Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Multifaceted Bioinspiration for Improving the Shaft Resistance of Deep Foundations
Download PDF
Download PDF
  • Open Access
  • Published: 04 September 2020

Multifaceted Bioinspiration for Improving the Shaft Resistance of Deep Foundations

  • Seyed Ali Aleali1,
  • Paola Bandini1 &
  • Craig Michael Newtson1 

Journal of Bionic Engineering volume 17, pages 1059–1074 (2020)Cite this article

  • 542 Accesses

  • 3 Citations

  • Metrics details

Abstract

This paper describes the bioinspiration process to derive design concepts for new deep foundation systems that have greater axial capacity per unit volume of pile material compared to conventional deep foundations. The study led to bioinspired ideas that provide greater load capacity by increasing the pile shaft resistance. The bioinspiration approach used problem-solving strategies to define the problem and transfer strategies from biology to geotechnical engineering. The bioinspiration considered the load transfer mechanism of hydroskeletons and the anchorage of the earthworm, razor clam, kelp, and lateral roots of plants. The biostrategies that were transferred to the engineering domain included a flexible but incompressible core, passive behaviour against external loading, a longitudinally split shell that allows expansion for anchorage, and lateral root-type or setae-type anchoring elements. The concepts of three bioinspired deep foundation systems were proposed and described. The advantage of this approach was illustrated with two examples of the new laterally expansive pile in drained sand under axial compression. The finite element analysis of these examples showed that the new laterally expansive pile can provide considerably greater load capacity compared to a conventional cylindrical pile due to the increased lateral confining pressure developed along the expanded pile core.

Download to read the full article text

Working on a manuscript?

Avoid the common mistakes

References

  1. DeJong J, Burrall M, Wilson D W, Frost J D. A bio-inspired perspective for geotechnical engineering innovation. Proceedings of Geotechnical Frontiers 2017: Geotechnical Materials, Modeling, and Testing (GSP 280), Orlando, Florida, USA, 2017, 862–870.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Benyus J. Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature, 1st ed., William Morrow & Company Inc, New York, USA, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Fayemi P E, Wanieck K, Zollfrank C, Maranzana N, Aoussat A. Biomimetics: Process, tools and practice. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 2017, 12, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Enquist M, Linad J, Ghirlanda S. The power of associative learning and the ontogeny of optimal behaviour. Royal Society Open Science, 2016, 3, 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Vincent J F V, Bogatyreva O A, Bogatyrev N R, Bowyer A, Pahl A K. Biomimetics: Its practice and theory. Journal of Royal Society Interface, 2006, 3, 471–482.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bogatyrev N R. A “living” machine. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2004, 1, 79–87.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Altshuller G, Shulyak L, Rodman S. The Innovation Algorithm: TRIZ, Systematic Innovation and Technical Creativity, 2nd ed., Technical Innovation Center, Worcester, USA, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Vincent J F V, Mann D L. Systematic technology transfer from biology to engineering. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical Physics and Engineering Sciences, 2002, 360, 159–173.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bogatyrev N, Bogatyreva O. TRIZ-based algorithm for biomimetic design. Procedia Engineering, 2015, 131, 377–387.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Craig S, Harrison, D, Cripps A, Knott D. BioTRIZ suggests radiative cooling of buildings can be done passively by changing the structure of roof insulation to let longwave infrared pass. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2008, 5, 55–66.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Vincent J F V. Stealing ideas from nature. In Pellegrino S, eds., Deployable Structures, Springer, Vienna, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hu N, Feng P, Dai G. The gift from nature: Bio-inspired strategy for developing innovative bridges. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2013, 10, 405–414.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Grigorian M. Biomimicry and theory of structures-design methodology transfer from trees to moment frames. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2014, 11, 638–648.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cortes D, John S. Earthworm-inspired soil penetration. Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium of Bio-mediated and Bio-inspired Geotechnics, Atlanta, USA, 2018. (In press)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Martinez A, DeJong J T, Jaeger R, Khosravi A. Evaluation of self-penetration potential of a bio-inspired site characterization probe by cavity expansion analysis. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2020, 57, 706–716.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Huang S C, Tao J L. Modeling of the burrowing mechanism by razor clam: Role of penetration kinematics. Proceedings of IFCEE, ASCE, Orlando, USA, 2018, 547–556.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Winter A G, Hosoi A E. Identification and evaluation of the Atlantic razor clam (Ensis directus) for biologically inspired subsea burrowing systems. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 2011, 51, 151–157.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Winter A G, Deits R L H, Dorsch D S, Slocum A H, Hosoi A E. Razor clam to RoboClam: Burrowing drag reduction mechanisms and their robotic adaptation. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 2014, 9, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Frost J D, Martinez A, Mallett S D, Roozbahani M M, DeJong J T. Intesection of modern soil mechanics with ants and roots. Proceedings of Geotechnical Frontiers 2017: Geotechnical Materials, Modeling, and Testing (GSP 280), Orlando, Florida, USA, 2017, 900–909.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Alcantar J, Aleali A, Pasillas Rodriguez J N, Bandini P, Newtson C M. Bio-inspired vascular system in driven pile foundations. Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium of Bio-mediated and Bio-inspired Geotechnics, Atlanta, USA, 2018. (In press)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hannigan P J, Rausche F, Likins G E, Robinson B R, Becker M L. Design and Construction of Driven Pile Foundations, technical report, National Highway Institute, FHWA GEC 012-volume I, USA, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Randlolph M F, Dolwin R, Beck R. Design of driven piles in sand. Géotechnique, 1994, 44, 427–448.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kulhawy F H. Limiting tip and side resistance: Fact or fallacy? Analysis and Design of Pile Foundations, ASCE, New York, USA, 1984, 80–98.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Construction Fixed Offshore Platforms — Load and Resistance Factor Design, 1997, API Recommended Practice 2A-LRFD (RP 2A-LRFD), 1st ed., American Petroleum Institute (API), Washington, DC, USA, reaffirmed 2003.

