2 Modeling Basics

3.2.1 Definition of the Parametric Study and Analyzed Pile Groups

This study was performed on a 4x4 pile groups with rows spaced at from 2D to 5D center-center in the direction of
the loading as shown in Figure 3.4. As illustrated in Figure 3.4 the piles were classified in the group according
to their row location and the location within the row. Leading row and trailing rows were defined according
to the loading direction. Moreover, piles were defined as outer and inner piles according to the location
within the row. The purpose of the analysis was to determine the individual pile behaviour within the group.
The load distribution of each pile and the bending moment distribution along the pile at this particular pile
arrangement was defined for clays.

The parametric study considers the variations in pile spacing, soil stiffness, load level and pile diameter. The
variables of the parametric study are listed in Table 3.1. A total of 24 different combinations were studied
using the variables listed in Table 3.1.
For 3D numerical models, 4x4 pile group was used that shown in Figure 3.4. The piles were fixed with a pile cap that
has a thickness of 0.80m. The 15m pile length was constant in all models. In order to determine the individual
pile behaviour with respect to the pile diameter, analysis had been performed with two different pile
diameters namely 0.80m and 0.50m. The pile spacing of 3D was found to be sufficient for the explanation of
load distribution with respect to pile diameter. By increasing the applied force to observe the behavior of
0.80m pile diameter at 3D pile spacing in pile group, the loads acting on
individual piles were calculated. A wide range of pile spacing ranging from 2D to 5D for the cases where the pile
diameter was 0.50m had been investigated to evaluate the influence of pile spacing. By increasing the applied
force to observe the behavior of 0.50m pile diameter, the loads acting on individual piles were calculated for
each pile spacing configuration.
In addition to pile diameter, pile spacing and lateral load level, other variable in the parametric study was the
soil stiffness. Analysis were performed on pile group having 3D pile spacing for both soft and moderately stiff
clay

3 Modeling Parameters
3.3.1 Clay Parameters
Soil elements were modeled using “Hardening Soil” Model. Hardening Soil model needs five input
parameters, modulus of elasticity (E) and Poisson’s ratio (ν) to define elastic soil response; friction angle (Φ)
 and cohesion (c) to define plastic response and angle of dilatancy (ψ). The parametric study was carried out
for both soft clay and stiff clay layers. The parameters used in this study are presented in Table 3.2. The
dilatancy of the clay is not taken into account in this study and full bond interface elements are used between
soil and piles.

3.3.2 Pile and Raft Parameters

Piles and pile cap were modeled using a linear elastic material model and the corresponding material properties are
given in Table 3.3. Table 3.2 Material Ptoperties of Clay
  Methods used in the numerical analysis of the performance of the pile groups under
passive loadings
In this paper, the performance of the passive pile groups can be evaluated by studying the effect
of some parameters such as the diameter of the pile, length of the pile, and different pile spacing
or pile group. The study is performed using FEM, PLAXIS 3D program.

 Constitutive models
Linear and non-linear material models are available in PLAXIS 3D, making it capable to
simulate different types of soils and structures. In this study the selected soil material model is
“Hardening Soil Model”.
The constitutive models used in this numerical analysis is the Hardening soil model. This model
is an advanced model for the simulation of soil behavior. This model can be used to accurately
predict displacement and failure for general types of soils in various geotechnical applications
(Ti, et.al.,2009).
The Hardening Soil (HS) model is based on the Dun-can Chang model showing more advances
than the Mohr-Coulomb (MC) model. Similar to the MC model, stress states of stress are
expressed by the friction angle φ, the cohesion force c, the dilatation angle ψ, but the stiffness of
the soil is expressed with greater precision by using 3 different input modulus variables: secant
modulus E50ref ; unloading-reloading stiffness E ref ur and tangent oedometric modulus E ref oed .

