Journal of Earthquake Engineering

ISSN: 1363-2469 (Print) 1559-808X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ueqe20

Dynamic Response of Laterally Loaded Pile Groups

in Clay

S. S. Chandrasekaran , A. Boominathan & G. R. Dodagoudar

To cite this article: S. S. Chandrasekaran , A. Boominathan & G. R. Dodagoudar (2013) Dynamic

Response of Laterally Loaded Pile Groups in Clay, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 17:1, 33-53,
DOI: 10.1080/13632469.2012.711957

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2012.711957

Accepted author version posted online: 01

Aug 2012.
Published online: 18 Dec 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1078

Citing articles: 7 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ueqe20
Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 17:33–53, 2013
Copyright © A. S. Elnashai & N. N. Ambraseys
ISSN: 1363-2469 print / 1559-808X online
DOI: 10.1080/13632469.2012.711957

Dynamic Response of Laterally Loaded Pile

Groups in Clay

S. S. CHANDRASEKARAN1 , A. BOOMINATHAN2 ,
and G. R. DODAGOUDAR2
1
Geotechnical Engineering, SMBS, VIT University, Vellore, India
2
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai, India

The effects of pile spacing, number of piles, and configuration on displacement and bending response
of pile groups in clay under dynamic lateral loading were investigated. The displacement response of
pile group in clay is strongly nonlinear. Pile-soil-pile interaction is predominant for the groups with
closer spacing and with greater number of piles. Group interaction causes reduction in the group
stiffness and increase in damping of the pile group. Strong group interaction leads to significant
differences in bending profiles of different row piles of the groups. Dynamic lateral loading increases
the maximum bending moment and active pile length.

Keywords Dynamic Lateral Load; Pile Group; Clay; Pile-Soil-Pile Interaction; Bending Moment;
Group Stiffness and Damping

1. Introduction
Various types of structures, including nuclear facilities, power plants, and petrochemical
complexes, are situated on the eastern and the western coastal regions of India. These
regions are characterized predominantly by soft marine clays with a thickness varying
from 5–20 m, hence pile foundations are commonly employed to support these structures
[Boominathan and Ayothiraman, 2007]. These pile foundations are subjected to dynamic
lateral load resulting from operating machineries, earthquake, blasting, and wind. A strong
group interaction occurs in piles in the group subjected to dynamic lateral loading due
to wave propagation. Therefore, pile group response cannot be deduced from single pile
response without taking dynamic pile-soil-pile interaction into account [Finn et al., 1997].
The pile groups in clay under dynamic lateral loading behave nonlinearly due to gap forma-
tion at pile-soil interface and pore pressure generation causing degradation of soil stiffness
and reflection and refraction of waves between piles, resulting in much more complex pile-
soil-pile interaction than under static and cyclic loading conditions. Moreover, the dynamic
lateral loading leads to greater pile head deflection and bending moment.
The behavior of pile groups depends on various factors such as spacing between piles,
configuration and size of group, loading characteristics, soil type, relative stiffness, embed-
ment length, and pile head fixity condition. The prediction of pile head deflection and
bending moment in pile is very important for serviceability requirements of pile-supported
structures and structural design of piles.

Received 04 September 2011; accepted 09 July 2012.

Address correspondence to S. S. Chandrasekaran, Geotechnical Engineering, SMBS, VIT University,
Vellore - 632 014, India. E-mail: sschandrasekaran@gmail.com

33
34 S. S. Chandrasekaran, A. Boominathan, and G. R. Dodagoudar

The field and laboratory experimental data on the behavior of pile groups in soft clay
under dynamic lateral loads are limited. Most of the analytical work reported for pile groups
under dynamic loading is based on linear approach, but significant discrepancies were noted
between the observed and predicted responses [Prakash et al., 1992]. The nonlinear models
proposed in the literature are approximate and not adequately validated by the experimen-
tal results. Although the bending behavior of pile groups under static (e.g., Chandrasekaran
et al., 2010a) and cyclic (e.g., Chandrasekaran et al., 2010b) lateral loading have been ade-
quately reported, only a very few experimental studies have been reported in the literature
on dynamic bending behavior of pile groups in clay.
In this study, an extensive experimental investigation was carried out on the dynamic
lateral response of model pile groups embedded in clay inside the simulated elastic half-
space (EHS). In this article, the effects of various factors affecting the displacement
response and bending behavior of the pile groups are brought out systematically.

2. Materials Used

2.1. Soil
The clay soil collected from the Siruseri area, located along the coast of the Chennai city
(India), is used in the present investigation. The properties of the clay are: liquid limit
(LL) = 67%; plastic limit (PL) = 28%; plasticity index (PI) = 39%; and undrained shear
strength (cu ) at consistency index (Ic ) of 0.38 = 9 kPa. The soil is classified as fat clay (CH)
as per ASTM-D2487-11.

2.2. Model Pile

An aluminum tube with outer diameter 25.6 mm and inner diameter 18.6 mm was used as
model pile. Aluminum plates of 20 mm thick were used as pile caps. Pile cap was attached
at the top of piles with a free standing length of 150 mm above the ground surface. Screwing
of piles in the threads provided in the pile cap leads to partial fixity condition. Piles were
instrumented with electrical resistance strain gauges along their length to study the bending
behavior. Foil-type electrical strain gauges having resistance of 120  were used in quarter
bridge arrangement along the pile length.

