This article was downloaded by: [University of Tennessee, Knoxville]

On: 23 December 2014, At: 16:10

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Geomechanics and Geoengineering: An International

Journal
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tgeo20

Method of initial parameters for laterally loaded piles

embedded in layered soils
a a
D. Basu & R. Salgado
a
School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, 550 Stadium Mall Drive , West Lafayette,
IN, 47907, USA
Published online: 05 Dec 2007.

To cite this article: D. Basu & R. Salgado (2007) Method of initial parameters for laterally loaded piles embedded in layered
soils, Geomechanics and Geoengineering: An International Journal, 2:4, 281-294, DOI: 10.1080/17486020701678869

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17486020701678869

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Geomechanics and Geoengineering: An International Journal
Vol. 2, No. 4, December 2007, 281--294

Method of initial parameters for laterally loaded piles embedded in layered soils
D. BASU and R. SALGADO*
School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, 550 Stadium Mall Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA

(Received 11 May 2007; in final form 12 September 2007)

The method of initial parameters (MIP) was originally developed to solve the problem of a beam on an elastic foundation with applied concentrated
forces along the span, which introduce discontinuities in the mathematical formulation of the problem. MIP is modified in this paper so that it can be
used for solving the problem of a laterally loaded pile with discontinuities due to soil layering along the length of the pile. In this paper, the basis of MIP
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014

is outlined, and its use to find the deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force of laterally loaded piles is illustrated. Example problems of
laterally loaded piles embedded in multi-layered soil media are provided.

Keywords: Pile; Lateral load; Method of initial parameters; Analytical solution; Layered soil

1. Introduction General solutions of the fourth-order, linear differential equa-

Accurate analysis of laterally loaded piles embedded in layered
soil deposits traditionally requires numerical techniques such as
the finite element (FE), finite difference (FD) or boundary ele-
ment (BE) methods (Poulos 1971, Banerjee and Davies 1978,
Randolph 1981, Trochanis et al. 1991). However, a simplified
approach may be adopted by assuming the pile to behave as an
Euler-Bernoulli beam with the surrounding soil mass represented
by a series of disjointed springs, often called the subgrade-reac-
tion (or one-parameter) approach (Winkler 1867, Terzaghi 1955,
Scott 1981, Madhav et al. 1971, Valsangkar et al. 1973). This
approach led to the development of the well known p-y method
(Reese and Cox 1969, Matlock 1970, Reese et al. 1974, 1975,
Reese and Van Impe 2001). Improvements have been proposed
to the spring model by considering shear interaction between
these springs (Pasternak 1954, Georgiadis and Butterfield 1982).
This we call the modified subgrade-reaction (or two-parameter)
approach. An even better method of analysis is available in
which the soil around the pile is treated as a continuum, and
the pile as a beam (Sun 1994a, Guo and Lee 2001, Basu and
Salgado 2007). All these approaches finally result in fourth-order
differential equations, with pile deflection as the variable. If the
soil is assumed to be linear elastic, then the differential equations
are also linear, and closed-form solutions for pile deflection can
be obtained by solving the differential equations with proper
boundary conditions. For nonlinear soils, the equations are non-
linear, and numerical methods, such as FE or FD, are generally
used to analyze the problem when it is formulated using non-
linear (p-y) springs (Matlock and Reese 1960, Stewart 2000).
*Corresponding author. Email: Rodrigo@ecn.purdue.edu.
nyi 1946, Vlasov and Leontev
tions are readily available (Hete
1966), and the four constants of integration can be determined
from the boundary conditions (Sun 1994a, Guo and Lee 2001).
Recently, we developed a continuum-based analysis for lat-
erally loaded piles in multi-layered elastic soils. The resulting
differential equation governing pile deflection within each
layer is identical to the equation of the modified subgrade-
reaction (two-parameter) approach. Analytical solutions for
the multi-layered problem can be obtained by using boundary
conditions at the interfaces of adjacent layers and the boundary
conditions at the pile ends (head and base). However, the
number of integration constants is four times the number of
soil layers present (four constants per layer), and, as a result,
obtaining algebraic expressions for these integration constants
(using the boundary conditions) becomes increasingly tedious
as the number of soil layers increases.
An alternative way of solving the pile deflection equation is
by the use of finite difference method or finite element method
with beam elements (Scott 1981, Zhaohua and Cook 1983, Sun
1994b). However, as described later, our analysis requires the
calculation of integrals, along depth, of the square of pile
defection and slope. These integrations are performed numeri-
cally and require fine discretization of the pile along its length
for accurate results. Therefore, if finite element or finite differ-
ence methods are used, the number of discretized pile elements
will have to be very large, resulting in increased computation
time. Thus, obtaining analytical solutions of the pile-deflection
equation is necessary for our analysis. In our study, we obtained
analytical solutions of pile deflection, but, instead of directly
determining the integration constants, we applied the method of
initial parameters (Hetenyi 1946, Vlasov and Leontev 1966,

Geomechanics and Geoengineering: An International Journal

ISSN 1748-6025 print=ISSN 1748-6033 online  2007 Taylor & Francis
http:==www.tandf.co.uk=journals
DOI: 10.1080=17486020701678869
 282 D. Basu and R. Salgado

Selvadurai 1979), which yields the final analytical solutions H0 = 0. The pile top (head) is at the level of the ground
without directly determining the integration constants. surface. The bottom (base) of the pile is considered embedded
The method of initial parameters (MIP) was originally devel- in the nth layer. The pile is acted upon by a horizontal force Fa
oped for solving problems of beams on elastic foundations and moment Ma at the pile head.
(Hetenyi 1946, Vlasov and Leontev 1966, Harr et al. 1969, We obtain the differential equation for pile deflection w
Rao et al. 1971). The method is particularly useful when some applying energy principles with the assumption that the displa-
form of discontinuity exists within the span of a beam. In the cement field within the soil can be represented by a product of
earlier research works, MIP was applied to problems where the separable variables (Vlasov and Leontev 1966, Sun 1994a,
discontinuity is originated by the application of concentrated Basu and Salgado 2007). The equation of w within any layer
forces at different points along the span of a beam (Vlasov and i, after normalizing with respect to the pile length Lp, is given by
Leontev 1966, Harr et al. 1969, Rao et al. 1971). In this paper, (Basu and Salgado 2007):
we modify the existing MIP to account for discontinuities along
d4 w
~i d2 w
~i ~
a laterally loaded pile caused by abrupt change in soil properties  2~ti ki w
~i 0 1
due to soil layering and obtain analytical solutions for pile d~z4 d~z2
deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force. where w ~ i ~z is the normalized pile deflection in the ith layer
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014

wi wi =Lp ), ~z is the normalized depth (~z = z /Lp), and ~ki and ~ti
(~
are the normalized compressive and shear resistances of soil,
respectively, which are due to normal and shear strains that develop
2. Differential equation for pile deflection and boundary
in the soil due to pile movement (figure 2) and are given by:
conditions
9Gsi 1 0:75si L4p K1  K0  2  2 1K1  2
~ki ;
We consider a pile of constant flexural rigidity EpIp, radius rp 4Ep Ip K0  2
and length Lp embedded in a multi-layered soil deposit
i 1; 2; :::; n 2
(figure 1). The soil is assumed to behave as a linear elastic
material and the pile is assumed to behave like a Euler-
Bernoulli beam. There are n horizontal soil layers, with the 8 3r2 G 10:75 L2 2 2
si p K1   K0  
bottom (nth) layer extending to infinity downward. The vertical
< p si 2 ; i1;2;:::n
8Ep Ip K0  
~ti 3
depth to the bottom surface of any intermediate layer i is Hi, : 3rp
2
G sn 10:75sn L2p K1  2
K0  2
; in1
which implies that the thickness of layer i is Hi - Hi-1 with 8Ep Ip

Ground
Ma Surface
Pile Shear resistance between
soil columns due to
r0
differential lateral
Fa Pile movement (accounted for
r (undeformed by ti)
2rp configuration)

Ma Fa r0 Pile (deformed
configuration)
.

