Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dynamic performance of driven and helical piles in cohesive soil

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Acta Geotechnica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper investigated and compared the dynamic responses of driven and helical piles in cohesive soil using finite element analysis. The finite element models were calibrated based on large-scale field dynamic tests on single steel piles driven into a soft clay layer and embedded in a gravelly sand layer. The soft clay was improved using the cement deep soil mixing technique. The calculated results from the numerical models were in good agreement with the measured response in the field tests. The numerical models were then employed to investigate the dynamic response of helical piles in clay. Driven steel piles and single- and double-helix piles were subjected to lateral dynamic loads, and their responses were compared. The results demonstrated that the helical pile exhibited excellent lateral and axial responses, comparable to that of the driven piles. The lateral displacement of the helical piles was similar to or less than that of longer driven piles depending on the clay strength, number, and spacing of the helices. In addition, the double-helix pile with an inter-helix spacing of 3 times the helix diameter reduced the required width of soil treatment to 7.5 times the pile diameter while achieving the same performance as a driven pile with a treated area 12 times the pile diameter. The kinematic and inertial interaction effects were evaluated for helical piles. It was found that the kinematic interaction forces increased the bending moment at the interface of different layers, while the inertial forces increased the bending moment at the ground level. Finally, the helical pile exhibited lower lateral deformations than the driven pile during the seismic motion, and the maximum bending moment was relatively lower.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

All data are fully available.

Code availability

software application "OpenSees" open source.

Abbreviations

CDSM:

Cement deep soil mixing

SPSI:

Soil–pile–superstructure interaction

FEA:

Finite element analysis

FDA:

Finite difference analysis

PGA:

Peak ground acceleration

SHPSI:

Soil–helical pile–superstructure interaction

BNWF:

Beam on nonlinear Winkler foundation

EI:

Stiffness

E :

Elasticity

D :

Pipe pile outer diameter

D helix :

Helix diameter

3D:

Three-dimensional

SHP:

Single-helix pile

DHP:

Double-helix pile

References

  1. Abdoun T, Dobry R (2002) Evaluation of pile foundation response to lateral spreading. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 22:1051–1058

    Google Scholar 

  2. Al-Baghdadi T, Brown M, Knappett J, Ishikura R (2015) Modelling of laterally loaded screw piles with large helical plates in sand. In: Frontiers in offshore geotechnics III: proceedings of the 3rd international symposium on frontiers in offshore geotechnics (ISFOG 2015). Taylor & Francis Books Ltd, pp 503–508

  3. Allotey N, El Naggar MH (2008) Generalized dynamic Winkler model for nonlinear soil–structure interaction analysis. Can Geotech J 45:560–573

    Google Scholar 

  4. Aly AF, El Naggar MH, Cerato AB, Elgamal A (2021) Seismic response of helical pile groups from shake table experiments. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng (Accepted)

  5. Bentley KJ, Naggar MHE (2000) Numerical analysis of kinematic response of single piles. Can Geotech J 37:1368–1382

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boulanger RW, Curras CJ, Kutter BL, Wilson DW, Abghari A (1999) Seismic soil-pile-structure interaction experiments and analyses. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 125:750–759

    Google Scholar 

  7. de Camargo Barros JM, da Silva Silveira RM, dos Santos Amaral C (2007) Correlation between the maximum shear modulus and the undrained strength of a remolded marine clay. In: XIII Panamerican conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, Isla de Margarita, Venezuela

  8. Dezi F, Carbonari S, Leoni G (2010) Kinematic bending moments in pile foundations. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 30:119–132

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dong J, Chen F, Zhou M, Zhou X (2018) Numerical analysis of the boundary effect in model tests for single pile under lateral load. Bull Eng Geol Environ 77:1057–1068

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ebeido A, Elgamal A, Tokimatsu K, Abe A (2019) Pile and pile-group response to liquefaction-induced lateral spreading in four large-scale shake-table experiments. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 145:04019080

    Google Scholar 

  11. Elgamal A, Yan L, Yang Z, Conte JP (2008) Three-dimensional seismic response of Humboldt Bay bridge-foundation-ground system. J Struct Eng 134:1165–1176

    Google Scholar 

  12. Elgamal A, Yang Z, Parra E (2002) Computational modeling of cyclic mobility and post-liquefaction site response. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 22:259–271

    Google Scholar 

  13. Elkasabgy M, El Naggar MH (2013) Dynamic response of vertically loaded helical and driven steel piles. Can Geotech J 50:521–535

    Google Scholar 

  14. Elkasabgy M, El Naggar MH (2015) Axial compressive response of large-capacity helical and driven steel piles in cohesive soil. Can Geotech J 52:224–243

    Google Scholar 

  15. Elkasabgy M, El Naggar MH (2018) Lateral vibration of helical and driven steel piles installed in clayey soil. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 144:06018009

