PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000

_________________________________________________________________________________________

PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL

Wei Dong Guo1

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia

ABSTRACT

Closed form solutions for vertically loaded piles in elastic-plastic, nonhomogeneous soil have
been established recently using an ideal elastic-plastic load transfer model. However, in some
cases, the load transfer from piles to surrounding soil shows softening behaviour. In this
paper, the established solutions are extended to account for this behaviour using a simplified
strain softening soil model. The solutions are recast in non-dimensional forms, and expressed
via modified Bessel functions. The effect of non-homogeneity and the degree of softening on
pile capacity is explored.

Key words: piles, axial loading; closed-form solutions; nonhomogeneous; soil softening

International Geotechnical Classification Numbers: E- 4; E-12; H- 1.

1. INTRODUCTION

Exact closed form solutions have been established previously for piles embedded in non-
homogeneous elastic-plastic media (Guo, 1997, 2000a, Guo and Randolph, 1997), and visco-
elastic media (Guo, 2000b). The pile-soil interaction is simulated by independent springs
distributed down the shaft and at the base (Coyle and Reese, 1966). The stiffness of the
elastic springs, expressed as the gradient of the local load transfer curves, may be correlated
to the soil shear modulus by load transfer factors. With suitable load transfer factors, the
analysis can provide satisfactory results compared with more rigorous numerical approaches
(e.g. Randolph and Wroth, 1978; Guo, 1997, Guo and Randolph, 1997; 1998).

The purpose of this paper is to extend the closed form solutions (Guo and Randolph, 1997) to
a soil exhibiting softening behaviour described by a simplified model given by Murff (1980).
The numeric values of the solutions were obtained using MathcadTM.

1Doctor of Philosophy (UWA, Australia), Logan research fellow, Department of Civil Engineering, Monash
University, Wellington Road, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia. Email: camsaweidguo@mailcity.com
___________________________________________________________________________
1
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

2. LOAD TRANSFER ANALYSIS

2.1 The Soil Addressed

The distribution of soil shear modulus, G down a pile is assumed as a power function of depth
(e.g. Fig. 1(a))

G = Ag z n (1)

where z is the depth below the ground surface; Ag and n are constants. At the depth of the pile
base level, the shear modulus is written as GL. Below the base level, shear modulus is written
as a constant, Gb. The effect of the distribution of Gb is account for by a base load transfer
factor described later. The limiting shear stress, τf with depth can be assumed as (Guo and
Randolph, 1997)

τ f = Av z θ (2)

where Av and θ are constants for limiting shear stress distribution. To achieve closed form
solution, θ is assumed to be equal to n in this paper, and is called non-homogeneity factor.

Pile-soil relative stiffness, λ is defined as the ratio of pile Young’s modulus, Ep over the soil
shear modulus at the pile base level, GL, i. e. λ = E p G L .

Shaft load transfer relationship is simplified as that given in Fig.1 (b). When the shaft stress
exceeds τf, the shear stress is kept as ξτf. ξ (0 < ξ ≤ 1) is a strain softening factor as defined
by Murff (1980). The current solutions are based on an elastic base model, but the solutions
can be extended to account for elastic-plastic response in certain cases as discussed later.

2.2 Load Transfer Models

The shaft displacement may be approximated by (Randolph and Wroth, 1978)

τ o ro
w= ζ (3)
G

where w is the local shaft displacement; τo is the local shaft shear stress and ro is the pile
radius. For the soil profiles shown in Fig. 1(a), the shaft load transfer factor, ζ may be
estimated by the following expression (e.g. Guo, 1997; Guo and Randolph, 1998),
___________________________________________________________________________
2
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

 1− ν s L 
ζ = ln A   + B (4)
  1 + n ro  

where L is the pile length; νs is the soil Poisson's ratio; parameter, B may be taken as 5, and A
is given by

A h  1  0.4 − ν s 2  
A=   +  + C λ ( ν s − 0.4) (5)
A oh  1 + n  n + 0.4 1 − 0.3n  

where Cλ is 0, 0.5, and 1.0 for λ = 300, 1,000, and 10,000 respectively. Aoh is Ah at a ratio of
H/L = 4. H is the depth to underlying rigid layer. Ah is given by the following equation

2 .23ρg  1− 
H
A h = 0124
. e  1 − e L  + 101
. e 0.11n (6)
 

where ρg = 1/(1+n). Since n = θ, the limiting shaft displacement, we is equal to Avroζ/Ag

which is obtained from Eq. (3) with G given by Eq. (1), and τo replaced by τf, respectively.
The we is linearly proportional to the pile shaft radius and the shaft load transfer factor, ζ.

At the base of the pile, the elastic load-deformation relationship may be given by (Randolph
and Wroth, 1978)

Pb (1 − ν s )ω
wb = (7)
4ro Gb

where wb is the base displacement; Gb is the shear modulus just below the pile base level; Pb
is the mobilised base load; ω is the base load transfer factor. Guo and Randolph (1998) found
that (1) ω lies in between 1.1 -1.7 for an actual profile of ζ with depth. (2) For predicting pile-
head-stiffness, given ζ a constant (obtained from Eq. (4)) with depth, ω may be normally
taken as unity.

