Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering

, Volume 17, Issue 5, pp 2433–2458 | Cite as

Investigation of seismic performances of unconnected pile foundations using dynamic centrifuge tests

  • Jeong-Gon Ha
  • Kil-Wan Ko
  • Seong-Bae Jo
  • Heon-Joon Park
  • Dong-Soo KimEmail author
Original Research


An unconnected pile foundation allows separation between the lower pile and the pile cap, and it has been proposed as an effective foundation type for reducing the seismic load during strong earthquakes. However, previous quantitative evaluations of unconnected piles with various foundation types and earthquake intensities are inadequate. In this study, the influence of base shaking level and the material of the interposed layer between pile and pile cap on the seismic behaviour of unconnected piles were evaluated using a centrifuge model test to reproduce the field stress conditions. A dynamic centrifuge model test was completed on an experimental model consisting of dry sandy soil, a foundation and a single degree-of-freedom structure. The acceleration of the structure and the settlement of the foundation system were measured during base shaking. For the unconnected pile system, the structural seismic load reduction effect due to rocking behaviour was confirmed, and the unconnected pile foundation with the interposed layer with large stiffness had less vertical settlement than the conventional shallow foundation. Finally, the rotational stiffness and damping ratio for the foundation system used in the centrifuge model tests were derived and discussed.


Centrifuge model test Unconnected pile foundation Seismic load Soil–foundation–structure interactions 



This research was supported by a Grant (030401) from the Infrastructure and Transportation Technology Promotion Research Program funded by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of the Korean government. This research was also supported by the National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea Grant funded by the Korean government (MSIP) (No. NRF-2015R1A2A1A15054531). The authors acknowledge the KREONET service provided by the Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information.


