International Conference on Sustainable Development in Civil Engineering, MUET, Pakistan (23 th – 25th Nov, 2017)

Numerical Evaluation of Pile Axial Capacity

Shamsher Sadiq1, Mehtab Alam2, Maarij Shaikh3, Saeed Ullah Jan Mandokhail4, Muhammad Bilal
Adeel1

Graduate Student, Department of Civil and Environment Engineering, Hanyang University, Seoul,
South Korea1
Senior Engineer, National Engineering Service of Pakistan, NESPAK2
Undergraduate Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Mehran UET, Jamshoro, Pakistan3
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, BUITEMS, QUETTA, Pakistan4

Abstract— Single axially loaded pile has been numerically simulated to evaluate axial bearing capacity in layered soil. Geotechnical
finite element software, PLAXIS 2D is capable to simulate soil-pile interaction, changes in state of stress in pile installation and its effect
on skin friction and end bearing. Soil response is simulated by 15-noded triangular element with elastic perfectly plastic Mohr Coulomb
constitutive model and pile response is assumed to be with linear-elastic. Soil-pile interaction has been simulated using interface element.
Load displacement curve of full scale pile load test is used in calibration of numerical model to select appropriate mesh size. Load
displacement curve from PLAXIS 2D shows reasonable agreement with pile load test. The calculated axial capacity from numerical
modeling is compared with published empirical and theoretical methods.

Keywords— Pile Axial capacity, Soil-Pile interaction, Pile Load Test, Finite Element Method

I. INTRODUCTION
With the increase in Infrastructure development in Pakistan, pile foundation is widely adopted. Cast in-situ piles are widely
used because of its advantages like adjacent soil is not disturbed, less disturbance to adjacent structures due to absence of
vibration, less environmental noise, strong adaptation for formation and high bearing capacity.
Estimation of load carrying capacity of cast in-situ concrete piles is still a challenge for engineers, even though several
methods are available for this purpose. These methods include some simplifying assumptions or empirical approaches
regarding soil stratigraphy, soil-pile structure interaction and distribution of soil resistance along the pile. Therefore, they do
not provide truly quantitative values directly useful in foundation design [1].
Piles load carrying capacity can be determined by five approaches: static analysis, dynamic analysis, dynamic testing, pile
load test and in-situ testing. Results obtained by static analysis are usually very approximate and these cannot be relied on
for the real capacity determination of piles. Dynamic analysis methods are based on wave mechanics for the hammer-pile-soil
system. The uncertainty in the hammer impact effect, as well as changes in soil strength from the conditions at the time
of pile driving, and at the time of loading, causes uncertainties in bearing capacity determination. Dynamic testing methods
can only be used by an experienced person and the capacity estimation is not available until the pile is driven [2]. Pile load
test is the most suitable method for pile load carrying capacity evaluation, however such tests are expensive and
time-consuming and which is often difficult to justify for ordinary or small projects. Therefore, it is necessary to rely upon
direct application of in situ tests performed along with the geotechnical investigation results to predict pile load capacities.
In this study, axial bearing capacity of in-situ bored pile is calculated based on axisymmetric finite element analysis using
PLAXIS 2D. Numerical model is validated using load-settlement curve obtained from pile load test. Numerically estimated
Axial bearing capacity is compared with calculated capacity from empirical and theoretical methods.

II. METHODS TO EVALUATE AXIAL BEARING CAPACITY

In Pakistan, theoretical (NAVFAC DM 7.2) [3] and empirical method based on SPT (Reese and Wright [4], Touma and
Reese [5], Decourt [6] and Meyerhof [7]) are commonly used to estimate axial pile capacity of in-situ piles. Theoretical and
empirical methods used in this study are listed in Table 1.
Depending upon the nature of project Pile Load tests are also performed to measure pile load carrying capacity. Slope and
Tangent method [8], Limit value method [9], 90% Hansen method [10] and AASHTO 6mm methods are typically used for the
interpretation of pile load test in Pakistan.