3. NON-DIMENTIONAL CLOSED FORM SOLUTIONS

3.1 Elastic Solution

Within elastic state, the basic differential equation governing the axial deformation of a pile
fully embedded in the soil addressed is derived as follows (Murff, 1975)
___________________________________________________________________________
3
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

d 2w πd w
2
= τf (8)
dz E p A p we

where Ep and Ap are the Young’s modulus and cross-sectional area of an equivalent solid
cylinder pile, respectively; d is the diameter of the pile. Any external subsidence is ignored,
thus, the axial pile displacement is taken as the pile-soil relative displacement, w as given by
Eq. (3). Introducing non-dimensional parameters, Eq. (8) is transformed into

d 2π 1
= π v1 / mπ θ2 π 1 (9)
dπ 22

where m = 1 (n + 2) , π 1 = w d , π 2 = z L (0 < z ≤ L). The pile-soil relative stiffness, πv is a

constant along the pile, and given by

π v = (πdAv L2+θ E p A p we )
m
(10)

Therefore, Eq. (9) may be solved in terms of modified Bessel functions, I and K of the second
kind of non-integer order m and m-1.

π 1 = π 21 / 2 ( A1 I m ( y ) + B1 K m ( y ) ) (11)

dπ 1
= π v1 / 2 mπ 2(1+ n ) 2 ( A1 I m −1 ( y ) − B1 K m −1 ( y ) ) (12)
dπ 2

where the variable y is given by

y = 2m(π vπ 2 )
1/ 2m
(13)

A1 and B1 are constants determined using (1) the pile-head load, Pt, and (2) the base load, Pb
that may be is correlated to the base displacement, wb by

Pb = Rb wb E p A p L (14)

where Rb is the base settlement ratio. With Eq. (7), Rb may be written in a non-dimensional
form

4 1 L
Rb = (15)
(1 − ν s )πω λη b ro

___________________________________________________________________________
4
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

where ηb (= GL/Gb) is taken as unity for the current analysis. With the boundary conditions,
the coefficients A1, B1 are readily obtained. Substituting A1 and B1 into Eq. (11), the non-
dimensional displacement, π1 at depth, π2 can be derived as a function of the pile-head load
1+ n
 π  2
1
π1 =
Pt L  2  (16)
E p A p dπ v1 / 2 m π2  Cq ( z)
 z = zt 
where zt is the depth of the pile-head, taking as an infinitesimal value rather than zero, and
C1 ( z t ) + C 2 ( z t ) Rb π v1 / 2 m
Cq ( z) = (π 2 )n / 2 (17)
C 3 ( z ) + C 4 ( z ) Rb π v 1/ 2m

and

C1 ( z ) = − K m −1 I m −1 ( y ) + K m −1 ( y ) I m −1
C 2 ( z ) = K m I m −1 ( y ) + K m −1 ( y ) I m
(18)
C 3 ( z ) = K m −1 I m ( y ) + K m ( y ) I m −1
C4 ( z) = − K m I m ( y) + K m ( y) I m

The axial force along the pile at depth z, P(z) is,

1+ n
 π  2
 C1 ( z ) + C 2 ( z ) Rb π v1 / 2 m 
P ( z ) = Pt  2    (19)
π2   C1 ( z t ) + C 2 ( z t ) Rb π v
1/ 2m

 z = zt 

In Eq. (10), the limiting displacement, we equals Avroζ/Ag. Thus, πv may be rewritten as
m
 2 L
2

πv =     (20)
 λζ  ro  
 

At depth z, with the displacement, w(z) by Eq.(16), and the load, P(z) by Eq. (19), a pile
stiffness may be defined as

P( z ) 2π  L  1
=   Cv ( z) (21)
G L w( z )ro ζ  ro  π v1 / 2 m

and

___________________________________________________________________________
5
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

C1 ( z ) + C 2 ( z ) Rb π v
1/ 2m

Cv ( z) = (π 2 )n / 2 (22)
C 3 ( z ) + C 4 ( z ) Rb π
1/ 2m
v

The difference in the functions Cv(z) and Cq(z) is the ‘zt’ in the Cq(z). Within the elastic state,
the shaft displacement at the pile-head level (z = zt), w(zt) equals the head settlement, wt. For
a rigid pile, firstly, the total shaft load, Pfs may be obtained by integration of Eq. (2) over the
pile length,

Pfs = πdAv L1+θ (1 + θ ) (23)

Secondly, the displacement of the pile equals wt at any depth. Using Eqs. (2) and (3), the
constant Av may be correlated with the displacement by Av = wtG/(ζroLθ). With Av, Eq. (23)
can be rewritten as

Pfs 2π  L  1
=   (24)
G L wt ro ζ  ro  1 + θ

For a pile of any rigidity, mobilisation of the shaft capacity may be quantified by the ratio of
Pt/Pfs. With Eqs. (21) and (24), the ratio may be given by

Pt (1 + θ )C v ( z t )
np = = (25)
Pfs π v1 / 2 m

where np is referred to as a capacity ratio. The sharing of the load between the pile base and
the head may be obtained by Eq. (19)

Pb 1 C1 ( L) + C 2 ( L) Rb π v1 / 2 m
=
Pt (
π2 z = zt
)
(1+ n ) / 2
C1 ( z t ) + C 2 ( z t ) Rb π v1 / 2 m
(26)

The results from these non-dimensional solutions are identical to those from the dimensional
solutions given previously (Guo and Randolph, 1997).

3.2 Plastic Solution

As discussed later, in the case that a rigid pile sites on a soft layer, plastic yield may be
initiated at the pile base before from the pile top. Generally as load on the pile top increases,
plastic yield may be assumed to initiate at the ground surface and propagates down the pile.

