. After reaching this load, the plate
crement was 10 kN. To investigate the mechanism of load transfer, and the micropiles were connected. Additional loads were applied to
four vibrating-wire rebar strain gauges were attached to the steel simulate the loading process of vertical expansion of a structure up
rebar cages in both MP1 and MP4 (one strain gauge in MP4 was to approximately 290 kPa.
damaged after the installation), whereas two strain gauges were
placed in both MP2 and MP3. After loading tests on the micropiles,
Numerical Modeling
a plate-loading test with a concrete plate size of the same dimension
as that used on the natural soil was conducted on a foundation under- A 3D finite-difference method incorporated in FLAC3D 3.0 (Itasca
pinned with four preinstalled micropiles, as shown in Fig. 2. The 2005) was adopted in this study. A numerical model was created to
load was first applied to 200 kN or 89 kPa (approximately half of the simulate the plate-loading tests on the natural ground and the

Applied pressure, p (kPa)

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

0

20
Vertical displacement, s (mm)

40

60

80

100

Field data Numerical result

120

Fig. 4. Pressure–displacement responses of the plate-loading test on natural ground in the field and from the numerical analysis

Load, P (kN)
0 50 100 150 200
0

5
Vertical displacement, s (mm)

10

15

20

25
Field data Numerical results
30

Fig. 5. Load–displacement responses of a micropile under compression in the field and from the numerical analysis

© ASCE 04016126-4 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 underpinned foundation and a single-pile compression test in the
field, as shown in Fig. 3. Because of the symmetry of the problem, a
quarter of the model was used in the analysis. The 3D model
included a radially graded mesh around cylindrically shaped tunnel
elements and the cylindrical elements. In the plate-loading test on
the natural ground, these elements were solid elements with soil
properties. To be consistent with the rate of loading for the plate-
loading tests on natural ground and the underpinned foundation,
only the micropile (i.e., MP1) under compression using the slow
loading method was selected for the numerical analysis. In the single-
pile and underpinned-foundation tests, the cylindrical elements were
used to simulate the micropile and the cylindrically shaped tunnel
elements were used to generate the soil around the micropile. The
mesh of the cylindrical elements for the micropile was refined. The
discretization was increased gradually through the radially cylin-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
elements with filling to develop the soil end-bearing reaction. The
radially cylindrical elements were also used to model an opening
on the loading plate above the natural ground for the underpinned-
foundation test.
The numerical analysis was conducted under an undrained condi-
tion. Because the soft lean clay and the CH had relatively high plastic-
ity indices, the undrained shear strengths of these soils should be
reduced from the measured vane shear strengths. In this model, the
undrained cohesion, Cu, values for the CL crust, the soft lean clay, and
the CH were estimated as 28, 14, and 15 kPa, respectively, to match
the results of the plate-loading tests. The soil was modeled as an elas-
toplastic material with the Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion, and
micropiles were modeled as elastic elements. This model is appropri-
ate for simulating the field test that was performed in relatively short
time considering the undrained parameters of the soil. The input pa-

drical elements of the surrounding soil until the side boundaries. rameters for the numerical analysis were driven on the basis of field
The soil beneath the pile tip was modeled using radially cylindrical vane shear strength of the soil as presented by Han and Ye (2006a).
Poisson’s ratio, , of the soil was 0.49, and its friction angle, w u, was
0. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE 1990) sug-
Axial load, Pz (kN) gested estimating the soil modulus of elasticity on the basis of the
0 50 100 150 undrained cohesion as Es = KcCu, where Es is the soil modulus (in
0 MPa), Kc is the correlation factor (ranging from 50 to 200 for soft
clays; 200 was selected in this study), and Cu is the undrained shear
strength of the soil (in MPa). The level of the water table was assumed
2 at the surface. The bottom boundary was fixed in the vertical direction,
and the three side boundaries were fixed in the direction that is perpen-
dicular to its plane but free in the vertical direction. The model was
first brought to an equilibrium under gravitational loading. A horizon-
Depth, z (m)

4
tal water table was created at a depth, z, of 0 m, and the wet density of
the clay was assigned to the zones below the water table.
For the plate-loading test on the natural ground, a concrete plate
6 was built on the natural ground, and the load was applied on the

8 Table 2. Values of Influence Factors Used in the Parametric Study

Item Parameter Value

Field data Numerical result
10 Load Initial pressure ratio (p*) 0.27, 0.42, 0.50a
Micropiles Young’s modulus [E (GPa)] 30,a 45, 55
Fig. 6. Axial load distributions along the micropile under compression Length [L (m)] 6, 8,a 10
in the field and from the numerical analysis a
Values used in the baseline case.

