MODEL STUDIES ON IMPROVEMENT OF LATERAL CAPACITY

OF PILES IN SAND

E.Saibaba Reddy, Professor of Civil Engineering, JNTUH, esreddy1101@gmail.com

Rakesh Reddy.E, UG Student, JNTUH, rakesh15794@gmail.com
ABSTRACT: This paper presents the details of two series of experiments carried out on
model piles embedded in sand. The test results are compared with the results obtained from an
equivalent plain pile. The additions of attachments have shown considerable increase in the
lateral capacity of a pile. For these piles, theoretical estimates are made and compared with
the experimental results. The theoretical estimates and the experimental results are found to
be in good agreement. The second part of the paper presents the details of the test series
carried out on model vertical piles under oblique pull. Experiments were carried out on three
model piles of different lengths. The load and the displacement of the pile head were observed
till failure of the pile. The uplift capacity is analyzed as a function of obliquity of load. The
theoretical estimates of the pile capacity under oblique pull were made.
Key word: Pull-out, oblique, attachments, pile, capacity.

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Lateral resistance of pile increases with depth up to a critical depth. Beyond this depth,
the lateral capacity of a pile does not increase significantly with depth. The lateral
capacity of a pile, in such a situation, can be improved by increasing its lateral
dimensions. Broms has suggested a few attachments to pile [1, 2] at shallow depths, to
improve its capacity to lateral loads. So far no attempts appear to have been made, either
in laboratory or in field, to examine the effect of these attachments on the lateral
capacity of a pile. An experimental investigation was carried out on model piles to study
the effect of four attachments, suggested by Broms, in improving the lateral capacity of
a pile. A number of investigations on vertical piles under inclined downward forces
were reported [3,4,5,6] however, only a few references are available on the behavior of
piles under oblique pull [7,8,9] the second part of this paper presents the details of an
experimental investigation carried out on vertical model piles under oblique pull. The
tests were carried out under different oblique angles. The ultimate pullout capacity of
pile under oblique load observed during experiments is compared with the theoretical
estimates. In the rest of this paper the details of the two series of experiments are
presented. The experimental results are compared with the respective theoretical
estimates.
2.0 MODEL STUDIES
Model laboratory studies were carried out on a number of model piles with and without
attachment to improve the lateral capacity of piles. All tests were conducted on piles
embedded in sand. The properties of sand used for the investigation, details of model piles
used and the test procedure is explained below.
2.1 Soil Properties: The sand used in both the test series was a dry angular silica sand
having D10 = 0.3mm and uniformity coefficient Cu = 2.8 was used. Direct shear test
indicated a friction angle () of 35o for the initial porosity of n = 41% used in the tests,
corresponding to a unit weight () of 16 KN/m3 and a relative density of Dr = 0.6 (60%).

2.2 Model Studies on Improvement of lateral Capacity of Piles

For this investigation a total of 15 model piles were fabricated with four types (Type-1, 2, 3
and 4) of attachments. Four piles were fabricated with attachment placed at different depths,
along the pile (Table 1). Besides these piles, three plain piles (without attachments) were
fabricated with different (360, 480 and 600mm) lengths. All piles were fabricated with steel
rod of 12mm diameter. The details of each model pile are presented below.

Pile Model

Table 1. Details of model tests

Test Conditions

Remarks

Plain pile
Type 1

D = 360, 480 and 600mm

a = 100, 200 and 300mm

-D = 600mm

Type 2

a = 100, 200 and 300mm

D = 600mm

Type 3

a = 100, 200 and 300mm

D = 600mm

Type 4

D = 360, 480 and 600mm

a = 50mm

Model pile type 1

In this, three 12mm diameter and 600mm long piles were fabricated; each was welded with
a pair of two steel rods as shown in Fig. 1. The attachment was positioned at three
elevations (a = 100, 200 and 300 mm) as shown in Fig. 1.
Model pile type 2
In this, three 12 mm diameter and 600 mm long piles were used. Each of these piles was
welded with a cross beam, of 12 mm diameter and 180mm long, at different elevations as
shown in Fig. 2.

