26 LOADED PILE GROUPS—Pouls:. Analysis of Pile Groups Subjected to Vertical and Horizontal Loads HL. Poutos, BE, Pu.D., M.LE.Aust.* Swormary—Thrce methods of analysing the behaviour of pile groups are described, a well established statical method in which Ro! account ‘aken of pileol interaction, a method in which the pile Broup i replaced. byan equivalent stractural bent anda method based on elastic theory i ‘which interaccion between the piles is taken into aecount in a logical Runner. Comparisons between these" tue methods indicate that Consideration of interepile Interaction inthe soil leads to increased ‘maximum loads and moments in 8 group, although the deflections and rotations may not differ ready, ‘A parametric study fs made of the deflections and rotation of typical pile groups, using the elastic imeracton method. ‘The effects of pile Bind, Bll spacing and intemsed ll sae In decreas the sup defccdbas 2nd robton are exe SYMBOLS a croe-setonal reo pie ae cuvalene rossctonl area of ple eae del BBC B6) sutmazice in caticntetedon method Cx, Cas Cg J 5 ‘Young's modulus of ple z ‘Youngs modula of sl # erin oad on ple 0p H orion fon pile 7 setzment nance for for sgl pile » moment of inertia of pile Tous ‘ional daplaemnent lfuence fice due to Seriznal ox Inust'ew —siontal daplacersetinvence factors for moment TonsTpe signal dnplacement nfence factors fOr Hae See pe Ison tation infuene factors for horizontal oad Thun T'er—rtationnene factors for moment (ate: pimed ‘alc ar for nen incresg Bath Sep) hulu Gupacementandsoation factors fora group of ples K pile ness actor Ks pile enbliy factor onsaneE) & pile eb factor inary varying 2) L fmbedded length of pil b quivalen ttl length of ple L “cuialent length of embedded portion of ple Mi ‘moment acing on pile group M, moment at head of ile M ‘atc of increase of Young's modulus with depth zm searaco of pile R rou setdement aio Rou Rea Ror aroup displacement ratios for horizontal load, mo- sent and for xed head piles Ron Row grouprotation ratios for horizontal load and moment v vertical lead acting on group ve vertical load on pile @ pile diameter . ‘unsupported length of pile above ground surface * number of piles in group : votre 1 centze spacing of piles ce ‘equivalent value of s for battered piles s distance from centre of gravity of pile group to pile Sin the positive x direction « {interaction factor for vertical loading sian ean ter teraction factors for horizontal displacement due te horizontal load, moment and for xed ‘head pile interaction factors for rotation due to horizontal load and moment 8 departure angle berwcen two piles ‘ke wuhors Reade, thon of Gi Bnglnoing. ive of Soe. 5 Poisson's rato of oi ° single pile settlement Pe settlement of pile group a horizontal movement of pile group ‘pus Pvow Prats Single pile vertical and horizontal movements due to unit loads and moment ° rotation Bis Bars single pil roatons due to unit load and moment INTRODUCTION ‘A considerable number ofmethods have been developed for analysing the behaviour of pile groups subjected to a general loading. system. ‘Sach methods may be classed into three eategores. (@ simple starcal methods which ignore the pressace of the soil tnd consider the ple group as a purely structural system, (methods which resuce che pile group to structural sytem but which ake some account ofthe elect ofthe sol by decermining Sault leestandng Lege of te pics| The hey ot ings, “Typical a thee’ methods ave those desctbed Francis (904), Heenaitot (1950), Kocnis 0088), Nein st al {iSe ant dale be "rs pe of sppoach il be sme the "aquivalent bent method! lowing Kocsis (1968) (i) amerhod in which the soli assumed to be an clastic continu Sind inter pile interaction can be onsidered ‘The first wo methods ean only consider interaction of the piles ‘through the pile cap and not inter-pile interaction through the sll os ‘well They therefore assume tat, once te load on soy ple are kaown, the defections of that ple may be calculated from thete loade alone. ‘The thied method removes tht imitation and slows consideration of pile interaction through the soi; the deflections of pile are therefore fot only function ofthe loas