Applied pressure, p (kPa)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0
Vertical displacement, s (mm)

10

20

30

40

50
Field data Numerical result
60

Fig. 7. Load–displacement responses of the foundation underpinned by micropiles in the field and from the numerical analysis

© ASCE 04016126-5 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 plate incrementally in the same magnitude as that used in the field.
After each load was applied, the model was run to equilibrium.
After reaching the maximum load, the load was reduced, in the
same manner as in the field test, to 0.
For the loading test of a micropile, the model was brought to
equilibrium. The properties of the cylindrical elements were
changed to the properties of the micropile (i.e., the modulus of elas-
ticity of the pile was 30 GPa). The model was brought to equilib-
rium again after installation of the pile. Then, axial loads of 30, 60,
90, and 120 kN were applied incrementally on the pile, if the pile
did not fail. Axial loads were applied as stresses over the cross sec-
tion of the pile head. A subroutine was developed to slowly increase
the load with steps.
For the foundation underpinned by micropiles, the model ground
was first brought to equilibrium. The properties of the cylindrical
elements were changed to the properties of the micropile (i.e., the
modulus of elasticity of the pile was 30 GPa). The model was
brought to equilibrium again after the installation of the pile. The

Applied pressure, p (kPa)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

10
Vertical displacement, s (mm)

20

30

40

50
p* = 0.50 p* = 0.42 p* = 0.27

60
(a)

Applied pressure, p (kPa)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0

10
Vertical displacement, s (mm)

20

30

40

50
p* = 0.50 p* = 0.42 p* = 0.27
60
(b)

Fig. 8. Effect of initial pressure ratio on pressure–displacement curves: (a) Case A; (b) Case B

© ASCE 04016126-6 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 loading plate was constructed above the ground with an opening on
the plate. No density was assigned to the plate to exclude the weight
of the plate for easy calculation. The opening of the plate was
located above the micropile, and the diameter of the opening was
390 mm, which was larger than the micropile diameter of 300 mm
so that the loading plate would not restrain micropile movement
during the first stage of the loading test on the underpinned founda-
tion. The loading plate was first loaded by normal stresses at magni-
tudes of 25, 50, 75, and 89 kPa to simulate the first stage of loading
on the natural ground. After the applied load reached the desired
value of 200 kN, the opening was filled with concrete so that the
micropile was connected with the loading plate. After that, the
second stage of loading was started at magnitudes of 100, 125, 150,
175, 200, 225, 250, and 280 kPa. This numerical process was the
same as that used in the field.
Results and Comparisons
Han and Ye (2006a) provided detailed experimental data from
their field study, including the vertical displacement of the load-
ing plate on the natural ground under loading and unloading, the
vertical displacement of the micropile under compression, and
the axial force in the micropile at the failure load. Han and Ye
(2006b) provided their test data of the vertical displacement of

Applied pressure, p (kPa)

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

0

10
Vertical displacement, s (mm)

20

30

40

50
E = 30 GPa E = 45 GPa E = 55 GPa
60
(a)

Applied pressure, p (kPa)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0

10
Vertical displacement, s (mm)

20

30

40

50
E = 30 GPa E = 45 GPa E = 55 GPa
60
(b)

Fig. 9. Effect of micropile modulus on pressure–displacement curves: (a) Case A; (b) Case B