___________________________________________________________________________
6
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

Thus, a transitional depth, L1 exists along the pile length at which the soil displacement, w
equals we, above which the soil resistance is in a plastic state, below which it is in an elastic
state. For the upper plastic zone (w ≥ we), since the limiting stress equals ξτf (Fig. 1(b)), the
governing differential equation for the pile may be derived as:

d 2π 1
= π 4π 2θ p (27)
dπ 2 p
2

where π 2 p = z L1 , L1 is the length of the upper plastic zone; and π 4 = ξπA v L21+θ ( E P A P ) .
Integration of Eq. (27) leads to

π4
π1 = π 2 p 2+θ + C1π 2 p + C 2 (28)
(1 + θ )(2 + θ )

The π4, is positive where the pile is in compression and negative where it is in tension. In
terms of the boundary conditions: (1) at the top of plastic zone (π2p = 0), the load is Pt, and
(2) at the transition depth (π2p = 1.0), the displacement, π1* is we/d. Therefore, it follows that

π1 =
π4
(1 + θ )(2 + θ )
( )
π 2 p 2+θ − 1 + t 1 (π 2 p − 1) + π 1*
PL
E p Ap d
(29)

3.3 Load and Settlement Response

To explore pile capacity, relevant plastic solutions established will be expressed in the form
of the capacity ratio, np. With the definition of np by Eq. (25), the pile-head deformation from
Eq. (29) may be rewritten as
2 +θ
wt ξπ v1 / m  L1  n pπ v1 / m  L1 
= 1−   +   (30)
we (1 + θ )(2 + θ )  L  1+θ  L 

At the transition depth of the elastic-plastic interface (z = L1), firstly, similar to Eq. (23), the
pile load, Pe is derived as
1+θ
πdAvξ 1+θ πdAv L1+θ  
Pe = Pt − L1 =  n p −  L1  ξ  (31)
1+θ 1+θ  L 
 

and, secondly, from Eq. (16), the displacement, we can be related to Pe by

___________________________________________________________________________
7
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

we Pe L 1
= (32)
d E p A p dπ v
1/ 2m
C v ( L1 )

where Cv(L1) = Cq(L1), since in Eq. (17), zt is replaced with L1. Therefore, the capacity ratio
np for an elastic-plastic case is (n = θ)
1+θ
L  1+θ
np = ξ 1  + C v ( L1 ) (33)
L π v1 / 2 m

where µ = L1 L is termed as the degree of slip. From Eq. (33), it follows that: (1) When L1
(Rb = 0) approaches the pile length, np reduces to ξ. (2) When L1 (Rb = 0) approaches zero (as
discussed later), Eq. (33) reduces to Eq. (25), np becomes the ratio of the limiting load (Pe)
divided by the ultimate load (Pult), Pe/Pult. And (3) given n = θ = 0, Eq. (33) reduces to the
following form

 L  1 Rb π v + tanh ((1 − L1 L )π v )
np = ξ 1  + (34)
 L  π v 1 + ( Rb π v ) tanh ((1 − L1 L )π v )

Eq. (34) is essentially the same as that given by Murff (1980). Given L1 = 0, and replacing
the stiffness, πv with an equivalent stiffness, π v1+ n / 2 in Eq. (34), the np for the non-
homogeneous case, may be approximated by

np =
1 (
Rb π v1 / 2 m + tanh π v1 / 2 m ) (35)
π 1/ 2m
v (
1 + ( Rb π v1 / 2 m ) tanh π v1 / 2 m )
The validity of Eq. (35) is discussed later.

With Eq. (33), the effect of the slip development on the pile capacity is examined. As shown
in Fig. 2(a), as slip develops (L1 > 0), pile capacity (np) may increase due to further
mobilisation of the shaft stress in the lower elastic part of the pile, or decrease because of the
strain softening (ξ < 1) in the upper plastic part. For a pile in a soil with stiffness factors of λ
= 1,000 (πv = 1.1 given n = 0 or 1.0), and Rb = 0, the figure shows that as long as ξ > 0.75, the
overall increase for the pile is greater than the decrease. Thus, the capacity ratio, np at any
degree of slip is higher than that at the incipient of slip (Pe/Pfs). Particularly for the case of n =
1.0, irrespective of the softening factor, ξ, a portion of the upper part (e.g. 20%) of the pile
may be allowed to develop slip to gain increase in the capacity ratio. The figure also indicates
that due to ξ < 1, there exists a critical degree of slip, µmax, at which the capacity ratio, np

___________________________________________________________________________
8
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

reaches maximum, nmax. This maximum can be viewed in another angle from Fig. 2(b) for the
relationship between the capacity ratio, np (given by Eq. (33)) and the normalised pile-head
displacement, wt/we (by Eq. (30)). In other words, one capacity ratio (np ≠ nmax) may be
corresponding to two different pile-head displacements. Similarly as noted in Fig. 2(b), there
exists a maximum value of the displacement, wt/we (written as (wt/we)max). When the
displacement, wt/we reaches (wt/we)max, the capacity ratio, np will stay at a constant (written as
nw), and the displacement will develop indefinitely. This is not shown in the figure, but
instead the unloading curve is given, with wt/we reducing to unity when the pile is completely
unloaded (Pt = 0).

With Eq. (33), the maximum, nmax may be theoretically determined through the first
derivative of np with respect to µ, and setting the result as zero

dn p  d  C v ( L1 )  
= (1 + θ ) µ θ ξ + L  1 / 2 m  (36)
dµ  
 dL1  πv 

With Eq. (36), the nmax for various values of 1/πv, at n = 0, and 1 (Rb = 0, ξ = 0.75), has been
estimated, and illustrated in Fig. 3 as envelope lines of the capacity ratio estimated using Eq.
(33) for various degrees of slip. In the figure, it is noted that (1) the capacity ratio, np
generally increases with the increase in the degree of slip, until the np attains the nmax.
Afterwards, the np generally decreases to the ξ at µ = 1. (2) The nmax attains at higher degrees
of slip for lower values of 1/πv (higher stiffness, πv for ‘flexible’ piles), but at an approximate
zero degree of slip for high values of 1/πv (low stiffness, πv for ‘rigid’ piles). (3) The nmax is
generally lower for lower values of 1/πv. In the design of offshore (normally ‘flexible’) piles,
reduction in pile capacity is a major concern due to strain softening, and degradation of soil
strength and stiffness upon cyclic loading. To avoid the reduction, the degree of slip may be
controlled (Randolph, 1983; 1988). Provided a degree of slip (µ), the design value of 1/πv
(thus, pile dimensions) may be taken as that corresponding to the nmax, since further increases
in the design value (µ = constant) leads to little increase in the pile capacity. The design value
itself of 1/πv is, however, higher for a lower given degree of slip. For instance, as
demonstrated in Fig. 3, given µ = 0.75 (ξ = 0.75, Rb = 0), np reach the maximum nmax of
0.794, and 0.828 at values of 1/πv about 0.5, 0.63 for n = 0, and 1, respectively. As the value
of 1/πv increases further to 2.0, the nmax shows little increases of 2.2% and 3.5% for n = 0, 1,
respectively. Given a lower degree of slip of µ = 0.5, the nmax occurs at higher values of 1/πv
≈ 0.9 (n = 0) and 1.1 (1.0), respectively.

___________________________________________________________________________
9
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

With Eq. (36), the influence of the softening factor, ξ on the maximum ratio of Pt/Pfs (nmax) is
examined for various relative stiffness πv as shown in Fig. 4. The figure illustrates that the
capacity ratio, nmax is (1) the ratio of Pe/Pult for ξ = 0; (2) insensitive to the non-homogeneous
factor, at low values of 1/πv (e.g. < 0.5, ‘flexible’ piles). Thus, it may be simply estimated
using Eq. (34); and (3) less affected by the strain softening factor, at high values of 1/πv
(‘rigid’ piles). These capacity ratios nmax occur at the degrees of slip, µmax shown in Fig. 5 and
tabulated in Table 1. At n = 0, the µmax may be simply given by (Murff, 1985)

1  R +πv  2 2 
µ max = 1 + ln b 1 − + 1 − ξ   (37)
2π v  Rb + π v  ξ ξ 

As the value of 1/πv increases, the degree of slip, µmax approaches zero (note: when µmax < 0,
µmax is taken as zero). Thus, Eq. (35), which is shown in Fig. 4 as dotted points for n = 0, and
1, respectively, compares well with Eq. (33).

With Eq. (33), the pile-head displacement by Eq. (30) may be rewritten as
2 +θ
wt ξπ v1 / m  L1  L 
= 1+   + π v1 / 2 m  1 C v ( L1 ) (38)
we (2 + θ )  L  L

In a similar manner to that for obtaining nmax, with Eq. (38), the displacement ratio, (wt/we)max
may be estimated through the first derivative of wt/we with respect to µ and setting the result
as zero,
1+θ
 L1  dC v ( L1 )
π 1/ 2m
v   ξ + C v ( L1 ) + L1 =0 (39)
L dL1

To find a real capacity ratio from the two possible values for a given pile-head displacement,
the displacement ratio, (wt/we)max has been estimated for various pile-soil stiffness, and
softening factor, and detailed in Table 2, together with the degree of slip, µw and the capacity
ratio, nw at which the displacement ratio occurs. Generally, the critical displacement
decreases, as the softening becomes more severe (ξ gets smaller).

3.4 Conditions for Initiation of Base Slip

The current solutions are developed for slip initiating from the pile-head, and the base is
assumed to follow the elastic model (Eq. (7)). The base may be assumed to follow an elastic-
___________________________________________________________________________
10
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

plastic load transfer model similar to that for the shaft (Fig. 1(b)), with the corresponding
shaft limiting stress, τf, softening factor, ξ and limiting displacement, we being replaced with
τfb, ξb and web, respectively. Therefore, at the pile base, using Eq. (3), the limiting
displacement, web, is: web = τfbroζ/Gb. As long as web ≥ we, slip will always be initiated from
the pile top. This limiting displacement, web may be correlated with that for the shaft, we by

τ fb G L
web = we (40)
Gb τ f

Provided that the ratio of τfb/Gb for the base soil is not less than that of τf/GL for the shaft soil,
web is not less than we. The slip will initiate from the pile top.