III. CASE STUDY

Orange Line Metro Train is an under-construction rapid transit line being built as part of Lahore Metro, Pakistan. The line
spans 27.1 km (16.8 mi). 25.4 km (15.8 mi) of the line is to be elevated, while 1.72 km (1.1 mi) km will be underground, and
0.7 km (0.4 mi) of track will be laid in the transition zone between elevated and underground sections. Most of the site area
comprises on existing roads surrounded by residential and commercial buildings. The soil deposits in the project region are
made up of river transported alluvial deposits which are typical of Punjab plains. The location plan of the area under study
is given in Fig. 1.
1
International Conference on Sustainable Development in Civil Engineering, MUET, Pakistan (23 th – 25th Nov, 2017)

To account for the spatial variation of subsurface soil parameters, the route is divided into five zones and geotechnical
investigations are performed. Fig. 2 shows the variation in subsurface strata encountered along alignment of the five zones of
orange line. A total of 109 SPT and 49 CPT sounding were conducted along the project route. The SPT was performed at
one-meter interval ranging up to a maximum depth of 50 m and CPT soundings were recorded at each 10 cm up to 20 m depth
below NSL. Energy and overburden corrections were carried out for SPT numbers [11]. After collection of soil samples and
subsoil data at site a detailed laboratory tests were performed on the representative soil samples. Based on site subsurface
investigations and laboratory testing, soil stratigraphy and soil strength parameters were finalized as shown in fig. 3.a-f.

Table 1: Theoretical and Empirical methods for axial bearing capacity estimation of In-situ bored piles
Method
Method Name Functional form Remarks
Type
NAVFAC DM
Theoretical Non-cohesive soils
7.2
Cohesive soils
Reese and Wright
Empirical Qu = 2.8NsAs + 64NtAp
(1977)
Touma and Reese
Qu = Kσs'tanφfAs + 1500(Ap/100) Medium dense sand
(1974)
Qu = Kσs'tanφfAs + 3800(Ap/k) Dense Sand

Decourt (1995) Qu = α (2.8N60+10) + KbNbAp

Meyerhof (1976) Qu = XmN55 + Ap (40N55) Lb/D ≤ Ap (380N55)

Fig. 1: Location Plan of Orange Line Metro Train Project, Lahore, Pakistan

Zone - 1
Zone - 2
Zone - 3 Zone - 5
Zone - 4

(3+143) (10+820) (16+291) (21+115)

Fig. 2: Idealized Subsurface Profile for Orange Metro Train Project, Lahore

2
International Conference on Sustainable Development in Civil Engineering, MUET, Pakistan (23 th – 25th Nov, 2017)

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

Fig. 3: Soil Profiles along five zones showing Soil classifications, SPT Navg blow counts and shear strength parameters (a) Zone-1 (b) Zone-2 (c) Zone- 3 (d)
Zone-4 (e) Zone-5

Fourteen full scale Pile load tests were also performed at the project site in accordance with ASTM D-1143 [12]. The test
load varied from 800 to 1200 tons for 760, 1000 and 1200mm diameter piles with length ranging from 22 to 40 m. In
performing pile load test, four settlement gauges were used to record the settlement of the piles. These gauges were connected
on two reference I beams. Each load increment was applied up to 25% of the design load. Shaft as well as tip were
fully mobilized for some of the piles while other shows small displacement at test load. The arrangement of reaction load was
made using a system of jack bearing against dead load which is resting on a platform. The dead load was supplied by using
concrete blocks at the platform as shown in Fig. 4. The averages of the four gauges give settlement after each load interval.
Summary of the pile load tests is given in Table 2 and load vs settlement curves for all the tests are shown in Fig. 5.

