Introduction
Offshore structures have been constructed in
many parts of the world for oil production and
many other purposes.
Most of these structures are supported on
piles.
Lateral forces on
offshore piles
Wave forces
Wind forces
Ice forces
Fig.1 : Environmental loads on
template platforms
Introduction
Lateral load analysis
Combined flexural and axial stresses
Complex problem
Requires structure and foundation elements to be rationally
analysed
Accurate soil information near the surface at depths less than
10-20 pile diameters in essentially important for successful
application of a rational method of lateral load analysis
Ultimate failure of pile-soil system catastrophic
Excessive deflections would impose severe difficulties in the
operational activities of offshore structure
Analysis of a single pile
The general theoretical approaches
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
Continuous nature of soil medium is ignored and the pile
reaction at a point is simply related to the deflection at that
point
Elastic continuum approach
Assumes the soil to be an ideal elastic continuum
Finite element analysis
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
Proposed by Reese and Matlock (1956) is based on
Winkler’s Hypothesis
Winkler’s hypothesis Assumptions
Soil medium approximated by a series of closely spaced independent elastic springs.
Reaction at any point on the base of the beam is dependent of the location of the point.
Beam Surface of Beam
elastic medium Closely spaced
elastic springs
reaction depends
only on the
deflection
Reactions are function of
every point on the beam
Fig.1 (a) Fig.1(b)
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
The reaction at any point on the beam shown in Fig.
1(b) depends only on the deflection at that point.
The problem of laterally loaded pile embedded in
soil is closely related to the beam on elastic
foundation.
A beam can be loaded at one or more points along
its length, whereas in case of piles, the external
loads and moments are applied at or above the
ground surface only.
The nature of a laterally loaded pile-soil system is
shown in this Fig.1(c) for a vertical pile.
Fig. 1(c): The concept of a laterally
loaded pile-soil system
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
A series of nonlinear springs represent the force-deformation
characteristics of the soil.
The springs attached to the blocks of different sizes indicate reaction
increasing with deflection and then reaching a yield point or limiting value
that depends on depth.
The gap between the pile and the springs indicates the moulding away of
the soil by repeated loading and the increasing stiffness of the soil is
shown by shortening of the springs as depth below the surface increases.
Soil response
Winkler’s hypothesis soil response in terms of a p-y curve (Fig. 3)
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
A A x1
(b) View AA – earth
pressure distribution
prior to lateral loading
(a) Pile elevation
y1
(c) View AA – earth pressure
distribution after lateral loading
Fig. 2 Graphical definition of p and y
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
Family of p-y curves each curve represents the soil behaviour at a
different depth (Fig. 3)
Secant modulus of soil reaction Es (Fig. 4)
p
Es y
------- (1)
y
p
y x = x1
p
y x = x2 y
p
p
y x = x3 y
Es = - p/y
p
y x = x4
-p
Fig. 4: Illustration of the
x secant modulus
Fig. 3: Family of p-y curves
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
Governing equation
A vertical pile with a lateral load, Pt and moment, Mt at its head
Determine (a) deflection (b) slope (c) moment
(d) shear and (e) soil reaction as functions of depth.
S
dy d2y d3y d4y
M EI V EI p EI
Pt Mt y dx dx 2 dx 3 dx 4
Deflection Slope Moment Shear Soil Reaction
Fig. 5: A complete solution of a laterally loaded pile problem
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
The equilibrium of an element is considered.
Horizontal equilibrium gives,
Q Q dQ ES . y.dx 0
dQ
or Es . y ------- (2)
dx M
Moment equilibrium gives,
Q
dx
M Q dx M dM Es y dx 0
2 dx Es.y
Ignoring small quantities we get,
dM Q+dQ
Q ------- (3)
dx M+dM
From Eqs. (2) and (3), we get,
Fig.6:Free body diagram of a
2
d M pile element
dx 2
Es . y ------- (4)
Now from conventional beam theory it is known that,
d2y
M EI dx 2 ------- (5)
Where, EI represents the flexibility if the pile
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
From Eqs. (4) and (5), we get,
EI d y E . y
4
s
------ (6)
4
dx
Solution of the above equations gives values of deflection, slope, shear, bending moment
and shear along the length of the pile.
Non dimensional method of solution
This method of solution is based on the work published by Reese and Matlock (1956).