© ASCE 04016126-7 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 the foundation underpinned by micropiles. These test results were
used to verify the numerical models as follows.
Fig. 4 shows a comparison of the pressure–displacement
response from the field plate-loading test on the natural ground with
that from the numerical analysis. The numerical result matched the
test data obtained by Han and Ye (2006a) under both loading and
unloading.
Fig. 5 shows the comparison of the load–displacement
responses of the micropile under compression in the field and
from the numerical analysis. The numerical result matched the
field data very well. In addition, Fig. 6 shows the axial load distri-
butions along the micropile in the field and from the numerical
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
analysis, which have a reasonable comparison. It is almost impos-
sible to install micropiles by the boring method in the field that
are as perfectly circular as those modeled in the numerical soft-
ware. Nonuniform cross sections of micropiles would affect the
load transfer from the pile head to the pile toe, especially because
the pile toe is at a greater depth.
Fig. 7 presents the pressure–displacement responses of the foun-
dation underpinned by micropiles in the field and from the numeri-
cal analysis, which show a reasonable comparison. Both curves
show that there were turning points at the applied pressure of
89 kPa, which was the end of the first stage of loading and the begin-
ning of the second stage of loading. At this point, four micropiles

Applied pressure, p (kPa)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0

30
Vertical displacement, s (mm)

60

90

120

150
L=6m L=8m L = 10 m
180
(a)

Applied pressure, p (kPa)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0

30
Vertical displacement, s (mm)

60

90

120

L=6m L=8m
150
L = 10 m
180
(b)

Fig. 10. Effect of micropile length on pressure–displacement curves: (a) Case A; (b) Case B

© ASCE 04016126-8 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 were connected to the loading plate. In the second stage of loading,
however, the underpinned foundation in the field test had a greater
nonlinear pressure–displacement response than that from the nu-
merical analysis. This difference might have resulted from the fully
bonded interface between the micropiles and the surrounding soil in
the numerical model. Although the micropiles had the fully bonded
interface, the soil under the existing footing had developed nonlin-
ear plastic deformations before the connection of the micropiles to
the plate. The plastic soil deformations can result in an overall non-
linear pressure–displacement response.
Parametric Study
Numerical Model
Fig. 2 shows the plan view and the cross section of the foundation
underpinned by micropiles tested in the field (Han and Ye 2006b).
This test was modeled in the numerical analysis as the baseline case
shown in Fig. 3(a). In this test and numerical model, micropiles
were preinstalled under the loading plate, the loading plate was
loaded to a certain magnitude, and then the micropiles were

100
p* = 0.50 p* = 0.42 p* = 0.27
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

75
% of load on piles

50

25

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
(a) Applied pressure, p (kPa)
100

p* = 0.50 p* = 0.42 p* = 0.27

75
% of load on piles

50

25

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
(b) Applied pressure, p (kPa)
Fig. 11. Effect of initial pressure ratio on percent load on micropiles: (a) Case A; (b) Case B

© ASCE 04016126-9 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 connected to the loading plate for additional loads. Fig. 7 shows the
test and numerical results of this underpinned plate-loading test.
This test condition (referred to here as Case A) is different from
most underpinned-foundation projects using micropiles, in which
foundations are first loaded to a certain magnitude on natural
ground and then micropiles are installed after the foundation is in
place and during service and are subjected to additional loads. The
second condition is referred to as Case B. The effect of preinstalla-
tion of micropiles on the behavior of underpinned foundations is
not clear and therefore deserves further investigation.
In this study, Case B was modeled numerically and investigated.
Similar to the numerical model of Case A, the numerical model of
Case B had a concrete plate of 1.5  1.5  0.55 m, four micropiles
with a 300-mm diameter, and boundary conditions the same as
those shown in Fig. 3. In addition to the effect of preinstallation of
the micropiles, this study investigated the following influence fac-
tors: the load level before underpinning, the modulus of the micro-
piles, and the length of the micropiles.
In the field test (i.e., Case A), the pressure was applied first to the
allowable bearing pressure of 89 kPa, which is 50% of the ultimate
bearing capacity of the natural ground, and then the plate was con-
nected with the micropiles for further loading. The loading from
0 kPa to the pressure before underpinning is referred to as initial
loading. The pressure applied after underpinning, referred to as