on that ple But also of the Toads on all ‘he pile io the grown, Tn this paper the above dhree approaches will be described and comparisons wil be presented between the result ofthese analyses for two typical examples. In the “equivalent bent method”, a modified ‘method of determining equivalent fteestanding eogts, based on eas theory rather than subgrade reaction theory, it detsles. Finally some prametric solutions obtained feom the third method will be presented for typical pile groups, to ilasteate the elects of various factors om tou behaviour. SIMPLE STATICAL ANALYSIS ‘Traditional design methods have relied on the consideration of the pile group as a purely structural system, ignoring the effect of the sol ‘ne suck method which may be employed either seaphically or analyti= cally, is illustrated ia Fig. 1. Considering, for simplicity, loads and ‘eater in the x, + plane only and piles having a pinned head, the steps in this method areas follows (2) she vertical pile loads are calel ated a5, vo Mx yak Se a Bee where x 1 ae distance to the heads of piles and j, measured from the centre of gravity ofthe group (Le-the point about which Ex 0) @) iFthe solution isdone graphically, the forces V and H are posted Torccs 1 trom (1) are the force polygon is then completed by drawing lines paralel to the pile Grectons, ‘The al ores vo each pile sy, thu. Be bind There is then a residual horizneal force He which assumed to be equaly diibuted Between each pile in the rou. (a) if desired the desig of che group may be amended and he pile tatters adjusted t give He 0 fe. ao normal component of Toad in the ples, so that each pile saxallyToaded. Ir shoud be noted that this method cant tae account of ferent conditions of ait a the pile head and always assumes 2=r0 moment at ‘he head ofeach pile. Arai Gnomchanic Sora 974LOADED PILE GROUPS—Poulos. a Typical group Force Polygon Fig. 1—Approximate method for determination of sroup load distribution. EQUIVALENT BENT METHOD Principle of method ‘The principle of this method js illustrated in Fig. 2 for a planar Broup. “The actual group is shown in Fig. 2a and is acted up by vectial and horizontal forces and a moment. ‘The equivalent bent is shown in Fig. 2b and consists of the pile cap supported by fixcd-ended fee standing columns of total equivalent fengths Z,, , and Ly and equivalent grosiesectonal areas Aa, deg and Ay, The equivalent azea of @ pile fs such that the axial deflection of the actual pile i equal to the axial Sefleetion of the equivalent column while the equivalent length is such that equal lateral defections or rotations are obtained, Once, the ‘equivalent lengths and areas have been determined, the equivalent bent ‘may be analysed by standard structural analysis techniques to determine ‘the deflections, rotations and pile Jouds in the syste, Determination of equivalent bent In existing methods which use the above approach, the equivalent lengths of the piles are almost invariably determined from a subgrade reaction analysis. ‘The normal defection (or rotation) of apie subjected to normal load or moment is calculated and equated to the novel deflection (or rotation) of « cantilever under the same load or moment, from which the equivalent length can be determined (e.g. Francis (1964), ‘Kocsis (1968) and Nair er al (1968)), ‘The equivalent area of each pile has generally been determined by equating the axial deformation of the ‘equivalent cantilever to the freestanding column axial deformation of ‘the actual pile i. interaction with the soll has been ignored. ‘With the development of elatie solutions for verceally~ and laterally loaded piles (Poulos (19712); Poulos (1O71D); Poulos & Mattes (1971); Poulos (1972); and Poulos (unpublished) itis now possible to make & ‘more satisfactory determination of the equivalent lengths and areas of the piles in the equivalent bent method, taking rational account of the flees of group action. This method of determination is described below. (© Eguivaion tug of pit ‘The simplest basis for determining che equivalent cantilever length of the embedded portion ofa pile is to equate the lateral deflection of the pile at the ground line and