The deflection, slope, moment, shear and soil reaction along the pile length are given as,
Deflection, PtT 3 M tT 2 --------- (7)
y( ) Ay ( ) By
EI EI
Slope,
S (
PtT 2 MT
) As ( t ) Bs
--------- (8)
EI EI
Moment, M PTt Am M t Bm --------- (9)
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
Shear, V ( Pt ) Av (
Mt
) Bv ------ (10)
T
pt M
Soil reaction, p( ) Ap ( 2t ) B p ------- (11)
T T
T is defined as relative stiffness factor and is expressed by the following relation,
1
T ( EI ) n 4 -------- (12)
nh
In the above relation ηh represents the coefficient of soil modulus variation with depth
according to the following relation,
E xn
s h
-------- (13)
n represents an integer
The non-dimensional coefficients A and B are functions of a coefficient Z
Z is referred to as depth coefficient
x
Z
T
-------- (14)
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
Coefficients A and B can be obtained for any variation of soil modulus with depth.
Reese and Matlock have assumed linear variation of soil modulus with depth which makes
the power n equal to 1,
The relative stiffness factor, T becomes
EI
T 5 ---------- (15)
h
The computations have further indicated that the values of A and B coefficients remain
almost the same as long as the maximum depth coefficient, Zmax (equal to L/T, L=pile
length) is equal to or greater than 4T.
Values of A and B coefficients given by Reese and Matlock (1956) for linearly varying soil
modulus with depth are tabulated in Table 1.
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
Table 1: Coefficients for long piles, Es = h x (Reese and Matlock, 1956)
Z (x/T) Ay As Am Av Ap By Bs Bm Bv Bp
0.0 2.435 -1.623 0.000 1.000 0.000 1.623 -1.750 1.000 0.000 0.000
0.1 2.273 -1.618 0.100 0.989 -0.227 1.453 -1.650 1.000 -0.007 -0.145
0.2 2.112 -1.603 0.198 0.956 -0.422 1.293 -1.550 0.999 -0.028 -0.259
0.3 1.952 -1.578 0.291 0.906 -0.586 1.143 -1.450 0.994 -0.058 -0.343
0.4 1.796 -1.545 0.379 0.840 -0.718 1.003 -1.351 0.987 -0.095 -0.401
0.5 1.644 -1.503 0.459 0.764 -0.822 0.873 -1.253 0.976 -0.137 -0.436
0.6 1.496 -1.454 0.532 0.677 -0.897 0.752 -1.156 0.960 -0.181 -0.451
0.7 1.353 -1.397 0.595 0.585 -0.947 0.642 -1.061 0.939 -0.226 -0.449
0.8 1.216 -1.335 0.649 0.489 -0.973 0.540 -0.968 0.914 -0.270 -0.432
0.9 1.086 -1.268 0.693 0.392 -0.977 0.448 -0.878 0.885 -0.312 -0.403
1.0 0.962 -1.197 0.727 0.295 -0.962 0.364 -0.792 0.852 -0.350 -0.364
1.2 0.738 -1.047 0.767 0.109 -0.885 0.223 -0.629 0.775 -0.414 -0.268
1.4 0.544 -0.893 0.772 -0.056 -0.761 0.112 -0.482 0.688 -0.456 -0.157
1.6 0.381 -0.741 0.746 -0.193 -0.609 0.029 -0.354 0.594 -0.477 -0.047
1.8 0.247 -0.596 0.696 -0.298 -0.445 -0.030 -0.245 0.498 -0.476 0.054
2.0 0.142 -0.464 0.628 -0.371 -0.283 -0.070 -0.155 0.404 -0.456 0.140
3.0 -0.075 -0.040 0.225 -0.349 0.226 -0.089 0.057 0.059 -0.213 0.268
4.0 -0.050 0.052 0.000 -0.106 0.201 -0.028 0.049 -0.042 0.017 0.112
5.0 -0.009 0.025 -0.033 0.015 0.046 0.000 -0.011 -0.026 0.029 0.002
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
Boundary conditions
Solutions are obtained for three sets of boundary conditions at the pile
head.
Pile head free to rotate
Pile head fixed against rotation
Pile head restricted against rotation
Case 1 – Pile head free to rotate
For this case, equations given for (a) deflection (b) slope (c) moment (d)
shear and (e) soil reaction (Eq. 7-11) are applicable .
The corresponding A and B coefficients are obtained from the Table 1.
Deflection and slope at ground level:
PtT 3 M tT 2
y0 (deflection at ground level): 2.43 1.62
EI 2 EI
Pt T MT
S0 (slope at ground level): 1.62 1.75 t
EI EI
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
Case 2 – Pile head fixed against rotation
This case corresponds to the situation when the superstructure translates under
the load but does not rotate.