3. Experimental Program

3.1. Elastic Half-Space Simulation

Piles subjected to dynamic lateral load produce stress waves, which propagate infinitely
in field conditions. But, the dynamic experiments conducted on piles installed in a conven-
tional model test containers experience severe wave reflection from rigid boundary wall and
adversely affect the measured dynamic characteristics of the soil-pile system. The response
curve for the pile embedded in the rigid tank is scattered and show multiple peaks due
to the reflection of long-period waves [Boominathan and Ayothiraman, 2005]. Hence, the
dynamic model tests have to be carried out in the laboratory by ensuring that stress waves
do not get reflected from the rigid boundary of the test container. This necessitates simu-
lation of Elastic Half-Space in the laboratory so as to simulate the actual field conditions.
The Elastic Half-Space Simulation (EHSS) adopted in the present study is similar to that
reported by Stokoe and Woods [1972], Srinivasulu et al. [1996], and Boominathan and
Ayothiraman [2007], as shown in Fig. 1a.
 Dynamic Lateral Loading 35

(a)

1 M.S. basket with geomembrane 8 Strain gauge

2 Model pile 9 Pore pressure transducer

3 Pile cap 10 Excitation amplifier

4 Exciter 11 Blower

5 Load cell 12 DAS (MGC + and Spider 8)

6 LVDT 13 PC with Catman software

7 Accelerometer

(b)

MS basket with
geomembrane

Saw dust

FIGURE 1 Experimental setup for dynamic lateral loading: (a) schematic diagram and (b)
log spiral shape of the mild steel basket (color figure available online).

The EHSS facility consists of a test tank of size 2.0 × 2.0 × 1.5 m, an absorbing
layer of saw dust and a boundary element. The tank wall of 250 mm thickness is made
of brick masonry. The boundary element consists of a mild steel basket in logarithmic
arc spiral shape (Fig. 1b), which is covered with geomembrane sheet to separate the soil
from the absorbing layer as well as to maintain constant moisture content in the clay layer.
The curved profile given to the boundary element is meant to avoid the interference of the
36 S. S. Chandrasekaran, A. Boominathan, and G. R. Dodagoudar

reflected waves at the central region where test pile groups are monitored under dynamic
excitation. The geomembrane was made to the required logarithmic arc shape by hot air
welding. Fiberglass coating was applied to bond the mild steel basket with the welded
geomembrane which is found to be waterproof. The space between the masonry wall and
the boundary element was tightly packed with wet sawdust. Sawdust is an effective absorb-
ing medium [Gazetas and Stokoe, 1991], and hence it is selected as a wave absorber. The
simulated EHSS along with test arrangement is shown in Fig. 2a.

3.2. Dynamic Load Test Setup and Instrumentation

A series of dynamic lateral load tests were conducted on model single piles and pile groups
embedded in clay in the simulated elastic half-space in the laboratory. A complete test
arrangement along with piles is depicted in Fig. 1a. The overall view of dynamic lateral
experiment setup with equipments, transducers and data acquisition system is shown in
Fig. 2. A steady state sinusoidal lateral excitation is applied to the pile group by electro-
dynamic exciter. The amplitude and frequency of the loading are controlled by an excitation
amplifier. A blower is used to cool the exciter while conducting the experiment. The
dynamic load applied to the pile group is measured using load cell attached between the
exciter and pile cap. The pile head deflection was measured using LVDT. A miniature

(a) (b)

LVDT

Accelerometer
Load
cell
Exciter

(c)

Blower

Excitation
amplifier

Data acquisition system - Spider 8 and

MGC Plus

FIGURE 2 Details of experimental setup for dynamic loading: (a) simulated EHSS along
with test arrangement; (b) exciter and transducers; and (c) data acquisition system and
excitation amplifier (color figure available online).
 Dynamic Lateral Loading 37

triaxial accelerometer was fixed on the pile cap to measure acceleration response. Miniature
pore pressure transducers were embedded in clay to measure pore pressure response during
dynamic lateral loading. A 50-channel data acquisition system was used to monitor and
store the data automatically.

3.3. Clay Bed Preparation

In the present study, the clay bed was prepared similar to the procedure adopted by Rao
et al. [1998]. The clay was mixed in a separate mixing tank with required amount of water to
get the required consistency of a typical marine clay deposit in the Chennai region and was
allowed to saturate for two days. After placing the model piles in the center of the test tank,
uniformly mixed clay was placed and packed in the test tank in layers of 50 mm thickness
and tamped with template in order to remove the entrapped air to ensure homogenous
condition. In this case, the installation procedure simulates the bored pile condition. Water
content, density, and undrained shear strengths were measured at various depths in the soil
bed to confirm the homogeneity of the prepared clay bed.
Vane shear tests were also carried out on the clay bed to ascertain the undrained shear
strength of the clay. The saturation of soil sample was checked by measuring Skempton’s
pore water pressure parameter (B) on samples tested in triaxial apparatus. The measured B
values were in the range of 0.97–0.99.
The dynamic properties of clay were determined by conducting cross-hole test as per
ASTM D 4428/D4428M – 07 in the prepared clay bed in the EHSS. The shear wave veloc-
ity (Vs ) measured with different consistencies is presented in Table 1. The maximum shear
modulus, Gmax was estimated using the following expression:

Gmax = ρV2s , (1)

where ρ is the density of soil.

3.4. Test Procedure

Dynamic lateral load tests have been carried out by applying steady state sinusoidal lateral
force with magnitudes corresponding to different Dynamic Load Ratio (DLR) to single
piles and pile groups using the electro-dynamic shaker, as shown in Figs. 1a and 2b. The
DLR is taken as the ratio of the magnitude of dynamic lateral load to static ultimate lateral
capacity of the pile or pile group. The magnitude of applied dynamic load is less than 20%
of the static lateral capacity. The constant exciting force was applied over a wide range
of frequency (i.e., 1–80 Hz). The time histories of applied load, pile head displacement,
acceleration, strain along the pile length, and excess pore pressure in soil were measured
using the data acquisition system.