Layer 1 Infinite soil

H1 B columns of
H2
infinitesimal
Layer 2
Hi-1 thickness
.

Hi A providing

resistance to pile
Hn-2 movement
Lp Hn-1
Layer i
Soil columns get
compressed (or

extended) due to pile

movement from, say,
point A to point B
Layer n1 (accounted for by ki)

Shear resistances between soil

Layer n Pile columns below the pile
produce pile base shear given
z by 2kntn+1 wn z =1 (occurs only if
pile base deflects laterally)

Figure 1. Laterally loaded pile in layered soil medium. Figure 2. Pile-soil interaction.
 Method of initial parameters 283

where Gsi and usi are the shear modulus and Poissons ratio of For the purpose of analysis, the nth (bottom) layer is split in
the ith layer; K0() and K1() are the zero-order and first-order two parts, with the part below the pile denoted by the sub-
modified Bessel function of the second kind (McLachlan script n+1; this makes Hn = Lp (H ~ n = 1) and Hn+1 (or
1961); and  is a dimensionless parameter that describes the ~ n+1) ! 1 (note that the normalized depth of the bottom
H
rate at which the displacement in the soil, due to pile deflec- surface of any layer i is denoted by H~ i = Hi/Lp) . The para-
tion, decreases with increasing radial distance from the pile. meter  is given by:

v
u q
u P n RH~ i dw~ i 2 ~kn 2
u 1 0:75 G d~ z 1 0:75 G ~ n j~z1
w
u 2r 2 i1 si si d~z sn sn 8~tn1
u p ~ i1
H
u 2 4
u3Lp P n RH~ i 2 q 2
t 1 0:75si Gsi w~ i d~z 1 0:75sn Gsn t2n1
~
~ n j~z1
~k wn
i1 ~ i1
H
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014

The boundary conditions of equation (1) at the pile head (z =

~z = 0) are as follows: dw~n
0 7c
d~z
~1 0
w 5a
or
or d2 w
~n
3 0 7d
d w~1 dw~1 ~ d~z2
3
 2~t1 Fa 5b
d~z d~z where F~ a (= FaLp2/EpIp) and M ~ a (= MaLp/EpIp) are the nor-
and malized applied force and moment.
The boundary conditions (equations (5)--(7)) can be interpreted
dw~1 physically by drawing an analogy with the Euler-Bernoulli beam
0 5c
d~z theory. Given that w is the pile deflection, the slope , bending
or moment M and shear force S at any cross-section of the pile (or
any Euler-Bernoulli beam resting on an elastic foundation) can be
d2 w
~1 ~a expressed, in their normalized form, as:
M 5d
d~z2
~
dw
~ i),
At the interface between any two layers (z = Hi or ~z = H ~ 8
d~z
the boundary conditions are:
2
~ MLp d w ~
~i w
w ~ i1 6a M 9
Ep I p d~z2

SL2p d3 w
~ ~
dw
~ i dw
dw ~ i1 ~S 3  2~t 10
6b E p Ip d~z d~z
d~z d~z
The shear force at any cross-section is the sum of the shear
forces arising due to pile (beam) flexure (the first term on the
d3 w
~i dw~ i d3 w
~ i1 ~ i1
dw right-hand side of equation (10)) and soil deformation (the
 2~ti  2~ti1 6c
d~z3 d~z d~z3 d~z second term on the right-hand side of equation (10)).
According to the above definitions, the boundary conditions
d2 w
~ i d2 w
~ i1 satisfy the continuity of deflection, slope, bending moment
2
6d
d~z d~z2 and shear force across the interfaces of adjacent layers. At the
pile head, the shear force must be equal to the applied hor-
At the pile base (z = Lp or ~z = 1) the boundary conditions
izontal force and either the slope must equal zero (this might
are:
occur if a pile cap is present that may be considered to com-
~n 0
w 7a pletely restrain pile head rotation) or the bending moment
must equal the applied moment. At the pile base, either the
or deflection is equal to zero (which may be assumed to occur
q when the pile is socketed into a very firm layer, such as rock)
d3 w
~n dw~n or the shear force just above the base of the pile is equal to the
 2~tn 2~kn~tn1 w ~n 7b
d~z3 d~z shear force just below the base. It is worth mentioning here
 284 D. Basu and R. Salgado

that the normalized shear force just below the pile base 4. Method of initial parameters
q
(~z = 1) is equal to 2~kn~tn1 w ~ n j~z1 (equation (7b)) (Basu
We first outline the conceptual basis for MIP and then illustrate
and Salgado 2007). The other boundary condition active at how it works for laterally loaded piles embedded in a layered
the pile base is that either the slope is zero (valid for a rigidly soil. We illustrate the method for ~ki > ~ti2 . The method is also
socketed base) or the bending moment is zero (valid for a applicable for ~ki # ~ti2 , but it is sufficient to demonstrate the
floating base). method for the more common case of ~ki > ~ti2 .
For the case of ~ki > ~ti2 , the functions F1, F2, F3 and F4 are
combinations of trigonometric and hyperbolic functions, as
3. General solutions shown in Table 1. Successive differentiations of these functions
with respect to ~z are also given in Table 1; these derivatives are
The general solution for equation (1) is given by: required for obtaining the final solution for the laterally loaded
pile problem.
i i i i Let us first consider the top layer (i = 1). The following
~ i ~z C1 1 C2 2 C3 3 C4 4
w 11
equations express the normalized deflection w ~ ~z, slope (equation
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014

i i i i
where, C1 , C2 , C3 and C4 are integration constants for the ith (8)), bending moment (equation (9)) and shear force (equation
layer; and F1, F2, F3 and F4 are functions of ~z that are indivi- (10)) for the top layer in terms of F1, F2, F3 and F4 as (see Table
dual solutions of the differential equation (1). The general 1 under ~k > ~t2 for the differentiations of F1, F2, F3 and F4):
solution (equation (11)) is not valid for long piles; we discuss
the solution procedure for long piles later in the paper. ~ 1 C1 1 C2 2 C3 3 C4 4
w 13
Assuming a solution of the form w ~ ~z em~z , the auxiliary
equation corresponding to equation (1) is given by:
~1 C1 a2  b4 C2 a1  b3
m  2~ti m2 ~ki 0
4
12 C3 a4 b2 C4 a3 b1 14
Solution of equation (12) leads to three conditions: (1) ~ki > ~t2 ,  

i ~ 1 C1
M a2  b2 1  2ab3
(2) ~ki < ~ti2 and (3) ~ki ~ti2 . Since condition 3 can occur only  

under very special conditions (when the numerical value of the C2 a2  b2 2  2ab4
square of ~ti exactly equals the numerical value of ~ki ), we deal  

C3 a2  b2 3 2ab1
with the first two conditions only. Condition 1 makes m a  

C4 a2  b2 4 2ab2 15
complex number of the form m a ib for which F1, F2, F3
and F4 are combinations of trigonometric and hyperbolic func-
tions. To satisfy condition 2, m does not require an imaginary    

