Nuclear Engineering and Design 54 (1979) 325-335

North-Holland Publishing Company

DYNAMIC STIFFNESS AND SEISMIC INPUT MOTION OF A GROUP OF BATTERED PILES *

John P. WOLF
Eleetrowatt Engineering Services LTD., BeIlerivestr. 36, 8022 Ziirich, Switzerland

Received 21 June 1979

The dynamic stiffness (unpedance function) and the corresponding seismic input motion of a group of battered piles,
which can be end-bearing and floating, situated in any desired configuration in horizontally stratified soil, are determined.
The soil and the piles consist of (frequency-dependent) visco-elastic material with hysteretic damping. The base mat can
be rigid or flexible. Any seismic excitation, for which the free-field motion can be calculated, can be specified (body waves,
propagating at an arbitrary angle, generalized surface waves). The soil is discretized by toroidal finite elements in conjunc-
tion with a Fourier expansion in the circumferential direction. Radiation and hysteretic damping are accounted for. The
dynamic-flexibility matrix of the soil is generated, superimposing the basic dynamic-flexibility coefficients calculated by
applying sequentially a horizontal and a vertical force at all nodes located on the axis of symmetry. The influence of the
soil which is subsequently replaced by piles is taken into consideration. Pile-soil-pile interaction is accounted for in this
method. The formulation can also be applied to embedded foundations and buried structures such as tunnelx and pipe
systems.

1. Introduction A recent state.of-the-art report on seismic effects

Nuclear-power plants whose safety-related struc-
tures are supported on piles are presently being built
in low to moderately active seismic areas. For instance,
unit 2 of the Angra dos Reis plant in Brazil is designed
for a safe-shutdown earthquake of close to 0.2 g in t h e
free field on the level of the base mat. Soil-structure
interaction for a foundation consisting of a group of
vertical and battered end-bearing and floating piles
(fig. 1) has to be properly accounted for. Of course,
in an acutal design not all types of piles will be present.
The response of a pile foundation to an earthquake,
where the excitation is applied on some specified level,
e.g. that of the tips o f the piles (bedrock), is also o f
interest in the field o f offshore platforms. The dynamic
response also has to be determined for machine founda-
tions, where the dynamic forces are applied on the
level of the base mat, which can often be regarded as
rigid, connecting the pile heads.
* Presented at the ASCE National Convention, Boston,
Massachusetts, 2-6 April 1979; Preprint 3595.
on piles is presented in ref. [1 ]. Any soil-structure
interaction analysis should ideally use fully nonlinear
three-dimensional models. At the present stage of the
development, however, only two distinct groups of
procedures exist. The first consists o f an iterative
linear approach or of the use of simple soil models
to account for the nonlinear constitutive laws and is
restricted to two-dimensional or axisymmetdc geo-
metries. In general, only one vertical pile with non-
linear soil behavior is considered [2]. It is difficult
to account for added mass affects, radiation damping
and interaction between the piles which are in a
group. The geometry o f the problem has thus not
been properly represented. To avoid this, the three-
dimensional geometry is correctly represented in the
second group o f procedures, which is, however,
restricted to a linear analysis of a viscoelastic material
with hysteretic damping. In general, soil properties
consistent with the level of the free-field strains
caused by the earthquake excitation are selected.
The change of the properties corresponding to the
interaction of the structure with the soil are neglected.
Pile-soft-pile interaction is, however, properly

