Experimental investigation of axially loaded group of piles with and without building frame: a parametric study

  • Venkata R. P. KoteswaraEmail author
  • Harikrishna Padavala
  • Hariprasad Chennarapu
Technical Paper


In the design of structures, stability and safety play a crucial role in serviceability. The response of the soil which influences the motion of the structure and vice versa is termed soil–structure interaction (SSI). Interaction effect is ignored to simplify the mathematical model for the analysis of problems involving soil interaction. In reality, the actual behaviour of the substructure is altered significantly if one considers the interaction among the foundations and the soil medium. In this study, a large-scale test setup (1.4 m × 0.8 m × 1.0 m) has been developed and model pile has been designed to find out the influence of SSI. Experimental tests were conducted on single pile, pile group (2 × 2), and pile-group-supported building frame subjected to an axial load. Parametric studies were conducted by varying pile spacing (3D, 4D, and 5D), aspect ratio (15, 25 and 40), and relative density of sand bed (35% and 70%). Pile cap rotation, pile head deflection, and bending moment values were measured for various configurations. The results showed that experimental findings are more useful for the evaluation of soil–structure interaction, and there is a necessity to consider the interaction effects in the calculation of design forces.


Soil–structure interaction (SSI) Building frame Pile foundations Pile spacing and aspect ratio 


  1. 1.
    Chamecki S (1956) Structural rigidity in calculating settlements. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 82(1):1–19Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Morris D (1966) Interaction of continuous frames and soil media. J Struct Eng Div ASCE 92(5):13–43Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee IK, Harrison HB (1970) Structure and foundation interaction theory. J Struct Div ASCE 96:177–197Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee IK, Brown PT (1972) Structure-foundation interaction analysis. J Struct Div ASCE 98:2413–2431Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    King GJW, Chandrasekaran VS (1974) Interactive analysis of rafted multistoreyed space frame resting on an inhomogeneous clay stratum. In: Proceedings of international conference on F.E.M. in Engineering, University of New South Wales. NSW Australia, pp 493–509Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Buragohain DN, Raghavan N, Chandrasekharan VS (1977) Interaction of frames with pile foundation. In: Proceedings of international symposium on soil–structure interaction, Roorkee, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Subbarao KS, Shrada BH, Raghunatham BV (1985) Interaction analysis of frames with beam footing. In: Proceedings of indian geotechnical conference, Roorkee, India, pp 389–395Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deshmukh AM, Karmarkar SR (1991) Interaction of plane frames with soil. In: Proceedings of indian geotechnical conference, Surat, vol I, pp 323–326Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dasgupta S, Dutta SC, Bhattacharya G (1999) Effect of soil–structure interaction on building frames on isolated footings. J Struct Eng 26(2):129–134Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buragohain DN, Raghavan N, Chandrasekaran VS (1981) Interaction of frames with pile foundation. In: Proceedings of international symposium on soil–structure interaction, Roorkee (India), pp 109–115Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ingle RK, Chore HS (2007) Soil–structure interaction analysis of building frames—an overview. J Struct Eng SERC 34(5):201–209Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chore HS, Ingle RK (2008) Soil–structure interaction analyses of pile supported building frame. ASEAN J Sci Technol Dev 25:457–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chore HS, Ingle RK, Sawant VA (2009) Building frame-pile foundation-soil interactive analysis. Interact Multiscale Mech 2:397–411. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chore HS, Ingle RK, Sawant VA (2010) Building frame-pile foundation-soil interaction analysis: a parametric study. Interact Multiscale Mech 3:55–79. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thangaraj DD, Ilamparuthi K (2010) Parametric study on the performance of raft foundation with interaction of frame. Electron J Geotech Eng 15H:1–18Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Agrawal R, Hora M (2006) Effect of differential settlements on nonlinear interaction behaviour of plane frame-soil system. ARPN J Eng Appl Sci 5:75–87Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Agrawal R, Hora MS (2009) Coupled finite-infinite elements modeling of building frame-soil interaction system. ARPN J Eng Appl Sci 4:47–54Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Natarajan K, Vidivelli B (2009) Effect of column spacing on the behavior of frame-raft and soil systems. J Appl Sci 9:3629–3640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dalili M, Alkarni A, Noorzaei J et al (2011) Numerical simulation of soil–structure interaction in framed and shear-wall structures. Interact Multiscale Mech 4:17–34. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Swamy HMR, Krishnamoorthy A, Prabakhara DL, Bhavikatti SS (2011) Evaluation of the influence of interface elements for structure-isolated footing-soil interaction analysis. Interact Multiscale Mech 4:65–83. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thangaraj DD, Ilamparuthi K (2012) Numerical analyses of soil-mat foundation and space frame system. Interact Multiscale Mech 5:267–284. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reddy CRK, Rao TDG (2011) Experimental study of a modeled building frame supported by pile groups embedded in cohesionless soil. Interact Multiscale Mech 4:321–336. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reddy CRK, Rao TDG (2014) Effect of rigidity of plinth beam on soil interaction of modeled building frame supported on pile groups. Civ Eng Dimens 16:8–17. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chore HS, Sawant VA (2016) Soil–structure interaction of space frame supported on pile foundation embedded in cohesionless soil. Indian Geotech J 46:415–424. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hariprasad C, Rajashekhar M, Umashankar B (2016) Preparation of uniform sand specimens using stationary pluviation and vibratory methods. Geotech Geol Eng 34:1909–1922. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    ASTM 854–02 (2002) Standard test methods for specific gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer 1. ASTM Stand Guide. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    ASTM:D422 (2007) Standard test method for particle-size analysis of soils: ASTM D 422. ASTM Int 63:1–8. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    ASTM International (2016) D4254—standard test methods for minimum index density and unit weight of soils and calculation of relative density. ASTM Int 1:9. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    ASTM International (2016) D4253—standard test methods for maximum index density and unit weight of soils and calculation of relative density. ASTM Int. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wood DM, Crewe A, Taylor C (2002) Shaking table testing of geotechnical models. Int J Phys Modell Geotech 1:1–13. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dai G, Salgado R, Gong W, Zhang Y (2012) Load tests on full-scale bored pile groups. Can Geotech J 49:1293–1308. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Poulos HG, Davis EH (1980) Pile foundation analysis and design. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Whitaker T (1957) Experiments with model piles in groups. Géotechnique 7:147–167. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vesic AS (1969) Experiments with instrumented pile groups in sand. Perform Deep Found ASTM. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chandrasekaran SS, Boominathan A, Dodagoudar GR (2010) Group interaction effects on laterally loaded piles in clay. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 136:573–582. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringNational Institute of Technology WarangalWarangalIndia
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringMahindra Ecole CentraleHyderabadIndia

Personalised recommendations