~S1 C1 a a2  3b2 2 b b2  3a2 4

part; consequently, F1, F2, F3 and F4 are exponential or hyper-    

bolic functions. Table 1 gives the detailed expressions for the C2 a a2  3b2 1 b b2  3a2 3
   

functions F1, F2, F3 and F4. C3 a a2  3b2 4  b b2  3a2 2

i i i i
The constants C1 , C2 , C3 and C4 must be determined for    

C4 a a2  3b2 3  b b2  3a2 1
different boundary conditions. We avoid direct calculation of
the constants and obtain solutions using the method of initial  2~t1 fC1 a2  b4 C2 a1  b3
parameters. C3 a4 b2 C4 a3 b1 g 16

Table 1. Functions appearing in equation (11) for piles crossing multiple soil layers

Relative Constants a and b Functions and their Individual solutions of equation (1)
magnitudes derivatives (prime ()
of ~k and ~t a b indicates differentiation) F1 F2 F3 F4

~k > ~t2 q
p
q
p

1=2 ~ 1=2 ~
Fa sinh a~z cos b~z cosh a~z cos b~z cosh a~z sin b~z sinh a~z sin b~z
k  ~t k  ~t F a2  b4 a1  b3 a4 b2 a3 b1
F a2  b2 1 a2  b2 2 a2  b2 3 a2  b2 4
 2ab3  2ab4 2ab1 2ab2
F aa2  3b2 2 aa2  3b2 1 aa2  3b2 4 aa2  3b2 3
q
p
q
p
a +bb2  3a2 4 +bb2  3a2 3 - bb2  3a2 2 - bb2  3a2 1
~k < t~2 ~t ~t2  ~k ~t  ~t2  ~k F sinh a~z cosh a~z sinh b~z cosh b~z
F a2 a1 b4 b3
F a2 1 a 2 2 b2 3 b2 4
F a3 2 a 3 1 b3 4 b3 3
a
sinh a~z 12 ea~z  ea~z and cosh a~z 12 ea~z ea~z :
 Method of initial parameters 285

where the constants C1, C2, C3 and C4, the functions F1, F2, F3  2 
 r
p  a b b3 1  ab2 a3 3 1
~
 1 z ~0
w
and F4, and the parameters a 0:5 ~k1 ~t1 and b 2ab
 r
p   a2  b2 4 2ab2 ~1
0:5 ~k1  ~t1 are valid for layer 1 (0 # ~z # H ~ 1). Let 0
2ab
the normalized pile deflection, slope, bending moment and a3 b1 ~ 1 4 ~1
M0 S
1 1 2ab 2ab 0 26
shear force at the pile head (i.e., at ~z = 0) be w ~ 0 , ~0 ,
M~ 01 and S
~1 , respectively. If we substitute ~z = 0 in equations
0
(13)-(16) (noting that ~t1 = a2 - b2; and that F1 = F3 = F4  4 2 2 4

1 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 z  a 2a b b 4 w
M
1
~0
= 0 and F2 = 1 for ~z = 0), we can express w ~ 0 , ~0 , M 0 and 2ab
~ 1
S as:  2 
0 3a b  b3 1  3ab2  a3 3 ~1
1
0
~ 0 C2
w 17 2ab
a2  b2 4 2ab2 ~ 1
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014

M0
2ab
1 dw~ 1 a3 b1 ~1
~0 C1 a C3 b 18 S0
d~z ~z0 2ab 27

    
~ 1 ~ 1
d2 w   4 2 3 5 4 3 2
~S1 z 3a b  2a b b 1 3ab  2a b a 3 w
5
1
M 0 2 C2 a2  b2 C4 2ab 19 2ab
~0
d~z ~z0
 
a4 2a2 b2 b4 4 ~1
 0
 3  2ab
d w~1 dw~    2 
~ 1
S0  2 ~t1 1 C1 a a2  3b2 a b b3 1  ab2 a3 3 ~ 1
d~z3 d~z ~z0 M0
2ab
 2     
 C3 b b  3a2  2 a2  b2 C1 a C3 b 20 a2  b2 4 ~1
2  S0
2ab
Solving equations (17)-(20) simultaneously for C1, C2, C3 and
C4 yields: 28

1 1 Thus, the normalized pile deflection, slope, bending moment

a2 b2 ~0  ~S0 1 1 ~ 1
C1 21 ~ 0 , ~0 , M
and shear force can be expressed in terms of w 0 and
2aa2 b2 1 1
S~ along with known functions of F1, F2, F3 and F4. If w
0 ~ , 0
1 ~ 1 ~1
~0 , M 0 and S0 are known, then we can determine the deflec-
1 tion, slope, bending moment and shear force at any point within
C2 w
~0 22
the first layer. This is the basic idea behind the method of initial
1 1 ~ 1 ~1
parameters. The quantities w ~ 0 , ~0 , M 0 and S0 are called the
1
a2 b2 ~0 ~
1
S0 initial parameters for the first layer; the corresponding section
C3 23 of the pile (~z = 0 in this case) is called the initial section. The
2ba2 b2
expressions in square brackets in equations (25)-(28), contain-
ing F1, F2, F3 and F4, associated with the initial parameters are
1 1
called the influence functions or influence coefficients.
a2  b2 ~ ~0
w0  M Although the ground surface is a natural choice for the initial
C4  24
2ab section of the top layer, any section within the top layer can be
chosen as the initial section. The expressions for the influence
If we now substitute C1, C2, C3 and C4 in equations (13)-(16), coefficients will change if a different initial section is chosen,
we get the expressions for pile deflection, slope, bending but equations similar to equations (25)-(28) can be obtained.
moment and shear force in the top layer as: Extending the method to account for multi-layered soil, we can
  state that the normalized deflection w ~ i , the slope ~i , the bending
a2  b2 4 1 a3 b1 ~1 ~ ~
moment Mi and the shear force Si within any layer i can be
~ 1 z 2 
w ~0
w 0
2ab 2ab expressed as:
4 ~ 1 a3  b1 ~1
M0 S i i i i i i i
2ab 2aba2 b2 0 25 ~ i ~z w
w i
~ 0 Kww ~0 Kw M
~ 0 KwM ~S0 KwS 29
 286 D. Basu and R. Salgado

i i i i ~ 0i K i ~ i i (layer 3) is at ~z = 1. The corresponding initial parameters are

~ 0 Kw ~0 K M
~i ~z w M S0 KS 30 3 3 ~ 3
~ 0 , ~0 , M
w ~3
0 and S0 (these are the normalized deflection,
slope, bending moment and shear force at ~z = 1). The initial
i i i i section for the middle layer (layer 2) is at ~z = H ~ 1 with the
~ i ~z w
M ~ 0i KMM
~ 0 KMw ~0 KM M
i
~
i i
S0 KMS 31 2 ~2 2 2
~ 0 and ~S0 (the normalized
initial parameters w ~ 0 , 0 , M
deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force at ~z = H ~ 1).
i i i i ~ i K i ~ i i Next, we impose the boundary conditions for the pile head
~ ~ 0 KSw ~0 KS M
Si ~z w 0 SM S0 KSS 32
and base on the initial parameters for the two end layers. For a
free pile head, equations (5b) and (5d) are valid; this yields:
i i i i
where w ~ 0 , ~0 , M
~ 0 and ~
S0 are the initial parameters, and the K
values are the influence coefficients of the ith layer. The influ- ~S1 F
~a 33
0
ence coefficients express the influence of one variable on the
other; e.g., KwM denotes the influence of bending moment in the
pile on pile deflection. Note that, although there are sixteen ~ 01 M
~a 34
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014