TABLE 1 Dynamic properties of clay

Consistency Shear wave Density, ρ Maximum shear modulus,
index of clay, Ic velocity, Vs (m/s) (kg/m3 ) Gmax (MN/m2 )
0.13 36 1650 2.14
0.31 51 1710 4.45
0.51 77 1760 10.44
38 S. S. Chandrasekaran, A. Boominathan, and G. R. Dodagoudar

3.5. Test Program

The piles are classified as rigid or flexible based on the relative stiffness factor (Krc )
proposed by Poulos and Davis [1980]:

Ep Ip
Krc = , (2)
Es L4

where EP = modulus of elasticity of model pile material (70 GPa), IP = moment of inertia
of pile section, Es = secant modulus of soil (= 55 cu ), cu = undrained shear strength of
clay, and L = embedded length of the pile.
From a number of published lateral load-deflection measurements on full-scale lat-
erally loaded piles, Poulos [1971] backfigured secant values of Es at working load levels
[Poulos and Davis, 1980]. For cohesive soils, the values of Es so deduced varied widely,
lying within the range (secant) Es = 15–95 cu. The lower values tend to be associated with
very soft clay and higher values with stiff clay. These values are lower than the values nor-
mally associated with surface foundations or axially loaded piles, and this can be attributed
to the effects of local yielding of the soil and pile-soil separation near the top of the pile
[Poulos and Davis, 1980; Prakash and Sharma, 1990]. Average value of 55 cu is taken in
the present study since the consistency of clay used is soft to medium (consistency Index
Ic = 0.13–0.51). Also, pile-soil separation (development of gap) near the top of the pile is
observed in the present experimental study.
The pile is said to be rigid if Krc is greater than 10−2 and flexible if Krc is less than
−5
10 [Poulos and Davis, 1980]. For the aluminum model piles used in the study, piles
having L/D ratio of 15, 30, and 40 are within the rigid, intermediate and flexible ranges,
respectively, for the clay consistency index of 0.38.
The dynamic tests were carried out on single pile and pile groups 1 × 2, 2 × 2, and 3 ×
3. The tests were carried out for piles embedded in clay at consistency index varying from
0.13–0.51. The length to diameter ratio was varied from 15–40 and spacing to diameter
ratio was varied from 3–9. The piles were subjected to dynamic loads with dynamic load
ratio (DLR) varying from 0.05–0.2 in the wide range of frequencies from 1–80 Hz. The
overall scheme of dynamic test program is presented in Table 2. The static lateral tests
were conducted on all the model single piles and pile groups prior to dynamic tests. The
pile groups with different pile configuration and the location of instrumented piles in the
experiments are shown in Fig. 3. The spacing in the direction perpendicular to the direction
of loading (ST ) was kept constant as 3D for 2 × 2 and 3 × 3 pile groups.

3.6. Relevance of the Study to Earthquake Engineering

When a soil-pile-structure system is subjected to earthquake loading, the seismically
deforming soil carries with it initially the piles and the embedded foundation, and subse-
quently the supported super structure. Two important phenomena occur as a result [Gazetas
and Mylonakis, 2005; Gazetas et al., 1993]. First, the piles that are forced to follow the
soil motion tend to provide resistance due to their flexural rigidity. The incident seismic
waves get reflected and scattered while piles are being stressed, thereby developing bending
moments. Second, this pile foundation motion induces oscillations in the super structure.
The inertia forces that are generated in the superstructure masses produce dynamic forces
and overturning moments at its base which are subsequently transmitted onto the piles and
eventually into the surrounding soil. Thus, the piles experience new dynamic movements,
deflections, and curvatures
 Dynamic Lateral Loading 39

TABLE 2 Dynamic test program

Length to Spacing to Dynamic
Consistency Diameter Diameter Load Ratio Frequency
index (Ic ) of clay Pile group (L/D) ratio (S/D) ratio (DLR) (Hz)
0.51 Single 15 – 0.05, 0.1, 1 to 80
2×2 15 3 0.15, 0.2
3×3 15 3
0.31 Single 15 –
2×2 15 3, 5, 7, 9
3×3 15 3 0.05, 0.1,
1×2 15 3 0.15
2×2 30 3
0.13 2×2 15 3
0.31 Single 40 – 0.05, 0.1,
0.15, 0.2
0.38 Single 40 – 0.05, 0.1,
0.38 2×2 40 3, 5, 7 0.15
0.38 3×3 40 3

FIGURE 3 Configuration of pile groups: (a) 1 × 2; (b) 1 × 4; (c) 2 × 2; and (d) 3 × 3

group.

The above two phenomena occur simultaneously with only a small time lag. However,
it is convenient to separate them into two consecutive phenomena. The two phenomena are
referred to as “kinematic interaction” and “inertial interaction.” The response of the system
can be obtained by superposition of the above two interactions [Gazetas and Mylonakis,
2005; Gazetas et al., 1993].
40 S. S. Chandrasekaran, A. Boominathan, and G. R. Dodagoudar

The present study addresses the second phenomenon only. The behavior of pile group
due to dynamic lateral load, which represents the inertial load developed due to structural
mass during earthquake, applied at top of pile group is investigated.
The main objective of the study is to determine the stiffness and damping constants of
pile groups from frequency response curves obtained from dynamic lateral load tests. The
stiffness and damping constants of pile groups are commonly used to analyze the seismic
response of pile supported structures by substructure approach [Ostadan et al., 2000].
The earthquake loading is transient in nature and its frequency content varies depend-
ing on the type of source and site conditions. In the simplified procedure proposed by Seed
and Idriss [1971] for evaluation of liquefaction potential of soil, the earthquake loading
is characterized by a level of uniform cyclic (harmonic) shear stress that is applied for
an equivalent number of cycles [Idriss and Boulanger, 2006]. Application of harmonic
loading for investigation of earthquake response of pile groups is also reported in the
literature [Dou and Byrne, 1996; Wood et al., 2002; Harada et al., 2006; Chau et al.,
2009].
In the present study, the harmonic loading at wide ranges of frequencies is applied to
the pile groups to find out the natural (resonance) frequency of the single piles and pile
groups, which are subsequently used to estimate the dynamic pile group stiffness that can
be used for analysis of seismic response of pile groups.