  25. Uesugi M, Kishida H. Frictional resistance at yield between dry sand and mild steel. Soils and Foundations, 1986, 26, 139–149.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Frost J D, Martinez A. An axial-torsional multi-sleeve friction penetration system for lunar subsurface studies. Proceedings of the Earth and Space 2012 Conference, Pasadena, USA, 2012, 335–343.

    Google Scholar 

  27. DeJong J T, Westgate Z J. Role of initial state, material properties, and confinement condition on local and global soil-structure interface behavior. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2009, 135, 1646–1660.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Dietz M S, Lings M L. Postpeak strength of interfaces in a stress-dilatancy framework. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2006, 132, 1474–1484.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Brown D A, Turner J P, Castelli R J. Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and LRFD Design Methods, National Highway Institute (FHWA GEC 010), USA, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Edil T B, Bosscher P J, Sundberg A J. Soil-structure interface shear transfer behavior. Proceedings of the Second Japan-U.S. Workshop on Testing, Modeling, and Simulation (Geomechanics II) (GSP 156), Tokyo, Japan, 2005, 528–543.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Iscimen M. Shearing Behavior of Curved Interfaces, PhD dissertation, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, USA, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Vogel S. Comparative Biomechanics: Life’s Physical World, Princeton University Press, Princeton, USA, 2004, 580.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve. Kelp Holdfast, [2020-01-15], https://www.flickr.com/photos/131153742@N06/16947086726/in/dateposted/ (Licensed under CC BY 2.0)

  34. Escobar A. Cross Section of a Tree’s Roots, [2020-01-15], https://www.flickr.com/photos/aaronescobar/2569091622/ (Licensed under CC BY 2.0)

  35. Atwell B J. Response of roots to mechanical impedance. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 1993, 33, 27–40.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Kier W M. The diversity of hydrostatic skeletons. Journal of Experimental Biology, 2012, 215, 1247–1257.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Wainwright S A. Axis and Circumference: The Cylindrical Shape of Plants and Animals, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA, 1988, 176.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Cloudzilla. Stroke Stroke (Cat paw), [2020-01-15], https://www.flickr.com/photos/cloudzilla/391395459/ (Licensed under CC BY 2.0)

  39. Foreman T K, Linge K. The importance of heel compression in the measurement of diurnal stature variation. Applied Ergonomics, 1989, 20, 299–300.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Ker R F. The design of soft collagenous load-bearing tissues. Journal of Experimental Biology, 1999, 202, 3315–3324.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Wainwright S A, Biggs W D, Currey J D, Gosline J M. Mechanical Design in Organisms, Princeton University Press, Princeton, USA, 1982, 423.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Winter A G, Deits R L H, Hosoi A E. Localized fluidization burrowing mechanics of Ensis directus. Journal of Experimental Biology, 2012, 215, 2072–2080.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Abaqus 2017 Analysis User’s Manual, Dassault Systèmes Simulia Corp, Providence, USA.

  44. Been K, Jefferies M G, Hachey J E. The critical state of sands. Géotechnique, 1991, 41, 365–381.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Jefferies M G. Nor-Sand: A simple critical state model for sand. Géotechnique, 1993, 43, 91–103.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Yu H. Plasticity and Geotechnics, Springer, New York, USA, 2006.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This material is based upon work primarily supported by the U. S. National Science Foundation (NSF) under NSF Award Number EEC-1449501. Any opinions, findings and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NSF. The authors appreciate the advice of Dr. Dipanjan Basu in some aspects of the numerical modeling.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Bio-mediated and Bio-inspired Geotechnics, Department of Civil Engineering, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico, 88003-8001, USA

    Seyed Ali Aleali, Paola Bandini & Craig Michael Newtson

Authors
  1. Seyed Ali Aleali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paola Bandini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Craig Michael Newtson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paola Bandini.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aleali, S.A., Bandini, P. & Newtson, C.M. Multifaceted Bioinspiration for Improving the Shaft Resistance of Deep Foundations. J Bionic Eng 17, 1059–1074 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42235-020-0076-6

Download citation

  • Published: 04 September 2020

  • Issue Date: September 2020

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42235-020-0076-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • bioinspiration
  • expansion
  • anchorage
  • deep foundation
  • pile capacity
  • frictional resistance
Download PDF

Working on a manuscript?

Avoid the common mistakes

Advertisement

Over 10 million scientific documents at your fingertips

Switch Edition
  • Academic Edition
  • Corporate Edition
  • Home
  • Impressum
  • Legal information
  • Privacy statement
  • California Privacy Statement
  • How we use cookies
  • Manage cookies/Do not sell my data
  • Accessibility
  • FAQ
  • Contact us
  • Affiliate program

Not affiliated

Springer Nature

© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Part of Springer Nature.