M
influence coefficients in equations (29)-(32), only ten of them
are actually unknown because, from the theorem of reciprocal For a free pile base, equations (7b) and (7d) are valid, which
deflection by Maxwell and Betti, we get KMM = K, yields:
KS = KwM, KMS = Kw, KSS = Kww, KS = KMw and q
KSM = Kw. If the initial parameters and the influence coeffi- ~S3 2~k3~t4 w 3
~0 35
0
cients are known for a layer, then the deflection, slope, bending
moment and shear force can be obtained as a function of depth.
We now illustrate how MIP can be used for layered soil with
~ 03 0
M 36
the help of an example. We consider, for our example, a pile
embedded in a three-layer soil medium with ~ki > ~ti2 for all the 1 ~ 1 ~3 ~ 3
Thus, the initial parameters ~S0 , M 0 , S0 and M0 are now
layers (figure 3). There is no restraint at the pile head (i.e., it is
known. The equations for the normalized deflection, slope,
free to translate and rotate). The same is true for the pile base.
bending moment and shear force for layers 1 and 3 can now
The first step is to choose an appropriate initial section for
be rewritten by substituting the known initial parameters into
each layer. We choose the pile head and base as the initial
equations (29)--(32) (for i = 1 and 3) as:
sections for the top and the bottom layers, respectively. For
the middle layer, we choose the upper interface as the initial
1 1 1 1 1 1
section. Thus, the initial section for the top layer (layer 1) is at ~1 w
w ~ 0 Kww ~0 Kw M
~ a KwM ~ a KwS
F 37
1 1 ~ 1 ~1
~z = 0. The four initial parameters are w ~ 0 , ~0 , M 0 and S0 ,
which are the normalized deflection, slope, bending moment
1 1 1 1 ~ a K 1 F
~ a K 1
and shear force at ~z = 0. The initial section for the bottom layer ~1 w
~ 0 Kw ~0 K M M S 38

2rp 1 1 1 1 1 1
M ~ 0 KMw ~0 KM M
~1 w ~ a KMM ~ a KMS
F 39
Ma Fa

1 1 1 1 1 1
Layer 1 H1 ~ 0 KSw ~0 KS M
~S1 w ~ a KSM ~ a KSS
F 40

q
3 3 3 3 3 3
Lp H2 ~3 w
w ~ 0 Kww ~0 Kw 2~k3~t4 w ~ 0 KwS
3 03 3 3
w~ K ~ K
0 ww 0 w 41
Layer 2

Pile
q
3 3 3 3 3 3
~ 0 Kw ~0 K
~3 w 2~k3~t4 w ~ 0 KS
3 03 3 3
Layer 3 w~ K ~ K
0 w 0  42

q
3 3 3 3 3 3
~ 0 KMw ~0 KM
~3 w
M 2~k3~t4 w ~ 0 KMS
3 03 3 3
Figure 3. Laterally loaded pile in a three-layer soil medium. w~ K ~ K
0 Mw 0 M 43
 Method of initial parameters 287

q Now we impose the interface boundary conditions on the initial

3 3 3 3 3 3
~ ~ 0 KSw ~0 KS
S3 w 2~k3~t4 w ~ 0 KSS parameters. This leads to a set of algebraic equations consisting of
w
3 03
~ K ~ K
3 3
44 the unknown influence coefficients and initial parameters. In our
0 Sw 0 S ~ 1 and ~z = H~ 2),
example problem, there are two interfaces (~z = H
03 3
p 3 and the boundary conditions at these interfaces are given by equa-
where Kw Kw 2~k3~t4 KS . Equations (37)--(40) are valid ~ 1 and ~z = H
tions (6a)--(6d) with i = 1 and 2 for ~z = H ~ 2, respec-
for layer 1 (i.e., for 0 # ~z# H ~ 1) while equations (41)--(44) are tively. There are four equations per interface, resulting in eight
~
valid for layer 3 (i.e., for H 2 # ~z# 1). simultaneous equations, which can be written in matrix form as:

2 1 1 32 1 3
Kww Kw 1 0 0 0 0 0 ~0
w 2 1 1 3
~ a KwM
M ~ a KwS
F
6 1 1 76 ~1 7
6 Kw K 0 1 0 0 0 0 76 0 7 6 ~ 1 ~ 1 7
6 1 1 76 2 7 6 Ma KM  Fa KS 7
6K KM 0 0 1 0 0 0 7 6~ 7 6 7
6 Mw 76 w 0 7 6 ~ 1 ~ 1 7
6 1 1 76 ~2 7 6 Ma KMM  Fa KMS 7
1
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014

6 KSw KS 0 0 0 0 0 76 0 7 6 ~ 1 ~ 1 7
6 2 2 2 2 76 2 7 6 Ma KSM  Fa KSS 7 45
6 0 0 Kww Kw KwM KwS 1 0 7 6~ 7 6 7
6 76 M0 7 6 0 7
6 0 0
2 2
Kw K
2
KM
2
KS 0 76 ~
1 76 S0 7 6
2 7 6 0 7
6 7
6 2 2 2 2 03 3 76 3 7 4 0 5
4 0 0 KMw KM KMM KMS KMw KM 54 ~
w0 5
2 2 2 2 03 3 3
~0 0
0 0 KSw KS KSM KSS KSw KS

We refer to equation (45) as the matrix equation. In the 1 1 a2  b2 4 2ab2

matrix equation, the first four rows are valid at ~z = H ~ 1 while K KMM 51
2ab
the second four are valid at ~z=H ~ 2. If, in equation (45), we
assume that the influence coefficient K values are known, then
all the unknown initial parameters for the different layers can be 1 a3 b1
KM 52
obtained. 2ab
We can determine the influence coefficients for use in
equation (45) by referring back to (25)--(28). In these
~ 1 and ~ 1 ~ a and F ~a, 1 1 a4 2a2 b2 b4 4
equations M 0 S0 are now replaced by M KMw KS  53
2ab
respectively, because of the boundary conditions of the
example problem given by equations (33) and (34).
1 1 ~
Hence, by comparing the coefficients of w ~ 0 , ~0 , M a and 1 3a2 b  b3 1  3ab2  a3 3
~
Fa in (25)--(28) with those in (37)--(40), we obtain the KM 54
2ab
influence coefficients for layer 1 as:
   
1 3a4 b  2a2 b3 b5 1 3ab4  2a3 b2 a5 3
KSw
2ab
1 1 a2  b2 4 55
Kww KSS 2  46
2ab
For the second (middle) layer, the following equations need to
be solved simultaneously in terms of C1, C2, C3 and C4 (note
1 1 a3 b1 that these constants are different from the constants of layer 1):
Kw KMS 47
2ab 2
~ 0 C1 1 C2 2 C3 3 C4 4
w 56

1 1 4 2
KwM KS 48 ~0 C1 a2  b4 C2 a1  b3
2ab
C3 a4 b2 C4 a3 b1 57

1 a3  b1  

KwS 49 ~ 02 C1
M a2  b2 1  2ab3
2aba2 b2  

C2 a2  b2 2  2ab4
 

1 1 a2 b b3 1  ab2 a3 3 C3 a2  b2 3 2ab1
Kw KSM 50  

2ab C4 a2  b2 4 2ab2 58
 288 D. Basu and R. Salgado

2    
Once the influence coefficients are known, the unknown
~
S0 C1 a a2  3b2 2 b b2  3a2 4
   
initial parameters are determined by solving the matrix equa-
C2 a a2  3b2 1 b b2  3a2 3 tion (equation (45)). The initial parameters and influence coef-
   