325
326 J.P. Wolf/Stiffness and seismic input of battered piles
. . . .
...
. i--I ! k-l//
//1//I.//////////////////////////////7///////////////7///////////////////////
Fig. 1. Foundation consisting of a group of vertical and battered end-bearing and floating piles.
accounted for, incorporating automatically the
frequency-dependent radiation damping and the
phenomenon of added mass. Since the analysis is
linear, the basic superposition theorem can be
used. For a rigid base mat, it is convenient to break
the solution into three steps [3,4].
(1) Determination of the so-called seismic input
motion, which is equal to that of the rigid massless
base mat, with the soil and piles being subjected to
the earthquake's excitation (kinematic interaction).
For body waves propagating not necessarily vertically
and for surface waves, the seismic input motion can
be expressed as a transfer function (complex frequency-
response function) to the base mat (translation and
rotation) from the level at which the motion is
introduced.
(2) Calculation of the dynamic stiffness (complex
impedance function), which is frequency-dependent.
(3) Dynamic analysis in the frequency domain of
the structure considered to be supported on the
dynamic stiffness of step (2) and subjected at the
base to the seismic input motion of step (1) (inertial
interaction).
For a flexible base mat, the substructure technique
[4,5], which is also based on the basic superposition
theorem, can be advantageously applied. For this case,
in addition to the dynamic stiffness, fictitious forces
which are equal to the product of the dynamic stiff-
ness and of the motion which the soil-pile system
undergoes adjacent to the base mat in the absence of
the structure have to be determined. These forces
rigid base mot
. . |
_o.
bedrock
Ill
can also be expressed as a function of the free-field
motion of the soil alone for any type of wave. For a
single pile, analytical solutions are used for the resis-
tance of the soil in vertical [6] and horizontal mo-
tions [7]. In ref. [8] the response of a single pile
embedded in a horizontally stratified soil deposit is
analysed for a horizontal vibration. The soil is model-
led with finite elements, and a consistent boundary
matrix is used to represent the effect of the far field
[9]. The procedure described in ref. [8] for a single
pile is generalized in ref. [10] for a group of vertical
piles for all modes of vibration, accounting for pile-
soil-pile interaction.
In this paper the procedure of ref. [10] is extended
to a group of battered piles. At the same time, the
formulation is streamlined, thus extending the field
of application to new cases for vertical piles by elimina-
ting certain assumptions: No approximations are intro-
duced if the group consists of end-bearing and floating
piles of different lengths and different radii. In addi-
tion, all cavities, where the soil is subsequently replaced
by the piles, are rigorously accounted for. The number
of steady-state analyses of the axisymmetric soil model
is also reduced by a factor of two as compared to
that of ref. [10]. The numerous examples in ref. [10],
e.g. emphasizing the importance of pile-soil-pile
interaction and the strong dependence of the dynamic
stiffness (but not of the transfer function of the
motion) on the frequency of the excitation, remain
valid and will not be reproduced in this paper. Ref.
[10] also contains the seismic analysis of the Angra
 J.P. Wolf~ Stiffness and seismic input of battered piles
2 reactor building resting on a foundation of over 200
vertical piles of 34 m length.
The following assumptions still apply. The soil
consists of horizontal layers of isotropic viscoelastic
material with hysteretic damping (fig. 1). The proper-
ties vary with depth, but remain constant within the
individual layers. The soil is discretized by toroidal finite
elements in conjunction with a Fourier expansion in
the circumferential direction. Elementary, viscous or
consistent boundaries can be used to model the far