100
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

E = 30 GPa E = 45 GPa E = 55 GPa

75
% of load on piles

50

25

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
(a) Applied pressure, p (kPa)
100

E = 30 GPa E = 45 GPa E = 55 GPa

75
% of load on piles

50

25

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
(b) Applied pressure, p (kPa)
Fig. 12. Effect of micropile modulus on percent load on micropiles: (a) Case A; (b) Case B

© ASCE 04016126-10 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 additional loading, was added to simulate adding stories to an exist-
ing structure. The ratio of the initial pressure before underpinning to
the ultimate bearing capacity of natural ground, p*, is defined as the
initial pressure ratio. In the field test, p* was 0.50. To investigate the
effect of the initial pressure ratio on the behavior of underpinned
foundations for both cases (Cases A and B), the initial pressure
ratios, p*, of 0.27 and 0.42 were used. In this analysis, the ultimate
bearing capacity of the natural ground was assumed to be the same
(i.e., 172 kPa). In addition to the initial pressure ratio effect, the mod-
ulus and length of the micropiles were investigated. Liew and Fong
(2003) discussed different types of grout used for micropiles that can
result in different compressive strengths and moduli, depending on
the cement/water ratio. Micropile compressive strengths of 100 and
150 MPa were selected for this parametric study. On the basis of the
relationship between Young’s modulus and the compressive
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
micropiles studied were 6 and 10 m. The values of three influence
factors investigated in this parametric study in addition to those of
the baseline case are summarized in Table 2.
Numerical Results and Discussion
Vertical Displacements
Fig. 8 presents the vertical displacement of the loading plate versus
the applied pressure, p, at different initial pressure ratios, p*, for
Cases A and B. For Case A, the decrease of p*, which enabled the
plate to be connected to the micropiles early, led to a slight reduc-
tion in the vertical displacements, as shown in Fig. 8(a). In addition,
the effect of the initial pressure ratio on the vertical displacements is
nonlinear. For example, the decrease of p* from 0.50 to 0.42 had a
more significant effect on the reduction of the vertical displacement

strength of concrete (Tomosawa et al. 1990), the Young’s moduli, E, than did the decrease from 0.42 to 0.27, because at a higher initial
of the micropiles were selected as 45 and 55 GPa. The lengths of the pressure ratio, the soil had a higher tendency to yield. The

100

L=6m L=8m L = 10 m
75
% of load on piles

50

25

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
(a) Applied pressure, p (kPa)
100

L=6m L=8m L = 10 m

75
% of load on piles

50

25

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
(b) Applied pressure, p (kPa)
Fig. 13. Effect of micropile length on percent load on micropiles: (a) Case A; (b) Case B

© ASCE 04016126-11 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 connection of the plate with the micropiles immediately transferred
large loads to the micropiles, as shown by the field test results (Han
and Ye 2006b) and the later stress analysis, and therefore reduced
the vertical displacement obviously.
Case B [Fig. 8(b)] had larger vertical displacements than Case A
[Fig. 8(a)]. The difference in the total vertical displacements
between these two cases was caused mainly by the different vertical
displacements during the initial loading stage. The preinstalled
micropiles provided resistance to the movement of the soil and the
plate, which was demonstrated by Han and Ye (2006b). In addition,
in Case A, the additional vertical displacement after underpinning
was approximately 33 mm, whereas in Case B, the additional verti-
cal displacement was approximately 27 mm. Therefore, Case B had
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
smaller additional vertical displacements after underpinning than
Case A.
Fig. 9 shows the effect of the micropile modulus on the vertical
displacement of the loading plate. It should be noted that the effect
of the micropile modulus E increase from 30 to 55 GPa was limited.
This limited effect might be because the micropiles were floating in
the soft soil and the toe and side movements had contributed to
most of the displacement of the micropile. The pressure–vertical
displacement curves for Case A are nearly linear except for the last
pressure, whereas those for Case B are not linear. In addition, Case
B had larger vertical displacements than did Case A. These differen-
ces resulted from the early involvement of the preinstalled micro-
piles in resisting loads in Case A. In the later stress analysis, it was

Skin friction (kPa)