of the equivalent cantilever at the ground Tine, (alternatively, the corresponding rotations could be equated, but Naie ct al (1969) and Kocsis (1968) found only small differences in the ‘equivalent length determined by the two approaches). ‘The equivalent Tength of the pile will depend on the boundary condition at the pile head and on the ype of loading assumed to act. A ‘number of cases have been considered, ay illustrated in Fig. 3, and the solutions derived for the equivalent cantilever lengths are suromarised in Table I. Autreion Gaowchanc Saal, 1974 Groung ‘Surface Fig. 2—Principle of equivalent bent epproach, (@) Actual pile group (8) Egutcalone Ben TABLE I Expressions for equivalent cantilever lengths Case (see Fig. 3) Bguivalent Length a Len L 9 3lgnKrkeon » Ley = by Bip © Ler 0 LR BR aloeRoe a&e «is solution to equation Lay g Mts aM _ ECE) sk Rontn) AO, (yal) iu For case (Le = Lad gp yg For case e) (Le ~ Les) [len Know + 1666/2) He Me eRe td] yay Toot Tors Ton and Loss ate displacement and rotation influence factors (see symbols), and Kir isthe pile flexibility factor, defined as Endy “BE Ke a8 LOADED PILE GROUPS—Poule. where El ple stifiness Ex Young's modulus of the soil (assumed constant with depth) L embedded length of pile. Values of the influence factors have been obtained by Poulos (19714). ‘The group effect has been taken into account approximately by applying group displacement and rotation ratio Ryus Rost, Rosy Rony Ross © the single pile movement (Poulos, unpublished). The above displacement and rotation ratios are determined by ‘superposition of appropriate “interaction factors” for lateally-loaded piles, expressing the increase in deflection or rotation of a pile due to an Adjacent loaded pile. Values of hese interaction factors and typical values ofthe group displacement and rotation ratice, are given by Poulos (197Hb). Table I gives cirecly the equivalent lengths for constant Young's ‘modulus E, with depth; corresponding solutions for linarly increasing ‘Young's modulus with depth may be obtained by replacing the influence factors Zi etc. by the eppropriate values for linearly increasing Young's modulus denoted af Tp et andthe ple sins for Kr by Kv o where Nj rate of increase of Young's modulus with depth. ‘Values of [gr ete. are given in Poulos (1973). Although che inter- action factors in Poulos (1971) apply strictly only to the ease of constant at 4 a re uli De Le | 7 oa t i L i att 7 T t i = ter y 1 Fe i | t 7 uot bet Sober Ae ye —H o Tt el fy e YH Led Actual pile Equivalent cantilever Fig. 3 Equivalent cantilevers for laterally loaded piles. ‘Young’s modulus with depth they may also be applied epproximately to the case of @ lineerly increasing modulus with depth, using a value of Kn equal to Kx. Tt should be noted that for case (), the fist term of the expression, for M represents the fixing moment developed at the pile head. If fixity is not considered to be fully effective, @ reduction factor, ranging bbersicen T and 0, can be applied to this first term. In the limit # m0 fixity is developed, case () then reduces to case (4), "Table II gives an example of the difference bewween the equivalent lengths Leu and Lge, assuming lateral load only, and mament only, to act respectively. A single free-head pile only is considered 0 that Roy = Rosy = 1, For flexible piles the equivalent length Ler is greater, but for rigid piles (Kx > 10, Lay becomes slight greater. ‘The derivation of the equivalent bent as described above assumes, linear elastic sol response, but as pointed out by Poulos (1973), this may rnot be a good astumption for lateral loading. An iterative approach fem be adopted if desired in which 2 non-linear load-defletion curve is specified for each pile and the soltion from the analysis ofthe equivalent bent is recycled, using successively corrected values of the equivalent cantilever length, until the load and deflection of each pile are compatible. rams Seana eka Ke | + | 10+ wo | 1+ | 10+ can [om | ow | ow | aw | om [oe ® Equivalent area of piles For a fully embedded pile, the settlement ofa pile in the group is siven approximately as o where I setlement influence factor applied axial load Ry group settlement ratio. Solutions for I have been presented by Poulos (1972) end Poulos (1974) ‘while values of R, have heen given by Poulos and Mattes (1971) for a ‘wide range of groupe.