Fig.4 Concrete Blocks Platform at Orange Line Metro Train Project, Lahore

Fig. 5. Load-Displacement curves of Pile Load Tests

3
International Conference on Sustainable Development in Civil Engineering, MUET, Pakistan (23 th – 25th Nov, 2017)

Table 2: Summary of field Pile Load Tests

Zone # Pile I.D. R. D Test Load Pile Length Pile Dia

- - - (Tones) (m) (mm)
Zone-1 TP-01 1+220 1000 30 1200

TP-AB02 2+196 800 22 1200

Zone-2 TP-AB03 5+000 800 22.6 1200

TP-04 8+694 1000 40 1000

TP-05 9+612 1000 30 1200

Zone-3 TP-06 12+348 1000 30 1200

TP-07 12+936 600 33 760

TP-08 15+400 1000 30 1200

TP-09 15+716 1000 30 1200

Zone-4 TP-10 49+436 1000 40 1000

TP-AB11 20+142 1000 24 1200

Zone-5 TP-12 12+348 1200 35 1200

TP-13 23+144 873 30 1200

TP-AB14 25+760 800 22 1200

IV. NUMERICAL MODEL

Axisymmetric two-dimensional (2D) finite element models (FEM) using PLAXIS 2D [13] were developed to simulate
load-settlement response of axially loaded pile for five zones of Orange Metro Train Project, Lahore. FEM computation
domain is shown in fig. 6 (a). Horizontal fixities and total fixities are applied at vertical and bottom sides respectively to
simulate boundary conditions. With these boundary conditions vertical settlement behavior of pile and soil due to vertical
load can be simulated.
Both soil and pile were modeled using 15-noded triangular solid element, which allows fourth order interpolation for
displacements. Relative movement between soil and pile is simulated by the 5-noded line interface elements. Interface
geometry is extended below pile toe to avoid nonphysical stress state. Sensitivity analysis was performed to select the
appropriate mesh size of domain, such that mesh size has no significant effect on ultimate capacity of pile, fig. 6 (b) shows
the optimum generated mesh. There are 27881 nodes, 3432 elements and 41184 stress points in computational model as
shown in fig. 6 (b).
Pile and soil behaviors were modeled with linear elastic and elastic perfectly plastic constitutive models respectively.
PLAXIS 2D, defines elastic perfectly plastic behavior of soil using Mohr-Coulomb (MC) failure criterion. Five parameters,
three cohesions, friction angle and dilatancy for shear strength and two moduli of elasticity and poisson’s ratio for stiffness
are required to define MC failure criterion. Interface behavior is also modeled using MC, with additional reduced strength
parameter[14].
Table 2: Mohr coulomb parameters for Zone-5 used in PLAXIS

Angle of
Depth below Young’s Poisson Dilatancy Undrained
Soil Type Internal
NSL (m) Modulus Ratio Angle* Cohesion
friction
From To - (MPa) degree degree KPa

0 2 Fill Material 5 0.4 25 - 0.01**

2 7 Lean Clay /Silty Clay 7 0.4 25 - 50

Silty Sand/Sandy Silt/Poorly
7 25 20 0.3 32 2 0.01
Graded Sand with Silt
Silty Sand/Sandy Silt/Poorly
25 38 30 0.3 33 3 0.01
Graded Sand with Silt
Silty Sand/Sandy Silt/Poorly
38 50 40 0.3 36 4 0.01
Graded Sand with Silt

4
International Conference on Sustainable Development in Civil Engineering, MUET, Pakistan (23 th – 25th Nov, 2017)

* Dilatancy angles are calculated following [15]

** Very small value of cohesion to avoid numerical instabilities.[13]
*** Elastic modulus is calculated following [16-18]

Prescribed Displacement

Fill

Clay

Lp=30
m

Sand 1 50m

Sand 2

Sand 3

Total Fixities

10m

(a) (b) (c) (d)

Fig. 6 Finite element simulation of Zone-5 Pile (a) Axisymmetric computational model (b) Generated mesh (c) Initial mean horizontal
stress contour (d) Final stage Displacement contours at pile toe

V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Pile axial load capacities are calculated from Theoretical, Empirical and Numerical methods for single pile in each zone for
Orange Line Metro, Lahore. Numerical model for each zone is calibrated using the measured pile load tests. Comparison of
measured and estimated load-settlement curve is presented in Fig. 7, which is reliable estimate. Estimated difference of each
method average axial load carrying capacity is calculated relative to the average of measured pile capacity for each zone, as
shown in Fig. 8.

