DYNAMIC LATERAL PILE-GROUP EFFECTS

By Takaaki Kagawa, 1 M. ASCE

ABSTRACT: Dynamic lateral pile-group effects are studied parametrically for a
linearly elastic soil-pile-structure system. The soil layer is assumed homogeneous, and all piles are identical and vertical. Pile-group responses for the soilpile systems used in this study are affected primarily by the spacing ratio, the
dimensionless frequency, and the directional angle between two piles. Spring
and damping coefficients of a pile group are strongly frequency dependent.
Spring coefficients of a pile group can be negative for a clustered group, and
they can be larger than a simple summation of single pile stiffnesses. Damping
of a pile group also is frequency dependent, and it can be either larger or smaller
than that of a surface footing with identical plan dimensions. Distribution patterns of shear and moment among piles are affected largely by frequency. The
study demonstrates potential importance of dynamic pile-group effects. Also,
it provided a procedure to generate theoretical pile-group effects for dynamic
analyses of complex soil-pile-structure systems.

INTRODUCTION

Pile-supported structures have experienced significant damage a n d

failure during major earthquakes (1,4), a n d the dynamic response analysis of soil-pile-structure systems h a s b e e n the subject of considerable
interest and research in recent years.
Dynamic soil-pile interaction of single piles has been studied u s i n g
various analytic methods. Until recently, however, dynamic pile-group
effects have not been studied using elastic wave propagation theories.
A rather empirical procedure, based on t h e concept of " t h e effective soil
m a s s , " (11), has been used frequently. Effective soil mass was included
in beam-on-Winkler foundation models of soil-pile systems to account
for the inertial force of the soil mass that moves in phase with the pile
group. This method, however, does not explicitly account for the radiation damping involved in soil-pile interaction.
Recently, attention has been given to the studies of dynamic pile-group
effects using elastic theories. Liou a n d Penzien (9) used Lamb's dynamic
solutions to evaluate soil displacements a r o u n d a pile. Wolf a n d v o n Arx
(15), and Wolf (14) utilized dynamic finite element m e t h o d s to study
lateral as well as axial pile-group effects. Nogami (10) analyzed pile-group
effects in the vertical vibration m o d e . Sheta a n d Novak (13) u s e d planestrain solutions for two concentric rings to study vertical pile-group effects. Gyoten, et al. (2) studied vertical pile-group effects u s i n g m o d a l
coordinate expansions of the soil-pile response. These studies illustrated
the significance of pile-soil-pile interaction effects. D u e to pile g r o u p effects, the spring coefficient of a pile in a g r o u p m a y be substantially
reduced and radiation damping m a y increase considerably compared to
*Engrg. Consultant, McClelland Engineers, Inc., 6100 Hillcroft, Houston, Tex.
77081.
Note.Discussion open until March 1, 1984. To extend the closing date one
month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Technical and
Professional Publications. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on December 3, 1982. This paper is part of the
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 109, No. 10, October, 1983. ASCE,
ISSN 0733-9410/83/0010-1267/$01.00. Paper No. 18301.
1267

an isolated pile. These studies provided information on the fundamental

characteristics of dynamic pile-group response. More analytic work as
well as case studies, however, are needed to evaluate and improve available analytic methods and to increase our understanding of this subject.
This paper presents results of a parametric study on the dynamic lateral pile-group effects. A pile-supported structure is represented by an
idealized, linearly elastic soil-pile system. The study demonstrates the
potential significance of the dynamic lateral pile-group effects, and it
provides a means to assess preliminary dynamic pile-group effects for
practical problems. In addition, the results of the parametric study were
used to develop an efficient procedure, based on a beam-on-Winkler
foundation model, for dynamic pile-group effects in more complex conditions involving soil layering (5).
ANALYTIC SOLUTION

Detailed descriptions of the analytic model and a solution procedure

were reported by the writer (5). Therefore, these will only be outlined
briefly in the following.
Model Description.A pile foundation is modeled by a linearly elastic soil-pile system (Fig. 1). The identical, linearly elastic piles have uniform cross-sectional properties and are partially embedded into a homogeneous soil layer of uniform thickness. The rigid pile-cap is allowed
to translate only in the x-direction and rotate at its base around the yaxis. The pile-cap is not in contact with the soil layer.
Solution Procedure.Solutions to the analytic model were derived by
introducing the following major assumptions: (1) The soil layer is homogeneous and linearly elastic with hysteretic material damping; (2) vertical soil motion generated by the horizontal vibration of a pile has only
MASS.
m,

FLEXURAL
RIGIDITY, El,
El 2

RIGID
FOUNDATION ~>

za.