The HS model also explains the dependence of the stiffness on stress. The level of dependence of
stress is given by the exponent m. In order to simulate stress dependence according to the
logarithmic law, Schanz et al. (1999) [7] investigated soft soils, the chosen exponent is m = 1 .
According to Janbu (1963), the value of m is about 0.5 for sand and clay in Norway. Whereas
von Soos (1980) has a m value of 0.85

Hardening soil model requires a total of seven parameters, those parameters are stiffness
parameters:-

 Reference secant stiffness from the drained triaxial test (Eref50),

 Reference tangentstiffness for oedometer primary loading (Erefoed),
 Reference unloading/reloading stiffness (Erefur), and strength parameters: -
 Internal Friction angle (ϕ),
 Cohesion (c) and Unloading/reloading
 Poisson's ratio (νur) and Dilatancy angle (ψ).

However, defining the parameters , ref ref E E ur oed in Plaxis generally chooses the default
word for all types of soil as formulas () and () often make calculations difficult [8]:

……………………………….

………………………………………….

Modeling Parameters
The choice of material properties in finite element analysis is important in order to reflect the
system precisely. For all soil models; drained, undrained and non-porous drainage types are
 available to represent the pore pressure behavior of soils in Plaxis 3D. Since long term stability is
more critical , it is decided to use drained parameters in the analysis.

Inputs soil parameters for the base model

Soil Parameters for the base model can be taken from the data gathered from ZIAS consult
P.L.C. Soil elements were modeled using “Hardening Soil” Model. Hardening Soil model needs
five input parameters, modulus of elasticity (E) and Poisson’s ratio (ν) to define elastic soil
response; friction angle (Φ) and cohesion (c) to define plastic response and angle of dilatancy
(ψ). The parametric study was carried out for stiff clay layers. The parameters used in this study
are presented in Table 3.2. The dilatancy of the clay is not taken into account in this study. and
full bond interface elements are used between soil and piles. The stiffness Parameters can be
taken from correlation-based on SPT data of the corresponding site.

N.Phien-wej, et.al. (2012) suggested a different strong correlation between Reference secant
stiffness (Eref50),and SPT N value for different soil types. Since the selected clay soil is stiff as
shown in Figure A1 in Appendix A, so we can take the following equation to determine the
Reference secant stiffness (Eref50) for the soil.

Eref50=700 N60……………………………………………………

Kumar, et.al. (2016) suggested a different strong correlation between Poisson’s ratio and SPT N
value for different soil types. Since the selected clay soil is stiff as shown in Figure A1 in
Appendix A, so we can take the following equation to determine the Poisson’s ratio for the soil

𝜐 = 0.125 + 0.0125𝑁…for stiff clay (SPT N range from 6 to 30)………………

Strength and stiffness parameters

Eref
F'(angle of oed(Reference
Bore hole C'(Cohesion Bulk unit Dry unit Poisson
internal SPT(N60) Odeometere
ID. in KPa) weight(kN/m3) weight(kN/m3) ratio
friction) modulus(in
kN/m2)

BH-1 33 11.31 16.82 11.66 5 0.1875 3800

BH-2 85 4.86 16.82 11.66 9 0.2375 6840
BH-3 89 7.97 18.35 13.37 5 0.1875 3800
BH-4 23.33 23 15.81 11.27 10 0.25 7600
 Average 57.5825 11.785 16.95 11.99 7.25 0.215625 5510

The average value is taken as shown on the last row of table.The Poisson’s ratio for soil is taken
as 0.215.

Pile properties and modeling

The piles were modeled as cylindrical massive circular piles with different geometry, in active
working space. Pile is generated by replacing the soil element by the pile with the adjusted
strength and stiffness parameter. Between the pile element and the soil element, an interface is
established to model the soil‐pile interaction, the system is brought to equilibrium. The
combinations of axial loads are applied in each stage. The pile properties used for the inputs of
Plaxis 3D Foundation are in the following table

Structural materials

Unit Youngs Poisson

Name Material Modeling Type Rint Drainage type
weight(kN/m3) modulus (Gp) ratio
pile Concrete Linear 25 30 0.2 1 Non porous
Pile cap Concrete Linear 25 30 0.2 1 Non porous