C3 a a2  3b2 4  b b2  3a2 2 ficients are then used to find the normalized pile deflection,
   
slope, bending moment and shear force at any pile section by
C4 a a2  3b2 3  b b2  3a2 1
using equations (37)--(40) for layer 1, (29)--(32) for layer 2
2~t2 fC1 a2  b4 C2 a1  b3 (with i = 2), and (41)--(44) for layer 3.
C3 a4 b2 C4 a3 b1 g 59 Evidently, MIP can be used for solving problems with any
number of layers and for different boundary conditions. It is
important to note that the matrix equations for the different
where 1, 2, 3 and 4 are the values of F1, F2, F3 and F4, cases (arising due to soil layering and pile boundary conditions)
respectively, at the initial section of the second layer (i.e., at are different. However, for a given pile head boundary condi-
 r
p 
~ ~ tion, the influence coefficients for the top layer are the same
~z = H 1). Note that the parameters a 0:5 k2 ~t2 irrespective of the number of soil layers and of the boundary
 r
p   conditions at the pile base. Similarly, for the bottom layer, the
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014

and b 0:5 ~k2  ~t2 in the above equations are differ-
ent from those of layer 1. After obtaining the expressions of C1,
C2, C3 and C4 from equations (56)--(59), the same procedure as
for layer 1 (i.e., substitution of the constants C1, C2, C3 and C4 in
the equations of w ~ 2 , ~2 , M
~ 2 and ~
S2 obtained from equation (11)
with i = 2 and its successive differentiations, and subsequent
comparison of the equations with equations (29)--(32) with
i = 2) needs to be followed to obtain the influence coefficients
of layer 2. Similarly, the influence coefficients of layer 3 can be
obtained by solving the following equations for C1, C2, C3 and C4:
3
~ 0 C1 1 C2 2 C3 3 C4 4
w 60
3
~0 C1 a2  b4 C2 a1  b3
C3 a4 b2 C4 a3 b1
 
influence coefficients are independent of the number of soil
layers and of the pile head boundary conditions. Likewise, for
any intermediate layer, the expressions of the influence coeffi-
cients are the same irrespective of the pile head and base
boundary conditions and of the number of layers present. This
makes the determination of the influence coefficient expres-
sions and subsequent programming easy because the expres-
sions for the top and bottom layers do not vary from problem to
problem if the boundary conditions remain the same, and the
expressions for intermediate layers are always the same, being
also independent of the head and base boundary conditions.
This means that the equations, once obtained, can be repeatedly
used for any laterally loaded pile problem.
The expressions for the influence coefficients and the matrix
equations for one-, two-, three- and four-layer soil deposits
have been obtained for all possible boundary conditions (i.e.,
61 free or restrained pile head with free or restrained pile base) and
are given in Basu (2006). The matrix equations for up to four
layers have been solved symbolically using Maple.

0 C1 a2  b2 1  2ab3
 

C2 a2  b2 2  2ab4
 
5. Solution for long piles
C3 a2  b2 3 2ab1
 

C4 a2  b2 4 2ab2 62
5.1 General solution

q Long piles are piles whose response is identical to that of

3    

2~k3~t4 w ~ 0 C1 a a2  3b2 2 b b2  3a2 4 infinitely long piles. For such piles, the boundary conditions
   
at the pile base do not affect the pile response. Pile response
C2 a a2  3b2 1 b b2  3a2 3 depends on the relative magnitudes of the pile and soil stiffness
   

C3 a a2  3b2 4  b b2  3a2 2 and on the pile geometry (pile slenderness ratio). Depending on
   
such ratios, as illustrated in figure 4, a pile of length 5 m may
C4 a a2  3b2 3  b b2  3a2 1
63 behave as a long pile, while a 10-m long pile may not.
 2~t3 fC1 a2  b4 C2 a1  b3 Figure 4(a) shows the deflection versus depth profiles of a set
C3 a4 b2 C4 a3 b1 g of 500 mm diameter concrete piles (Ep = 2.4 106 kPa) of
lengths 2.5 m, 5 m and 6 m, respectively, embedded in a dense
sand layer (k = 130 MPa and t = 7.9 MN; these values are
where 1, 2, 3 and 4 are the values of F1, F2, F3 and F4, obtained from equations (2) and (3) by using suitable values of the
r
p 
~k3 ~t3 soil elastic constants as input). A horizontal load of 100 kN is
respectively at ~z =1; and a 0:5 and applied to all the piles at the pile head. The piles are assumed to be
r
p  free at the head; however, both free and fixed conditions for the
b 0:5 ~k3  ~t3 base are considered. It is evident from figure 4(a) that the
 Method of initial parameters 289

(a) clay deposit with k = 11.6 MPa and t = 6.8 MN and sub-
0 jected to a 100 kN horizontal load at the head. The pile head is
assumed to be free, while both free and fixed conditions are
considered for the base. The deflection profile clearly shows the
influence of the pile base condition, which is in contrast to the
hf
response of the 5 m long pile of figure 4(a) (note that both the 5-
2 m and 10-m piles have the same slenderness ratio). This indi-
Depth, z (m)

2.5-m-long pile, fixed base
2.5-m-long pile, free base
4
5-m- and 6-m-long pile,
both fixed and free base
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014
cates that the 10-m long pile in clay does not behave as a long
pile and that the depth of fixity (i.e., the critical pile length) hf is
greater than the length of the pile. Thus, the greater the ratio of
pile to soil stiffness, the greater the depth of fixity is, and the
greater the length required for a pile to behave as a long pile is.
For long piles, the solution given by equation (11) must be
modified, as mentioned earlier. This is required because, for long
piles, the exponential terms with positive exponents (i.e., the terms

6 containing ea~z or eb~z , with a and b increasing with soil stiffness) in

0.4 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
the functions F1, F2, F3 and F4 (Table 1) become excessively
Pile Deflection (mm)
large for sufficiently large ~z and the solution no longer represents
(b) the actual physical problem. The reason why this happens is that,
for long piles, the exponential terms with negative exponents (i.e.,
0 the terms containing ea~z or eb~z ) become negligible beyond a
threshold value of ~z and cannot balance the effects of the extre-
mely large positive exponential terms. This makes the general
2
solution unacceptable because the pile deflection, and thus the
functions F1, F2, F3 and F4, should decrease with increasing ~z,
while the positive exponential terms produce the opposite result.
Depth, z (m)

4
The solution of equation (1) for ~ki > ~ti2 , when rewritten by
uncoupling the positive and negative exponential terms of the
6 hyperbolic functions (Table 1), leads to:
h i
i i
~ i ~z ea~z C1 cos b~z C2 sin b~z
w
Free Base
8 h i
Fixed Base i i
ea~z C3 cos b~z C4 sin b~z 64