** Both {and the interaction factors are functions of the pile siftnes Factor K, where Ra xa He ‘where Ep Young's modulus of pile E, Young's modulus of soil [Ry area ratio of pile which equals ratio of ares of pile section to gross cross-sectional area. Although the solutions given are for constant with depth they may be ‘applied approximately to other cases, provided that an average value of Ez slong the length of the pile is usd. ‘For estimating R, when the group contains batered piles, che battered piles can, 282 first approximation, be considered as vertical ples located At the mid-point of the embedded part ofthe pile, and allowance can be ‘ade for tensile loads in the piles (which, in effect, will decrease setle~ tment interaction between the piles) "The equivalent pie will aves length L which will be determined as described above (Table 1) for lateral deflection equivalence. The axial ‘Sefletion of this equivalent pile is ° Ube ’ © & geal Sonali ae re ala py rune wh etl ym de wi eee, Shia be ast or fous a when wane oe Biestrein eae SREP Ney tes of n-itor fod Aurion Gemachri oun, 974LOADED PILE GROUPS—Poulor. 29 where 2p Young's mols of pie Av cquralent area of pie From ( and @), bad Bi ald a aR, Ep Q Foca pit having an unsupported length above the ground sac the axial deci ofthis length mt be de to tan forthe emi portion, The corresponding expreston for fe ten Lite ® ‘The above expressions for 4. should apply for battered ples as well as vertical ples since, as shown by Poulos and Madhav (1971), the axial movement ofa pile is nat significantly influenced by its inclination, ELASTIC INTERACTION ANALYSIS Analyses ofthe behaviour of groups of vertical pile, based on elastic theory, have been presented for aval loading (Poulos and Mates, 1971) and lateral loading (Poulos, 19716). ‘These analyses have been based on the use of “interaction factors”, which express the increase in movement of pile de to an adjacent loaded pile and which are functions of the pile spacing, relative siness and geometry, and for horizontal loads, ofthe direction of loading. "By summation of the jnteraetion factors for each pile in a group due to all the other piles in the group, the displacement ofeach pile may be written ‘in terms of the loads on each pile in the group. ‘This approach can be extended to groups containing battered piles. ‘An earlier such extension was deseribed by Powlos and Madhay (1971). ‘The present method contains some revisions ofthis earlier method. The case considered first isa group in which all the piles are battered in the ‘ame plane and on which the horizontal load acts in the same plane. Considering two piles # and j ina proup, i is assumed that an axial load ‘0 pile j will cnuse a defection of pile which is in the axial direction of pile j and equal to the axial deflection of pile j under this axial load ‘uliiplied by an interacon factor for axial loading. Similarly it is assumed that «normal load on ple j will cause a deflection of pile which is in the normal direction of ile j and equal tothe normal deflection of pile j under this normal loed multiplied by an interaction factor for horsial loading. Tr will be assumed for simplicity that the interaction factors fortwo battered piles are identical with thoue for vertical piles at some equivalent spacing ‘«. Calculations suggest that for practical ranges of pile flexibility, s. is approximately the centre-to-contre. distance Derween the ples one-hied of the vertical depth of the pile for lateral loading, and somewhat greater for axial loading. However, for con- venience, the same equivalent spacing will be assumed for both axial and lateral loading (se Fig. 4). Tes further assumed, following the findings ‘of Poulos and Madhav (1971), that the interaction factor for axial dis- placement due to axial lad equals that for vertical displacement due to vertical Toad on a vertical pile, and the rotation and normal displacement interaction factors due to normal