100

a 100

d1

d2

Hook for loading

a= (d1+d2)/2
a=100, 200 and
300 Figure not to
scale, All
dimensions are
in mm

D=600

D=600

D=600

180

a=100, 200 and

300 Figure not to
scale All

a=100, 200 and 300

Figure not to scale
All dimensions are in
mm

dimensions are
in mm

(a) Front view

Vanes

(a) Front view

(a) Front view
12 mm

12 mm dia. steel rods

(b) Top view

Weldin
3.5

180

(b) Top view

Fig.2. Model Pile

Fig.1.Model Pile Type-1

Type-2

Fig.3. Model Pile Type-3

Model pile type 3

The third model was developed by welding four vanes as shown in Fig. 3. The vane
dimensions and their locations are presented in Fig. 3.
Model pile type 4
The fourth model pile was fabricated by welding a large (40 mm) diameter rod of 100mm
long over the 12 mm diameter pile as shown in Fig. 4. In this model, unlike other three
models, different trials were made by changing the length of the pile as shown in Fig. 4.
This was achieved by testing initially with a total length of 600mm then for the next trials
the pile length was cut from the bottom, to obtain a total length of 480mm and 360mm as
shown in Fig. 4.
Method of sand filling and pile installation
The sand was placed in a circular tank of internal diameter 1120 mm and 1200 mm high
(Fig.5). The tank was filled with sand in layers of 100 mm thick. Each layer was compacted,
with a rammer under a constant height of fall, to ensure a constant unit weight of 16 kN/m3.
The density of sand was measured by placing a number of containers along the depth of the
tank (Reddy, 1986).The pile was installed by jacking gradually into the sand up to the
required embedded depth.
Hook for loading

Dial Gauge
100

Pulley

40

Pile

1200

D=600

Test

D=360, 480 and 600

Figure not to scale
All dimensions are
in mm

sand

Load

1120

Brick
Masonry
(a)

Front view

40 mm Dia

Figure not to scale

All dimensions are in mm

Fig.5. Details of test tank

(b)

Top view

Fig.4.Model Pile
Type-4

Pile Loading
After installation of the pile, a dial gauge (least count 0.002 mm) was positioned to measure
the horizontal deflection of the pile head. The horizontal load was applied at the pile head
by means of a wire rope passing over a pulley mounted on to the side of the tank as shown
in Fig. 5. The load on the pile head was increased in steps of about 10 N. The horizontal

deflection of the pile head, under each load, was recorded with time. When the deflection
under an applied load was ceased (< 0.01mm/minute), the load on the pile head was
increased to the next value. The test was continued till the pile failed by showing continuous
increase in the deflection under no increment or a small increment of load. After each test,
the tank was emptied and refilled for the next test. The details of tests performed are
presented in Table 1.
3.0 ANALYSIS OF TEST RESULTS
Lateral capacity of plain pile
The ultimate lateral capacity of pile is obtained from load-displacement curve, as the load
corresponding to the start of the final linear portion of the curve [10].The theoretical pile
capacity for a pile under horizontal load (Qh) is obtained from Eq. (1)
Qh = Fb D2eu Kb B

(1)

Where is the unit weight of sand, Deu is the ultimate effective embedded depth of an
equivalent rigid pile, Kb is the net lateral soil pressure coefficient, F b is the lateral
resistance factor (0.12) and B is the diameter of the pile. The effective depth ratio (Deu/D)
for a given fixity condition at the pile head depends mainly on the relative pile stiffness Kr
given by Eq. (2)
Kr = (EpIp) / (Es D4)

(2)

Where EpIp is the flexural rigidity of pile and Es is the horizontal soil modulus at pile toe.
In the present case, the value of Kr and the corresponding Deu/D for different values of pile
depth (D) are presented in Table 2. For the values of Deu/D the Kb is estimated [11] . On
substituting the values in Eq. (1), Q h for the three plain (360, 480 and 600 mm long) piles
is computed (Table 2).
Table 2. Lateral capacity of plain piles (computed)
Kr
Deu/D
Deu (mm)
Qh (N)

Pile length, D (mm)

360
480
600

63.6 x 10-4
20.1 x 10-4
8.3 x 10-4

0.90
0.78
0.70

324
376
422

41.8
45.6
57.4

Details of Modified pile types-1,2 and 3

Table 3 and Fig. 6 shows the comparison of the lateral capacity of modified piles (Type-1,
2 & 3) with a plain pile having the same length. It can be observed from Fig. 6 and Table 3
that the attachments have significantly (20 to 124%) increased the lateral capacity of the
pile. Among the models tried. Type-3 gave a maximum increase in pile capacity. This is
expected because; the laterally projected area in Model Type-3 is large compared to the
Model Type-1 and 2.The lateral capacity of a modified pile is computed by considering the
increase in lateral resistance of the pile due to attachment, using Eq. (3).
Qhm = (Qh + Qh1 Qh2)

(3)

Where Qhm is the lateral capacity of the modified pile, Qh is the lateral capacity of the plain
pile. Qhl is the lateral capacity of, extra projection than pile diameter, considering the
attachment length equal to d1 (Fig.1) and Qh2 is the lateral capacity of the attachment
considering its length equal to d2. Where d1 is the depth below the sand surface up to the

bottom of the attachment and d2 is the depth below the sand surface up to the top of the
attachment (Fig.1). The ultimate lateral capacity of model piles, obtained theoretically and
experimentally, with attachments Types-1,2,3 are compared in Fig.7. From Fig.7. it can be
observed that the theoretical estimates are close to the experimental results. However, the
estimated values are consistently lower than the experimental values. This deviation could
be due to the fact that, in computing the lateral capacity of a modified pile, the increase in
its stiffness due to the attachment was not accounted. Hence, the computed effective depth
of pile will be less than the depth that is due to increased stiffness.