-10 0 10 20 30
0

2
Depth (m)

p* = 0.50 p* = 0.42 p* = 0.27

10
(a)

Skin friction (kPa)

-10 0 10 20 30
0

4
Depth (m)

p* = 0.50 p* = 0.42 p* = 0.27

10
(b)

Fig. 14. Effect of the initial pressure ratio on the distribution of skin friction along the micropile at the maximum applied pressure, p: (a) Case A;
(b) Case B

© ASCE 04016126-12 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 shown that the micropiles in Case A carried more loads than those
in Case B, which is why the micropile modulus had a greater effect
in Case A than in Case B, especially at higher pressures.
Fig. 10 shows the change of the vertical displacement of the
plate related to the change in micropile length. It was found that
shortening the micropiles from 8 to 6 m (i.e., by 25%) resulted in a
dramatic increase of the vertical displacement in both cases. This
dramatic increase of the vertical displacement started at an applied
pressure of 200 kPa, at which the micropiles likely reached the ulti-
mate load capacity. At the maximum applied pressure of 280 kPa,
reductions of the vertical displacement of the plate reached approxi-
mately 50% in Case A and 70% in Case B when the micropile
length was increased from 6 to 8 m. Again, the vertical displace-
ments in Case B were larger than those in Case A, but the micropiles
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
were more effective in reducing the vertical displacement of the
plate in Case B than in Case A. This is because in Case B, the micro-
piles just started to resist loads after the natural ground settled under
the initial applied pressure; therefore, the role of the micropiles in
Case B was more important in saving the foundation from failure
than that in Case A.
Percent Load on Micropiles
The percent load on micropiles was calculated as the percentage of
the total friction and end-bearing load of all micropiles to the total
applied load on the plate. Fig. 11 shows the effect of p* on percent
load on the micropiles in Cases A and B. In Case A, the connection
of the micropiles with the plate resulted in an immediate increase of
percent load and then a reduction of percent load on the micropiles

100
p* = 0.50 p* = 0.42 p* = 0.27
% of skin friction load on the pile

75

50

25

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
(a) Applied pressure, p (kPa)

100
p* = 0.50 p* = 0.42 p* = 0.27
% of skin friction load on the pile

75

50

25

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
(b) Applied pressure, p (kPa)
Fig. 15. Effect of the initial pressure ratio on percentage of skin friction load on the micropile: (a) Case A; (b) Case B

© ASCE 04016126-13 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 because the axial load distribution was changed. After the connec-
tion, the micropiles carried the increased load with an increase of
the applied pressure. In addition, an increase of p* reduced the per-
cent load on the micropiles because more load had been carried by
the soil. In Case B, the installation and connection of micropiles to
the plate made the micropiles immediately carry the additional load.
At the maximum applied pressure, the micropiles in Cases A and B
carried a similar percentage of total load (i.e., approximately 65%),
which is similar to that in the field test (Han and Ye 2006b).
Fig. 12 shows the effect of the micropile modulus on percent
load on the micropiles. Similar to other results, the micropile modu-
lus had a limited effect on percent load on the micropiles for the
Fig. 13 presents percent load on micropiles at different micropile
lengths in Cases A and B. It can be seen that an increase of the
micropile length increased percent load on the micropiles after con-
nection of the micropiles with the plate in both cases. However, the
effect of the micropile length on percent load on the micropiles was
more obvious in Case B than in Case A because the preinstalled
micropiles in Case A had carried loads before the additional load
was applied.
Skin Friction
Skin friction, t z, along a micropile can be calculated on the basis of
t z = (s iþ1
zz − s zz − s w ) Ap/As, where s zz and s zz are the axial
i j iþ1 i

same reason. stresses in the micropile at nodes i þ 1 and i (node i þ 1 was above
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Skin friction (kPa)

-10 0 10 20 30
0

3
Depth (m)

L=6m L=8m L = 10 m
12
(a)

Skin friction (kPa)

-10 0 10 20 30
0

3
Depth (m)

L=6m L=8m L = 10 m
12
(b)