load and moment are identical with those for rotation and horizontal displacement dive to horizontal loed snd ‘On the basis of the above assumptions, the resulting equations for vertical and horizontal displacement and rotation may be written in smatsix form a8 follows} [a Beo\ [VY fo ABecn}( a }=[ AsBoGe] uv} \e ag Case {0} Ib} ‘Tao Battered ples where the coeficients of the sub-matrice areas follows ‘ru = pussy coh + px sins Bry = pate c08 yin Ys — prin sin $608 4 Gio = “pian sa ‘Akg = pm yo 9) ~ pens $8 Bus ~ Area prog cos hi Pa on ou = toetain Boy ~ frags oo Gry = tp pas sxial deflection of single pile due to unit axial load wet normal deflection of single pile due to unit normal load ‘xan normal defection of single pile due to unit moment 8s. rotation of singe pile de to unit normal load sri rotation of singe pile due to unit moment “The above unit deflctons and rotations may be calculated from the ‘heoretcal seltonshipe Poulos (197le)s Poulos (29716) end Poulos and ‘Mattes (1971) irwalus ofthe soil modu canbe estimated (Posloe (1973) and Poulos (1974). or if pile lod tert date is available, trom the ile Getecions atthe Working loads. The interaction factors 2 are given in Poulos and Mattes (1071) while valuer of the interaction factors pn pus 295 AE ven in POS (19710) "The submatrices Ay, By, ee, are of onder m x n while the vectors, V, musta, areof order m.” Equrtin (9) together with the tres equations expressing vericl and horizontal lad equilibrium and moment equ trum, may be solved to obtain the 3n +3 unknown verceal and hor ost loads, moment, displacements and rotations, for the desired ‘oundary conditions athe pile heads ‘A number of cares may be considered including ) gid pile cap rigidly aached tothe piles, so tat the rortons © far idional Saphcenent of a les Se egal ad he ‘Vertical displacement ofs piles seated to te postion ia the troup and the rotation. i) pilex pinned 0 2 igh pile cap, which ie (© Pitt te pie bead omnes ue sce (i) pies atached 10 a massive cap in which cage Rorizontal and ‘erica displacements are eal ut‘ pls ead ovations are iv) pile atached to a relatively feible pile cap s0 that cash pile GO) Pieisecd wo kuowa lovin ements ° ‘No account is taken inthe above analysis ofthe horizontal shear and rotational resistance between the cap ant the sol sldaugh the analy ould be extnded to take thee ity account. Groups in which ples tre battered in eiffeent directions can be treated appeesimately by resolving the horizontal lad into two components and calculating the invline horizontal displacements die to each component, sing, a the length of pile ie projected length in the plane of foading. The resul- tant horizontal’ displacement can then be calculated from these dis- placement components Tt should be emphesizd shat the fact that 3x 3 equations axe required, rather than only 3 a5 ip many methods based on subgrade ection theory ea consequence of conidering the interaction betveen the piles rather than assuming thatthe dsplaeersents snd rotation of & pile area finetion only ofthe loads and moments on that particular ple. ‘The consideravon of inter-ple Interaction ins logical manner in the present analysis thas obviates the necesiy co make approximate allow nees for group effecs ay inthe eguvalent beat approach, "To evskate (©) a computer program Gtest (Groupe Under GEneral Loading) hes been walt. ilar to case (0) Vertical piles at eoulvalent spacing Fig. 4~Bqusoalent spacing of battered piles, AueralionGoomahanc Sornl, 97430 LOADED PILE GROUPS—Poula. COMPARISON BETWEEN METHODS OF PILE GROUP ‘ANALYSIS ‘To compare the three methods of analysis described in this paper, two simple planar pile groups have been analysed, as shown in Fig. 5. Each group has three piles, and in the fret, all piles are vertical while in the second, the outer piles are battered. In applying the equivalent bbent method, the equivalent length of each member has been taken as the mean of Lar and Lear (Table D. A computer program (Harzisos, 1973) has been used to evaluate the solution. For the clatic analysis, the single pile vertical and horizontal responses and the interaction factors hhave been obtained from the