    Google Scholar 

  16. Elkasabgy M, El Naggar MH (2019) Lateral performance and p-y curves for large-capacity helical piles installed in clayey glacial deposit. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 145:04019078

    Google Scholar 

  17. Elsawy MK, El Naggar MH, Cerato A, Elgamal A (2019) Seismic performance of helical piles in dry sand from large-scale shaking table tests. Géotechnique 69(1071):1085. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.18.P.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Filippou FC, Popov EP, Bertero VV (1983) Effects of bond deterioration on hysteretic behavior of reinforced concrete joints. In: Earthquake engineering research center at the College of engineering, university of California, Berkely, to the National Science Foundation. https://nehrpsearch.nist.gov/static/files/NSF/PB84192020.pdf

  19. Fleming BJ, Sritharan S, Miller GA, Muraleetharan KK (2016) Full-scale seismic testing of piles in improved and unimproved soft clay. Earthq Spectra 32:239–265

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ghalibafian H (2006) Evaluation of the effects of nonlinear soil-structure interaction on the inelastic seismic response of pile-supported bridge piers. University of British Columbia, Vancouver

    Google Scholar 

  21. Giuffrè A (1970) Il comportamento del cemento armato per sollecitazioni cicliche di forte intensità. Giornale del Genio Civile

  22. Hara A, Ohta T, Niwa M, Tanaka S, Banno T (1974) Shear modulus and shear strength of cohesive soils. Soils Found 14:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  23. Harnish J, El Naggar MH (2017) Large-diameter helical pile capacity–torque correlations. Can Geotech J 54:968–986

    Google Scholar 

  24. He L (2005) Liquefaction-induced lateral spreading and its effects on pile foundations. University of California, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  25. Heidari M, El Naggar H, Jahanandish M, Ghahramani A (2014) Generalized cyclic p–y curve modeling for analysis of laterally loaded piles. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 63:138–149

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hussein AF, El Naggar MH (2021) Seismic behaviour of piles in non-liquefiable and liquefiable soil. Bull Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01244-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hussein AF, El Naggar MH (2021) Seismic axial behaviour of pile groups in non-liquefiable and liquefiable soils. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 149:106853

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hussein AF, El Naggar MH (2022) Effect of model scale on helical piles response established from shake table tests. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 152:107013

    Google Scholar 

  29. Jamsawang P, Voottipruex P, Jongpradist P, Bergado DT (2015) Parameters affecting the lateral movements of compound deep cement mixing walls by numerical simulations and parametric analyses. Acta Geotech 10:797–812

    Google Scholar 

  30. Laora DR, Rovithis E (2015) Kinematic bending of fixed-head piles in nonhomogeneous soil. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 141:04014126

    Google Scholar 

  31. Li L, Liu H, Wu W, Wen M, El Naggar MH, Yang Y (2021) Investigation on the behavior of hybrid pile foundation and its surrounding soil during cyclic lateral loading. Ocean Eng 240:110006

    Google Scholar 

  32. Li L, Zheng M, Liu X, Wu W, Liu H, El Naggar MH, Jiang G (2022) Numerical analysis of the cyclic loading behavior of monopile and hybrid pile foundation. Comput Geotech 144:104635

    Google Scholar 

  33. Liu C, Soltani H, Muraleetharan KK, Cerato AB, Miller GA, Sritharan S (2016) Cyclic and seismic response of single piles in improved and unimproved soft clays. Acta Geotech 11:1431–1444

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lorenzo GA, Bergado DT (2006) Fundamental characteristics of cement-admixed clay in deep mixing. J Mater Civ Eng 18:161–174

    Google Scholar 

  35. Lu J, Elgamal A, Yang Z (2011) OpenSeesPL: 3D lateral pile-ground interaction user manual (Beta 1.0). University of California, Department of Structural Engineering, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  36. Mayoral JM, Pestana JM, Seed RB (2005) Determination of multidirectional py curves for soft clays. Geotech Test J 28:253–263

    Google Scholar 

  37. Mazzoni S, McKenna F, Scott MH, Fenves GL (2006) OpenSees command language manual. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center 264

  38. McKenna F (2011) OpenSees: a framework for earthquake engineering simulation. Comput Sci Eng 13:58–66

    Google Scholar 

  39. Meymand PJ (1998) Shaking table scale model tests of nonlinear soil-pile-superstructure interaction in soft clay. University of California, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  40. Ohsutka T, Aramaki G, Koga K (2004) Soil improvement of soft ground around pile foundation in earthquake-resistant design. Lowland Technol Int 6:42–54

    Google Scholar 

  41. Orang MJ, Boushehri R, Motamed R, Prabhakaran A, Elgamal A (2021) Large-scale shake table experiment on the performance of helical piles in liquefiable soils. In: 45th DFI annual conference on deep foundations. Deep Foundations Institute

  42. Porbaha A (1998) State of the art in deep mixing technology: part I. Basic concepts and overview. Proc Inst Civ Eng Ground Improv 2:81–92