field in the horizontal direction. A fixed or a viscous
boundary is introduced at the bottom of the model.
The number and the location of the battered and
vertical piles of different length and different radii
can be freely chosen. The piles with a straight axis are
linearly viscoelastic with hysteretic damping and of
circular cross section. The rigid base mat connecting
the pile heads is separated from the underlying soil,
which is assumed to have settled. If this is not the
case, the dynamic stiffness of the base mat resting on
the viscoelastic layers has to be added to that of the
pile group.
For a practical foundation with a large number of
piles, the dynamic stiffness and the seismic input motion
have to be determined by substructuring the founda-
tion itself. This mathematical formulation for a rigid
base mat is presented in section 2. For the sake of con-
ciseness, the formulation for a two-dimensional model
is selected, for which obviously a direct method of
analysis could be used, allowing nonhorizontal
layering and nonlinear soil models, as discussed above.
The mathematical formulation is applicable to a three-
dimensional geometry in a straightforward way. In
section 3 the method is generalized considerably
(piles with variable cross section and polygonal axis,
flexible base mat, embedded foundations and
buried structures). By way of illustration a simple
pile group is analysed in section 4. The final section
contains a summary and the conclusions.
2. Mathematical formulation
The dynamic stiffness and input motion of a rigid
base mat supported by piles in a layered-soil media
under steady-state conditions can be determined by
generalizing the method used in ref. [11 ]. The
assumptions are listed in section 1. The forces and
327
displacements which are introduced in the following
steady-state analysis are complex amplitudes and
should be multiplied by e i~t, where ~ is the circular
frequency of the excitation. For the sake of simplicity,
this time-dependent factor is omitted.
The computational procedure separates the piles
and the soil, introducing unknown generalized inter-
action forces at discrete nodes on the circumference
of the piles, shown as circles in fig. 2. For the two-
dimensional geometry used for illustration, (K}
consists of the amplitudes of these forces Rxm and
Ry m in the two directions of the global coordinate
system x, y at the free nodes m of all piles. In fig. 2
they are shown acting on the piles. An overbar refers
to all variables associated with the nodes on the
circumference of the piles. The vector of the corre-
sponding amplitudes of the displacements within
the same coordinate system in the same nodes is
denoted by ,[~R) (~Rl and ~Rt in node/). {K) and
{~n) are related by the (complex)dynamic flexibil-
ity matrix (compliance function), which depends on
the frequency co of the harmonic vibration of the
soil, whereby the cavities where the soil is subsequently
replaced by the piles are taken into account. For the
continuous soil (i.e. without cavities), this relation-
ship is formulated as
(~n} = [F s] {Ks}, (1)
where [F s] denotes the dynamic-flexibility matrix of
the continuous soil. A superscript s is used to indicate
the continuous soil. All elements in [F s] are calculated
from the following basic dynamic-flexibility coeffi-
cients by using simple geometric transformations
(fig. 3). Applying harmonically a horizontal and a
vertical force sequentially to all free nodes situated on
a vertical line of the finite-element mesh, which extends
to infinity, the basic dynamic-flexibility coefficients
in all nodes of the soil can be calculated. For example,
for RSm applied at node m, ~ynt is expressed as
-R - s -s
Uyl - F y x l m (Ym, Xl - Xm, Yt - Y m ) R x m (2a)
and follows from:
(-w2[MS] + (1 + 2iDS)[KS])(~ n) = IRxrn~ , (2b)
t(o) )
where FJxlm is the displacement amplitude at node
l in the y-direction, generated by a harmonic force
328 J.P. Wolf / Stiffness and seismic input of battered piles