Table 3. Increase in the lateral capacity of pile due to attachments (observed)

Pile model
a = 100mm
a = 200mm
a = 300mm
Q
Q
Q
%
%
%
hm
hm
hm
increase*
increase*
increase*
(N)
(N)
(N)
Type 1
78.0
30.0
91.0
51.7
104.0
73.3
Type 2
71.5
19.2
84.5
40.8
97.5
62.5
Type 3
91.0
51.7
104.0
73.3
124.0
106.7
Note: * increase is with respect to a plain pile of 600mm long

Fig.6.Comparison of lateral
capacity of modified Pile
with an equivalent plain pile

Fig.7.Comparison of theoretical
and experimental results for
model piles Type-1, 2 and 3

Model pile Type-4

The lateral capacity of the model pile Type-4 for different pile lengths are compared with
that of an equivalent plain pile in Fig. 8. From Fig. 8 it can be observed that, the ultimate
capacity of the modified pile maintains almost a constant amount of increase in the lateral
capacity, over the plain pile, for all lengths. This result is also expected because in each of
the trials there is a constant amount of increase in area and it is located at a constant
position, from sand surface, for all trials. The lateral capacity of model pile Type-4 is
estimated using Eq. (3) by taking Qh2 = 0. The theoretical estimates of the lateral capacity of
model pile Type-4 are compared with the experimental results in Fig. 9. It can be seen that
the theoretical estimates are agreeing well with the experimental results.

Fig.8.Comparison of lateral capacity of

model pile Type-4 with an equivalent plain
pile.

Fig.9.Comparison of theoretical values with

experimental results (Model pile Type-4).

4.0 PILES UNDER OBLIQUE PULL

Test details

The sand bed was formed in a circular tank of internal diameter 1120 mm and 1200 mm in
depth (Fig.10). The sand was placed in layers as explained earlier. For this investigation
three model piles 360 mm, 480 mm and 600 mm were fabricated. All piles were of 12 mm
diameter so that the D/B ratios of 30, 40 and 50 were achieved. The model pile was jacked
into the sand bed to the required depth as explained earlier. After installation of the pile,
two dial gauges one to measure horizontal deflection and the other to measure vertical
deflection of the pile head, were positioned. The pull out load, on the pile head, was
applied by placing dead weights on the hanger connected to a wire rope passing over the
pulley mounted on to the side of the tank as shown in Fig. 10. The oblique load angles 0o,
30o and 45o were achieved by positioning the pulley at different elevations (Fig.10). The
load on the pile head was applied in steps of 1 kg (10 N). The horizontal and vertical
deflection of the pile head under each load was recorded. The vertical deflection of the pile
was insignificant when compared to its horizontal deflection [12]. Therefore the horizontal
deflection was considered as the criteria for determining the pile capacity. When the
horizontal deflection was practically constant under the applied load, the load on the pile
head was increased to the next value. The test was continued till the soil failed by showing
continuous increase in the horizontal deflection under a constant load.

Analysis of results

The load versus horizontal displacement curves for the 600 mm long pile (D/B = 50), under
pull-out loads with loading angles = 0o, 30o and 45o are presented in Fig. 11. The ultimate
pull out capacity Qu of the pile is obtained from the load displacement curve as the load
corresponding to the start of the final linear portion of the curve [10] Similar load
displacement relationships were observed for the other two embedment depths (D/B = 30 and
40) of pile. The variation of ultimate capacity of pile with the inclination of the load is shown
in Fig. 12.
From Fig. 12 it can be observed that, the uplift capacity of the pile is increasing with the
loading angle (). This indicates that, the capacity of pile is small under the horizontal load
when compared to vertical pull-out capacity.

Fig.10. Details of test setup

The pile capacity under oblique pull is estimated from Eq.(4) [8,13]
(Qu Sin / Qv)+ (Qu Cos/ Qh)2= 1

(4)

Where Qu is the ultimate pull out capacity of the pile under a load inclined at degrees with
the horizontal, Qv is the ultimate vertical capacity of the pile ( = 900) and Qh is the
ultimate lateral resistance of the pile ( = 0). The values of Qv are estimated using Eq.
(5).[13,14]

Fig.12. Effect of load Angle on pile capacity

Qv = 0.5 D2 B Ku

Fig.11. Load Displacement curves

for 600mm long pile
(5)