If the following conditions are satisfied: web < we, and wt/we < 1, plastic yield of the base may
occur before the slip is initiated at the pile top. The two conditions may be conveniently
represented through a critical stiffness, πvc introduced below. From Eqs. (14), (16) and (26),
the pile displacement, π1 at any depth may be given by

wb Rb  C 3 ( z ) + C 4 ( z ) Rb π v1 / 2 m  1
π1 =  (π 2 ) 2 (41)
d π v1 / 2 m  C ( L) + C ( L) R π 1 / 2 m 
 1 2 b v 

In Eq. (41), giving an amount of we for the pile-head displacement (ie, wt = we, at z = zt), and
replacing wb with web, a critical value of the stiffness, πv (written as πvc) may be back-
estimated from Eq. (41) for each ratio of we/web. For various ratios of we/web, the value of
1/πvc is demonstrated in Fig. 6. Slip may be initiated at the base before at the top, when the
pile-soil stiffness, πv is lower than πvc. The stiffness of many offshore piles may be higher
than a typical critical stiffness, πvc of 2 (1/πvc = 0.5). Thus, yield may never occur at the pile
base before the top, given we/web = 5. However, when slip developed from the pile top moves
down to a certain depth, L1, and wb becomes greater than web, plastic yield may be initiated at
the base. The depth, L1, may be obtained using Eq. (41) by replacing the base (wb) and the
normalised head (π1) displacement, with web, and we/d, respectively. For instance, given n =
0, the L1 may be determined using the following equation

we   L  R   L 
= ch π v 1 − 1   + b sh π v 1 − 1   (42)
web   L  π v   L 

Eq. (42) also implies that the critical stiffness, πvc for slip moving to a depth of L1 (written as
πvp) reduces by a factor of (1-L1/L) for the case of n = 0. Thus, for n = 0, it follows that
___________________________________________________________________________
11
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

 L1 
π vp = 1 − π vc (43)
 L

Similar analysis may be undertaken for the non-homogenous soil described by Eq. (1), using
the available elastic solution (e.g. Eq. (16)).

4. APPLICATIONS

With Eq. (25), the normalised limiting load, Pe by the Pfs at the elastic-plastic transition depth,
L1 may be given by

Pe 1+θ
= 1 / 2 m C v ( L1 ) (44)
Pfs π v

As noted previously, mobilization of pile capacity depends on pile-soil relative slip, strain-
softening properties of the soil. For piles in a homogenous soil with a lower softening factor,
e.g. ξ < 0.75 (Fig. 2(a)), the slip should not be allowed to develop even at the ground surface
(Randolph, 1983). However, when the effect of the non-homogeneity of the soil profile is
taken into account, this research shows that the slip for flexible piles is beneficial if occurring
within a small portion of the upper part of the piles.

When the pile is subject to a cyclic loading, degradation to the residue skin friction, ξτf will
occur at a lower limiting local shaft stress, τfc given by (Randolph, 1988a,b),

τ cf = α cτ f (45)

where αc = 0.5(1+ξc) under one-way cyclic loading between zero and τfc; while αc =
(1+ξc)/(3-ξc) under 2-way (symmetric) cyclic loading between -τfc and τfc. ξc = a yield stress
ratio for cyclic loading, which may be approximately taken as ξ for the monotonic loading
described before (Randolph, 1988b). With this new limiting shaft stress, τfc, the limiting shaft
displacement, we should be reduced to wec

τ f ro
wec = α c ζ = α c we (46)
G

Therefore, Eq. (33) may be modified as

___________________________________________________________________________
12
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

α c (1 + θ )
1+θ
L 
nc = ξ  1  + C v ( L1 ) (47)
L π v1 / 2 m

where nc is the safe cyclic load amplitude. Fig. 7 shows the effect of the yield stress ratio, ξc
on the amplitude of nc. Different value of the yield stress ratio, ξc from the residue stress
ratio, ξ (= 0.5) is assigned, in order to show the effect of the relative ratio of ξc and ξ. The
figure shows the following points: (1) nc increases linearly with the stress ratio, ξc at high
values of 1/πv, probably because the slip part (corresponding to L1 ≈ 0) disappears in Eq. (47).
(2) The effect of ξc on nc is dependent of the pile-soil stiffness, particularly at low values of
1/πv. (3) Given ξc = ξ, the difference of the nc between that obtained from µ = 0 and directly
from Eq. (47) is significant at low values of 1/πv, which implies that the component of the
pile capacity due to residue strength in the slip part may be important. Nevertheless, for piles
in calcareous sediments, ξ is normally rather low, and may be simply taken as zero
(Randolph, 1988b). The effect of the residue value of ξ on the capacity ratio, nmax has been
illustrated previously in Fig. 4, but may be more straightforwardly seen in Fig. 8.

4.1 Capacity and Cyclic Amplitude

As an illustration, a typical offshore pile, with L = 100 m, d =1.5m, wall thickness = 50 mm,
Young’s modulus Ep = 7.037 × 108 kPa was installed in a soil with Av = 150 kPa/m, ξ = 0.5,
taking we = 0.01d. The predicted capacity of the pile is demonstrated in Tables 3 and 4 for
three typical soil profiles. As the factor n increases, firstly, if the ultimate pile capacity, Pfs is
kept as a constant, the ratio nmax decreases only about 4.5 % (Table 3), but the limiting load,
Pe at ground level reduces about 37%. Secondly, if given a constant stiffness, the ratio nmax
increases about 11.3% (Table 4), the limiting load, Pe at ground level reduces about 51%,
although the ratio Pe/Pfs shows only slightly change.