Pile number: group pile is containing four or more rows (McVay, e.tal.1998). Leussink .H .K.P
and Wenth (1969) found that the soil movement were sufficiently large (maximum of about 80
cm) to case of failure of the installed pile.Accordingly, the stepping movements are 20cm,
40cm , and 80cm. The pile cap thickness is taken to be fixed as 65cm throughout this paper. In
order to investigate different modes of failure suggested by Viggiani (1981 length of moving
layer (Lm) values varies from 0.3 Lp(length of pile) up to 0.6 Lp(length of pile ) .Generally, the
model parameters used to study in this paper are summarized in the table below

.
Pile length Pile diam, Surface Pile
area(pDL) Unit skin C/C spacing(m)
(m) (m) configuration
m2 friction(ƒs)kN/m2
0.6 11.304 36 2.5 D 5D
L=6 0.8 15.072 36 2.5 D 5D 3x4(3 Row)
1 18.84 36 2.5 D 5D
0.6 26.376 84.58 2.5 D 5D
L=14 0.8 35.168 84.58 2.5 D 5D 4x4(4 Row)
1 43.96 84.58 2.5 D 5D
0.6 41.448 100.84 2.5 D 5D
L=22 0.8 55.264 100.84 2.5 D 5D 5x4(5 Row)
1 69.08 100.84 2.5 D 5D

The combinations of the above pile parameters are used in modeling. Numerically Pile modeling
by Plaxis 3-D Foundation has its own process, as can be referred in Plaxis 3D Foundation
manual. Beforehand starting the basic construction, stages fixing the dimensions and describing
the working plane should be completed.

The first is the initial stage, in this stage if there is water table nearest to the foundation or pile
layer, ignore it because of the water table is considered as the undrained condition, it is
dissipated in the long time throughout the construction period. The next stage is theinstallation of
the piles. In this stage a group of piles are installed, in Plaxis 3D Foundation. Piles are installed
according to the pile depth defined in the material cluster.

 EMBEDDED BEAM ELEMENT IN PLAXIS 3D

The embedded beam approach was introduced by Sadek and Shahrour 2004 [6]. In this concept
pile volume isn’t discretized with solid elements, but replaced with advanced formulation.
The embedded pile is a special feature in PLAXIS 3D which was developed to simulate the
behaviour of piles in a simplified way.
Realistic modeling of pile groups needs the use of complex nonlinear 3D simulations, usually
with full discretization of pile continuum. In order to reduce the complexity of these models, the
number of elements required to analyze a certain pile–soil interaction problem as well as the
Calculation time, in past years an embedded beam element has been formulated and
implemented into FEM computer codes such as PLAXIS 3D. This is mainly due to the complex
meshing of the pile body and its interaction points with the surrounding soil when using volume
pile. Another advantage of the embedded pile is that the output forces can be directly obtained,
unlike the volume pile which is modeled as soil material

Embedded pile model - consisting of slender beams, skin and foot interfaces – has been
successfully implemented in the Plaxis 3D Foundation Program. The interfaces represent the
interaction at the contact surface between the pile and soil. Rigid/flexible connection and
slippage at the pile-soil contact surface can be modelled by selecting appropriate features of the
interfaces.
However, one of the limitations of the embedded pile is that it does not take the method of
installation into account. Therefore, driven and displacement piles could be affected more than
bored and augered piles due to this limitation (Haryono, 2013).

 Interface modeling
The finite element method is based on continuum mechanics and is incapable of effectively
evaluating the loading and displacement condition induced by relative displacement between
materials.
Interfaces will be required to simulate the finite frictional resistance between the structure such
as pile and neighboring soil and also pile to pile interaction, pile to raft interaction and raft to soil
interaction
As shown In figure an interface element is an element connecting structure and soil,with or with
out thickeness ,which has large quite large normal stiffness but relatively small shear stiffness so
that it can simulate the relative displacement between soil and structure.if inter face elements are
not to be adopted ,the soil in the vicinity of the structure can be considered to divided in to fine
elements.