3.7. Limitations and Applicability of the Present 1g Model Tests

The 1g model study is carried out to improve the qualitative understanding of the complex
nature of pile group behavior under dynamic lateral loading.
The present small scale model tests on laterally loaded piles (0.4–1 m long model
piles) are carried out in 1g conditions. A solid reinforced concrete prototype pile of 550 mm
diameter with a compressive strength of 25 N/mm2 is modeled as an aluminum tube with
outer diameter 25.6 mm and inner diameter 18.6 mm with a length scaling factor (1/n) of
1/10 [Chandrasekaran et al., 2010a] for static lateral loading tests based on the similitude
law proposed by Wood et al. [2002]:

Em Im 1
= 5, (3)
Ep Ip n

where Em = modulus of elasticity of model pile, Ep = modulus of elasticity of prototype

pile, Im = moment of inertia of model pile, Ip = moment of inertia of prototype pile,
and 1/n = scale factor for length. This is based on scaling factors stiffness of soil nG
(1/nα ), stress in soil (1/n), length nl (1/n), mass density nρ (1), acceleration ng (1), and
force (1/n3 ). Small strain stiffness (G) is proportional to effective stress level (p) (G = pα ).
Exponent α = 1 for clay. The scaling law and scale factors used in the study were verified
by modeling the full-scale single pile in clay subjected to static lateral load reported by
Rollins et al. [1998] [Chandrasekaran et al., 2010a].
However, the scaling law adopted may not accurately model the materials, dimensions
of the pile, and frequency of the loading under dynamic lateral loading conditions because
of other requirements of dynamic similitude [Wood et al., 2002]. The soil deposit of certain
thickness exhibit stresses (both horizontal as well as vertical) corresponding to a particular
depth and for a particular stress history. But the model tests are conducted at low confining
pressure of soil. Contact pressure between pile and soil in the field may be different from
model tests. Certain aspects of the prototype behavior, such as self-weight effects of the
soil, realistic soil-pile stress fields, the stress-strain behavior of the soil, and roughness
 Dynamic Lateral Loading 41

of the prototype pile, are difficult to incorporate in the 1g model tests [Meymand, 1998;
Blaney and O’Neil, 1989; Wood, 2004].
The soil used in the present study is saturated clay (in undrained condition), whose
undrained stress-strain response is independent of confining pressure [Meymand, 1998].
The tests are conducted in simulated Elastic half Space (EHSS) to reduce boundary effects.
The efficacy of the EHSS was verified to dampen stress waves significantly and frequency
responses are not interfered by the reflected stress waves which was a common problem in
the studies conducted in rigid tanks [Boominathan and Ayothiraman, 2007]. Scale effects
are generally considered greater for non cohesive soils rather than cohesive soils used in
the present study [Burr et al., 1997].
It is generally accepted that minimum dimension of embedded structure (diameter of
pile in the present study 25 mm) of 20–30 times more than the mean particle size of soil
(less than 75 micron in the present study) is sufficient to avoid scaling effects [Ovesen,
1979; Randolph and House, 2001].
The relative stiffness (Ep/Gs of 7000–15000) of soil-pile system and length to diame-
ter ratio (L/D of 15–40) of piles used in the present study is similar to that normally adopted
in field conditions [Novak and El Sharnuoby, 1983]. The natural frequency of the soil-pile
system obtained from the present study is comparable to natural frequency of full-scale
soil-pile system reported by Puri and Prakash [1992].
The present small scale 1g tests provide valuable qualitative insight on soil-pile system
response under dynamic lateral loading. The important aspects of group interaction effects
on displacement and bending response of pile groups are brought out.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Time Histories of Measured Load and Displacement

Figure 4 shows typical force and displacement time histories under steady state condition
before the occurrence of resonance. It can be noticed from the figure that the displacement
lags the applied dynamic load by 38◦ . However, the phase lag increases to 90◦ at resonance.

4.2. Displacement Response

The measured steady state responses (peak displacement, maximum pore pressure,
maximum strain) of the pile group are plotted (Figs. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 14) against
frequency of the applied harmonic loading. The response plotted are neither Fourier spectra

Time (S)
20 0.4
15
Dynamic displacement

0.3
Dynamic force (N)

10 0.2
5
(mm)

0.1
0
0
–5126 126.5 127 127.5 128 128.5 129 129.5
–10 –0.1

–15 –0.2
–20 Time (S) –0.3
Load Displacement

FIGURE 4 Phase lag between force and displacement (color figure available online).
42 S. S. Chandrasekaran, A. Boominathan, and G. R. Dodagoudar

nor response spectra, they are frequency-response curves. Plotting of measured responses
of pile group with steady state frequency is common for sinusoidal loading and reported in
literature (e.g., Hassini and Woods 1989; El-Marsafawi et al.,1992; Han and Vaziri, 1992;
Burr et al., 1997).
Frequency response curves are used to find natural (resonance) frequency of the soil-
pile system which is subsequently used to estimate pile group stiffness and damping
constants that can be used for analysis of seismic response of pile groups.
A typical hysteresis loop for load-displacement response of 2 × 2 pile group (S/D =
3) subjected to dynamic lateral load is shown in Fig. 5. The smaller hysteresis loop corre-
sponds to low frequency of 10 Hz and the larger hysteresis loop corresponds to resonance
condition at 24 Hz. It indicates that hysteretic damping is strongly dependent on frequency.
A typical variation of excess pore pressure in clay bed with frequency during appli-
cation of dynamic load on single pile (L/D = 40) is shown in Fig. 6. The excess pore
pressure is measured at a distance of 1.5 D from the pile and at a depth of 6 D from
the ground surface. Figure 6 clearly shows the occurrence of maximum pore pressure at
resonant frequency and hence a significant degradation of the strength and stiffness of the
soil at resonance.
Frequency displacement responses for different magnitudes of applied load for 2 ×
2 pile group (L/D = 15, S/D = 3, Ic = 0.31) are shown in Fig. 7. It is observed from
the figure that the displacement amplitude increases with the increase in magnitude of the
applied load at all frequencies particularly at resonance. The peak amplitude gets shifted
considerably towards left with increase in the applied load. This indicates decrease in the

0.1
Displacement (mm)

0.05

0
–20 –10 0 10 20
–0.05
Frequency 10Hz
–0.1
Resonance frequency
–0.15 24Hz
Load (N)

FIGURE 5 Hysteresis loop.

0.35
Excess pore pressure (kN/m2)

0.3

0.25 Load = 7.5 N

0.2
0.15
0.1

0.05
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Frequency (Hz)

FIGURE 6 Excess pore pressure response.