77Tsrrumsrrr

MH

G , - SHEAR
P = MASS

MODULUS
DENSITY

V = POISSON'S

OF SOIL

RATIO

El = FLEXURAL

RIGIDITY

m p = MASS

OF PILE

OF SOIL LAYER

OF UNIT

L = LENGTH
BELOW

PILE

LENGTH

OF PILE

it - THICKNESS

OF SOIL

OF PILE

H = THICKNESS

7/A\WMM\v)Av//

RATIO

P = DAMPING
f 0 = RADIUS

t,i *

OF SOIL

OF SOIL

OF SOIL

LAYER

PILE TIP

RIGID BASE

FIG. 1,Analytic Model of Pile-Supported S t r u c t u r e

1268

a minor effect on the pile response and can be neglected; (3) horizontal
soil motion generated by the vertical vibration of a pile can be neglected;
(4) piles are perfectly bonded to soil; and (5) vertical shear forces at the
soil-pile interface do not influence the lateral vibration of the pile. These
assumptions are good for studying the response characteristics of single
piles (8), and are believed to be good also for evaluating dynamic pilegroup effects.
Dynamic responses of the piles and the soil layer were described separately in terms of unknown stresses between the soil layer and the piles.
The soil-pile stress distribution pattern over the width of a pile was assumed, but its magnitude and variation with depth were unknown parameters. For the lateral pile vibration, both a uniform and Boussinesq
type soil-pile stress patterns, as shown in Fig. 2, were studied. For vertical vibration, two identical uniform soil-pile stress patterns were placed
crosswise.
Solutions to the soil layer were obtained from its equations of motion
by expanding the soil displacement into its orthogonal modal coordinates and with assumed soil-pile stresses as a source term. Thus, the
problem was reduced for each mode to the pile-soil-pile interaction under plane-strain conditions. The dynamic response of piles for each mode
was obtained with the assumed soil-pile stresses as an external force.
Compatability conditions between the piles and the soil layer were satisfied in an approximate manner by considering average deformation of
the soil masses excited by the assumed soil stresses. Introduction of the
compatibility condition eliminated the unknown magnitudes of soil-pile

i-lh PILE

i-th PILE

*. X

*(_>

1)1=11)=)))

nisD/siii

))A\Y/A\Y))

M\V)AV/)

(b) BOUSSINESQ SOIL-PILE

STRESS PATTERN

(a) UNIFORM SOIL-PILE

STRESS PATTERN

FIG. 2.Soil-Pile Interface Stresses f o r A n a l y s i s

1269

FIG. 3.Directional Angle for 2 Piles

stresses from equations describing responses of piles. The remaining unknown integration constants were determined from boundary conditions imposed on the piles.
System Parameters.Factors affecting the pile-group response in the
present analytic model include: (1) Spacing ratio, s/2r0; (2) dimensionless frequency, a0 = <ar0/Vs; (3) directional angle between two piles, 6;
(4) embedment ratio, L/H; (5) pile slenderness ratio, L/2r0; (6) local pile
flexibility factor, KR = EI/Esr40; (7) local pile compressibility factor, Kc =
EA/Ejl; (8) Poisson's ratio of soil, v; (9) material damping of soil, (3;
and (10) pile-head fixity condition, and loading condition. (Most of the
notation is described in Fig. 1.) 0 is defined in Fig. 3; Es = the Young's
modulus of soil, and Vs = the shear wave velocity of soil. Table 1 summarizes the ranges of dimensionless parameters used in this study. These
ranges should cover the variations of soil-pile parameters in most practical problems.
Soil-Pile Stress Patterns.In the present method, the soil-pile stress
distribution pattern over the width of a pile has to be assumed, although
its variation with depth is determined from the dynamic equilibrium of
a soil-pile system.
Soil stress distribution patterns around piles depend largely on exciting frequency and pile spacing ratios, among other factors. Effects of
variations of soil-pile stress patterns on pile response were evaluated for
the lateral vibration mode to select a simple but reasonably accurate soilpile stress pattern. The vertical vibration mode was secondary to the
objective of the present study. Therefore, the validity of using the two
identical uniform distribution patterns was confirmed by comparing the
single pile responses obtained from this distribution and the theoretical
solution previously derived by the writer.
Single Pile Response.Fig. 4 shows the lateral pile-head spring coefficients of a pile for both uniform and Boussinesq type soil-pile stress
patterns. Also shown in Fig. 4 are the mathematical solutions for a pile
with a circular cross section (8). For the uniform and Boussinesq type
stress patterns, the soil displacements at the center of a loaded area were
1270

