Open Access

Comparative Analysis of Single Pile with Embedded Beam Row and Volume Pile Modeling under Seismic Load

Queen Arista Rosmania Putri Sumarsono
Queen Arista Rosmania Putri Sumarsono
, 
As’ad Munawir
As’ad Munawir
 and 
Harimurti
Harimurti
   | Jan 25, 2023
Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica's Cover Image
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Cite
Article Category: Original Study
Published Online: Jan 25, 2023
Page range: 28 - 40
Received: Apr 28, 2022
Accepted: Oct 23, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2022-0027
Keywords
© 2023 Queen Arista Rosmania Putri Sumarsono et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Figure 1

Pile due to cyclic load.
Pile due to cyclic load.

Figure 2

The p–y curve based on the Winkler's model.
The p–y curve based on the Winkler's model.

Figure 3

Site of the study.
Site of the study.

Figure 4

Bore pile elevation.
Bore pile elevation.

Figure 5

Pile modeling: (a) 2D finite element (b) 3D finite element.
Pile modeling: (a) 2D finite element (b) 3D finite element.

Figure 6

(a) Failure mechanism of 2D single pile. (b) failure mechanism of 3D single pile. (c) vector direction of 2D single pile. (d) vector direction of 3D single pile.
(a) Failure mechanism of 2D single pile. (b) failure mechanism of 3D single pile. (c) vector direction of 2D single pile. (d) vector direction of 3D single pile.

Figure 7

Lateral load capacity versus deflection: (a) combination lateral loads effect, (b) pile stiffness effect, (c) soil stiffness effect.
Lateral load capacity versus deflection: (a) combination lateral loads effect, (b) pile stiffness effect, (c) soil stiffness effect.

Figure 8

Lateral bearing capacity.
Lateral bearing capacity.

Figure 9

p–y curve.
p–y curve.

N60 and Vs values derived from SPT data.

Parameters Methods Unit Values
Soil classification MH MH SC–SM SC–SM CL
Depth m 0.00–5.50 5.50–8.50 8.50–11.50 11.50–14.50 14.50–17.50
N¯60 {{\text{\bar{N}}}_{60}} 12 11 14 28 34
Vs Maheswari et al. [13] m/s 176.67 172.18 194.68 233.75 243.14
Hasancebi and Ulusuay in Hammam and Eliwa [12] 204.80 200.34 208.53 249.35 269.12
Tsiambaos and Sabatakakis [14] 237.39 230.90 209.41 269.15 334.70
Parameters Methods Unit Values
Soil classification MH SM SM MH CL–ML
Depth m 17.50–20.00 20.00–23.50 23.50–26.50 26.50–29.50 29.50–30.00
N¯60 {{\text{\bar{N}}}_{60}} 44 68 55 54 55
Vs Maheswari et al. [13] m/s 263.66 296.06 279.39 279.36 241.78
Hasancebi and Ulusuay in Hammam and Eliwa [12] 288.43 314.14 296.83 303.06 305.09
Tsiambaos and Sabatakakis [14] 365.18 372.23 343.76 388.62 456.36

Modulus of elasticity.

Parameters Symbol Unit Values
Soil classification MH MH SC–SM SC–SM CL
Depth m 0.00–5.50 5.50–8.50 8.50–11.50 11.50–14.50 14.50–17.50
Shear modulus Gmax1 kN/m2 31,512.89 30,168.81 54,463.84 58,647.40 62,843.00
Gmax2 kN/m2 42,346.40 40,843.44 62,487.42 66,734.39 76,989.80
Gmax3 kN/m2 56,897.20 54,258.68 63,015.42 77,752.24 119,082.54
Modulus of elasticity Es1 kN/m2 80,257.83 76,107.67 141,750.84 157,208.03 172,158.08
Es2 kN/m2 107,848.87 103,036.85 162,633.48 178,885.72 210,913.15
Es3 kN/m2 144,907.24 136,879.86 164,007.69 208,419.75 326,226.01
Parameters Symbol Unit Values
Soil classification MH SM SM MH CL–ML
Depth m 17.50–20.00 20.00–23.50 23.50–26.50 26.50–29.50 29.50–30.00
Shear modulus Gmax1 kN/m2 71,347.32 137,818.78 132,539.58 81,007.64 66,740.49
Gmax2 kN/m2 85,382.60 155,159.96 149,607.27 95,333.66 106,266.07
Gmax3 kN/m2 136,865.04 217,852.44 200,658.77 156,762.39 237,768.36
Modulus of elasticity Es1 kN/m2 199,772.48 385,892.57 371,110.81 226,821.40 186,873.38
Es2 kN/m2 239,071.29 434,447.88 418,900.34 266,934.24 297,544.98
Es3 kN/m2 383,222.10 609,986.82 561,844.55 438,934.70 665,751.40

The difference in lateral resistance with the FEM 3D.

Lateral resistance (kN) Difference in lateral resistance with FEM 3D (%)
FEM 2D FEM 3D
Combination lateral loads effect
PS1 115.808 304.663 61.988
PS2 118.323 414.567 71.459
PS3 210.442 524.270 59.860
Pile stiffness effect
Ep1 210.442 524.270 59.860
Ep2 187.449 525.274 64.314
Ep3 175.958 526.043 66.551
Soil stiffness effect
Es1 210.442 524.270 59.860
Es2 219.603 522.476 57.969
Es3 227.736 520.390 56.237

The difference in deflection with the FEM 3D.

Lateral resistance (kN) The difference in deflection with FEM 3D (%) The difference in deflection with FEM 2D (%)
FEM 3D 10,410.00 - 81.220
FEM 2D 1,955.00 81.220 -
FDM – API (2011) 7,025.381 32.513 72.172
Klinkvort (2012) 3,931.621 62.232 50.275
Liang et al. (2018) [10] 4,441.177 57.337 55.980
Hyunsung and Sangseom (2018) [11] 1,306.272 87.452 33.183
eISSN:
2083-831X
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
4 times per year
Journal Subjects:
Geosciences, other, Materials Sciences, Composites, Porous Materials, Physics, Mechanics and Fluid Dynamics
Journal RSS Feed