10
2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5
Pile Deflection (mm)
Figure 4. Pile in (a) dense sand and (b) soft clay.
deflection profile of the 5-m long pile is independent of the pile
base conditions and that the pile behaves as a long pile. This
happens because the ground is stiff enough compared with the
stiffness of the pile so that it could prevent lateral movement of
the pile beyond a depth hf less than the length of the pile
(hf = 3.3 m in this example) known as the depth of fixity (also
sometimes called the critical length of the pile). The 6-m long pile
also behaves as a long pile because the depth of fixity remains at
3.3 m, which is less than the pile length (figure 4(a)). However,
the response of the 2.5-m long pile depends on the base condition
because the pile has a length less than the depth of fixity; conse-
quently, it does not behave as a long pile (a pile as short as 2.5 m
does not generally appear in practice, being used here only for the
illustration of the concept of what constitutes a long pile).
Figure 4(b) shows the deflection versus depth profile of a
1-m diameter concrete pile of length 10 m embedded in a soft
6 As ~z ! 1 (i.e., z ! Lp) for long piles, w ~ i ! 0. This condition
can be satisfied only if the constants C3(i) and C4(i) are each
identically equal to zero because, otherwise, the term ea~z will
dominate (i.e., it will increase greatly with increases in ~z and
produce large values of w ~ i ). Consequently, we get only two
functions, associated with the negative exponent term, as the
solutions for equation (1) with ~ki > ~ti2 .
For the case of ~ki < ~ti2 , the solution can be similarly written
by decoupling the positive and negative exponents as:
i i i i
~ i ~z C1 ea~z C2 eb~z C3 ea~z C4 eb~z
w 65
Following logic similar to that for equation (64), the constants
C3(i) and C4(i) in equation (65) are zero and again we get only
two functions which contain the negative exponential terms.
Thus, for both the cases of ~ki > ~ti2 and ~ki < ~ti2 , the general
solution for long piles can be written as:
i i
~ i ~z C1 1 C2 2
w 66
The details of the functions F1 and F2 and their derivatives are
given in Table 2.
 290
Table 2. Functions appearing in equation (66) for infinitely long piles crossing multiple soil layers
Relative Constants a and b
magnitudes
of ~k and ~t a b
~k > ~t2 q
p
q
p
1=2 ~ 1=2 ~
k ~t
q
p
q
p
F  aa2  3b2 1 +bb2  3a2 2  aa2  3b2 2 - bb2  3a2 1
~k < ~t2 ~t ~t2  ~k ~t  ~t2  ~k
The reduction of the solution functions from four to two can
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014
be explained using linear algebra. The arguments a~z or b~z of
the hyperbolic functions in Table 1 have values greater than 3
for values of ~z corresponding to depths greater than the depth
of fixity. For such values of arguments, hyperbolic sine and
cosine functions give almost identical results (i.e., the
functions, when plotted, fall on top of each other for
arguments greater than 3). Since functions can be treated as
vectors in linear algebra, the solution
i i i i
~ i ~z C1 1 C2 2 C3 3 C4 4 can be assumed
w again consider the same example of a three-layer soil (figure 3)
to represent a vector space with the linearly independent
vectors F1, F2, F3 and F4 (the functions F1, F2, F3 and F4
are linearly independent because they are solutions of linear
differential equations) forming the basis of the four-dimen-
sional vector space. However, when two of the functions
become equal to the other two (i.e., sinha~z = cosha~z and
sinhb~z = coshb~z), there are only two linearly independent
vectors, and the four-dimensional solution (vector) space col-
lapses onto a two-dimensional space. Consequently, we need
only two functions to produce the required solution.
5.2 Method of initial parameters
Application of MIP to equation (66) requires modifications to
the method described earlier, although the procedure, in prin-
ciple, is the same. The solution procedure using MIP is simple
in the case of a homogeneous soil deposit; however, for layered
deposits, MIP equations will be different depending on the
location of the depth of fixity. For layers deeper than the
depth of fixity hf (and, indeed, for portions of a layer deeper
than it), the MIP equations are not the same as for layers above
hf (derived earlier). The criterion adopted in this paper to
identify depths greater than the depth of fixity is that a~z > 3
or b~z > 3.
The MIP equations for equation (66) can be developed by
following a procedure similar to that followed before for equa-
tion (11). Since there are only two constants now, only two
initial parameters are required. For any layer i, the new MIP
equations are given by:
i i i i
w ~ 0 Kww ~0 Kw
~ i ~z w
D. Basu and R. Salgado
Functions and their Individual solutions of equation (1)
derivatives (prime ()
indicates differentiation) F1 F2
F ea~z cos b~z ea~z sin b~z
k  ~t F  a1  b2  a2 b1
F a2  b2 1 2ab2 a2  b2 2  2ab1
F ea~z eb~z
F  a1 b2
F a2 1 b 2 2
F  a3 1 b3 2
i i i i
~ 0 Kw ~0 K
~i ~z w 68
i i i i
M ~ 0 KMw ~0 KM
~ i ~z w 69
i i i i
~ 0 KSw ~0 KS
~Si ~z w 70
In order to illustrate how MIP works for long piles, we will
with ~ki > ~ti2 for all the layers. The pile head is again assumed to
be free; however, no condition for the pile base is required
because, for long piles, the base is sufficiently far away from
the influence of the applied force or moment that the deflection,
slope, bending moment and shear force at the base are all equal
to zero. We will further assume that the depth of fixity lies in the
second (middle) layer, which means that the arguments a~z and
b~z become greater than 3 in the second layer (note that, in
numerical calculations, such a priori assumption is not neces-
sary because, depending on the numerical values of a~z and b~z,
the algorithm automatically calculates the depth of fixity and
determines which layer it lies in). Thus, the MIP equations
corresponding to the top layer, as described before in the
example, are all valid, while for the second and the third
(bottom) layers new equations must be developed.
A point to be noted here is that, although a~z and b~z are
assumed to become greater than 3 in the middle layer in this
example, they are not necessarily greater than 3 in the bottom
layer (this can happen if the bottom layer consists of soft or
loose soil so that the values of a and b are lower than 3).
However, equation (66) is still valid for the bottom layer
(even if a~z and b~z are less than 3), and, in general, for any
layer below the depth of fixity, because pile deflection is
negligible below the depth of fixity (which means that the
positive exponential terms should be omitted).
As before, we first choose the initial sections for each soil
layer. For the top layer, the pile head is chosen as the initial
section. For the bottom layer, the pile base cannot be chosen as
the initial section because the corresponding initial parameters
(i.e., the deflection and slope at pile base) are already known to
be zero. So, for both the middle and the bottom layers we
67 choose the upper interfaces as the initial sections. Thus, the
 Method of initial parameters 291

initial sections in the example are at ~z = 0 for the top layer, at where the constants C1 and C2 are valid for the second layer;
~ 1 for the middle layer and at ~z = H ~ 2 for the bottom r
p  r
p 
~z = H
1 1 and a 0:5 ~k2 ~t2 and b 0:5 ~k2  ~t2 .
layer. The initial parameters for the top layer are w ~ 0 , ~0 ,
1 1 2 2
M~ 0 and ~ S0 ; for the middle layer are w~ 0 and ~0 , and for the We solve equations (72) and (73) for C1 and C2 at the initial
3 ~3 ~ 1):
bottom layer are w ~ and  .
0 0 section of the second layer (i.e., at ~z = H
Next, we impose the boundary conditions. Imposing
boundary conditions at the pile head results in equations 2
~ 0 C1 1 C2 2
w 76
(33) and (34). This leads to equations (37)--(40) again
describing the top layer. The pile base boundary conditions
have already been used up in obtaining equation (66). Using
2
~ 1 and H
the interface boundary conditions at H ~ 2, we obtain the ~0 C1 a1 b2 C2 a2 b1 77
following matrix equation:
2 32 3 where 1 and 2 are the values of F1 and F2 (Table 2) at
1 1 1 ~ 1. Solving equations (76) and (77), we get:
Kww Kw 1 0 0 0 ~0
w ~z = H
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014