Fig. 2. Discretized piles and base mat.

-.-

-_.

-_

Fig. 3. Basic flexibility coefficients of soil.

 J.P. Wolf~ Stiffness and seismic input of battered piles
//
['s.', ]
/% Uyl
Fig. 4. Assembling dynamic-stiffness matrix of piles.
of unit amplitude at node rn in the x-direction. In
addition to the dependency on soil properties, this
basic dynamic-flexibility coefficient is solely a function
of the vertical coordinate Y m of the node where the
force is applied and of the coordinates of the node
of the displacement relative to the node of application
of the force x t - X m and Y t - Y m . [M] represents
the mass matrix, [K] the (real) stiffness matrix and
D the ratio of the hysteretic damping. For viscous
and consistent boundaries, additional terms are
introduced [9]. When assembling [FS], interpolation
has to be used when the nodes on the circumference
of the subsequently introduced piles (fig. 2) do not
coincide with those of the finite-element mesh (fig.
3).
To account for the cavities, the dynamic-stiffness
matrix [S c] is assembled from the corresponding
submatrices [SCl] of those soil elements which are
subsequentty replaced by the pile elements (fig. 4).
The superscript c denotes the cavities and the sub-
script el the individual finite element. In the global-
coordinate system, this matrix relating amplitudes
of harmonic forces and displacements equals
[SCl] = -(x)2 [msl] + (1 + 2iDS)[KSl] . (3)
Inverting eq. (1) leads to the dynamic-stiffness matrix
of the soil layers. Subtracting [SC], the dynamic-
329
Rxj
.
stiffness matrix (impedance function) of the soil
layers accounting for the cavities is determined:
(/~} = (IF s]-I _ [SC]){~R}. (4)
For all layered soil systems without any piles or
structure present, the free-field motion can be deter.
mined for body waves propagating at an arbitrary angle
and for surface waves (generalized Rayleigh and
Love waves) using numerical or analytical methods
[12]. (~f} represents the vector of amplitudes of
this free-field motion of the soil in the same (free)
nodes as are introduced in fig. 2 and which are located
on the circumference of the subsequently introduced
piles. In each node l, the two components ~ft and
Ufytare specified (fig. 5). The superscript f denotes
the free-field motion of the continuous soil. {ub}
with components Ubxi and Ubyi in node i represents
the amplitudes of the specified free-field motion of
the soil on the lateral and bottom boundaries (b =
boundary). The relationship between {~f) and
(~f,c), the amplitudes of the free-field motion of
the soil in the same nodes, whereby the cavities
are taken into account, and for the same seismic
excitation and thus identical {ub}, is determined
next (fig. 5). Eliminating the amplitudes of the
displacements in all internal nodes located in the
soil, which are not present either on the circumfe-
330 J.P. Wolf~ Stiffness and seismic input of battered piles
~t ~fg
.o.,
&-7
Fig. 5. Free-field excitation; left: soil, right: soil with cavity,
rence of the piles or on the boundary, the vector of the
amplitudes of the internal forces of the soil alone,
{/~f), is expressed as
,[/~f} = ([F s] -1 _ [SC]){~f} + [S b] {u b}
and, using the dynamic-stiffness matrix [S c] of the
soil which will subsequently be deleted, is then
expressed as
{/~f} = - IS c] {~f).
IS b] would follow from the elimination of the
amplitudes of displacement on the internal nodes
of the soil. The internal forces of the soil with the
cavities are zero and can be formulated analogously
to eq. (5) as
{0} = ([FS] -1 - [SCl){N f'c} + IS b] {tAb}.
Subtracting eq. (7) from eq. (5) and introducing
eq. (6) on the left-hand side results in
( [ F S ] - i _ [SC]){~f,c) = [/7s] -1 {~f}.
Thus, [S b] is never calculated.
The amplitudes of the total displacement of the
soil, while taking into account the cavities {fi},
equals
{fi} = {~f,c} + {~R}.
The vector of the amplitudes of the generalized
displacements in discrete nodes located on the axis
1
i" Ubxi
of the piles is denoted by {u} (figs. 2 and 4). For
each node shown as a dot, two translations Uxj,
Uyj referred to the global-coordinate system and a
(5) rotation Sj are introduced. The vector of the ampli-
tudes of the corresponding generalized forces is (R}
(Rxj , Ryj and RMI in each node j). Assuming beam
theory to apply to the piles, the following transforma-
tions are formulated:
(6) {~} = [7"] (u } (10)
and
{R} = [T]t (/~'} . (11)
[T] is assembled on a nodal basis from the submatrix
of transformation [Tnode] of order 4 3 which
relates the amplitudes of the two translations in each
(7) of the two nodes (located at the intersection of the
normal to the axis of the piles with its circumference)
to the amplitudes of the three generalized displace-
ments on the axis. [Tnode] depends only on the
(8) angle a and on the radius r of the pile (fig. 4). Since
the displacement assumptions of the beam and of
the adjacent soil elements are different (cubic as
apposed to linear), complete compatibility is not
achieved. This should be of no practical significance.
The equations of motion of the discretized system
(9) of piles are formulated by expressing equilibrium
and compatibility for all free nodes j as (figs. 2, 4)
[SPl {u} + {R} = [{0} J " (12t
 J.P. Wolf~ Stiffness and seismic input of battered piles
This in effect adds the pile elements to the soil
system. The dynamic stiffness matrix [S p] is assem-
bled from the pile-element submatrices [Sepl]
defined in the global-coordinate system:
[SePl] = -~o2 [MePl] + (l + 2iDP)[KPl] .
The superscript p denotes the piles. {ph} consists
of the amplitudes of the generalized stress resultants
Pxk, Py~, Mk at the head of all piles k. For an end-
bearing pile, eq. (12) is not formulated for the nodes
at the tip. However, an additional vector equal to
the product of the off-diagonal submatrix of the
dynamic stiffness of the last element [SePt] - [SCel]
and of the prescribed componant of (fif} at the tip
is added to the equations corresponding to the
degrees of freedom of the nodes at the other end of
the last element of the pile. Substituting eq. (9)
into eq. (4) and then using eqs. (10) and (11), it is
possible to transform eq. (12) to
([SP] + [T]t([FS]-I - [SC])[T]){u} = ({0} ]
+ [T]t([FS] - 1 - [SC])(uf'C) . (14)
The coefficient matrix on the left-hand side of eq.
(14) represents the dynamic stiffness (impedance
function) of the pile-soil system. The second term
on the right-hand side equals the product of the trans-
formed dynamic-stiffness matrix of the soil (the
cavities being taken into account) and of the free-
field motion of the soil (the cavities again being
taken into account). The contribution of the soil
accounting for the cavities depends on the motion
relative to that of the corresponding free-field
(//} __ (/~f,c} (difference of the second terms on the
left- and right-hand sides). Using eq. (8), the second
term on the right-hand side can be expressed as the
product of the transformed dynamic-stiffness
matrix of the soil alone with the corresponding free-
field motion, resulting, for eq. (14), in
(IS p] + [T]t([FS] -1 - [SC])[T]){u}
= "{ {Ph}l + [T]t[FS] -I (fif}
{o} ]
Setting {/oh} = 0 in eq. (14) or (15), the free-field
motion of the pile-soil system without the restrain-
ing base mat could be calculated.
Various simplifications are possible. The discrete
331
nodes in the soil can be chosen to lie directly on the
axis of the piles (dots in figs. 2 and 4). The transfor-
mation is thus avoided. The generalized interaction
forces consist of forces only. When calculating the
contribution of the piles to the dynamic-stiffness
(13)
matrix of the system, that of the cavities can be sub-
tracted([S r] - [S c]). With this procedure, the
numerical difficulties that arise when inverting [F s]
for very slender piles, where always two nodes lie
very close together (distance 2r) in the rigorous formu-
lation, are avoided. In addition, the soil's vertical and
horizontal displacements caused by the horizontal
and vertical interaction forces, respectiviely, can be
suppressed (relaxed contact).
Using eq. (15), all amplitudes of displacements
in {u}, with the exception of those associated with
the pile heads {uh}, are eliminated. This results in