This happens in cases were superstructure is very stiff in relation to the pile.
In such a case, equations for deflections and moments can be developed from the
corresponding equations for a free head pile.
Pt and Mt are transferred to the pile head from superstructure. If the
superstructure is stiff, pile head does not rotate.
Then at x=0, slope s=0
PtT 2 MT
S ( ) As ( t ) Bs 0
EI EI
Mt As
Therefore at x=0 ------- (16)
PtT Bs
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
From table 1, for z =x/T =0
A s [ 1.623 ] 0.93
B s
1.75
Mt
Therefore = -0.93
Pt T
Pt T 3 M tT 2
Now, y( ) Ay ( )B y
EI EI
making substitution for Mt = -0.93 Pt T in the above equation,
Pt T 3 Pt T 3
y ( Ay 0.93B y ) C y
EI EI
where C y ( Ay 0.93B y )
The values of Cy for various values and depth coefficient Z can be computed by taking
corresponding A and B value from Table 1.
Pt T 3
For example, the ground line deflection yo is computed as, y 0 0.93
EI
Modulus of subgrade reaction approach
Similarly the moment equation for the fixed head pile condition
can be written (using Eq.9) as, M ( Pt T ) Am ( M t )Bm
Mt
or M Pt T [ Am (
Pt T
) Bm ]
Mt
Pt T = -0.93
Therefore, M Pt T ( Am 0.93Bm ) Fm Pt T
where, Fm ( Am 0.93Bm )
at GL, M t 0.93PT
t
The values of Fm with respect to the depth coefficient Z can be
calculated using Table 1.
Example 1
A steel pipe pile of 61 cm outside diameter with a wall thickness
of 2.5 cm is driven into loose sand (relative density =30%) under
submerged condition to a depth of 20 m. The submerged unit
weight of soil is 8.75 kN/m3 and angle of internal friction is 330.
The EI value of the pile is 4.35 × 1011 kg-cm2 (4.35×102 MN-
m2). Compute the ground line deflection of the pile under lateral
load of 268 kN at ground level under free head condition. Take ηh
= 6 MN/m3.
Solution
2.43 p T
3
y t
for Mt=0
0 EI
EI
T ( )1 / 5
h
where , Pt =0.260MN
EI = 4.35×102 MN-m2 and ηh = 6 MN/m3.
4.35 10 2 1 / 5
Therefore T ( ) 2.3554m
6
2.43 0.268 2.3554 3
y0 4.35 10 2
0.01956m 19.56cm
Example 2
If the pile in the Example 1 is subjected to a lateral load at height
of 2 m above ground level, what will be the ground line
deflection?
Solution :
• y0
2.43 Pt T 3 1.62 M t T 2
EI EI
As in Example 1,
T = 2.3554 m , Mt =0.268 × 2 = 0.536 MN-m.
Substituting ,
2.43 0.268 2.3554 3 1.62 0.536 2.3554 2
y
0 4.35 10 2 4.35 10 2
= 0.01956 + 0.01107 = 0.03063 m = 3.063 cm …Ans.
Example 3
If the pile in Example 1 is fixed against rotation, calculate the
deflection at the ground line level.
Solution :
Use the following equation for the case of pile head fixed
against rotation
0.93 Pt T 3
y0 EI
The values of Pt , T and EI are given in Example 1.
Substituting
0.93 0.268 ( 2.3554 )3
y0 4.35 10 2
= 0.7485 cm
Example 4
If the pile head given in Example 1 is partially fixed having a spring
stiffness Kθ of 50 MN/radian, compute the ground line deflection.
Solution :
Use the following equation for the case of pile head
restricted against rotation.
Mt Ast T K where T = 2.3554 m
EI = 4.35×102MN-m2
Pt T ( EI K Bst T )
Pt = 268 kN
From Table 1, Ast = -1.623, Bst = -1.75
Substituting,
Mt 1.623 2.3554 50
0.298
Pt T ( 4.35 10 50 1.75 2.3554 )
2
Contd….
From Fig. 8 ,
Mt
Cy = 1.925 for Pt T
0.298
From the equation for deflection for the case of pile head restricted
against rotation
C y Pt T 3 1.925 0.268 2.3554 3
y0
EI 4.35 10 2
= 0.01549 m = 1.549 cm …….Ans.