Fig. 16. Effect of the micropile length on the distribution skin friction along the pile at the maximum applied pressure, p: (a) Case A; (b) Case B

© ASCE 04016126-14 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 node i), sjw is the self-weight of the element j between nodes i
and i þ 1, Ap is the cross-sectional area of the micropile, and As
is the surface area of the micropile between nodes i and i þ 1.
Fig. 14 shows the distribution of the skin friction, t z, along the
micropile caused by the change of p* in both cases. In Case A,
negative skin friction existed close to the pile head because of
the soil movement relative the pile. The negative skin friction
did not exist in Case B. The effect of p* was more obvious in
Case A than in Case B, because the preinstalled micropile in
Case A carried more load. In addition, for the same reason, the
micropile in Case A had higher skin friction than that in Case B.
The percent skin friction load can be calculated as the percentage
of the total load by skin friction to the total load on the micropile. In
other words, percent toe resistance of the micropile is equal to
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
100% minus the percent skin friction load. Fig. 15 shows the effect
of the initial pressure ratio on the percent skin friction load on the
micropile. The initial pressure ratio had an obvious effect right after
the connection of the micropiles with the plate. However, the effect
became less obvious at high applied pressure. For both bases, the
percent skin friction load on the micropile approached 80% at the
maximum applied pressure. In other words, the percent toe resist-
ance of the micropile was 20%, which is close to that in the field test
(Han and Ye 2006b).
The effect of the micropile modulus had a minor effect on the
distribution of the skin friction along the micropile in both cases;
therefore, the numerical results on this effect are not provided here.
Fig. 16 shows the change of the skin friction distribution,t z,
along the micropile at different pile lengths in both cases. It can

100
L=6m L=8m L = 10 m
% of skin friction load on the pile

75

50

25

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
(a) Applied pressure, p (kPa)
100
L=6m L=8m L = 10 m

75
% of skin friction load on the pile

50

25

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
(b) Applied pressure, p (kPa)
Fig. 17. Effect of the micropile length on percentage of the skin friction load on the micropile: (a) Case A; (b) Case B

© ASCE 04016126-15 Int. J. Geomech.