theoretical eolutiont in Poulos (19718); Poulos (1971b) and Poulos and Mattes (1971). v= 600K +500 88 ron Mt 300KNm ecco fhsz00KN + = ‘ | ee | T 1 oe r } om | als Team Ey= 7000KPa Eps 21% 10 Po Group A Group B Fig. 5—Pile groupe considered in comparizo of method ‘The piles are assumed to be rigidly attached to a rigid cap in both ‘cases. The loads, moments and deflections from each method of analysis fre summarised in Table IT “The main points of interest are © the vertical pile loads from the three methods agrce, quite Sloe altobgh the ela anaes tends to predict higher (i there is a considerable discrepancy between ‘pomenes ffom the equivelent beat and lst Simple statical analysis assumes zero moment in (Gd the equivalent bene approach predicts a smaller rration than ‘he cittc anna and anges verucaldefstion ofthe leading pile, buts smaller horizontal deflection, ‘TABLE mr Comparison of methods of group analysis 1 aes | Quantity statical ‘bent Elastic | Set | ace. | Ss cows [RR Te ge) a era ne Beare aicas eae aa epee das ele ads ce aaa Pearce ene Sean ese pee eas Selena S| eal ets Gove 8 inl escaal res aoe Paceline: aoe see ae eee See lpet aot ae eae Sea eeceeess Se aleee a ens = 164 | 138 ed sens = | Sow | "ane {should be noted thatthe computed rotation and horizontal defiec- tion inthe equivalent bent method are sensitive to the equivalent length of the piles. For example, for Group A, if the equivalent length was taken a8 Lay (= 1.96 m) instead ofthe mean of Lar nd Lon (= 2.24 m), the vertical deflection and rotation are 16.8 mm, 67 mm snd 00521 compared with 17.5 mm, 8.9mm end .00S561 ia Table III. On the ther hand, if Laur (= 252m) is used, che coresponding values are 18.2:mm, 11.4 mm and.00639, ‘The latter values of horizontal defection corresponds more closely to that from the elastic analysis and hence the ‘use of an equivalent pile length equal to Ler appears desirable 'A more detailed comparison of the computed deflection and rotation under the individual components of load reveals tht the vertical move- rent due to vertical load given by the equivalent bent method and elastic agree closely but thatthe computed rotation due to both horizoaral Joad and moment is considerably smaller in the equivalent bent method. ‘The equivalent bent method also gives a larger horizontal deflection due to moment but a smaller horizontal deflection de to horizontal load ‘The above comparisons therefore highlight the dificult of attemp- ting to characterise a complex pile-soll system by a structural frame [Because itis # more rational nature, th elastic analysis should give more reliable deflection predicions and is recommended. However, in cases ‘Om where the piles in the group have a significant unsupported length above ‘the ground line or where the pile eap cannot be considered as fig, the equivalent bent approach may provide a more convenient means of analysis. PARAMETRIC STUDIES OF TYPICAL PILE GROUPS In this Section, solutions for the displacement and rotation of some typical pile groups are presented. The effects of the following facors fon group behaviour are examined: pile stiffness, pile baer, pile spacing and pile configuration. ‘The results are expressed in terms of dimension- Jess influence factors and have been obsained from the elastic interaction analysis. Effect of pile stiffness and batter angle “The effects of pile stiffness and batter angle on the deflection and. rotation of e pile group are illustrated in Fig. 7 for a group of six 25, diameter piles in.a deep sol layer, as shown in Fig. 6, for ~ 3d. The piles are assumed to be rigidly atiached to a rigid pile exp, and the soil, clastic and has « Young's modulus which s constant withdepts. Three values of pile sitiness factor K are considered, K = 100 (corresponding te concrete piles in a sti soil), K~ 1 000 (Corresponding to concrete piles in a medium-sci coil) and K— 10 O00 (corresponding to concrete piles in a soft soil). For each value of K, the valve of pile Bexibiicy actor Ki is related a flows Klp Rat where Jy,-moment of inertia of pile section -R, area ratio, defined in equation Kr wo) L pile length ae rao pte Eien + (2) ee, oe ecceeee 2 Too, Iu