[G h] (u h} = (ph} + ( p t } , (16)
where [G h] represents the dynamic stiffness (imped-
ance function) on the level of the pile heads. {Pf}
is the vector of the amplitudes of the forces exerted
at the pile heads by the seismic motion when the
heads are kept fixed ({u h} -- 0).
Formulating the compatibility equations between
the rigid base mat and the pile heads leads to
{uh} = [A] {qo}, (17)
where {qo} is the vector of the amplitudes of the
generalized total displacements, Uxo, Uyo, Poat point
0, and [.4] depends only on the coordinates of the
heads of all piles k (fig. 2).
The equilibrium equations at point 0 are
{Qo} = [A] t (ph}, (18)
where {Qo} consists of the amplitudes of the total
generalized forces Pxo, Pyo, Mo acting at point 0.
Substituting eq. (17) into eq. (16) and solving for
(ph}, which is then introduced into eq. (18) leads to
[A]t[Gh][A](qo} : (Qo} + [A]t (ef} (19)
The coefficient matrix on the left-hand side is the
(15) dynamic stiffness (impedance function) of the total
pile foundation. The second term on the right-hand
side represents the vector of the amplitudes of the
generalized forces acting on the base mat, these forces
being caused by the seismic motion for a fixed base
mat.
332 J.P. Wolf~ Stiffness and seismic input of battered piles
Alternatively, by introducing the vector of the
amplitudes of the generalized total velocities {qo),
eq. (19)can be formulated as
[K0] {qo} + [Co] {qo) = {Qo} + [A] t {Pf},
where [Ko] and [Co] are the (real, far-coupled)
stiffness and damping matrices, respectively.
If we select the analysis procedure which deter-
mines the total motion as the sum of those of the
kinematic and inertia interaction, the calculations
are performed as follows. Setting {Qo) = 0 in eq. (19),
the resulting amplitudes {q0) represent the motion
of the massless base mat and thus the seismic input
motion (kinematic interaction). It should be noted
that, for a general pile foundation with freely chosen
position of the piles, all amplitudes of displacement
components will be present even for the simple
case of a vertically propagating shear wave. Even
for a symmetric pile foundation, substantial rocking
will result in certain cases [10]. The analysis of the
inertia interaction is straightforward. Substantial
pile forces will result in both the kinematic and
inertia interaction phases. Alternatively, choosing
the substructure technique, eq. (19) is assembled into
the corresponding steady-state equations of motion
of the structure.
To determine the dynamic-stiffness matrix [G h]
of a group of (identical) vertical piles for a prelimi-
I /i
. I I-- I II
II
II
[ 11
= I t - -
II
II
II
' II
" = II
'
"-~ I
"-,.~-/ I
1t
II
Fig. 6. Generalizationembedded foundation, tunnel, pipe.
nary design, the following approximate method
can be used. The center pile is included in the model
of the soil when calculating the basic dynamic flexi-
bility coefficients. These are equal to the horizontal
(20)
and vertical displacements and the rotation on the
surface of the soil caused by applying harmonically
a horizontal force, a vertical force and a bending
moment sequentially only to the node located on the
axis of this pile at the level of its head. The dynamic
flexibility matrix of the pile-soil system relating
{ph) to {u h} is again calculated from the basic flexi-
bility coefficients using geometric transformations.
Compatibility for a preliminary design is thus only
formulated on the level of the pile heads and is not
rigorously satisfied for the other nodes along the
piles. The inverse of this flexibility matrix equals
the dynamic-stiffness matrix [G h] of eq. (16).
3. Generalization
The procedure described in the previous section
can be significantly generalized since it is based
on the substructure theorem. It is applicable to all
linear dynamic analyses of viscoelastic-material
behaviour, which can be frequency-dependent, with
hysteretic damping.
Three-dimensional foundations with battered piles
II I I
l i
Ii
II
II
II
II
II
Ii
II
Ii
I II
I II
I II
I II
T//
 J.P. Wolf~ Stiffness and seismic input of battered piles 333