6 1 76 7
6K 1
07 6 1 7
6 w K 0 1 0 76 ~0 7
6 1 76 2 7 2 2
~ 0 b1  a2  ~0 2
w
6K 1 2 2
07 6~ 7
6 Mw KM KMw KM 0 76 w 0 7 C1  2  78
6 1 76 2 7 b 1 22
6K 1 2 2
0 76 ~0 7
76
6 Sw KS KSw KS 0 7
6 76 3 7
6 0 0
2
Kww
2
Kw 1 76 ~0 7
0 54 w
4 5 2 2
2 2 ~3 ~ 0 a1 b2 ~0 1
w
0 0 Kw K 0 1 0 C2  2  79
2 1 1
3 b 1 22
M~ a KwM  F ~ a KwS
6 7
6 M 1 ~ a K 1 7
6 ~ a KM  F S 7 Substituting the constants C1 and C2 into equations (72)--(75)
6 7
6 M 1
~ a KMM F~ a KMS1 7 2 2
~ 0 and ~0 in these four
66
7
7 71 and comparing the coefficients of w
6 M 1
~ a KSM 
1 7
~ a KSS
F equations with those in equations (67)--(70) (with i = 2), we
6 7
6 7 obtain the influence coefficients for the middle layer. The
4 0 5
influence coefficients for the bottom layer can be obtained
0 following similar steps, and, in fact, the expressions are
identical to those of the middle layer (with the exception
In the above matrix equation, the first four rows are valid at that 1 and 2 are the values of F1 and F2 at ~z = H ~ 2; and
~ 1 while the remaining two are valid at ~z = H ~ 2. r
p  r
p 
~z = H
a 0:5 ~k3 ~t3 and b 0:5 ~k3 ~t3 .
The influence coefficients can be obtained as before.
Equations (46)--(55) give the influence coefficients for the top Using the values of the influence coefficients, the unknown
layer. In order to obtain the influence coefficients for the middle initial parameters are determined by solving the matrix equa-
layer, we refer back to equation (66). The normalized pile tion (71). The initial parameters and the influence coefficients
deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force can be are then used to find the normalized pile deflection, slope,
obtained from equation (66) and its derivatives (see Table 2 bending moment and shear force at any pile section by using
under ~k > ~t2 for the differentiations of F1 and F2) as: equations (37)--(40) for layer 1 and by using equations (67)--
(70) for layers 2 (with i = 2) and 3 (with i = 3), respectively.
~ 2 C1 1 C2 2
w 72 The expressions for the influence coefficients and the matrix
equations for up to four layers, with the depth of fixity lying in
the first, second, third or fourth layers, were obtained for free or
~2 C1 a1 b2 C2 a2 b1 73 restrained pile head conditions (Basu 2006) and can be readily
used. Solutions of the matrix equations were performed sym-
bolically as well.
 

~ 2 C1
M a2  b2 1 2ab2 The advantage of using MIP over direct determination of the
 
integration constants lies in the fact that complete symbolic
C2 a2  b2 2  2ab1 74
solutions can be obtained using MIP for problems with up to
four soil layers. Moreover, pile slope, bending moment and
   
shear force are determined without any post-processing of the
~
S2 C1  a a2  3b2 1 b b2  3a2 2
   
pile deflection data (post-processing becomes necessary for
C2  a a2  3b2 2  b b2  3a2 1 75 numerical solutions or for analytical solutions through direct
 2~t2 fC1 a1 b2 C2 a2 b1 g determination of the integration constants). However, if the
 292 D. Basu and R. Salgado

number of soil layers exceeds four, then symbolic solutions of

the matrix equations are difficult to obtain. In any case, the (a)
computational effort is always less in the case of MIP as 0
compared with analytical solution by direct determination of
the integration constants because, for any multi-layered pro-
blem, the number of equations required to be solved simulta-
2.5
neously when using MIP is always four less than the number of
equations required to be solved for direct determination of the

Depth, z (m)
integration constants. A distinct feature of MIP is that it deline-
ates the influence of the different variables on each other and 5
thus provides an insight into the problem. In the case of passive
piles (i.e., when the piles are subjected to applied loads along
the span of the pile), the use of MIP is more convenient than
7.5
direct determination of integration constants, particularly if
concentrated forces act along the pile span (just as in the case Analytical
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014

Finite Element Analysis

of beams on elastic foundations).
10
2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Pile Deflection (mm)
6. Solution algorithm (b)
0
An iterative technique (Basu and Salgado 2007) is used to
solve the problem because the parameter  is not known a
priori. Assuming an initial value of , pile deflection, slope,
bending moment and shear force are calculated applying MIP 2.5
as the first iteration. At the end of the iteration,  is calculated
Depth, z (m)

by performing integrations of the square of obtained pile

deflection and slope according to equation (4) and compared 5
with the assumed initial value of . If the difference between
the two values is more than the tolerable limit, a second
iteration is performed. Iterations are continued until the values
of  obtained from two consecutive iterations fall below the 7.5

prescribed limit, which we prescribe as  j1   j < 0:001. Analytical
An initial value of  = 1 was used in the calculations. The
final solutions were obtained in seconds and took not more 10
than six iterations. 40 0 40 80 120 160 200
Bending Moment (kNm)
(c)

7. Examples 0

We consider two example problems. For the first example, we

consider a four-layer soil profile with H1 = 2 m, H2 = 5 m, 2.5
and H3 = 8 m; Es1 = 20 MPa, Es2 = 35 MPa, Es3 = 50
Depth, z (m)

MPa and Es4 = 80 MPa (Esi is the Youngs modulus of the

ith layer; Gsi Esi =21 si ); us1 = 0.35, us2 = 0.25,
5
us3 = 0.2 and us4 = 0.15 (usi is the Poissons ratio of the ith
layer). We consider a 10-m-long pile with 0.6 m diameter. A
force Fa = 300 kN is applied at the head and the pile modulus
assumed is Ep = 24 106 kPa. Figure 5(a), (b) and (c) show 7.5
the pile deflection, bending moment and shear force, respec-
Analytical
tively. Also plotted in figure 5(a) is the deflection profile of a
three-dimensional finite element analysis of the problem. The 10
results match reasonably well. 100 0 100 200 300
For the second example, we consider the pile load test per- Shear Force (kN)
formed by McClelland and Focht (1958). The length and radius Figure 5. (a) Deflection, (b) bending moment and (c) shear force of a 10-m
of the pile are 23 m and 0.305 m, respectively, and the pile was long laterally loaded pile.
 Method of initial parameters 293

embedded into a normally consolidated clay. The pile was acted (a)
upon by a lateral force Fa = 300 kN and a negative moment
0
Ma = -265 kNm at the head. Randolph (1981) back-calcu-
lated the pile modulus Ep as 68.42 106 kN/m2 from the
reported pile flexural rigidity. Randolph (1981) further sug- 5
gested, based on back-calculation of test results, that the soil
shear modulus profile for this soil deposit must, in order to

Depth, z (m)
match his finite element analysis (coupled with Fourier series), 10
be given by:

Gs 0:8z 103 kN=m2 80 15

with us = 0.3. We divided the soil profile into four layers and
calculated the shear modulus Gs at the middle of each layer, 20 Measured
which were considered to be the representative values for each Analytical
Randolph (1981)
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014

layer. Thus, we have H1 = 4.0 m, H2 = 8.0 m and H3 = 12

m; Gs1 = 1.6 MPa, Gs2 = 4.8 MPa, Gs3 = 8.0 MPa and 25
5 0 5 10 15 20 25
Gs4 = 14.0 MPa. In figure 6(a) we plot the pile deflection
Pile Deflection (mm)
profile, as obtained from our analysis and the finite element
analysis of Randolph (1981), and compare it with the measured (b)
values. In figure 6(b), we plot the corresponding bending 0
moment profiles. The deflection profile obtained from our
analysis matches the measured profile, although the match
between the bending moment profiles is not equally satisfac- 5
tory. Given the assumption of linear elasticity in both the
Randolph (1981) and the present solutions, it is not surprising Depth, z (m)
that a perfect reproduction of deflection and bending moment 10
profiles is not possible.
15

8. Conclusions
20 Measured
Analytical
An analytical solution was presented for the problem of a Randolph (1981)
laterally loaded pile embedded in a layered soil medium. 25
We modified the method of initial parameters, traditionally 400 200 0 200 400 600
used to solve problems of beams on elastic foundations, to Bending Moment (mm)
obtain the pile deflection, slope, bending moment and shear
Figure 6. (a) Pile deflection and (b) bending moment for the pile load test of
force for a laterally loaded pile embedded in a layered soil McClelland and Focht (1958).
medium. The method was illustrated using an example of a
laterally loaded pile embedded in a three-layer soil deposit.
Two example problems have been solved and compared
with finite element analysis; it is evident that this method the data presented herein, and do not necessarily reflect the
of solution produces satisfactory results, provides important views of NSF and views or policies of the Federal Highway
insights into pile response, and offers a solid framework for Administration and the Indiana Department of Transportation,
further research. nor do the contents constitute a standard, specification, or
regulation. Tanusree Chakraborty assisted with the finite ele-
ment analysis, for which we are grateful.
Acknowledgements

This material is based in part upon work supported by the References

National Science Foundation (NSF) under grant number
CMMI-0556347. We also acknowledge partial support from
the Joint Transportation Research Program administered by
the Indiana Department of Transportation and Purdue
University. The contents of this paper reflect the views of the
authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of
Banerjee, P. K. and Davies, T. G., The behavior of axially and laterally loaded
single piles embedded in nonhomogeneous soils. Geotechnique, 1978,
28(3), 309--326.
Basu, D., Analysis of laterally loaded piles in layered soil, Ph.D. Thesis, Purdue
University, 2006.
Basu, D. and Salgado, R.,. Elastic analysis of laterally loaded pile in multi-
layered soil. Geomech. Geoengng. Int. J., 2007, 2(3) 183--196.
 294 D. Basu and R. Salgado
Georgiadis, M. and Butterfield, R., Laterally loaded pile behavior. J. Geotech.
Engng. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs, 1982, 108(GT1), 155--165.
Guo, W. D. and Lee, F. H., Load transfer approach for laterally loaded piles. Int.
J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001, 25(11), 1101--1129.
Harr, M. E., Davidson, J. L., Ho, D.-M., Pombo, L. E., Ramaswamy, S.V. and
Rosner, J. C., Euler beams on a two parameter foundation model. J. Soil
Mech. Fdn. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs, 1969, 95(SM4), 933--948.
nyi, M., Beams on elastic foundation, 1946 (Univ. Michigan Press: Ann Arbor).
Hete
Madhav, M. R., Rao, N. S. V. K. and Madhavan, K., Laterally loaded pile in
elasto-plastic soil. Soils Fdns, 1971, 11(2), 1--15.
Matlock, H., Correlations for design of laterally loaded piles in soft clay. Proc.
2nd Offshore Tech. Conf., Houston, Texas, 1970, 1, pp. 577--594.
Matlock, H. and Reese, L. C., Generalized solutions for laterally loaded piles. J.
Soil Mech. Fdn. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs, 1960, 86(SM5), 63--91.
McClelland, B. and Focht Jr., J. A., Soil modulus for laterally loaded piles.
Trans. Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs., 1958, 123, 1049--1063.
McLachlan, N. W., Bessel functions for engineers, 1961 (Oxford Univ. Press).
Pasternak, P. L., On a new method of analysis of an elastic foundation by means
of two foundation constants, Gosudarstvennoe Izdatelstvo Literaturi po
Downloaded by [University of Tennessee, Knoxville] at 16:10 23 December 2014
Stroitelstvu i Arkhitekture, 1954, Moscow, USSR (in Russian).
Poulos, H. G., Behavior of laterally loaded piles: I -- single piles. J. Soil Mech.
Fdn Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs, 1971, 97(SM5), 711--731.
Randolph, M. F., The response of flexible piles to lateral loading. Geotechnique,
1981, 31(2), 247--259.
Rao, N. S. V. K., Das, Y. C., Anandakrishnan, M., Variational approach to
beams on elastic foundations. J. Engng. Mech. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs,
1971, 97(EM2), 271--294.
Reese, L. C. and Cox, W. R., Soil behavior from analysis of tests of uninstru-
mented piles under lateral loading. Performance of Deep Fdns., ASTM
STP, 1969, 444, 160--176.
Reese, L. C. and Van Impe, W. F., Single piles and pile groups under lateral
loading, 2001 (A.A. Balkema: Rotterdam, The Netherlands).
Reese, L. C., Cox, W. R. and Koop, F. D., Analysis of laterally loaded
piles in sand. Proc. 6th Offshore Tech. Conf., Houston, Texas, 1974,
2, pp. 473--483.
Reese, L. C., Cox, W. R. and Koop, F. D., Field testing and analysis of laterally
loaded piles in stiff clay. Proc. 7th Offshore Tech. Conf., Houston, Texas,
1975, 2, pp. 671--690.
Scott, R. F., Foundation analysis, 1981 (Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ).
Selvadurai, A. P. S., Elastic analysis of soil-foundation interaction, 1979
(Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands).
Stewart, D. P., User Manual PYGMY, 2000 (University of Western Australia).
Sun, K., Laterally loaded piles in elastic media. J. Geotech. Engng., Am. Soc.
Civ. Engrs, 1994a, 120(8), 1324--1344.
Sun, K., A numerical method for laterally loaded piles. Comput. Geotech.,
1994b, 16, 263--289.
Terzaghi, K., Evaluation of coefficients of subgrade reaction. Geotechnique,
1955, 5(4), 297--326.
Trochanis, A. M., Bielak, J. and Christiano, P., Three-dimensional nonlinear
study of piles. J. Geotech. Engng., Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs, 1991, 117(3),
429--447.
Valsangkar, A. J., Rao, N. S. V. K. and Basudhar, P. K., Generalized solutions of
axially and laterally loaded piles in elasto-plastic soil. Soils Fdns, 1973,
13(4), 1--14.
Vlasov, V. Z. and Leontev, N. N., Beams, plates and shells on elastic founda-
tions, 1966 (Israel Program for Scientific Translations: Jerusalem).
Winkler, E., Die Lehre von der Elasticitaet und Festigkeit, 1867 (Dominicus:
Prague).
Zhaohua, F. and Cook, R. D., Beam elements on two-parameter elastic founda-
tions. J. Engng. Mech., Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs., 1983, 109(6), 1390--1402.