These are defined with a strength reduction factor Rinter that models the roughness of the
interaction. The interface is in general weaker and more flexible than the associated soil layer
why the strength reduction factor is smaller than 1,0. Hence a rigid interface is assigned the value
1,0 and that means that the backwall moves along with the soil. A smoother interface has a value
over 0,0 and means that the soil and backwall moves more independent of each other. A low
interface coefficient about 0,1 -0,2 for a weak interface (complete smoothness can not be
achieved) is recommended by PLAXIS (PLAXIS, 2008) based on experience.
Schweiger (Schweiger, 2007) presents analyses performed in PLAXIS made with the Hardening
Soil Model that clearly shows the significant influence of the parameter Rinter. Compared to a
Mohr-Coulomb model high differences are obtained for the displacements. It is obvious from
theses results that input parameters for modeling wall/soil interaction have to be chosen very
carefully, which is however a difficult task because the elastic stiffness of an interface is not a
well defined mechanical property.
Each interface has a “virtual thickness” which is an imaginary dimension used to define the
material properties of the interface. The virtual thickness is calculated as the virtual thickness
factor times the average element size.

Interfaces are modeled as 16-node interface elements and elements consist of eight pairs of
nodes, compatible with the eight-nodded quadrilateral side of a soil element.

The basic property of an interface element is the associated material data set for soil and
interfaces. When interface element models the interaction between a pile and the soil, which is
intermediate between smooth and fully rough. The roughness of the interaction is modeled by
choosing a suitable value for the strength reduction factor in the interface (R-inter). This factor
relates the interface strength (structure surface friction and adhesion) to the soil strength (friction
angle and cohesion). Elastic-plastic model is used to describe the behavior of interfaces for the
modeling of soil-structure interaction.
  Sensitivity Study
To increase the accuracy, mesh width used in the pile group was decreased. The mesh element
size can be adjusted by using a general mesh size varying from very coarse to very fine and also
by using line, cluster and point refinements. Very fines meshes should be avoided in order to
reduce the number of elements, thus to reduce the memory consumption and calculation time.
3D finite elemet mesh is composed of elements, nodes and stress points. Figure 3.3 illustrates the
distribution of nodes over the elements. During a finite element analysis, displacement values are
calculated at the nodes . On the contrary, stresses and strains are calculated at individual stress
points (Gaussian integration points) rather than at the nodes. A 15-node wedge element contains
6 stress points that shown in Figure 3.3. However, stress and strain values at stress points are
extrapolated to the nodes for the output purposes
Mesh size and properties of the Base Model
At the time of using a finite element method to resolve a problem, first the domain of the
problem must be discretized. Selecting a proper mesh size is very important because it
significantly affects the precision of the results. It is vital to have a high-density mesh in regions
of high stress or strain gradients. Sizing the mesh for accurate results, but with a reasonable
number of zones, can be complicated. Mesh size significantly affects the analysis time. In order
to select proper mesh size, these factors should be carefully adressed:

 Finer mesh leads to more accurate results because it provides a better representation of high
stress gradients.

 Accuracy increases as zone aspect ratios approaches unity.

 If different zone sizes are depending on the expected stress concentrations, the results are more
reliable

In order to execute finite element calculation, the model geometry has to be divided in to
elements. In PLAXIS 3D, the mesh coarseness is estimated to have a significant influence on the
expected results.

PLAXIS 3D came up with five types of mesh coarseness (very coarse, coarse, medium, fine, and
very fine meshes) which gives different number of the generated mesh elements. In this paper,
in all model’s finer mesh type is used. The following table shows how mesh types affects the
number of elements and node number.

 Sensitivity analysis

is used to define or fix the soil boundaries horizontally and vertically. This is can be computed
by considering one point or node in the Finite element model for different dimensions of the
model. When the model dimension becomes increased, after some point the stress effect on the
selected node becomes constant. Therefore, the model dimension that the effect becomes
constant considered as the best suit for numerical analysis. In this paper, the soil model of
dimension from 4*4 m to 10*10 m for single GAP with diameter 0.3 m and length 6 m were
checked. The plan dimension of the footing pad used is 2*2 m. As shown in the figure below
almost 8*8 m and 10*10 m bring the same result. Therefore, the soil plan dimension of 10*10 m
is used for the whole analysis. The vertical dimension (depth) of the soil is used as 10 m because
the clay soil is existing up to a depth of 10 m in the selected site.