Fig. 7 Comparison of measured (Pile load test) and estimated (FEM) load-settlement curve for Zone-5

5
International Conference on Sustainable Development in Civil Engineering, MUET, Pakistan (23 th – 25th Nov, 2017)

Fig. 8 Trend of variation of estimated Pile Capacity from Measured Pile Load tests

VI. CONCLUSION
In this research, the comparison of axial load carrying capacity of piles evaluated from Numerical analysis (FEM),
Theoretical (NAVFAC) and Empirical methods (SPT N, based) with measured pile load tests data for soil conditions of
Lahore are presented. Among these methods, which predict axial capacity close to measured are recommended as suitable
for local soils.
Calibrated numerical model gives a reliable prediction of Axial load capacity of single pile in a layered soil deposits. FEM
model along with Decourt’s and Reese & Wright and NAVFAC DM 7.2 method gives close results to those measured from
pile load test data, therefore it is recommended to use these methods for local soil conditions. In absence of pile load test
data, it is recommended to compare numerical axial load carrying capacity with upper bound of Decourt and lower bound of
Reese and Wright. Further studies are currently underway to address three-dimensional modeling of axial pile response
along with nonlinear soil constitutive models.

References

1. Eslami, A. and B.H. Fellenius, Pile capacity by direct CPT and CPTu methods applied to 102 case histories. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 1997.
34(6): p. 886-904.
2. Rausche, F., G.G. Goble, and G.E. Likins Jr, Dynamic determination of pile capacity. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1985. 111(3): p.
367-383.
3. NAVFAC, D.M., 7.2 (1984): Foundation and Earth Structures. US Department of the Navy.
4. Reese, L. and S. Wright, Construction procedures and design for axial loading. Drilled Shaft Manual HDV-22, 1977.
5. Touma, F.T. and L.C. Reese, Behavior of bored piles in sand. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 1974. 100(Proc Paper
10064).
6. Décourt, L., On the load-settlement behavior of piles. Revista Solos e, 1995.
7. Meyerhof, G., Penetration tests and bearing capacity of cohesionless soils. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, 1956. 82(1):
p. 1-19.
8. Butler, H. and H. Hoy, The Texas quick load method for foundation load testing. 1977, Federal Highway Administration McLean, Virginia, USA.
9. Davisson, M., High capacity piles. Proceedings, Soil Mechanics Lecture Series on Innovations in Foundation Construction, 1972: p. 81-112.
10. Kondner, R.L., Hyperbolic stress-strain response: cohesive soils. J. Geotech. Engrg. Div., 1963. 89(1): p. 115-143.
11. Skempton, A., Standard penetration test procedures and the effects in sands of overburden pressure, relative density, particle size, ageing and
overconsolidation. Geotechnique, 1986. 36(3): p. 425-447.
12. ASTM, D., 1143-81, Standard test method for piles under static axial compressive load. American Society for Testing and Materials, Annual book
of standards, 2000: p. 96-106.
13. 8.6, P.D., PLAXIS 2D 8.6 [Computer software]. Delft, Netherlands, PLAXIS.
14. Broere, W. and A.F. van Tol, Modelling the bearing capacity of displacement piles in sand. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers-Geotechnical Engineering, 2006. 159(3): p. 195-206.
15. Bolton, M., The strength and dilatancy of sands. Geotechnique, 1986. 36(1): p. 65-78.
16. Obrzud, R. and A. Truty, The hardening soil model-a practical guidebook z soil. Report PC, 2012. 100701.
17. Kézdi, Á. and L. Rétháti, Handbook of soil mechanics. Vol. 1. 1974: Elsevier Amsterdam.
18. PRAT, M., et al., La modélisation des ouvrages. 1995.

View publication stats