 Dynamic Lateral Loading 43

0.8
0.7

Displacement (mm)
0.6 Average Load = 3 N
0.5 6N
0.4 9N
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 20 40 60 80
Frequency (Hz)

FIGURE 7 Effect of magnitude of load on displacement response of 2 × 2 pile group.

resonant frequency of the soil-pile system and is attributed to the increase in hysteretic
damping of the soil due to the development of large-amplitude shear strain in the resonance
region.

4.2.1. Compliance. The measured dynamic displacement amplitude of the pile head is nor-
malized by the corresponding magnitude of the applied dynamic load. A typical plot of
normalized amplitude against frequency is shown in Fig. 8 for 2 × 2 group (S3D). For a
typical linear system, the displacement is linearly proportional to the force, and hence the
variation of normalized amplitude with frequency at all forces must become a single curve.
But the occurrence of distinguishable normalized response curves proves the prevalence of
a nonlinear response, and is more predominant in the low frequency region. As observed
from Fig. 8, the pile group behavior is highly nonlinear compared to the single pile behav-
ior. The normalized amplitude reduces with an increase in the magnitude of the applied
load close to resonance, due to nonlinear behavior of the soil-pile system.

4.2.2. Group Interaction Effect. The displacement response of 2 × 2 pile group with spac-
ing of 3D, for the same average load of 9 N per pile, is compared with the response of single
pile in Fig. 9. It can be observed from the figure that the peak displacement of piles in the
group is higher than that of the single pile response due to strong group interaction. This is
attributed to the reduction in the stiffness of the pile group and increase in the nonlinearity
of the soil-pile system. The resonance frequency is shifted to lower frequency under all
Normalised displacement (mm/N)

0.025

0.02 Average Load = 3 N

6N
0.015
9N
0.01

0.005

0
0 20 40 60 80
Frequency (Hz)

FIGURE 8 Normalized displacement versus frequency (2 × 2 pile group).

44 S. S. Chandrasekaran, A. Boominathan, and G. R. Dodagoudar

0.8
0.7

Displacement (mm)
0.6 2 x 2 group
0.5 Single pile
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Frequency (Hz)

FIGURE 9 Comparison of displacement response of 2 × 2 group (L/D = 15, S/D = 3)

with single pile.

TABLE 3 Comparison of natural frequency and peak displacement of pile group (L/D =
15) with single pile
Natural frequency fn (Hz) Peak displacement (mm)
Average load per pile (N) Single pile 2 × 2 (S3D) Single pile 2 × 2 (S3D)
3 27 24 0.123 0.24
6 26 22 0.25 0.48
9 25 19 0.355 0.68

loading conditions indicating reduction in stiffness of the pile due to nonlinear behavior
of clay. The natural frequency and peak displacement of the 2 × 2 group are presented in
Table 3. The table demonstrates that the peak displacement of the piles in the pile group is
higher than the single piles. The natural frequency (resonance frequency) of pile group is
lower than that of single pile due to pile-soil-pile interaction.

4.2.3. Dynamic Magnification Factor. The dynamic magnification factor (DMF) is the
ratio of dynamic displacement amplitude to static deflection. Figure 10 depicts the DMF for
the 2 × 2 pile group (S/D = 3). The static deflection in this case is obtained from the load-
deflection curve for the corresponding static load. The frequency ratio (r) was evaluated by
dividing the exciting frequency (ω) by the natural frequency (ωn ). The variation of DMF
Dynamic Magnification Factor

2.5

2 Load = 24 N

1.5

0.5

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Frequency ratio

FIGURE 10 Dynamic magnification factor versus frequency ratio (2 × 2 group).

 Dynamic Lateral Loading 45

with frequency ratio for 2 × 2 pile group subjected to dynamic load of 24 N is shown in
Fig. 10. It is evident from the figure that the peak displacement, at resonant condition, due
to dynamic load is amplified compared to the static displacement.

4.2.4. Effect of Spacing. The displacement response of 2 × 2 pile group with various S/D
ratios, subjected to same average load per pile of 9 N, is shown in Fig. 11. The peak ampli-
tude increases with decrease in the pile spacing due to less radiation damping caused by
the pile-soil-pile interaction. The 2 × 2 pile group with spacing of 3D has more peak dis-
placement than that of the group with spacing of 7D. It is observed from the figure that
the resonant frequency shifts to lower frequency with decrease in the pile spacing due to
increase in the nonlinearity of the soil-pile system.

4.2.5. Effect of Size and Configuration of the Group. Figure 12 shows the displacement
responses of 1 × 2, 2 × 2, and 3 × 3 pile groups subjected to an average load per pile
of 3 N. The peak displacement increases with the number of piles in the group and the
resonance frequency shifts to lower frequency due to pronounced pile-soil-pile interaction.
The interaction effect becomes increasingly pronounced as the number of piles in the pile
group increases. Among all the groups considered, the group interaction is predominant in

0.8

0.7

0.6 S/D = 3
Displacement (mm)

S/D = 5
0.5 S/D = 7
0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Frequency (Hz)

FIGURE 11 Effect of spacing on displacement response (2 × 2 group).

0.35
0.3
Displacement (mm)

1x2
0.25
2 x2
0.2 3x3
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0 20 40 60
Frequency (Hz)

FIGURE 12 Displacement response of pile groups (S/D = 3, L/D = 15) with varying
number of piles.
46 S. S. Chandrasekaran, A. Boominathan, and G. R. Dodagoudar

3 × 3 pile group. These observations are attributed to the fact that it is the cross interaction
between piles in different columns that plays a predominant role in the dynamic response
of pile groups [Gazetas et al., 1993].

4.3. Stiffness and Damping Constants

The dynamic analysis of pile supported foundation requires two important parameters:
group stiffness and group damping constants. From the fundamentals of vibration of a
SDOF system, the lateral stiffness (kx ) of the pile-soil system is evaluated from the natural
frequency of the system using the following expression:

kx = m ω2nx , (4)

where m is the mass of the pile cap and ωnx is the circular natural frequency of the pile-
soil-pile system. The damping constant (Cx ) of the soil-pile system is evaluated from the
following expression:

Cx = ξx Cc , (5)

where Cc is the critical damping constant = 2 mωnx .