Where is the unit weight of the soil, Ku is the uplift coefficient [5,15], and the other
symbols as defined before. For the present case Ku is 9. The computed values of Qv, for the
three piles using (5), are presented in Table 4. The theoretical pile capacity of a pile under
horizontal load (Qh) is obtained from Eq. (1)[5,14] . The effective depth ratio Deu/D for the
given fixity condition of the pile head depends mainly on the relative pile stiffness given by
Eq. (2) [2,16]. Using these Kr value, the ultimate effective depth ratio (Deu/D) is computed
from Eq. (6) [15].
Deu/D = 1.65 Kr 0.12

(6)

Values of Qh for the three embedment depth tested (D/B = 30, 40 and 50) are presented in
Table 4. The values of Qh and Q v are substituted in (4) to obtain the corresponding Qu
values under different values. The computed ultimate pull out capacities of piles under
different load angles are in close agreement with the observed values as seen in Fig. 13 and
Table 4.

Table 4: Uplift Capacity of Piles under Inclined Loads

Uplift Capacity, Qu
(N)

Pile Length

(mm)

=
00 (Qh)

Est.

Obs.

= 300

Est.

Obs.

360

33.6

31.2

33.2

32.5

480

45.6

44.8

46.8

47.0

600

57.4

57.5

59.9

64.0

= 450
Est
.
36.
4
52.
5
68.
4

= 900 (Qv)

Obs.

Est.

36.0

62.2

52.5

110.6

74.0

172.8

Note:Est = Estimated value; Obs. = Observed value

5.0 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the experimental and theoretical investigation carried out, the following
conclusions are drawn.
Four attachments were tried for a model pile, to improve its lateral capacity when embedded
in sand. The percentage increase in the lateral capacity, due to these attachments, is ranging
approximately from 20% to 124% of an equivalent plain pile. The percentage improvement
depends on the type of attachment and its depth below ground level. Among the models
tried a pile with four vanes shown a maximum improvement.

Fig.13. Comparison between estimated and observed values of pull out

capacity

The theoretical estimates of lateral capacity of plain and modified piles are in good
agreement with the experimental results. Three model piles were tested each under three
different values of oblique pullout loads. From the investigation it was observed that, as the
inclination of the load with the horizontal was increasing, the pull-out capacity of the pile
was found increasing. The estimated pull-out capacities of piles under oblique loads closely
agreed with the observed values.

REFERENCES:
1. Broms, B.B., (1972). Stability of flexible structures (piles and pile groups). Proceedings of 5th
European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Madrid. Vol. 2: 239-269.
2. Polous, H.G. and Davis, E.H. (1980), Pile foundation analysis and design. John Willey and Sons.
3. Meyerhof, G.G. and Ranjan,(1972), the bearing capacity of rigid piles under inclined loads in sand
I: Vertical piles. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, G., 9: 430-446.
4. Chari, T.R. and Meyerhof, G.G. (1983), Ultimate capacity of rigid single piles under inclined
loads in sand. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 20: 849-854.
5. Meyerhof, G.G. and Sastry, V.V.R.N. (1985), Bearing capacity of rigid piles under eccentric and
inclined loads. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 22: 267-276.
6. Koumoto, T., Meyerhof, G.G. and Sastry, V.V.R.N. (1986), Analysis of bearing capacity of rigid
piles under eccentric and inclined loads. Canadian Geotechnical Journal., 23: 127-131.
7. Broms, B.B. (1965) Design of laterally loaded piles. Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, ASCE, 91 (3): 79-97.
8. Meyerhof. G.G. (1973), The Uplift capacity of foundation under oblique loads. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, 10(1): 64-70.
9. Das, B.M., Seely, G.R. and Raghu, D. (1977), Uplift capacity of model piles under oblique loads.
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 1202 (9): 1009-1013.
10. Terzaghi, K. and Peck, R.P. (1967), Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice. John Willey and
Sons, Inc., New York.
11. Meyerhof. G.G. (1994), Behavior of pile foundations under special loading conditions: R.M.
Hardy key note address. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 32: 204-222.
12. Murthy, B.S. (1986), Studies on group of piles subjected to oblique loading. M.Tech. thesis,
Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad, India.
13. Das, B.M. (1990), Earth anchors. Elsevier Science publishers, B.V. Amsterdam. The Netherlands.
14. Meyerhof, G.G., Sastry, V.V.R.N. and Yalcin, A.S. (1988), Lateral resistance and deflection of
flexible piles. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 25: 511-522.
15. Sastry, V.V.R.N. and Meyerhof, G.G. (1990), Behaviour of flexible piles under inclined loads.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 27: 19-28.
16. Bowles, J.E (1982), Foundation analysis and design. McGraw-Hill Book Company New York.
17. Reddy, K.K. (1986), Lateral capacity of single pile-method of improvement. M.Tech. thesis.
Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad, India.