The resulted capacity of 41.35 MN for n = 0 is lower than 52 MN reported by Randolph

(1983), where a gradually softening soil model is adopted. For slip just starting at ground
level (L1 = 0), the limiting load, Pe at n = 1 is about half of that at n = 0. However, in the case
of cyclic loading, degradation of pile capacity is less severe at n = 1 than at n = 0 (Poulos,
1981). Therefore, a limiting load for the case of n > 0 should be allowed at least equal to that
for n = 0. This implies that slip (µ = 0.1556, 0.255 for n = 0.5, 1, respectively) should be
allowed to reach a desired limiting value of Pe/Pfs = 0.3183 for n = 0. However, the degree of
the slip should be strictly limited. In the case of two-way cyclic loading (αc = 1/3), and ξc = 0,
the safe cyclic load amplitude, nc is estimated as 4.13 MN.
___________________________________________________________________________
13
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

5. CONCLUSIONS

Exact solutions have been developed for axially loaded piles embedded in an elastic-plastic
non-homogeneous soil. The soil stress-strain soften property has been also accounted for
using the idealised shaft load transfer model. The solutions may be very useful in parametric
studies.

6. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The work reported here was partly undertaken during doctoral studies by the author at the
University of Western Australia, under Professor Mark F. Randolph. During the period, the
author was supported by an Australian Overseas Postgraduate Research Scholarship and by
scholarships from the University. This financial assistance is gratefully acknowledged.

___________________________________________________________________________
14
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 1 Maximum pile capacity ratio (nmax) and degree of slip (µmax)

ξ n 0.1@ 0.25 0.5 0.75 1.0 1.5 2.0

< 0* <0 <0 <0 <0 <0 <0

0
0 .1000 .2499 .4820 .6526 .7616 .8742 .9242

.752 .514 .271 .141 .075 .024 .009

0.5
.1397 .3176 .5417 .6898 .7851 .8857 .9312

1.0 .781 .578 .367 .243 .168 .091 .055

.1768 .3802 .6053 .7389 .8196 .9030 .9408

.868 .671 .342 .012 <0 <0 <0

0
0.25 .3037 .3842 .5184 .6526 .7616 .8742 .9242

.870 .686 .422 .238 .131 .042 .017

0.5
.3284 .4373 .5921 .7099 .7930 .8872 .9316

.873 .698 .47 .318 .222 .121 .074

1.0
.3518 .4834 .6488 .7583 .8290 .9057 .9419

.912 .780 .559 .339 .119 <0 <0

0
0.5 .5266 .5666 .6332 .6998 .7664 .8742 .9242

.913 .782 .576 .394 .250 .092 .037

0.5
.5393 .5954 .6807 .7537 .8128 .8912 .9326

.913 .785 .592 .434 .317 .178 .110

1.0
.5519 .6217 .7193 .7933 .8467 .9111 .9439

.945 .863 .725 .588 .451 .176 <0

0
0.75 .7588 .7720 .7940 .8160 .8380 .8820 .9242

.945 .863 .728 .597 .473 .264 .131

0.5
.7631 .7821 .8123 .8402 .8657 .9078 .9348

.945 .864 .731 .607 .495 .320 .210

1.0
.7672 .7917 .8285 .8601 .8867 .9255 .9497
@
1 π v1 / 2 m ; *Numerator and denominator for µmax and nmax respectively; when µmax <
0, it was taken as zero.

___________________________________________________________________________
15
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 2 Capacity ratio (nw), degree of slip (µw) at maximum settlement ((wt/we)max)
ξ n 0.1@ 0.25 0.5 0.75 1.0 1.5 2.0
8.766 * 3.334 1.797 1.394 1.232 1.107 1.061
0
.825 ∆ .698 .598 .556 .535 .517 .510
.094 # .209 .333 .399 .434 .467 .481
8.760 3.330 1.719 1.350 1.205 1.094 1.053
0 0.5
.833 .714 .625 .589 .571 .557 .551
.093 .204 .431 .502 .538 .569 .582
8.211 3.034 1.655 1.315 1.183 1.084 1.048
1.0
.840 .728 .647 .615 .601 .588 .584
.172 .349 .506 .576 .610 .639 .651
18.028 4.422 2.000 1.472 1.273 1.124 1.071
0
.887 .773 .675 .631 .609 .590 .582
.303 .373 .455 .500 .525 .548 .557
15.421 3.948 1.859 1.404 1.233 1.106 1.06
0.25 0.5
.888 .780 .691 .653 .635 .620 .613
.327 .423 .524 .574 .601 .624 .634
13.650 3.614 1.758 1.355 1.204 1.092 1.052
1.0
.890 .786 .705 .672 .657 .644 .639
.350 .467 .579 .631 .657 .679 .688
28.270 5.721 2.256 1.573 1.326 1.147 1.083
0
.922 .837 .758 .720 .700 .683 .676
.526 .562 .604 .628 .641 .654 .659
23.233 4.894 2.040 1.474 1.272 1.121 1.069
0.5 0.5
.825 .840 .766 .732 .716 .703 .698
.094 .589 .643 .672 .687 .700 .706
19.863 4.335 1.893 1.407 1.232 1.104 1.059
1.0
.922 .842 .774 .744 .730 .718 .713
.551 .613 .677 .708 .723 .737 .743
39.235 7.228 2.579 1.706 1.398 1.177 1.10
0
.952 .900 .853 .831 .820 .810 .806
.759 .770 .783 .790 .793 .796 .798
31.727 6.022 2.276 1.571 1.322 1.143 1.081
0.75 0.5
.952 .901 .856 .853 .826 .818 .814
.763 .779 .797 .805 .810 .814 .816
26.72 5.217 2.073 1.480 1.271 1.121 1.068
1.0
.952 .902 .859 .840 .831 .824 .821
.767 .788 .809 .819 .825 .829 .831
@
1 π v1 / 2 m ; * (wt/we)max ; ∆ µw, and # nw at (wt/we)max respectively

___________________________________________________________________________
16
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 3 Analysis of an offshore pile in strain softening soil

n 1/ π v1 / 2 m Pe/Pfs* At nmax state At (wt/we)max state

nmax (wt / we )
(MN) nw µ w (wt/we)max
µ max Pmax
22.48 .5851 3.856 .5757
0 0.3194 3.961
70.69 .719 41.35 .809
16.97 .5993 4.512 .5917
0.5 0.2608 4.594
70.69 .773 42.17 .835
14.14 .6111 4.968 .6045
1.0 0.2259 5.037
70.69 .805 42.35 .853
* Pfs = constant.