Int. J. Geomech., 04016126

 be seen that shortening the pile length reduced the skin friction,
t z, close to the head of the micropile but increased the skin fric-
tion at greater depths. In addition, the effect of the micropile
length on the skin friction distribution was more obvious in Case
A than in Case B.
Fig. 17 shows the effect of micropile length on the percent skin
friction load to the total pile load in both Cases A and B. In Case A,
the shortest micropile had the largest percent skin friction load
because the skin friction along the shortest preinstalled pile was
largely mobilized. In Case B, however, the shortest micropile had
the smallest percent skin friction load, because the mobilization
of the skin friction happened after the additional load was applied
and the longer pile mobilized more skin friction. In addition, the
shortest micropile transferred more load to the toe resistance after
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 10/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
the applied pressure exceeded 200 kPa.
Conclusions
Micropiles have been used successfully to underpin existing foun-
dations for additional loads. Thus far, limited studies on the behav-
ior of foundations underpinned by micropiles have been conducted.
A 3D numerical analysis was conducted in this study to investigate
the behavior of foundations underpinned by micropiles. The numer-
ical models were first verified with the field study including plate-
loading tests on natural ground, a micropile, and a foundation
underpinned by four micropiles. The verified numerical models
were adopted for a parametric study to investigate the effect of the
installation sequence of the micropiles, the initial pressure ratio
before underpinning, and the modulus and length of the micropiles.
The following conclusions can be made from this numerical study:
1. The preinstallation of micropiles under the loading plate had
obvious effects on the behavior of foundations underpinned by
micropiles. However, this installation sequence is not com-
monly used in practice.
2. The installation and connection of micropiles with the loading
plate after the initial loading stage are commonly used in prac-
tice. This practice resulted in more vertical displacements of
the plate and a smaller percent load carried by the micropiles.
3. The initial pressure ratio and the micropile length had obvious
effects on the behavior of the foundations underpinned by
micropiles. The large initial pressure ratio resulted in more ver-
tical displacement of the plate and a smaller percent load car-
ried by the micropiles. An increase of micropile length reduced
the vertical displacement of the plate and increased the percent
load carried by the micropiles.
4. The micropile modulus had a limited effect on the behavior of
foundations underpinned by micropiles. This conclusion is
based on the condition that the micropiles considered in this
study were floating in soft soil.
© ASCE 04016126-16
Int. J. Geomech., 04016126
References
Armour, T., Groneck, P., Keeley, J., and Sharma, S. (2000). “Micropile
design and construction guidelines—Implementation manual.” FHWA-
SA-97-070, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC.
Bruce, D. (1988). “Aspects of minipiling practice in the United States.” J.
Ground Eng., 21(8), 20–33.
Bruce, D. (1989). “Aspects of minipiling practice in the United States.” J.
Ground Eng., 22(1), 35–39.
Esmaeili, M., Nik, M., and Khayyer, F. (2013). “Experimental and numeri-
cal study of micropiles to reinforce high railway embankments.” Int. J.
Geomech., 10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000280, 729–744.”
FLAC3D 3.0 [Computer software]. Itasca Consulting Group, Minneapolis.
Górski, K., Wierzbicki, J., Mazur, R., and Mazurkiewicz, J. (2013). “The
numerical calculations of influence of underpinning on foundations set-
tlement.” J. Stud. Geotech. Mech., 35(4), 47–64.
Gutierrez, A. (2004). Rep. on geotechnical investigation and foundation
recommendations for the design of the proposed arts and science mu-
seum, Univ. of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez, Mayagüez, Puerto Rico, 42.
Han, J. (2015). Principles and practice of ground improvement, John Wiley
& Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
Han, J., and Ye, S. L. (2006a). “A field study on the behavior of micropiles
in clay under compression or tension.” J. Can. Geotech., 43, 19–23.
Han, J., and Ye, S. L. (2006b). “A field study on the behavior of a founda-
tion underpinned by micropiles.” J. Can. Geotech., 43(1), 30–42.
Itasca. (2005). FLAC3D 3.0 user’s guide, 2nd Ed., Itasca Consulting Group,
Minneapolis.
Liew, S., and Fong, C. (2003). Design & construction of micropiles,
Geotechnical Course of Pile Foundation Design & Construction, Ipoh,
Malaysia.
Lizzi, F. (1980). “The use of root pattern piles in the underpinning of monu-
ments and old buildings and in the consolidation of historic centres.” J.
L’Industria Costruzioni, 110, 25.
Makarchian, M., and Poulos, H. (1996). “Simplified method for design
of underpinning piles.” J. Geotech. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)0733
-9410(1996)122:9(745), 745–751.
PLAXIS 3D [Computer software]. Plaxis bv, Delft, Netherlands.
Pearlman, S. L. (2001). “Pin piles for structural underpinning.” Proc., Ohio
River Valley Solis Seminar XXXII, Nicholson Construction Company,
Cuddy, PA.
Shu, S., Muhunthan, B., and Li, X. (2011). “Numerical simulation of the
influence of initial state of sand on element tests and micropile perform-
ance.” Int. J. Geomech., 10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000095,
370–380.
Thorburn, S., and Hutchison, J. (1985). Underpinning, Surrey Univ. Press,
Glasgow, U.K.
Tomosawa, F., Noguchi, T., and Onoyama, K. (1990). “Investigation of
fundamental mechanical properties of high-strength concrete.” Annual
Meeting of Architectural Institute of Japan, Summaries of Technical
Papers, Architectural Institute of Japan, Tokyo, 497–498.
USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). (1990). “Engineer manual.”
1110-1-1904; DC 20314-1000, Washington, DC.
Ye, S. L., Han, J., and Ye, G. (1994). Soil improvement and underpinning
technologies, 2nd Ed., Chinese Architecture and Building Press, Beijing
(in Chinese).
Ye, S. L., Han, J., Zhan, J., and Yang, W. (1993). “Experimental and theo-
retical studies of micropiles and their applications.” Research Reps. 1
and 2, Tongji Univ., Shanghai, China (in Chinese).
Int. J. Geomech.