can be calculated, the dynamic-flexibility matrix G

~GN/mZ+J[[Mg/m
~] ~3
[F s] of the soil can again be assembled with geo- O.Om i

metric transformations from the basic dynamic- sand 351 1.95 0.42
- 4.5m
flexibility coefficients, determined as displacements clay o~+9
- 7.5m
caused by applying harmonically a horizontal and a transition 0,944 2.10 0,255
- 11.Sin
vertical force sequentially to all free nodes situated on I
residual I 1,022! i 2,05 0.36
the (vertical) axis of symmetry of the finite-element i
-20.Om
mesh [10,11 ]. The horizontal and vertical forces residual 2 11. 0.34
correspond to the first and zeroth harmonics of the -27.0m
axisymmetric layered soil model, respectively. weathered +3 i12 ~i
0.43
The individual piles can be tapered and have a - 34.0m
-- =!=
polygonal axis. The material properties can change j 2~x 2x +'~ 3x4Om 3x
0.65m 20m 30m 6.0m
along the axis of the piles. (This can prove useful in
an analysis of the group of piles as actually built.) Fig. 7. Free-field properties and finite-element mesh of soil
For a flexible base mat, eq. (16) determines the dy- layer.
namic-stiffness matrix [G h] and the force vector
{job} of the foundation. Adding them to the corre- tion. Relaxed contact is assumed, thereby neglecting
sponding values of the structure, including the flexible the displacements of the soil perpendicular to the
base mat, leads to the force-displacement relation- direction of the applied interaction forces. In addition,
ship of the structure, including the soil-structure the discrete nodes in the soil are selected to lie directly
interaction. It should be emphasized that eq. (14) or on the axis of the piles, as discussed in section 2.
(15) already represents the force-displacement equa- In the vertical direction, nine rows of finite elements
tions of a flexible "structure" (the piles) embedded as shown in fig. 7 are used. To calculate the basic
in the soil, whereby the cavities are taken into account. dynamic-flexibility coefficients in the horizontal
The mathematical formulation also applies to direction, a horizontal harmonically varying force
(three-dimensional) embedded foundations, buried is applied sequentially to the nine free nodes located
structures (caissons, tunnels, pipe systems). The on the axis of symmetry of the finite-element mesh.
walls can be inclined and be either rigid or flexible The subdivision of the mesh in the horizontal direc-
(fig. 6). tion, especially in the neighbourhood of the axis
of symmetry, has to be chosen very carefully. As a
load applied in a node of a finite-element mesh is
4. Example approximately equivalent to a distributed load acting