TABLE 1.Ranges of Dimensionless Parameters

Parameters
(1)
Spacing ratio (s/2r)
Dimensionless frequency ( = u>r0/Vs)
Directional angle (6)
Embedment ratio (L/H)
Pile slenderness ratio (L/2r)
Local pile flexibility factor (KR = EI/E,rt)
Local pile compressibility factor (K^ = EA/Esrf)
Poisson's ratio of soil (v)
Damping ratio of soil (p)

Range of values
(2)
2-100
0-0.7
0-90
0.5-1.0
33-133
370-370,000
84-2,000
0.30-0.45
0.05

KAGAWA AND
KRAFT (1981)
{CIRCULAR PILE)

FIXED-HEAD

UNIFORM
PATTERN
W / FACTOR = 0.85

PILE

KR = 366
H / 2 r 0 = 67

*- = 0 45
0 = 0 05
H/L = 1 0

_L
0.5
1.0
DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a 0
FIG.

1.5

4.Single Pile Spring Coefficients from Several Methods

considered to be representative of the soil motion due to the soil-pile

stresses. The soil displacements caused by these soil-pile stresses, however, vary from the center to the edge of the loaded area. For the uniform stress pattern, the soil near the center moves more than that at the
edge. Therefore, the pile-head spring and damping coefficients of a pile
from this stress pattern are less than the theoretical solutions. The Boussinesq type stress pattern, however, provided good approximation to
the theoretical solutions at low frequenceis, although it resulted in a pilehead spring similar to that of the uniform stress pattern at high
frequencies.
Pile responses with the uniform stress pattern can be improved by
averaging soil displacements generated by the soil-pile stresses, as is
frequently done for footing vibration problems (3). Also, this can be accomplished approximately by adjusting the computed soil displacement
at the center of a loaded area. Thus, an adjustment factor of 0.85 was
selected to match pile responses from the present analytic model and
the mathematical solutions. Fig. 4 shows that the pile-head stiffness using the uniform stress pattern with a 0.85 factor provides a good match
1271

1.5

2 PILES ( 6 = 0 )

=fc=^r8i)

1.0
m

,(_ # - - m

S/2r0
= 16

--

EL

1 0-5

V)

UNIFORM PATTERN
BOUSSINESQ PATTERN
SIMULATING EXACT SOLUTION
'

'

'

0.5

1.0

DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY. a
FIG. 5.2-Pile Interaction for Different Soil-Pile Stress Patterns

of the rigorous solution up to the dimensionless frequency of about 0.5.

The damping, however, is slightly underestimated.
2-Pile Response.Fig. 5 shows the effects of the difference in assumed soil-pile stress patterns on the stiffness and damping of 2-pile
groups. The two piles are alined with the loading direction, with the
directional angle 6 being equal to zero. Pile responses were obtained
using: (1) Uniform stress pattern with a factor of 0.85; and (2) Boussinesq
type stress pattern. Also, reference solutions were generated by discretizing a pile into several vertical strip segments. Uniform stress acted
over the width of each strip segment, but its magnitude was determined
using the condition that all segments within a pile move together. Six
to eight strip segments usually were required to approximate the correct
stress variation over the width of a pile.
Fig. 5 indicates that the uniform stress pattern approximates closely
the exact solutions and that the Boussinesq type stress pattern results
in erroneous pile-group effects for closely spaced piles. Thus, the uniform stress pattern with an adjustment factor of 0.85 was used in the
remaining study to evaluate pile-group effects.
Comparison with Other Solution.The lateral pile-group effects from
the present method were compared with those by Poulos (12) for static
pile-head loading conditions (Fig. 6). Both results are in general agreement. The group deflection factor here is defined, according to Poulos,
as the ratio of the pile-group displacement to the displacement of a freehead pile carrying an average load per pile in the group.
PILE-GROUP EFFECTS

Major Factors Affecting Pile-Group Effects.Pile-soil-pile interaction

is due to the soil motion generated by the vibration of piles. The soil
motion generated by a pile depends strongly on frequency and involves
phase changes along the distance from the pile. The soil motion at the
1272

3.0
IFREE HEADI
PRESENT
STUDV

2.0 POULOS
(1979)

22

1.0

GROUP

S/2r0= 2
H / Z r = 67

a =0

o
IX

10-7

10 3

10-5

io-i

FLEXIBILITY FACTOR, KR = EI/(EsLa)

FIG. 6.-Comparison with Other Solutions

o
D

1
H
0
0.10
0.25
0.50

e - o

2 PILES
Rc = 243
H/L = 1

, H/L = i

yO"