ete. ate dimensionless deflection and rotation coefficients ‘eviuated from the analysis FE, Young's modulus of soil FFor the symmetical group considered here, ny — py ~ 05 i the horizontal defection and rotation due to unit vertical load are zero “The coefficients generally decrease (ji. the deflections and rotation decreage) ag the batter angle ofthe piles increases. However, the factors primarily inflienced are the vertical defection and rotation du horizontal load vm and Tyi), and che horizontal deflection duc 0 horizontal load and moment (line and Jy). The ether coefficients are virtually unaffected by pile batter. The pile stifinese factor K has a significant effect on most coeficieats. Auraion Gama on, 974LOADED PILE GROUPS—Poulos. at ae] ig. 6—Pile group considered in parametric study. Effect of pile spacing ‘The effect of pile spacing on the deflecion and rotation coeficients for a pile group is shown in Fig. 8 for a batter angle of 15". Almost all coeflcients decrease with increasing spacing, as would be anticipated. ‘The decrease is generally more marked for lower values of K. Effect of pile configuration In order to examine the effect of pile configuration on group rotations sand deflections, the six groups shown in Fig. 9 have been analysed Group A is the one shown in Fig. 6 while Group B is the same group except that the centre two piles are removed. ‘The other four groups have different piles battered, In all caset, the batter angle of any battered piles i615, ‘The defection coefficients for each group ate shown in Table TV. ‘The following observations may be made (© The behaviour of Group A is very similar to that of Group B, ive, he enatre pier in Group A have Hite influence on’ ek Asicetion and reaton coeeeats, (i) The advantages of Group D over Group C arise primarily from the equiv forizoal detection and reason developed ner (it) Groups B aid F behave smal ie, battering the cenee piles Sar ite ifluence onthe group elector ® TABLE IV Effect of pile configuration on deflection and rotation coefficients * (ee Fig. 9 for details of pile groups) gol a | a |e lo fs] e octet Tr | ame | oe, i | Sheer) tts wo | apiei| tnsee he | Oe fin | oes | Soe Ths, | ‘Soe —e06a3 Be | Bg ite | Boao) Boras irk | once) aotes *Goetien are for he edn les of er, In order to guin a better appreciation of the relative merits of the six groups considered, a numerical example tt been taken in which L = 10m, d= 0am, E, = 7000 KN/m!, V = 1200 KN, H = 400 KN and Af = 600 kNm. ‘The resulting deflections and rotations calculated from (11) to (13) and the cosficients in Table IV, are shown in Table V. cis evident that Group C is less satisfactory than the others. Ove Groups E and F deftect the least, although Group B is little inferior to these Groups or to Group A, and would be preferred from the point of view of economy, provided that vertical and lateral stability is adequate — «09 THES ERB. SS 88 10 ORS oF -o1 os} —~——] 00s. | Lym [>=-—- Typ ° ~04 ob 1 Oe TL Batter angle ss - fs 2 “005 2 0s S| y ee oF 5 Ti The Sd . ° 005 O75 15 805 a5 G55 Better Angle® or — -008 0s ° ° ° 002 lev Ton . a ey Toy lou a a so | otter Angle a Gy o Fie, Ter of Baer angle and vl pie wits dfn and (ile group, L/d = 25, », = 0.5, 5/d = 3) Artin Geamsheic onl, 1974 Fig. 8 Effect of ple spacing on defection and rotation coffins (C-pile group, Lid ~ 25, », ~ 0.5, batter angle = 15°)2 LOADED PILE GROUPS—Pouos. mT 6 piles 4 piles 6 piles o E F 6 piles 6 piles © piles Fig. 9—Groups considered in parametric study of effet of pile configuration. (Un all caces, pile spacing at cap ~ 3ds L/d = 25, K = 1000, », = 0.5, batter angle 6 -~ 15°) TABLE V Comparison of group performance HY B Sais EL Nae CONCLUSIONS Comparisons between three approaches 1 che analysis of pile groups ‘under general loading systems have shown that similar vertical loads in the piles are calculated by the three methods, but that horizontal loads ha moments may flr considerably, even to the extent of difering in Syn. These aiferences arise from the manner in which inter-pile action is considered; the largest loeds and moments appear to be predicted from the elastic interaction analysis which