By way of illustration, the dynamic stiffness of a

foundation with 2 2 piles is determined. Vertical
piles are selected since for this case the results of ref.
[10] can be used for comparison. A stratified layer
of soil resting at a depth of 34 m on rigid bedrock
is chosen. The material properties of the soil compat-
2r--~
ible with the strains caused by the free-field motion
of a minor earthquake are specified in fig. 7 (G = shear
modulus, O = mass density, ~ = Poisson's ratio). The
ratio of hysteretic damping for all layers equals 0.05. ..a
Piles made of concrete with a modulus of elasticity =
30 GN/m 2, a mass density = 2.5 Mg/m 3, and a ratio
of hysteretic damping = 0 for a diameter of 2r =
0.32 m reaching down to bedrock (h = 34 m) are
used (fig. 8). The distance d is varied in the investiga- Fig. 8. Foundation with 2 X 2 piles.
334 J.P. Wolf~ Stiffness and seismic input of battered piles
g
kxx 5. Summary and conclusions
s
:Ekxx
(1) A procedure is described for determining the
1.5- dynamic stiffness (impedance function) and the
corresponding seismic input motion of a group of
1.0- battered piles situated in any desired configuration
in horizontally stratified soil. The soil and the piles
0.5 J
consist of (frequency-dependent) viscoelastic material
d
with hysteretic damping. The base mat can be rigid
...... 2 3 ~ ?o 2'o 3b 5'0 16o ~6o3'oo- 2~ or flexible. Any seismic excitation, for which the
free-field motion can be calculated, can be specified
s (body waves, propagating at an arbitrary angle,
:ECxx
1
- - 2r = 0.32m generalized surface waves).
2.0- (2) The soil is discretized by toroidal finite elements
.......... 2r = 1.30m in conjunction with a Fourier expansion in the
1.5
circumferential direction. Radiation damping can be
rigorously accounted for using consistent boundaries.
The dynamic-flexibility matrix of the soil is generated,
0.5 " ' " "" " ' ~
superimposing the basic dynamic-flexibility coefficients
calculated by applying sequentially a horizontal and
~ IO vertical force at all nodes located on the axis of
I Z 3 5 20. 3b
. . 5'0. =
IOO ~ZOO 300 ~'r
symmetry. The influence of the soil which is sub-
Fig. 9. Horizontal stiffness and damping coefficients as a sequently replaced by piles is taken into consideration.
function of distance between piles. P i l e - s o i l - p i l e interaction is accounted for in this
method, which can be regarded as substructuring
on the (average) length of the adjacent two finite based on the basic superposition theorem.
elements, this length o f the element adjacent to the (3) Many numerical results of simple pile configura-
axis of symmetry should be equal to twice the dia- tions and a seismic analysis of a reactor building
meter o f the piles. (Other criteria could be used.) The founded on vertical piles are described in ref. [10].
frequency of the excitation is selected as 4 Hz. The (4) The formulation can also be applied to
dynamic stiffness in the horizontal direction, expressed embedded foundations and buried structures such as
as the (real) stiffness and damping coefficients [eq. tunnels and pipe systems with rigid or flexible walls.
(20)], is determined by varying the distance d. The
expression kgx represents the stiffness coefficient
for a group of piles when the p i l e - s o i l - p i l e inter- References
action is properly accounted for, kSxx being the
corresponding value for a single pile. EkSx thus [1 ] H. Tajimi, Proc. Specialty Session 10, 9th Int. Conf. on
denotes the stiffness coefficient for a group of piles, Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Tokyo
neglecting the group effect, cgx and EcSx are (1977), Paper 2/1, pp. 15-26.
defined analogously. As can be seen from fig. 9 (solid [2] H. Matlock, S.Foo and L.M. Bryant, Proc. Geotechnical
Engineering Division Specialty Conf. on Earthquake
line), the p i l e - s o i l - p i l e interaction is very important. Engineering and Soil Dynamics, Pasadena, vol. II (Amer-
For the foundation examined, it can be neglected only ican Society of Civil Engineers, 1978), pp. 600-619.
for a distance-to-diameter ratio exceeding 100 for [3] H.B. Seed, R.V. Whitman and 1. Lysmer, in: Structural
a vibration in the horizontal direction. The results and Geotechnical Mechanics (Prentice-Hall, 1975),
for a pile diameter of 2r = 1.30 m are shown as a pp. 220-241.
[4] E. Kausel, R.V. Whitman, J.P. Morroy and F. Elsabee,
dotted line in fig. 9. They agree well with the approxi- Nucl. Eng. Des. 48 (1978) 377.
mate results of ref. [10]. The systematic investigations [5 ] J.A. Gutierrez and A.K. Chopra, Earthquake Eng. Struct.
of this reference should thus remain valid. Dyn. 6 (1978) 51.
 J.P. Wolf~ Stiffness and seismic input of battered piles
[6] T. Nogami and M. Novak, Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn.
4 (1976) 277.
[7] M. Novak and T. Nogami, Earthquake Eng. Struct.
Dyn. 5 (1977) 263.
[8] G.W. Blaney, E. Kausel and J.M. Roesset, Proc. 2nd
Int. Conf. on Numerical Methods in Geomechanics,
Blocksburg, vol. 2 (American Society of Civil Engineers,
1976), pp. 1001-1012.
[9] E. Kausel, Research Report R74-11, Structures Publica-
tion no. 384, MIT (1974).
335
[10] J.P. Wolf and G.A. Von Arx, Proc. Geotechnical Engi-
neering Division Specialty Conf. on Earthquake Engi-
neering and Soil Dynamics, Pasadena, Vol. II (Ameri-
can Society of Civil Engineers, 1978), pp. 1024-1041;
also in: Proc. Conf. on Structural Analysis, Design and
Construction in Nuclear Power Plants, Porto Alegre,
Brazil (1978), pp. 1-22.
[11] J.P. Wolf, Nucl. Eng. Des. 38 (1976) 357.
[12] W.M. Ewing, W.S. Jardetsky and F. Press, Elastic Waves
in Layered Media (McGraw-Hill, 1957).