I I i i 11!
5
10

0
0.10
0.25
0.50

|LATERAL|

"

| I II I

1 1 | 1 1 1 l|
1
1 1 | 1i 1
2 PltES
FIXED HEAD. 8, = 365

i I ii

_J

SPACING RATIO, S/2r

I I I I II I
5
10
SPACING RATIO. S/2r0

1111

| 1 lll|

1 1 | 1 1

|LATERAL|
ps^^ryp-

-vf

0 o 0.25
0.10 o 0.50
1
1 1 1 1 11 1

A
a
0
o

| VERTICAL |
I

10

SPACING RATIO, S/2|

i I
5

Mill
10

=0
*0
0.10
0.25
0.50

1 1 1 1 11

SPACING RATIO. S/2l 0

FIG. 7.Effects of s/2r and Frequency on 2-Pile Lateral Interaction

FIG. 8.Effects of s/2r0 and Frequency on 2-Pile Vertical Interaction

second pile generated by the first pile may not be in phase with the
motion of the second pile. Thus, effective stiffness and damping of the
second pile can be either larger or smaller than those of a single pile
due to the vibration of the first pile. The spacing ratio and the excitation
frequency, therefore, have a large impact on pile-group responses.
Spacing Ratio (s/2r) and Frequency (a0).The effects of spacing ratio
and frequency on 2-pile interaction are shown in Figs. 7-8. Since the soil
motion generated by a pile becomes negligible at a large distance from
1273

the pile, both spring and damping coefficients of a pile in a group approach those of an isolated pile for large pile spacing. Under the static
condition, this distance is about 30 pile diam for the lateral mode, and
about 20 pile diam for the vertical mode. As the frequency increases,
the ratios of dynamic to static spring and damping coefficients exhibit
wavy variations with the spacing ratio. These ratios, however, are nearly
unity at spacing ratios of about 50.
Pile Slenderness Ratio (L/2r0).The pile length, L, was kept sufficiently long so that it had a negligible influence on the pile-group response for the soil-pile parameters in Table 1. The influence of the pile
radius on the pile-group effects was found to be small when the frequency scale was represented by the dimensionless frequency, aa = <s>r0/
Vs, as shown in Fig. 9 for the lateral 2-pile interaction. Similar results
were obtained for the vertical case.
Soil-Pile Stiffness (KR or Kc).The effects of the local pile flexibility
factor, KR, on the lateral 2-pile interaction were studied (Fig. 10). Stiff
piles involve more interaction than flexible piles near the static condi1.5

"i

i
1
1
r
2 PILES ( 0 = 0 )

r
/ s/2i
5/Zl0 =
= Ie

.-o--

1.0

Br'

x>.

i ca- -a. _ .g

s/2r =

l2

ts 0.S

H/2t

K = 366
O

LATERAL

33

67

133
I

1.0

0.5
DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a 0

,&"

i
X

1
1
1
2 PILES 1 9 = 0 )

"

"^x , ^ - 8 / 2 ^ = 8

1.0

1 (\
S 0.5
t
Iu
n

H/2i
O

K = 366 |

LATERAL
i

33

# 6 7

133
1

0.5
DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a0

1.0

FIG. 9.Effects of H/2.r0 on 2-Pile Lateral Interaction

1274

0.5

1.0

DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a 0

1.5

1
1
2 PILES
9 = 0'

, - S/2[ 0 = B

H/L = 1.0

fr

1.0

< / ^

S/2r 0

0.5

*n

a a 3.7 * t o 2

LATERAL

O O 3.7 * 10 5

__!__

1.0

0.5

. DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a

ILES

FIG. 10.Effects of KR on 2-Pile Lateral Interaction

'

2 PILES
H/L = 1.0

a.
Urn

1.5
o

S/2r

= 8

2.0

2 PILES
H/L = 1,0

. S/2r 0 = 8

1.5 -A

VERTICAL

<?
*

=i 1.0

2L.

S/2i = 2 '
CJI

SINGLE

2
1.01t
o.
e

243

1012

1.0

to 0.5
K
O

"a

S/2r 0 = 2

0.5
DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a 0

VERTICAL

, 1

243

o
a

1012
2024

0.S
DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a 0

FIG. 11.Effects of Kc on 2-Pile Vertical Interaction

1275

10

1.5
I LATERAL I
S/2r 0 = 8

1.0

= 2

u 0.5

2 PILES
FIXED HEAD
T< = 366

POISSON'S
BATIO
D
O

D
O

0.40
0.30

B =0, H/L =1
0.5
DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a 0

1.0

ILATERALl

1.0

POISSON'S
RATIO

0.5

0.40

0.30

0.5
DIMENSIONLESS

0:45

1.0

FREQUENCY, a 0

FIG. 12.-Effects of Poisson's Ratio on 2-Pile Lateral Interaction

tion. The difference, however, becomes small when the dimensionless

frequency exceeds about 0.1. Similarly, the local pile compressibility factor, Kc, has a relatively minor effect on the vertical 2-pile interaction (Fig.
11).
Embedment Ratio (L/H).Lateral 2-pile interaction was not affected
by the embedment ratio for the soil-pile properties in Table 1. Vertical
2-pile interaction, however, was affected by this ratio. Interaction was
larger for the floating condition {L/H = 0.5) than for the end-bearing
condition (L/H = 1) at a dimensionless frequency, a0, less than about
0.1. The difference was about 7% for the soil-pile system with Kc of 2,000.
This difference became smaller for more compressible piles.
For floating pile systems with L/H of 0.5, the writer studied the vertical 2-pile interaction as affected by the local pile compressibility factor,
Kc. Kc had a larger impact on the 2-pile interaction for the floating condition than for the end-bearing condition. As the pile becomes stiffer
relative to the soil and Kc becomes larger, the interaction became more
pronounced. The static 2-pile interaction for Kc equal to 84 had about a
10% difference from that for Kc = 2,000. This difference, however, became insignificant when the dimensionless frequency, a0, exceeded 0.2.
Poisson's Ratio of Soil (v).Poisson's ratio of soil had a small influ1276

I.5r
llATEHAll

1.0

2 PILES

% = 366
FBEE HEAD

0 , H/L = 1

0.5
DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a 0

1.0

LATERAL I

1.0

0.5

FREE HEAD

0.5
DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a 0

1.0

FIG. 13.Effects of Pile-Head Fixity Condition

ence on the pile-group response. Larger Poisson's ratios, however, tend

to result in larger interaction between piles than smaller Poisson's ratios,
as demonstrated in Fig. 12 for the lateral mode.
Pile-Head Fixity Condition.Fig. 13 shows the influence on the lateral 2-pile interaction of the pile-head fixity conditions. The "fixed head"
involves no pile-head rotation, while the "free head" indicates no moment transfer at the pile head. Fig. 13 compares spring coefficients of 2pile groups and single piles that have the same pile-head fixity conditions. The pile-head fixity condition is shown to have a very small influence on the pile-group response.
Directionality.Lateral 2-pile interaction is affected by the directional
angle, 0, as well as absolute distance between the piles. The present
study showed that the lateral 2-pile interaction is about the same when
the first pile is at the origin of the local coordinates (x, y), and the second
pile is located on an ellipse:

x2 + (20 = (Q-

(1)
This observation is nearly exact under static loading conditions and it
seems reasonable at small dimensionless frequencies. Fig. 14 shows the
2-pile interaction for the cases with the constant Ce in Eq. 1 equal to 4
1277

2.0

1 ' 1o

5s 1-0,l ^ j

/ \

LATERAL
H / L = 1.0

POSITION OF
2nd PILE

ii
o e

--o

IE

1 1

2 PILES

-u~^"

i 0.5i

WZto*"

"

_
1 . 5~
-

X__

1 1

0.5

__Y

_
"
_
1.5

1.0

2.0

1 1

2 PILES
LATERAL
H / L = 1.0

1.5

0.5

Hx

\7

POSITION OF
2nd PILE

-- 8
0

0
i

0.5
DIMENSIONLESS

1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1

(jP

X_

16

1.0
FREQUENCY,

16

1 1 1 1 1 11

DIMENSIOPJLESS FREQUENCY, a 0

1.5

a0

FIG. 14.Directionality of 2-Pile Interaction

and 16-pile diam. Results are shown for two piles with directional angles
of 0 and 90 degrees. Two-pile interaction tends to deviate more when
the spacing between the two piles becomes larger.
Loading Condition.Effective stiffness of a pile is different theoretically when the pile is loaded either at the pile head or seismically through
free-field soils. Under the seismic loading conditions, piles deform due
both to the free-field soil deformation and the inertial load from a superstructure. Pile responses caused by these two sources can involve different pile-group interaction effects. The effect of difference in loading
condition on the pile-group response was studied by computing the effective stiffnesses of pile groups excited seismically at the rigid base. The
study indicated that the pile-group effects are essentially independent
of loading conditions for the soil-pile systems in Table 1. Thus, the effective stiffness and damping of a pile group for a seismic response analysis can be evaluated from single-pile stiffness and damping for the seismic loading condition that is modified for the pile-group effects obtained
from the pile-head loading condition.
Spring and Damping Coefficients of Pile Group,Dynamic spring
and damping coefficients of pile groups were computed for several arrangements of piles. Fig. 15 shows the results for 3 x 3 groups. The
1278