Table 4 Analysis of an offshore pile in strain softening soil

n 1/ π v1 / 2 m * Pe/Pfs At nmax state At (wt/we)max state

nmax (wt / we )
(MN) nw µ w (wt/we)max
µ max Pmax
22.48 .5851 3.856 .5757
0 0.3194 3.961
70.69 .719 41.35 .809
14.30 .6202 3.351 .6073
0.5 0.3194 3.447
47.12 .724 29.22 .813
10.92 .6512 3.01 .6355
1.0 0.3194 3.099
35.34 .729 23.02 .817
* π v1 / 2 m = constant.

___________________________________________________________________________
17
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

APPENDIX I REFERENCES

Coyle, H. M., and Reese, L. C. (1966). "Load transfer for axially loaded piles in clay." J. of
Soil Mech. and Found. Engrg. Div. 92(2), 1-26.
Guo, W. D. (1997) "Analytical and numerical analyses for pile foundations” thesis presented
to the University of Western Australia for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Guo, W. D. (2000a). "Vertically loaded single piles in Gibson soil." J. of Geotech. &
Geoenviron. Engrg. Div., ASCE. 126(2), 189-193.
Guo, W. D. (2000b). "Visco-elastic load transfer models for axially loaded piles." Int. J.
Num. & Analy. Methods in Geomechanics, 26(2), 113-144.
Guo, W. D., and Randolph, M. F. (1997). "Vertically loaded piles in non-homogeneous
Media." Int. J. Num. & Analy. Methods in Geomechanics, 21(8), 507-532.
Guo, W. D., and Randolph, M. F. (1998). "Rationality of load transfer approach for pile
analysis." Computers and Geotechnics 23(1-2), 85-112.
Guo, W. D., and Randolph, M. F. (1999). "An efficient approach for settlement prediction of
pile groups. " Geotechnique, 49(2), 161-179.
Lee, C. Y. and Poulos, H. G. (1991). "Tests on model instrumented grouted piles in offshore
calcareous soil." J. of Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 117(11), 1738-1753.
Murff, J. D. (1975). "Response of axially loaded piles." J. of Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE,
101(3), 357-360.
Murff, J. D. (1980). "Pile capacity in a softening soil." Int. J. Numer. and Analy. Methods in
Geomechanics, 4, 185-189.
Poulos, H. G. (1981). "Cyclic axial response of single pile." J. of Geotech. Engrg. Div.,
ASCE, 107(1), 41-58.
Randolph, M. F. (1983). “Design consideration for offshore piles.” Proc. Conf. on Goet,
Practice in Offshore Engrg. Div., ASCE, Austin, Texas, pp. 422-439.
Randolph, M. F. (1988a). “The axial capacity of deep foundation in calcareous soil.” Int.
Conf. on Calcareous Sediments, A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2, pp.
837-857.
Randolph, M. F. (1988b). “Evaluation of grouted insert pile performance.” Int. Conf. on
Calcareous Sediments, A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2, pp. 617-626.
Randolph, M.F., and Wroth, C.P. (1978). “Analysis of deformation of vertically loaded
piles.” J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., ASCE, 104(12), 1465-1488.

___________________________________________________________________________
18
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________

APPENDIX II NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

Roman

Ag = constant for soil shear modulus distribution;

Ap = cross-sectional area of an equivalent solid cylinder pile;
Av = constant for shaft limit stress distribution;
Cv(z) = function for assessing pile at a depth of z, under vertical loading;
Cq(z) = function for assessing pile at a depth of z, under vertical loading;
d = diameter of pile;
Ep = Young’s modulus of equivalent solid cylinder pile;
G = elastic shear modulus;
Gb = shear modulus at just beneath pile base level;
GL = shaft soil shear modulus at just above the pile base level;
H = depth to underlying rigid layer.
Im, Im-1 = Modified Bessel functions of the first kind of non-integer order, m and m-1
respectively;
Km = Modified Bessel functions of the second kind of non-integer order, m;
Km-1 = Modified Bessel functions of the second kind of non-integer order, m-1;
L = embedded pile length;
L1 = depth of transition from elastic to plastic phase, the slip part length of a pile under
vertical loading;
L2 = length of elastic part of pile under a given load;
m = 1/(2+n);
n = power of shear modulus distribution, nonhomogeneity factor;
nc = safe cyclic load amplitude;
nmax = maximum ratio of the pile head load and the ultimate shaft load;
np = ratio of pile head load and the ultimate shaft load;
Pb = load transmitted to pile base;
Pe = axial load at depth of transition (L1) from elastic to plastic phase;
Pf(Pult) = ultimate pile bearing load;
Pfs = ultimate shaft load of a pile;
Pt = load acting on pile head;
Rb = ratio of settlement between that for pile and soil caused by Pb, base settlement
ratio;
ro = pile radius;
w = local shaft deformation at depth of z;
wb = settlement of pile base;
we = limiting local shaft displacement calculated by using τf;
web = limiting base displacement calculated by using τfb;
wec = limiting local displacement for cyclic loading;
wt = pile-head settlement;
z = depth.
zt = depth of pile-head, taking as an infinitesimal value rather than zero.