  1. Allmond JD, Kutter BL (2014) Design considerations for rocking foundations on unattached piles. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 140:4014058. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anastasopoulos I, Kontoroupi T (2014) Simplified approximate method for analysis of rocking systems accounting for soil inelasticity and foundation uplifting. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 56:28–43. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Antonellis G, Panagiotou M (2014) Seismic response of bridges with rocking foundations compared to fixed-base bridges at a near-fault site. J Bridg Eng 19:4014007. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ASCE/SEI 41 (2014) Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings. American Society of Civil Engineers, RestonGoogle Scholar
  5. Chotesuwan A, Mutsuyoshi H, Maki T (2012) Seismic behavior of bridges with pier and foundation strengthening: PsD tests and analytical study. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 41:279–294. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Deng L, Kutter BL, Kunnath SK (2012) Probabilistic seismic performance of rocking-foundation and hinging-column bridges. Earthq Spectra 28:1423–1446. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Deng L, Kutter BL, Kunnath SK (2014) Seismic design of rocking shallow foundations: displacement-based methodology. J Bridg Eng 19:4014043. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eslami A, Veiskarami M, Eslami MM (2012) Study on optimized piled-raft foundations (PRF) performance with connected and non-connected piles-three case histories. Int J Civ Eng 10:100–111Google Scholar
  9. FEMA 356 (2000) Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildingsGoogle Scholar
  10. Fioravante V, Giretti D (2010) Contact versus noncontact piled raft foundations. Can Geotech J 47:1271–1287. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gajan S, Kutter BL (2008) Capacity, settlement, and energy dissipation of shallow footings subjected to rocking. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 134:1129–1141. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gajan S, Kutter BL (2009) Effects of moment-to-shear ratio on combined cyclic load-displacement behaviour of shallow foundations from centrifuge experiments. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 135:1044–1055. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Garnier J, Pecker A (1999) Use of centrifuge tests for the validation of innovative concepts in foundation engineering. In: Pinto S (ed) Earthquake geotechnical engineering. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 431–439Google Scholar
  14. Gazetas G (2015) 4th Ishihara lecture: Soil–foundation–structure systems beyond conventional seismic failure thresholds. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 68:23–39. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ha JG, Lee S-H, Kim D-S, Choo YW (2014) Simulation of soil–foundation–structure interaction of Hualien large-scale seismic test using dynamic centrifuge test. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 61–62:176–187. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kim MK, Lee SH, Choo YW, Kim DS (2011) Seismic behaviours of earth-core and concrete-faced rock-fill dams by dynamic centrifuge tests. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31:1579–1593. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kim DS, Kim NR, Choo YW, Cho GC (2013a) A newly developed state-of-the-art geotechnical centrifuge in Korea. KSCE J Civ Eng 17:77–84. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kim DS, Lee SH, Choo YW, Perdriat J (2013b) Self-balanced earthquake simulator on centrifuge and dynamic performance verification. KSCE J Civ Eng 17:651–661. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kim DK, Lee SH, Kim DS, Choo YW, Park HG (2015) Rocking effect of a mat foundation on the earthquake response of structures. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 141:4014085. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ko K-W, Ha J-G, Park H-J, Kim D-S (2018) Comparison between cyclic and dynamic rocking behavior for embedded shallow foundation using centrifuge tests. Bull Earthq Eng. Google Scholar
  21. Kokkali P, Abdoun T, Anastasopoulos I (2015) Centrifuge modeling of rocking foundations on improved soil. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 141:4015041. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kourkoulis R, Gelagoti F, Anastasopoulos I (2012) Rocking isolation of frames on isolated footings: design insights and limitations. J Earthq Eng 16:374–400. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kramer SL (1996) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice-Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Kutter BL, Moore M, Hakhamaneshi M, Champion C (2016) Rationale for shallow foundation rocking provisions in ASCE 41-13. Earthq Spectra 32:1097–1119. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lee SH, Choo YW, Kim DS (2013) Performance of an equivalent shear beam (ESB) model container for dynamic geotechnical centrifuge tests. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 44:102–114. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Martakis P, Taeseri D, Chatzi E, Laue J (2017) A centrifuge-based experimental verification of soil–structure interaction effects. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 103:1–14. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Paolucci R, Figini R, Petrini L (2013) Introducing dynamic nonlinear soil–foundation–structure interaction effects in displacement-based seismic design. Earthq Spectra 29:475–496. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Park H-J, Ha J-G, Kwon S-Y, Lee M-G, Kim D-S (2017) Investigation of the dynamic behaviour of a storage tank with different foundation types focusing on the soil-foundation-structure interactions using centrifuge model tests. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 46(14):2301–2316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pecker A (2004) Design and construction of the Rion Antirion Bridge. In: Yegian MK, Kavazanjian E (eds) Geotechnical engineering for transportation projects, proceedings of geo-trans 2004, Los Angeles, Calif., 27–31 July 2004. GSP 126. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, pp 216–240Google Scholar
  30. Pitilakis D, Dietz M, Wood DM et al (2008) Numerical simulation of dynamic soil–structure interaction in shaking table testing. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 28:453–467. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Safak E (1995) Detection and identification of soil–structure interaction in buildings from vibration recordings. J Struct Eng 121:899–906. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shirato M, Kouno T, Asai R, Nakatani S, Fukui J, Paolucci R (2008) Large-scale experiments on nonlinear behavior of shallow foundations subjected to strong earthquakes. Soils Found 48:673–692. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stewart JP, Fenves GL, Seed RB (1999) Seismic soil–structure interaction in buildings. i: analytical methods. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 125:26–37. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Teguh M, Duffield CF, Mendis PA, Hutchinson GL (2006) Seismic performance of pile-to-pile cap connections: an investigation of design issues. Electron J Struct Eng 6:8–18Google Scholar
  35. Tileylioglu S, Stewart JP, Nigbor RL (2011) Dynamic stiffness and damping of a shallow foundation from forced vibration of a field test structure. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 137(4):344–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zhang F, Okawa K, Kimura M (2008) Centrifuge model test on dynamic behavior of group-pile foundation with inclined piles and its numerical simulation. Front Archit Civ Eng China 2:233–241. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringKAISTDaejeonKorea
  2. 2.Infrastructure Research CentreK-water InstituteDaejeonKorea
  3. 3.School of Urban and Environmental EngineeringUNISTUlsanKorea

Personalised recommendations