The damping ratio (ξ ) is obtained from the frequency response curves by bandwidth
method as below:
 
1 f 2 − f1
ξ= , (6)
2 fn

where fn = natural frequency of the soil-pile system and f1 and f2 are the frequencies at a
displacement of 0.707 times the peak dynamic displacement.
Table 4 presents the mass, natural frequency, and damping ratio for 2 × 2 pile group.
The stiffness and damping constants for single piles and 2 × 2 pile group (L/D =
15) obtained by the above method are presented in Table 5. It can be noted that both the

TABLE 4 Mass, natural frequency and damping ratio for pile group (L/D = 15)
Mass (m) Natural frequency (ωnx ) Damping
Pile configuration Pile spacing (kg) (rad/s) ratio (ξ )
2 × 2 pile group 3D 1.059 119.3 0.197
5D 1.104 138.2 0.239
7D 1.152 150.7 0.261

TABLE 5 Stiffness and damping constants for single piles and pile groups (L/D =15)
Stiffness constant kx Damping constant cx
Pile configuration Pile spacing (kN/m) (N-s/m)
Single pile – 6.8 7.8
2 × 2 pile group 3D 15.3 51.0
5D 21.2 72.8
7D 25.8 87.8
 Dynamic Lateral Loading 47

stiffness and damping constants decrease with decrease in pile spacing due to increase in
the soil-pile interaction at closer spacing.

4.3.1. Group Stiffness and Damping With and Without Interaction. The stiffness and
damping constants for 2 × 2 pile group obtained from experimentally evaluated single
pile stiffness and damping without considering interaction between piles, i.e., single pile
stiffness and/or damping multiplied by number of piles in the group are presented in Figs.
13a and b, respectively. The variation of stiffness and damping constants with pile spacing
obtained from the pile group experiments are also presented in Fig. 13. It is found that
the group interaction under dynamic loading causes reduction in the group stiffness up to
7D spacing (Fig. 13a). The maximum reduction occurs at 3D spacing. It is observed from
Fig. 13b that the pile-soil-pile interaction increases damping of the pile group and percent-
age increase is more for higher spacing due to increase in the size of soil block between
piles moving in phase with them and causing more energy radiation. Similar observations
were reported by Hassini and Woods [1989] and Han and Vaziri [1992].

4.4. Dynamic Bending Behavior

The dynamic bending moment is evaluated from the bending strain measured at various
points along the length of the model pile using the following expression:

M = EIε/r, (7)

(a)
30
Group stiffness (kN/m)

25
20

15
Without interaction (from
10 single pile expt.)

With interaction (from pile

5
group expt.)
0
0 2 4 6 8
Spacing to diameter (S/D) ratio
(b)
100
Group damping (N-s/m)

80
Without interaction
(from single pile expt.)
60
With interaction (from
pile group expt.)
40

20

0
0 2 4 6 8
Spacing to diameter (S/D) ratio

FIGURE 13 Effect of spacing on (a) group stiffness and (b) group damping.
48 S. S. Chandrasekaran, A. Boominathan, and G. R. Dodagoudar

(a)
Depth = 0.03 m
20

Strain (Micro m/m)

0.09 m
15 0.15 m
0.21 m
10 0.3 m
5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
(b) Frequency (Hz)
Bending moment (N-m)

2.5
2 x 2 group
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 20 40 60
Frequency (Hz)

FIGURE 14 Typical response of a pile in 2 × 2 pile group: (a) strain and (b) bending
moment.

where E = Young’s modulus of the model pile material, I = moment of inertia of the
model pile, ε = measured bending strain, and r = horizontal distance between strain gauge
position and neutral axis.
Typical strain responses at various depths are shown in Fig. 14a for leading row pile
R1 in 2 × 2 pile group (L15D, S3D). The typical bending moment response is shown in
Fig. 14b for a pile in 2 × 2 group with L/D ratio of 30 (S3D). It can be observed from
the figures that the strain/bending moment response strongly depends on frequency of the
applied load. The maximum dynamic bending moment occurs at resonance frequency of
the system due to substantial increase in the inertial force at resonance [Dou and Byrne,
1996]. Similar observations were also reported by Kavvadas and Gazetas [1993] based on
the numerical study. Further interpretations are performed for the bending moment obtained
at the resonant frequencies.
The bending moment profiles of piles in closely spaced (S3D) 2 × 2 pile group (L40D)
for various magnitudes of loading are shown in Fig. 15 for leading row pile (R1). The bend-
ing moment increases to a maximum at a depth between 10D and 15D and then decreases
to zero at greater depths (40D). The figure shows that all the points along the pile experi-
ence the same sign of bending moment at any instant of time. Thus, all points are vibrating
in phase indicating that the pile is vibrating in the first mode of vibration [Sreerama, 1992;
Prakash et al., 1992; Finn and Gohl, 1992]. It can be noted from the figure that the magni-
tude of maximum bending moment and its depth of occurrence increase with the increase
in magnitude of the applied load.

4.4.1. Moment Distribution Among Different Rows in Pile Group. The bending moment
profiles of different row piles of closely spaced (S3D) 3 × 3 group (L40D, Ic = 0.38) for
the average load per pile of 7.5 N are shown in Fig. 16. Significant differences in bending
moment profile of different row piles indicate very strong group interaction. The leading
row pile (C3R1) has the highest and the middle row pile (C2R2) has the least magnitude of
 Dynamic Lateral Loading 49

Bending moment (N-m)

0 2 4 6
0

Normalized depth (Z/D)

10

15

20

25
Average Load = 5 N
30
7.5 N
35 15 N
40

FIGURE 15 Bending moment profiles of leading row R1 pile in 2 × 2 pile group (S/D = 3,
L/D = 40) for different magnitudes of load.

Bending moment (N-m)

0 1 2 3
0

5
Normalized depth Z/D

10

15

20

25 C3R1
C3R3
30 C2R2
35

40

FIGURE 16 Bending moment profiles of various row piles of 3 × 3 pile group (S/D = 3).

maximum bending moment. The row-wise moment distribution of 3 × 3 groups is similar

to that under static (Chandrasekaran et al., 2010a) and cyclic (Chandrasekaran et al., 2010b)
loading. The group interaction effect under dynamic loading is more pronounced in 3 ×
3 group compared to 2 × 2 group. It reiterates the fact that the pile-soil-pile interaction
increases with the number of piles in the group and the cross interaction between piles
in different columns plays a dominant role in the response of pile groups under dynamic
loading [Gazetas et al., 1993].