___________________________________________________________________________
19
PILE CAPACITY IN NONHOMOGENEOUS SOFTENING SOIL Guo, 2000
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Greek
αc = limiting shaft stress reduction factor for one-way, or two-way cyclic loading;
ζ = shaft load transfer factor;
ηb = pile base shear modulus non-homogeneous factor, (GL/Gb);
θ = power of the shear stress distribution, non-homogeneity factor;
λ = relative stiffness ratio between pile Young's modulus and the soil shear modulus
at just above the base level, (Ep/GL);
µ = degree of pile-soil relative slip;
νp = Poisson's ratio of pile;
νs = Poisson's ratio of soil;
ξ = shaft stress softening factor, when w ≥ we;
ξb = base stress softening factor, when wb ≥ web;
ξc = yield stress ratio for cyclic loading case;
π1 = normalised pile displacement;
π1* = normalised local limiting displacement;
π2 = normalised depth with pile length;
π4 = normalised pile-soil relative stiffness for plastic case;
π2p = normalised depth with slip length;
πv = normalised pile-soil relative stiffness;
πvc = critical stiffness for slip occurring at base before at pile top ;
πvp = critical stiffness, πvc for slip occurring at a depth of L1;
τf = limiting local shaft stress;
τfc = limiting local shaft stress for cyclic loading;
τo = loca shear stress on pile soil interface; and
ω = pile base shape and depth factor.

___________________________________________________________________________
20
Pile capacity in nonhomogeneous softening soil Guo (2000)

Shear modulus, MPa

τ
τf
0 125 250
0
Shaft model
Pile
E p = 21GPa
n=0 ξτ f
νp = 0.2 0.25 25
d = 1.5 m
λ = 630 0.5

GL = 250MPa L 0.75
50
H/L=3 1 we w
τ
75 τ fb Base model
ξbτfb
100

Underlying rigid layer web w

(a) Typical pile and soil properties (b) Strain-softening load transfer models
Figure 1 Schematic pile-soil system

1 1
Figure 2 Development of load ratio as slip develops (λ = 1000, Rb = 0)
Pt/Pf s (np)

Pt/Pf s (np)

0.5 0.5
n =0 n = 1.0
π v = 1.1 π v = 1.1
0 0
0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1
L1 /L L1 /L

(a) Variation of capacity ratio with slip degree, L1/L

1 1
Pt/Pf s (np)

Pt/Pf s (np)

0.5 0.5
n =0 n = 1.0
π v = 1.1 π v =1.1
0 0
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
w t/w e wt/we
(b) Variation of capacity ratio with pile-head displacement, wt/we

Legend nmax (w t/w e) max

CF
ξ 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1.0
Figure 2 Development of the capacity ratio as slip develops
Pile capacity in nonhomogeneous softening soil Guo (2000)

1
nmax (n =1): Envelope line for np

0.8
µ = 0.75

µ = 1.0
0.6 nmax (n = 0): Envelope line for np
Pt/Psf (np )

ξ = 0.75 Rb = 0

0.4
Legend

CF 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1.0

0.2
Lines with dots for n = 1.0
Solid lines without dots for n = 0

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
1/π v

Figure 3 Development of load ratio as slip develops

Pile capacity in nonhomogeneous softening soil Guo (2000)

ξ = 0.75
0.8
Dotted points by Eq. (35)
0.5
0.6
nmax
0.25
0.4
Legend
CF
0.2 0
n 0 0.5 1.0

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
1/π v

Fig. 4 nmax versus πv relationship

(ξ as shown and Rb = 0)

1
ξ = 0.75
0.8 Legend
CF
0.6 n 0 0.5 1.0
µmax
0.4
0.0
0.2 0.5

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
1/π v

Fig. 5 µmax versus πv relationship

(ξ as shown and Rb = 0)
Pile capacity in nonhomogeneous softening soil Guo (2000)

1
Plastic response
occuring at the base
0.8

0.6

1/π vc
0.4

Solid line: n = 0 Broken line: n = 1

0.2
we/web as shown 2 3 4 5
6 8 10 12

0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Rb/π vc

Figure 6 Critical stiffness for identifying initiation of plastic response at

the base prior to that occuring at ground level
Pile capacity in nonhomogeneous softening soil Guo (2000)

1 1
ξc = 1.0
(1/πv)1/2m = 4.0
0.9 0.8 0.75
3.0 0.50
Dotted
0.8 points 0.6 0.25
1.5
nc nc 0
0.7 1.0 0.4
ξc = 0(µ = 0)
0.75 0.5(0)
0.6 0.2 1.0(0)
0.5 Dotted
0.25 points
0.5 0
0 0.5 1 0 1 2 3
ξc 1/πv

Fig. 7 Effect of yield stress level (ξc) on the safe cyclic amplitude (nc)
(ξ = 0.5, n = 0, Rb = 0, one-way cyclic loading)

1
2.5
1.5
1.0 0.8

0.6
0.5
nmax

n =0
n = 1.0 0.25 0.4

0.2
(1/π v )
1/2m
=0

0
1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0
ξ

Fig. 8 Effect of strain softening factor on ultimate capacity ratio (nmax) (Rb = 0)