takes ehe most Regie eccouat of interaction, while the smallest loads are predicted by the simple satical analysis in which no account of interaction is taken. Despite considerable differences in computed loads and moments, the Ucdctions and rotations given by the equivalent bent method and the ‘Gass interaction analysis are similar, although differences do exist in SERUE “Components of the horizontal deflection and rotation. The tisde interaction analysis appears to be the most logical method but in Seats here the ples in the group have a signifiant unsupported length SEove’ the ground line or where the pile cap has finite flexibility, the huvalent bent approuch may be easier to apply. Parametric studies of typical pile groups have shown that the com- ‘ponents of defection and zotation most influenced by pile batter are the ‘Vertical defection due to horizontal loed, the horizontal deflection due to moment and the rotation due to horizontal load. The pile stifiness ‘most influences the deflecions and rotation due to moment. AS would be expected, increasing the spacing between the piles leeds to sigaifeant decreases in most ofthe components of defection and rotation. Finally, the solutions indicate that the centre piles in asix-pile group serve litle twseful puspose as far ab defections and rotations are concerned. “The elastic interaction analysis described inthis paper assumes linear response of the piles co losd, but it i possible to introduce non-linearity by carrying out an iterative analysis in which the unit deflections and rotations are dependent on load level, A theoretical method of assessing this dependence is decribed by Poulos (1972, 1973). Calculations have Shown that the interaction factors may reasonably be assumed to be independent of load level. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS “The work desoribed inthis paper forms part ofa general programme cof esearch into the settlement and deformation of all types of foundation being easried out in the School of Civil Engineering atthe University of Sydney, end supported by the Australian Research Grants Committee, ‘The programme ie under the general direction of Profesor BH. Davis, Whose comments and advice are grateully acknowledged, ‘The author Is also grateful to Astociate Professor H. B. Harrison for his assistance in carcying out the structural analysis described herein. References aos, J (196)—Anavisf ile Groups with Plexuat Rextange Fees See Sai! Mechanics © Foundations Div Vol. 90, Nov 3M3, pp. 5 Hawwsson, H. B, (1973)—Computor Methods in Structural Analysis. Prentice Fl rao “Hxowxteorr, A, (1950)—Analyss of Ple Foundations with Batter Pile, Tran 4.5.6.8, Vol. 115, p. 351 Koosts, P, (1968)—Laveral Loads on Pils. Chao, tino. Nath, K GRAY, H. and Donovan, N. (1968)— Analysis of Pile Group Behaviour ASTM, Spee. Teck. Piblicavion, STP 444, pp. 118-52. Poctos, H. G, (1978)—Behaviour of Laterally Loaded Piles: I Single Piles Proc, cS. Jour. Sool Mechanies & Foundations Div, Vol 97, Xo. SMS, pp. 711-31 octos, H. G. (197%b}-—Behuviour of Laterally Loaded Piles; II—Pite Grotps, Pret A.S.CEy dour. Sail Mechames & Foundations Dien, Vol. 97, No. SM, pp. 733-51. ovos, H. G. and Mapia, M.R, (1971)—Analyas ofthe Movements of Battered Biles. Proc. 1st AN.Z, Conf. on Geomechanics, Melbourne, Nol. spp. 268-75. Povtos, H. G. and Matas, N. 5. (1971)-—-Settement and Load Dis- Edbuton Analyas of Pile Gtoups, Auiralian Geomechanics Jour., Vol GI, No. pp. 18-28 Poutos, H. G, (1972}—Load-Setslement Prediction for Pies and Piers, Prac L SCSES Jour, Soil Mochanice © Fowdarions Dio., Vol. 98, No. SMV, pp. 318-97. PouLos, H. G.(1973)—Load-Deflection Prediction for Laterally Loaded Piles, "Australian Geomechanics Four, Vol. G3, No. 15 pp. 18, Pouos, H. G. (1974)—Some Recent Developments inthe Theoretical Galva of Pile Behaviour. "Soil Mockanicr—New Horizons. 1. Ku Lee Bas Butterworths, London. Povros, H. G, (unpublished) —Lateral Load-Deftection Prediction for Die Gebups. To be published in Jour. Geotechnical Divn., ASCE, Paipore, R.A. (190! bl at, Val. CES, Ni Buceau of Engineering, Load Distibution in Piled Ben's Bp. a3 Trane Arlo Gamacanies Jura, 1976