dynamic spring coefficient of a pile group is strongly frequency dependent. This coefficient first decreases as the frequency increases from the
static condition. The decrease is due to the increased inertial effects of
the soil mass that moves in phase with piles. Similar phenomena have
been observed in the dynamic response of footings. For clustered pile
groups (e.g., s/2r0 case), the dynamic spring coefficients can become
negative. The dynamic spring coefficients of pile groups then increase
with an increase in frequency and exhibit peaks. These peaks are generated as a result of dynamic pile-soil-pile interaction effects in which
the soil motion generated by vibration of the pile group imposes constraints onto the pile movement for a certain combination of pile spacing
and frequency. For example, this is demonstrated at a dimensionless
frequency of about 0.2 for the group with the spacing ratio of 4.0. The
damping coefficients of a pile group also are influenced strongly by the
dynamic pile-soil-pile interaction. The frequency at which the interaction
effects start to become prominent depends on the pile spacing ratio.
The major difference between the damping characteristics of a surface
footing and a pile group was studied. Fig. 16 compares the damping of
pile groups with that of surface footings; this damping is essentially due

DIMENSIONLESS

3.0

2.0 - ,

1.0

-i

FREQUENCY, a 0

3x3 GROUP
LATERAL
FIXED HEAD
H/L = 1.0

1.0
DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a 0

FIG. 15.Pile-Group Effects for 3 x 3 Groups

1279

to radiation damping. Comparisons for two foundation sizes are shown

in Fig. 16. In either case, the plan dimension of the surface footing equals
the outer dimensions of the corresponding pile groups. Fig. 16 shows
that the damping of a pile group can be considerably larger than that of
a surface footing with the same plan dimension at low frequencies where
the dynamic pile-soil-pile interaction effect is still small. The damping
of a pile group, however, does not increase steadily with frequency, and
it becomes much lower than that of the corresponding surface footing
at high frequencies. Thus, the damping behavior of a pile group cannot
be estimated from that of a surface footing. Such an estimate can either
over or underestimate the true damping of the pile group depending on
the frequency and the pile spacing.
Moment and Shear Distributions.Pile-head moment and shear distributions among piles can be affected by the pile-group effects. Distribution patterns of pile-head moment and shear vary with frequency.
The pile-head moment and shear distribution patterns computed for the
static loading condition can be invalid under the dynamic loading condition at which the dynamic pile-soil-pile interaction is significant.
Fig. 17 shows the distributions of pile-head moment for 3 x 3 groups

T i i i i i i i I i i r

CASE 1
{SURFACE
FOOTING)

CASE 2
{ 2 x 2 GROUP)

TT

CASE 3
{ 3 x 3 GROUP)

1.5

0.5
1.0
DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a 0
10.0
CASE 1
{SURFACE
FOOTING)

CASE 2
( 2 x 2 GROUP)

CASE 3
(3 x 3 GROUP)

a
71*
hri

i_

0.5
1.0
DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a

1.5

FIG. 16.--Damping for Pile Groups and Surface Footings

1280

1.5 " 1

j -

.
_

(1)

- . <3>
-**
p = e = ^ _ ^

, 0.5

I I I )

'1.0

(1)
3 x3

GROUP

( S / 2 r 0 = 2, FIXED HEAD)
1

1
0.5

DIMENSIONLESS

1.5|

(1)

(2)
/

<t

s
l

[,<. ^ \
1

_
1

1.0

FREQUENCY. a

0.5

3 3
_J

GROUP ( S / 2 r 0 = 8,
I

I
0.5

DIMENSIONLESS

FIXED
I

HEAD)

1.0
FREQUENCY,

a0

FIG. 17.Distribution of Pile-Head Moment

with spacing ratios of 2 and 8. Center piles carry the least load under
the static condition, but they tend to carry larger load as the interaction
becomes larger. On the other hand, corner piles become less stiff as the
frequency increases from the static condition. For the case with a spacing
ratio of 2, the effective stiffness of the center pile increased by a factor
of more than 2 as the dimensionless frequency increased from 0 to 0.7.
For pile groups with large spacings, the moment distribution pattern
among piles fluctuates strongly with frequency. Similar phenomena were
observed also for the pile-head shear distribution among piles.
Soil-Pile Springs and Damping.A beam-on-Winkler foundation type
analysis of a pile group requires soil-pile springs that include dynamic
pile-group effects. Equivalent soil-pile springs were evaluated for the
present analytic model following the method represented by Kagawa
and Kraft (6-8). The lateral load-displacement relation, p-y, was defined
V = E*8Hy

(2)

in which p = lateral soil reaction on a unit pile length; E* = complex

Young's modulus of soil [= 2(1 + v)G*]; G* = Gs(l + f2g); Gs _= shear
modulus of soil; 8H = lateral soil-pile spring coefficient (= 8f + t'8?); and
y = pile displacement relative to the free field. All quantities in Eq. 2
1281

1.5

| LATERAL |

&

-S/2r0

!5

- = 32

1.0

^^-^

X ^ > ^ ^
8

C^
>

--~

'-

^^
4

= 2

a- 0.5

2 PILES
FIXED HEAD
KR = 366, H/L = 1
0 = 0
I

0.5

1.0

DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a

1.0

0.5

~I

2 PILES
FIXED HEAD
1(B = 366, H/L = 1
0 = 0

-0.5

0.5

1.0

DIMENSIONLESS FREQUENCY, a 0

FIG. 18.Pile-Group Effects on Soil-Pile Spring Coefficients, 8

are complex numbers. The real part of 8 H , 8? is the "true" soil-pile spring
coefficient, and the imaginary part represents the material as well as the
radiation damping associated with the soil-pile interaction.
The axial load-displacement relation, t-z, was defined in a similar manner as
t = E?8"z.

(3)
in which t = axial soil reaction on a unit pile length; 8" = soil-pile spring
coefficient (= 8? + z'Sg); and z = axial pile displacement.
An extensive parametric study was m a d e t o determine the behavior
of the soil-pile spring coefficients, 8 H and 8", as affected by the pilegroup interaction. Results were summarized, e.g., in terms of the ratios
between the soil-pile spring coefficients for two piles and a single pile.
These ratios are similar essentially to the ratios of pile-head spring coefficients, and they depend primarily on the dimensionless frequency, a0,
the spacing ratio, s/2r0, and the directional angle between piles, 6. Fig.
18 shows the real and imaginary parts of the ratio for the lateral mode.
These results were used to develop a numerical method, based on the
beam-on-Winkler foundation approach, for dynamic response analyses
1282

of pile groups. Details of the parametric study and the numerical method
are reported elsewhere (5).
CONCLUSIONS

Pile-group effects were studied parametrically for an idealized, linearly

elastic model of a pile group. Major findings are summarized in the
following:
1. Correct lateral pile-soil-pile interaction can be obtained using uniform soil-pile stress patterns over the width of a pile for dimensionless
frequencies up to about 0.5.
2. Pile-group effects depend primarily on the dimensionless frequency, the spacing ratio, and the directional angle between two piles
for piles, with the local pile flexibility factor ranging from 370-370,000,
and the local pile compressibility factor from 84-2,000. Other factors such
as the pile slenderness ratio, Poisson's ratio of soil, and the pile-head
fixity condition had only minor influence on the pile-group effects.
3. Two-pile interaction is pronounced at the spacing ratio less than
about 30 for the lateral vibration mode and about 20 for the vertical vibration mode.
4. Spring coefficient of a pile group varies strongly with frequency.
For a clustered pile group, the group spring coefficient can become negative as the inertial effect increases with increasing frequency. The group
spring coefficient for a clustered group, however, increases significantly
as the dynamic pile-soil-pile interaction begins to dominate the pile-group
response. As a result, the group spring coefficient can be larger than a
simple summation of single pile stiffnesses.
5. Damping coefficient of a pile group also is frequency dependent.
Damping of a pile group can be larger than that of a surface footing,
with the same plan dimensions as the pile group at low frequencies where
the dynamic pile-soil-pile interaction effects are not pronounced. Damping of a pile group at higher frequencies, however, can be considerably
lower than that of a surface footing with equivalent plan dimensions.
6. Distribution patterns of shear and moment among piles depend
largely on frequency. For example, center piles can be stiffer and carry
greater load in relation to corner piles under dynamic loading conditions
than they do under static conditions.
7. Pile-group effects are strongly frequency dependent. Pile-group efficiency from a static theory is, thus, not necessarily appropriate for designing a dynamically loaded pile foundation.
The present study demonstrated clearly the potential importance of
dynamic pile-group effects. Also, the results of the parametric study on
2-pile interaction provided an important basis to develop discrete soilpile interaction elements (springs and dashpots) for a beam-on-Winkler
foundation model of a pile group. A description and validity of such a
method for a pile group in layered soils were reported by the writer (5).
The method was found very useful in evaluating response behavior of
pile groups for both seismic and machine-vibration problems, and it has
1283

been used for practical problems in designing pile foundations for machinery.
The present study, however, w a s limited to the linear range. The results cannot be used directly in the time-domain analyses of pile g r o u p s
that involve several forms of nonlinearity including gapping b e t w e e n
piles a n d soil. Extensive studies are needed to develop a procedure to
determine soil-pile springs a n d d a m p i n g for nonlinear beam-on-Winkler
models of pile groups.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This material is based u p o n w o r k supported by the National Science

Foundation u n d e r Grant N o . PFR 80-01503 and McClelland Engineers'
research and development program. The financial support for this study
is gratefully acknowledged.
APPENDIX I.REFERENCES

1. Fukuoka, M., "Damage to Civil Engineering Structure," Soils and Foundations,

Vol. 6, No. 2, 1966, pp. 45-52.
2. Gyoten, Y., Mizuhata, K., Fukusumi, T., Nozoe, H., Inoue, T., and Mizuno,
T., "Soil-Pile Interaction in Vertical Vibration," Proceedings, International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, University of Missouri, Rolla, Mo., Vol. 1, 1981, pp. 289-294.
3. Housner, G. W., and Castellani, A., discussion of "Comparison of Footing
Vibration Tests with Theory," by F. E. Richart, Jr., and R. V. Whitman, journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. 95, No. SMI,
1969, pp. 360-364.
4. Kachadoorian, R., "Effects of the Earthquake of March 27th, 1964, on the
Alaska Highway System," Geological Survey Professional Paper 545-C, U.S.
Department of Interior, Washington, D.C., 1968.
5. Kagawa, T., Seismic Soil-Pile-Structure Interaction: Pile Groups, Report to the
National Science Foundation, McClelland Engineers, Inc., NTIS No. PB82171471, 1981.
6. Kagawa, T., and Kraft, L. M., Jr., "Seismic p-y Responses of Flexible Piles,"
Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 106, No. GT8, 1980,
pp. 899-918.
7. Kagawa, T., and Kraft, L. M., Jr., "Lateral Load Deflection Relationships of
Piles Subjected to Dynamic Loadings," Soils and Foundations, Vol. 20, No. 4,
1980, pp. 19-36.
8. Kagawa, T., and Kraft, L. M., Jr., "Dynamic Characteristics of Lateral LoadDeflection Relationships of Flexible Piles," Journal of Earthquake Engineering
and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1981, pp. 53-68.
9. Liou, D. D., and Penzien, J., Seismic Analysis of an Offshore Structure Supported
on Pile Foundations, EERC Report 77-25, Earthquake Engineering Research
Center, University of California, Berkeley, Calif., 1977.
10. Nogami, T., "Dynamic Group Effect on Multiple Piles under Vertical Vibration," Proceedings, ASCE Engineering Mechanics Specialty Conference, Austin, Tex., 1979, pp. 750-754.
11. Parmelee, R. A., Penzien, J., Scheffey, C. F., Seed, H. B., and Thiers, G. R.,
Seismic Effects on Structures Supported on Piles Extending Through Deep Sensitive
Clays, Report submitted to the California State Division of Highways, SESM
64-2, University of California, Berkeley, Calif., 1964.
12. Poulos, H. G., "Group Factors for Pile-Deflection Estimation," Journal of the
Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 105, No. GT12, 1979, pp. 14891509.
1284

13. Sheta, M., and Novak, M., Vertical Vibration of Pile Groups, Research Report
GEOT-13-80, Faculty of Engineering Science, University of Western Ontario,
London, Ontario, 1980.
14. Wolf, J. P., "Dynamic Stiffness of Group of Battered Piles," Journal of the
Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, "Vol. 106, No. GT12, 1980, pp. 198203.
15. Wolf, J. P., and von Arx, G. A., "Impedence Function of a Group of Vertical
Piles," Proceedings, ASCE, Vol. 2, 1978, pp. 1024-1041.
APPENDIX II.NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

do

Es

E?

EI,EA
Gs
G*
H
KR

L
V
r0
s
t

vs

y
z

.0

5H

6D
V

9
0)

= dimensionless frequency (= a>r0/Vs);

= Young's modulus of soil;
= complex Young's modulus of soil [= s (l + i2(3)];
= flexural and axial rigidities of pile;
= shear modulus of soil;
= complex shear modulus of soil [= Gs(l + z'2p)];
= thickness of soil layer;
= local pile flexibility factor (= EI/Esr);
= local pile compressibility factor (= EA/Esr20);
= pile length;
= lateral soil reaction on unit pile length;
pile radius;
= center-to-center spacing of piles;
= axial soil reaction on unit pile length;
= shear wave velocity of soil;
= lateral pile displacement relative to free field;
= axial pile displacement;
= material damping of soil;
= lateral soil-pile spring coefficient (= Sf +_ 8f);
= axial soil-pile spring coefficient (= 8" + 182);
= Poisson's ratio of soil;
= directional angle between two piles; and
= circular frequency.
=

1285