4.4.2. Comparison of Piles in the Group with Single Pile. The bending moment variations
of leading row pile (R1) of closely spaced (S/D = 3) 2 × 2 pile group (L40D, Ic = 0.38) and
that of the single pile are shown in Fig. 17. The pile group and single pile are subjected to
same average load per pile of 5 N. Significant difference is observed between the profiles
of pile in group and single pile due to strong interaction between piles in the group. The
50 S. S. Chandrasekaran, A. Boominathan, and G. R. Dodagoudar

Bending moment (N-m)

0 1 2 3
0
5

Normalized depth Z/D

10
15
20
25
30 Single pile
2 x 2 group
35
40

FIGURE 17 Comparison of BM profile of pile group and single pile.

group interaction leads to higher values in the magnitude of maximum bending moment of
the piles in the group as compared to the maximum bending moment of the single pile. The
depth of occurrence of maximum bending moment in the piles of a group is deeper than
that of the single pile.

4.4.3. Comparison of Dynamic and Static Bending Profiles. The variation of bending
moment along the length of pile for both the dynamic (at resonance frequency) and static
loading is compared in Fig. 18 for leading row pile (R1) of 2 × 2 pile group (L/D = 40,
S/D = 3). The piles are subjected to same average load (7.5 N) per pile both under static
and dynamic loading.
The following points are noted from the figure. (a) The bending moment changes
sign along the length of the pile in static case, whereas under dynamic loading, all the
points experience the same sign of bending moment thus indicating a rigid behavior. It is
to be noted that the pile exhibiting flexible behavior (length independent) under static load-
ing cannot be considered as flexible under dynamic loads, at frequencies near resonance.

Bending moment (N-m)

–1 0 1 2 3
0

10
Normalized depth Z/D

15

20

25

30 Static
Dynamic
35

40

FIGURE 18 Comparison of dynamic and static BM profiles of 2 × 2 group.

 Dynamic Lateral Loading 51

TABLE 6 Magnitude of maximum BM: 2 × 2 group (S/D = 3, L/D = 40)

Average load per pile (N) Dynamic Max. BM (N-m) Static Max. BM (N-m)
5.0 1.9 1.0
7.5 2.7 1.35

TABLE 7 Depth of maximum BM: 2 × 2 group (S/D = 3, L/D = 40)

Normalized depth of dynamic Normalized depth of static
Load per pile (N) Max. BM (Z/D) Max. BM (Z/D)
5.0 10.8 6.7
7.5 12.8 7.2

(b) Dynamic lateral loading produces strong pile-soil-pile interaction compared to static
loading which results in increase of magnitude of maximum bending moment (Table 6).
(c) Dynamic pile-soil-pile interactions lead to increase in depth of occurrence of maximum
bending moment compared to that under static loading, indicating an increase in the active
length of pile (Table 7). Based on the experimental studies carried out on model piles sub-
jected to harmonic lateral vibrations, Han and Novak [1988] and Dou and Byrne [1996]
arrived at similar conclusions. Similar observations have also been reported by Krishnan
et al. [1993] based on the results of dynamic finite element analysis.

5. Conclusions
Based on the results of the present experimental investigations on model pile groups in
clay, the following conclusions are drawn.
1. The displacement response of pile group under dynamic lateral loading in clay is
strongly nonlinear, more pronounced with increasing magnitude of force, due to
stiffness degradation and an increase in hysteretic damping of the soil induced by
development of large-amplitude shear strain and excess pore pressure.
2. The peak displacement of the 2 × 2 pile group is higher than that of the single piles,
due to reduction in the stiffness of the pile group and increase in the nonlinearity of
the soil-pile system. The natural frequency (resonance frequency) of the pile group
is lower than that of single pile due to pile-soil-pile interaction.
3. Pile-soil-pile interaction is predominant for the group with closer spacing (3D) due
to less radiation damping, and the extent of interaction decreases with increased
spacing.
4. The group interaction effect becomes increasingly pronounced as the number of
piles in the pile group increases. Among all the groups tested in the study, the group
interaction is predominant for 3 × 3 pile group due to cross interaction between the
piles of the different columns of the group.
5. Group interaction under dynamic lateral loading causes reduction in the group
stiffness and increase in damping of the pile group.
6. Strong group interaction leads to significant differences in bending profiles of
different row piles of the groups.
7. Dynamic lateral loading produces strong pile-soil-pile interaction compared to
static loading which results in increase in the magnitude of maximum bending
moment and active length of the pile.
52 S. S. Chandrasekaran, A. Boominathan, and G. R. Dodagoudar

References
ASTM D2487–11 [2011] Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes
(Unified Soil Classification System), ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
ASTM D 4428/D4428M–07 [2007] Standard Test Methods for Crosshole Seismic Testing, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
Blaney, G. W. and O’Neill, M. W. [1989]. “Dynamic lateral response of a pile group in clay,”
Geotechnical Testing Journal, ASTM 12(1), 22–29.
Boominathan, A. and Ayothiraman, R. [2005] “Dynamic behaviour of laterally loaded model piles in
clay,” Geotechnical Engineering, ICE 158, 207–215.
Boominathan, A. and Ayothiraman, R. [2007] “An experimental study on static and dynamic bending
behavior of piles in soft clay,” Geotechnical and Geological Engineering 25, 177–189.
Burr, J. P., Pender, M. J., and Lankin, T. J. [1997] “Dynamic response of laterally excited pile groups,”
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE 123(1), 1–8.
Chandrasekaran, S. S., Boominathan, A., and Dodagoudar, G. R. [2010a] “Group interaction effects
on laterally loaded piles in clay,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
ASCE 136(4), 573–582.
Chandrasekaran, S. S., Boominathan, A., and Dodagoudar, G. R. [2010b] “Experimental investi-
gations on the behaviour of pile groups in clay under lateral cyclic loading,” Geotechnical and
Geological Engineering 28, 603–617.
Chau, K. T., Shen, C. Y., and Guo, X. [2009] “Nonlinear seismic soil-pile-structure interactions:
Shaking table tests and FEM analyses,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29, 300–310.
Dou, H. and Byrne, P. M. [1996] “Dynamic response of single piles and soil-pile interaction,”
Canadian Geotechnical Journal 33, 80–96.
El-Marsafawi, H., Han, Y. C., and Novak, M. [1992] “Dynamic experiments on two pile groups,”
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE 118(4), 576–592.
Finn, W. D. L., Wu, G., and Thavaraj, T. [1997] “Soil-pile-structure interactions,” in Seismic Analysis
and Design for Soil-Pile-Structure Interactions, ed. S. Prakash (ASCE) (Geotechnical Special
Publication 70, Reston, USA), pp. 1–22.
Finn, W. D. L. and Gohl, W. B. [1992] “Centrifuge model studies of piles under simulated earth-
quake lateral loading,” in Dynamic Response of Pile Foundations – Experiment, Analysis and
Observation, ed. T. Nogami (ASCE) (Geotechnical Special Publication 11, Reston, USA),
pp. 21–38.
Gazetas, G., Fan, K., and Kaynia, A. [1993] “Dynamic response of pile groups with different
configurations,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 12, 239–257.
Gazetas, G. and Mylonakis, G. [2005] “Seismic soil- structure interaction: New evidence and emerg-
ing issues,” Proc. of International Conference on Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil
Dynamics III, Berkley, USA, pp. 1119–1173.
Gazetas, G. and Stokoe, K. H. [1991] “Free vibration of embedded foundations: Theory versus
experiment,” Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE 117(9), 1382–1401.
Han, Y. and Novak, M. [1988] “Dynamic behaviour of single piles under strong harmonic excitation,”
Canadian Geotechnical Journal 25, 523–534.
Han, Y. and Vaziri, H. [1992] “Dynamic response of pile groups under lateral loading,” Soil Dynamics
and Earthquake Engineering 11, 87–99.
Harada, N., Towhata, I., Takatsu, T., Tsunoda, S., and Sesov, V. [2006] “Development of new drain
method for protection of existing pile foundations from liquefaction effects,” Soil Dynamics and
Earthquake Engineering 26, 297–312.
Hassini, S. and Woods, R. D. [1989] “Dynamic experiments with model pile foundations,” Proc.
of the 12th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Rio de
Janeiro, 2-15/9, pp. 1135–1138.
Idriss, I. M. and Boulanger, R. W. [2006] “Semi-empirical procedures for evaluating liquefaction
potential during earthquakes,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 26, 115–130.
Kavvadas, M. and Gazetas, G. [1993] “Kinematic seismic response and bending of free head piles in
layered soil,” Geotechnique 43, 207–222.
 Dynamic Lateral Loading 53

Krishnan, R., Gazetas, G., and Velez, A. [1983] “Static and dynamic lateral deflexion of piles in
non-homogeneous soil stratum,” Geotechnique 33(3), 307–325.
Meymand, P. J. [1998] “Shaking table scale model tests of nonlinear soil – pile – superstructure inter-
action in soft clay,” Ph.D Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University
of California, Berkley, California.
Novak, M. and El Sharnouby, B. [1983] “Stiffness constants of single piles,” Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, ASCE 109(7), 961–974.
Ostadan, F., Chin, C., and Lysmer, J. [2000] SASSI 2000-A system for analysis of soil-structure
interaction, University of California, Berkeley, California.
Ovesen, N. K. [1979] “Contribution to discussion on the use of physical models in design,” Proc.
of 7th European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Brighton, 4, pp.
319–323.
Poulos, H. G. [1971] “Behaviour of laterally loaded piles: I – Single piles,” Journal of Soil Mechanics
and Foundation Engineering Division, ASCE 97, SM5, 711–731.
Poulos, H. G. and Davis, E. H. [1980] Pile Foundation Analysis and Design, John Wiley and Sons,
New York.
Prakash, S. and Sharma, H. D. [1990] Pile Foundations in Engineering Practice, John Wiley and
Sons, Inc.
Prakash, S., Sreerama, K., and Puri, V. K. [1992] “Dynamic pile-soil-pile interactions,” Proc. Seminar
on Soil Dynamics and Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 353–386.
Puri, V. K. and Prakash, S. [1992] “Observed and predicted response of piles under dynamic loads,”
in Piles under Dynamic Loads, Geotechnical Special Publication, No. 34, ed. Shamsher Prakash
(ASCE), Reston, USA, pp. 153–169.
Randolph, M. F. and House, A. R. [2001] “The complimentary roles of physical and computational
modelling,” International Journal of Physical Modelling in Geotechnics 1, 1–8.
Rao, S. N., Ramakrishna, V. G. S. T., and Rao, M. B. [1998] “Influence of rigidity on laterally loaded
pile groups in marine clay,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE
124(6), 542–549.
Rollins, K. M., Peterson, K. T., and Weaver, T. J. [1998] “Lateral load behaviour of full- scale
pile group in clay,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE 124(6),
468–478.
Seed, H. B. and Idriss, I. M. [1971] “Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential,”
Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE 107(107), SM 9, 1249–1274.
Srinivasulu, P., Gopalakrishnan, N., Sathishkumar, K., and Rameshkumar, K. A. V. [1996] “Dynamic
testing of model piles – A laboratory study,” Proc. of the 6th International Conference on
Exhibition on Piling and Deep Foundations, Bombay, pp. 3.11.1–3.11.8.
Sreerama, K. [1992] “Model tests on piles under simulated earthquake conditions,” Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla, Missouri.
Stokoe, K. H. and Woods, R. D. [1972] “In situ shear wave velocity by cross-hole method.” Journal
of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE 98(5), 443–460.
Wood, D. M. [2004] Geotechnical Modelling, Spon Press, London.
Wood, D. M., Crewe, A., and Taylor, C. [2002] “Shaking table testing of geotechnical models,”
International Journal of Physical Modelling in Geotechnics 1, 1–13.