    Google Scholar 

  43. Porbaha A, Tanaka H, Kobayashi M (1998) State of the art in deep mixing technology: part II. Applications. Proc Ins Civ Eng Ground Improv 2:125–139

    Google Scholar 

  44. Randolph MF, Wroth CP (1978) Analysis of deformation of vertically loaded piles. J Geotech Eng Div 104:1465–1488

    Google Scholar 

  45. Reese LC, Wang S, Isenhower W, Arrellaga J (2000) Computer program Lpile plus version 5.0 technical manual. Ensoft, Inc, Austin, Texas

  46. Rollins KM, Adsero ME, Brown DA (2009) Jet grouting to increase lateral resistance of pile group in soft clay. In: Contemporary topics in ground modification, problem soils, and geo-support, pp 265–272

  47. Rollins KM, Brown DA (2011) Design guidelines for increasing the lateral resistance of highway-bridge pile foundations by improving weak soils, vol 697. Transportation Research Board

  48. Sen R, Davies T, Banerjee P (1985) Dynamic analysis of piles and pile groups embedded in homogeneous soils. Earthqu Eng Struct Dyn 13:53–65

    Google Scholar 

  49. El Sharnouby M, El Naggar M (2018) Numerical investigation of axial monotonic performance of reinforced helical pulldown micropiles. Int J Geomech 18:04018116

    Google Scholar 

  50. Su L, Lu J, Elgamal A, Arulmoli AK (2017) Seismic performance of a pile-supported wharf: three-dimensional finite element simulation. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 95:167–179

    Google Scholar 

  51. Su L, Wan H-P, Abtahi S, Li Y, Ling X-Z (2020) Dynamic response of soil–pile–structure system subjected to lateral spreading: shaking table test and parallel finite element simulation. Can Geotech J 57:497–517

    Google Scholar 

  52. Taghavi A, Muraleetharan KK (2012) Seismic response of CDSM improved soft clay sites supporting single piles. In: GeoCongress 2012: state of the art and practice in geotechnical engineering, pp 1839–1848

  53. Taghavi A, Muraleetharan KK (2017) Analysis of laterally loaded pile groups in improved soft clay. Int J Geomech 17:04016098

    Google Scholar 

  54. Terashi M, Juran I (2000) Ground improvement-state of the art. In: ISRM international symposium, Melbourne. International Society for Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, pp 461–519

  55. Tokimatsu K, Suzuki H, Sato M (2005) Effects of inertial and kinematic interaction on seismic behavior of pile with embedded foundation. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 25:753–762

    Google Scholar 

  56. Tombari A, El Naggar MH, Dezi F (2017) Impact of ground motion duration and soil non-linearity on the seismic performance of single piles. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 100:72–87

    Google Scholar 

  57. Wang R, Fu P, Zhang J-M (2016) Finite element model for piles in liquefiable ground. Comput Geotech 72:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  58. Yamashita K, Hamada J, Onimaru S, Higashino M (2012) Seismic behavior of piled raft with ground improvement supporting a base-isolated building on soft ground in Tokyo. Soils Found 52:1000–1015

    Google Scholar 

  59. Yang Z, Elgamal A (2002) Influence of permeability on liquefaction-induced shear deformation. J Eng Mech 128:720–729

    Google Scholar 

  60. Yang Z, Lu J, Elgamal A (2008) OpenSees soil models and solid-fluid fully coupled elements. User’s Manual Ver 1:27

    Google Scholar 

  61. Zerwer A, Cascante G, Hutchinson J (2002) Parameter estimation in finite element simulations of Rayleigh waves. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 128:250–261

    Google Scholar 

  62. Zhang Y, Conte JP, Yang Z, Elgamal A, Bielak J, Acero G (2008) Two-dimensional nonlinear earthquake response analysis of a bridge-foundation-ground system. Earthq Spectra 24:343–386

    Google Scholar 

  63. Zienkiewicz OC, Chan A, Pastor M, Schrefler B, Shiomi T (1999) Computational geomechanics, vol 613. Citeseer, Chichester

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  64. Zienkiewicz O, Chang C, Bettess P (1980) Drained, undrained, consolidating and dynamic behaviour assumptions in soils. Geotechnique 30:385–395

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Western University, London, ON, N6A 5B9, Canada

    A. Fouad Hussein & M. Hesham El Naggar

Authors
  1. A. Fouad Hussein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Hesham El Naggar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AFH did conceptualization, methodology, investigation, resources, numerical analysis, validation, data curation, writing—original draft. MHEN performed supervision, conceptualization, methodology, resources, writing—review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Hesham El Naggar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests or conflicts of interest.

Ethics approval

All software is available online free or supported by Western University, London, ON, Canada.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional in the published map and institutional affiliation.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hussein, A.F., El Naggar, M.H. Dynamic performance of driven and helical piles in cohesive soil. Acta Geotech. 18, 1543–1568 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-022-01649-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-022-01649-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation