Search Documents

By Donald A. Bruce

The construction of major structures in karstic limestone terrains poses difficult problems to designer and contractor alike. This reflects the inherent variability of such conditions, and also the significant impacts caused by the construction processes themselves. Three case histories are provided of recent projects in the United States: the sealing of a major inflow into a quarry, the improvement of a highly loaded bridge pier foundation, and the installation of high capacity micropiles. Emphasis is placed on problem assessment and execution verification.

Jan 1, 2002

By R. A. Bullivant

Roger Bullivant Piling Limited has started 1992 with the introduction of the CONE PILE into its range of precast concrete foundation techniques. Since the establishment of its Piling Division ten years ago, alongside the original Underpinning Company, a commitment to innovated development has seen a steady growth in Roger Bullivant's activity in piling, ground treatment and general foundation engineering. Over the last four years, £1.2 million has been invested by the Bullivant Piling Division into research and development in the field of precast piling and other foundation systems. The goal has been to develop economically attractive systems tailored to our clients design requirements and, wherever possible, unique to Roger Bullivant Piling.

Jan 1, 1992

By Timothy C. Siegel, Derrick Dasenbrock, Rich Lamb, Paul J. Axtell

"The axial resistance provided by deep foundations may be divided into two components: side resistance and tip resistance. The direction that the side resistance acts depends on the relative movement between the deep foundation and the adjacent soil. That is, when the foundation moves downward relative to the soil, then the side resistance is positive and acts upward. Conversely, when the soil moves downward relative to the foundation the side resistance is negative and acts downward. Research supports that both positive side resistance and negative skin friction develop in essentially all deep foundations. The side resistance distribution is a function of the soil strength and stiffness, the applied top loads, and whether the top load is sustained, transient, or a combination of sustained and transient loads. Consideration of drag load and downdrag has become more convoluted with implementation of geotechnical aspects into the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and its use of load and resistance factors. This paper examines the current AASHTO Specifications and presents an alternative design approach for drag load and downdrag using the LRFD framework. The alternative design approach is illustrated by two examples involving drag load and downdrag.IntroductionThe axial resistance provided by deep foundations may be divided into two components: side resistance and tip resistance. The direction that the side resistance acts depends on the relative movement between the deep foundation and the adjacent soil. That is, when the foundation moves downward relative to the soil, then the side resistance is positive and acts upward. Conversely, when the soil moves downward relative to the foundation the side resistance is negative and acts downward. Research supports that both positive side resistance and negative skin friction develop in essentially all deep foundations. The side resistance distribution is a function of the soil strength and stiffness, the applied top load, and whether the top load is sustained, transient, or a combination of sustained and transient.Consideration of drag load and downdrag has become more convoluted with implementation of geotechnical aspects into the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and its use of load and resistance factors. This paper examines current LRFD design specifications and presents an alternative design approach for drag load and alternative design approach is applied to several examples where drag load and/or downdrag may control design."

Jan 1, 2015

By Fabrice Mathieu

The Cutter Soil Mixing (CSM) provides a cost effective solution for the rapid construction of retaining and cut-off walls using new equipment developed from diaphragm wall cutter technology. CSM consists of cutting and mixing drums mounted on compact hydraulic motors. Soletanche Bachy CSM has been designed to leave the space above the tool free, thereby mixing the soil efficiently during all the phases of the wall construction, with high penetration rates. The precise positioning and verticality of the wall is achieved using a kelly bar and full monitoring. Soletanche Bachy CSM is a versatile equipment which can be mounted on various carriers: pile rigs, hydraulic crane, carrier equipped with telescopic mast. The major phases of Soletanche Bachy CSM development are presented, including the results of an extensive trial carried out in Le Havre (France). The soil consists of hydraulic fill with soft soil lenses overlying sandy deposits. 20m deep panels were constructed to support a rectangular shaft. During the construction, and after its completion, the shaft was subjected to an extensive series of tests followed by a partial excavation. The paper discusses also the future development of the technique and its potential applications.

Jan 1, 2006

By Erik M. Westerberg

The Soilex Pile combines a slender shaft, for quick and easy installation, with an enlarged pile toe, for high capacity. The key component is the Expander Body, which is inflated by injecting cement grout when in position. The latest development in the Soilex Pile System results in a reduction of the total cost of Soilex Piles, in many cases values that are competitive with pre­cast concrete piles and displacement piles. Soilex Piles can now be installed on top of a bearing soil layer, instead of 3 to 4 m into that soil as previously required, further minimising the ground disturbance. Soilex Piles achieve high capacity in relatively loose soils, with ultimate loads typically between 1000 and 2000 kN in a sand with CPT qc = 5 to 10 MPa or SPT N= 10 to 20. It is possible to pre-load and proof-load all piles with dynamic testing up to 2000 kN or using built-in jacks, thereby verifying the capacity. The vibratory installation method, which is extremely quick and causes very little soil disturbance and noise, is exemplified by two case histories.

Jan 1, 2000

By Gyimah Kasali

Rapid Load Testing was performed as part of an extensive drilled pier testing program for the University of California Berkeley Capital Improvement Program. The purpose of the program was to: (1) Verify the axial compressive design capacity values for the planned 24" piers, and to estimate the capacity of the existing 30" CIDH piers, and (2) To evaluate the seismic performance of the proposed drilled shafts. The Fundex PLT was used since the loading period of the PLT is very similar to the period of a seismic event, making it an ideal tool to model the pier response to seismic events. "Performance-based design" of structures subject to seismic loads has been of particular interest to UC Berkeley Seismic Review Committee and the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. The comparison of static tests to Rapid Load testing also provided valuable correlations. The program represents one of the most comprehensive drilled pier test programs on the West Coast. The testing program consisted of Rapid Load Testing using the Fundex PLT on 6 drilled piers. Rapid Load Tests were followed by conventional static compression and tension tests on selected piers, followed by another cycle of rapid load tests on the statically tested piers. The piers featured extensive instrumentation to allow detailed interpretation of the test result. Correlations were drawn to compare static load test result to that of the PLT in the particular soil profile, and the PLT also provided the data to analyze the ultimate seismic capacity of the piers. The load test results indicate that the ratio of interpreted failure load from the PLT data to the corresponding load from the static load test data is about 1.2 to 1.3 for the clayey soils underlying the test site. The results also indicate that the PLT offers an economical approach to defining the stiffness of drilled pier foundations subjected to seismic loads for use in performance-based design.

Jan 1, 2002

By Roy A. Imbsen

Following the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) expedited an effort to evaluate and retrofit important state-owned toll bridges to en­hance performance of the state's transportation systems during and after major (credible) earthquake events. Imbsen and Associates, Inc. (IAI) along with their sub-consultants, were awarded a contract to conduct seismic evaluation and to develop retrofit design for Benicia-Martinez Toll structure, to meet a "Serviceable" performance requirement after the event of a "Safety Evaluation Earthquake." This paper describes the design and construction specifications for the deep foundations supporting the main spans of the Benicia-Martinez Bridge. Benicia-Martinez Toll Structure (George Miller Bridge), a high-level deck-type welded truss bridge with welded girder approach spans, carries Interstate Route I-680 over the easterly end of Carquinez Strait near San Francisco, CA. The nearly 5000 ft long main truss structure consists of ten spans, ranging from 330' to 528' in length, supported on cellular reinforced con­crete pier structures. Foundation systems across the waterway, consist of cellular reinforced concrete footings, supported by groups of 6' diameter, concrete filled, steel caissons, resting on 5' deep rock sockets, at depths of 50' to 150' below the water level. Seismic evaluation of the existing foundation systems accounted for spatially varying ground motion along the length of the structure, variability of foundation material strength (i.e. at bed-rock), variation and effects of scour depth on the performance of the foundations, and dy­namic soil-structure interaction. Performance of caissons beyond their elastic strength, as well as their effects on the behavior of the foundations and substructures were evaluated and considered in establishing foundation vulnerabilities. Several retrofit strategies were considered leading to a final retrofit strategy to strengthen end connections of existing caissons, as well addition of new caissons to provide adequate lateral force resistance for the foundations. Final design package includes specifications as well as construction methods and requirements for existing and new caissons, under traffic, and pile load testing procedures for design loads of up to 12500 kips per caisson.

Jan 1, 1998

By Roy A. Bell

A 200-foot diameter, 72-foot high petroleum storage tank was built in a hillside ravine where a portion of the site contained soft clay fill. Soil-cement piles, 40 inches in diameter and up to 38 feet long, were installed to support the tank shell and ringwall, and a portion of the tank floor by drilling into the stiff to hard underlying soils and weathered bedrock. The goal was to provide a strong enough foundation to resist the seismic tank shell loading and to minimize differential settlement of the tank shell to avoid out-of-round clearance problems between the shell and floating-roof. A cantilevered retaining wall up to 8 feet high was constructed around a portion of the tank perimeter by inserting steel H-beams into soil-cement piles. The cantilever soldier piles for the retaining wall were installed from a temporary earth embankment on the hillside directly over the top of the wall. The temporary embankment was then removed and the tank pad was cut to grade in front of the soldier piles. Some of the soil-cement piles for both the tank foundation and retaining wall could not be advanced to design depth because the drill/mixing tools could not penetrate to the required depth in the hard soils/bedrock. Smaller diameter borings (22 inches in diameter) were drilled through the centers of the short-of-design soil-cement piles to the design depth and then backfilled with concrete.

Jan 1, 1997

By Paolo Heiniger

The aim of this paper is to present the operative solutions devised and then adopted to implement the underexcavation (soil extraction) of the Tower of Pisa, by means of soil extraction. The intervention has been performed by the Consorzio Progetto Torre di Pisa, a joint venture made of five qualified Italian companies (Trevi S.p.A. , Rodio S.p.A., Italsonda S.p.A., Ismes -Enel Hydro S.p.A., Bonifica S.p.A.), selected for their experience in the field of monitoring and restoration of monuments, structural design, foundation engineering and specialised works in underground conditions. Since 1991 the Consorzio has been charged with the specific task of implementing, within the contractual frame of a Concession, all the decisions made by the International Multidisciplinary Commission appointed by the Italian Government the previous year, with the aim at solving the «problem» of the Tower, strengthening the structure and stabilising its foundation. The Trevi Group, which is represented by Trevi S.p.A. in the above mentioned Consorzio, has given and is giving its direct and constant contribution and is engaged in supplying the special equipment to the operation and the drilling technology which has been successfully adopted to date.

Jan 1, 2000

By Matteo Montesi

Deep foundation elements are often used as discrete elements in externally supported earth retaining structures such as soldier piles and lagging walls, secant/tangent pile walls, anchored walls, etc. These structures can be designed using different approaches such as conventional limit equilibrium methods, finite element/difference analyses, and soil spring (p-y) analyses which are contained in various commercially available computer programs used by engineers worldwide. Although these programs usually undergo various degree of verification and validation, users must be aware of each program’s limitations and conditions in which each design approach should or should not be used. These programs may incur difficulties when non-continuous deep foundation elements are used as part of the retaining system and in cases of non-uniform geometry where closed-form solutions are not available. Design input parameters such as passive arching width, wall-to-soil friction, and p-multipliers (pm) are not always given enough attention which may result in potential design deficiencies. This paper presents the main features of various earth retaining structure design approaches and discusses their advantages/disadvantages. The paper addresses some of the limitations and difficulties that may be faced with when utilizing non-continuous discrete deep foundation elements and identifies key elements that are sources of potential deficiencies and errors. An example comparing the design outcomes using different design approaches is presented. INTRODUCTION Earth retaining structures are used to retain soil and create or maintain a difference in ground elevation between grades in front and behind the retaining structure. Deep foundation elements have been used for decades to support earth retaining structures. Earth retaining structures that are supported by deep foundation elements are typically referred to as externally stabilized system (O’Rourke and Jones, 1990). An externally stabilized system uses an external structural element, in contrast to internally stabilized systems which rely on reinforcements installed within and extending beyond the potential failure mass. The design of externally supported retaining structures can be accomplished using different approaches, which can be challenging under certain conditions. Each approach has been discussed extensively in available literature, and is well summarized in the and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines. The objective of this paper is to present the most widely used design approaches and discuss their limitations and difficulties in one concise and brief document, giving the reader a good source for comprehensive understanding of the various design approaches, supported by a technical example. This paper is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all available design methods and formulations available in the literature.

Jan 1, 2018

By Haijian Shi, Drew Pizzo

This article focuses on the appropriate application of subsurface investigation methods for transmission structures, which are typically designed to resist lateral rather than vertical loads. Currently, the three methods used most often for the subsurface investigation of transmission structures in the field are the Standard Penetration Test (SPT), the Cone Penetration Test (CPT), and the Flat Dilatometer Test (DMT). Each of these methods has advantages and disadvantages, and each is more applicable to some scenarios than to others. To gain a better understanding of these test methods and the implications of using them for various kinds of applications, a comparison study was conducted in the field in Maryland, for three boring locations. Each boring location was explored using each of the three tests as stated. The results of the tests and lessons learned are presented and compared, and these comparisons show that the three test methods agree on the majority of the findings. The results from each test method were also used to derive key parameters such as the soil friction angle for given foundation designs considered in order to establish a clear basis for comparison. Recommendations for performing transmission structure subsurface investigations are made in order to optimize the use of each method and thereby optimizing subsequent foundation designs. INTRODUCTION For overhead transmission structures, the most important structural requirement for determining the foundation design differs from the requirement for other structures such as buildings and bridges in accord with the conditions the transmission structures will need to withstand. In addition to the ability to bear a given vertical load consistent with its use, the foundation must bear lateral loads arising from wind and other weather conditions. The foundation types used most often for overhead transmission monopole structures include concrete drilled pier, vibratory caisson, and direct embedment. In order to determine an appropriate and even an optimum foundation design for any given set of conditions, an appropriate subsurface investigation method or approach is needed. Currently, the standard penetration test (SPT), the cone penetration test (CPT), and the flat dilatometer test (DMT) are the three most commonly used subsurface investigation methods.

Jan 1, 2018

By Jim Frazier

Tradition has often dictated low design load stresses on piles. Such traditions often developed prior to modern static or dynamic pile testing methods and perhaps result from a few limiting situations. These low stress limits were then broadly applied, even in cases where the piles could carry substantially higher loads. With sufficient testing to prove the design, higher design loads may present significant overall savings to the project owner. The cost of the testing then becomes an insignificant cost compared to the potentially great benefit of increased pile loadings. To confirm higher load possibilities for driven piles, the pile is tested either statically or dynamically. Further savings and increased testing efficiency result from remote dynamic pile testing. This paper presents a project where design stresses were considerably increased as a result of additional testing and use of remote dynamic pile testing equipment.

Jan 1, 2002

By A. Eslami

In recent development of piled raft design, the contribution of both raft and piles to tolerate the loads is taken into account, depending on the stiffness and contributions of involved elements i.e.; piles, raft and surrounding soil. The piles are usually required not to ensure the overall stability of the foundation but to act as settlement reducers. One alternative method of foundation design is therefore to introduce piles purely as a means of improving or enhancing the stiffness of the base soil by structurally disconnecting the piles from the raft. In this paper, two and three dimensional finite element analysis of disconnected pile-raft systems are performed on three case studies including a 12-storey residential building in Iran, a 39-storey twin tower in Indonesia, and the 256m height of Messeturm tower in Frankfurt, Germany. The analysis include different geometrical parameters, e.g., pile spacing and embedment length, arrangement and raft thickness for foundation system to obtain the optimized design functions and to clarify the role of each parameter and method of analysis. The parametric study results and comparison to a few field measurements indicate that by concentrating the piles in the central area of the raft foundation leads to the optimum design with the minimum total length of piles. This achievement can be considered as a criterion for project cost efficiency. On the other hand, disconnected piled-raft systems can significantly reduce the settlements and raft internal bending moments. Finally, the comparison indicates that simple and faster 2D analysis has almost the identical results to 3D analysis which is complicated and time consuming.

Jan 1, 2008

By Juan M. Antorena

A pile driving and testing program was undertaken to evaluate installation procedures, assess capacity, particularly in uplift, of 360- and 460-mm (14- and 18-inch) square prestressed concrete piles and provide foundation design parameters for the New Mid-Point Bridge project in Fort Myers, Florida. Nine piles were dynamically monitored during installation, and six piles were monitored during restrike driving to evaluate pile drivability and uplift and bearing capacity including time related capacity increases due to soil "set-up". In addition, two static load tests (tension and compression) were performed to calibrated the results obtain during the dynamic testing. This paper presents descriptions of the pile driving testing program along with findings regarding pile uplift and compression capacities from the static load testing, pile capacities from dynamic testing (CAPWAP® analyses), soil-pile adhesion values, wave equation factors, soil strength vs. time dependency, foundation design (anticipated pile tip elevation) and pile driving recommendations.

Jan 1, 1995

By Joseph T. Coe, Siavash Mahvelati, Alireza Kordjazi

This paper introduces recent advances in stress-wave NDT systems for use in assessments of in-service foundation integrity and drilled shaft construction. The primary results of the laboratory experiments are very promising, as the acquired image was capable of differentiating changes in pile cross section as low as 0.3 cm. The preliminary results with the same hardware components on a relatively large scale cemented sand model were also promising. A brief overview is provided of both systems including hardware, survey methods, and data processing techniques, followed by a discussion on application of the results to QA/QC of deep foundations. INTRODUCTION There are two main applications in which current QA/QC NDT technology fails to provide sufficient information regarding deep foundation conditions: (1) detection of flaws in outside cover concrete of drilled shafts and corrosion in steel piling; and (2) evaluation of anomalies beneath the bottom of drilled shaft excavations. Previous studies have demonstrated the capabilities of high frequency stress waves for geotechnical and foundation evaluation purposes (Lee and Santamarina 2005; Coe and Brandenberg 2010; Coe and Brandenberg 2012; Coe and Kermani 2016). Higher frequency waves can visualize smaller anomalous features at the expense of higher attenuation and smaller propagation distance. Therefore, the goal of this study was to advance the state of NDT practice by development of a prototype high resolution stress-wave imaging system as proof-of-concept. The equipment and hardware were modular, which allowed simultaneous development of two system configurations for application to in- service foundations as well as drilled shaft excavations during construction. Results are presented based on two large scale soil models. The first laboratory model simulated section loss in an in-service steel pipe pile and drilled shaft foundation (Fig. 1a). The second model simulated anomalous conditions beneath drilled shafts excavations as might be encountered in areas with significant karst (Fig. 1b). For both models, evaluation of foundation conditions relied on the propagation of small amplitude seismic stress waves using hardware similar to those described in Coe and Brandenberg (2010) and Coe and Brandenberg (2012).

Jan 1, 2018

By B. Ramanathan

The results of a pile load test on a 1200 mm dia and 25 m long bored Cast-in-situ pile in soft rock is reported. The subsoil has a high N value of above 60 from 7 m to 21 m. The soft rock was observed below 21 m and N value exceeded 100. The theoretical calculations showed that the safe carrying capacity will be about 410 t. But the actual load test on the pile indicated that the allowable load is only about 140 t. This is attributed to the fact that the soil is cemented and loses strength due to remoulding caused by pile installation. It is concluded that great care should be exercised in determining the carrying capacity of piles in cemented soils and soft rocks and that 'N' value alone should not be used.

Jan 1, 1996

By Michael Quadagno

Hudson River Pier 86, home of the historic USS Intrepid Aircraft Carrier and the Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum, is currently undergoing a $30M reconstruction. This project involves the demolition of the old timber pile supported pier and construction of a new 150 ft wide by 782 ft long concrete pier, built over the footprint of the old piles. The new pier consists of steel pipe piles, precast concrete pile caps, and a composite deck, made up of precast, prestressed concrete planks and cast-in-place concrete topping. This paper focuses on both the structural design and construction of the new pier, with emphasis on the pile foundation. Pier 86 is unique in that it is required to resist the extremely high lateral loads imposed on it by the permanently moored 898 ft long aircraft carrier during severe storms. A total of 360 steel pipe piles support the new pier. These piles, which are 24 in. in diameter and range in length from 58 ft to 175 ft, were driven down to bedrock. The piles, each having 200 ton allowable capacities, work together to resist the significantly large lateral loads exerted on the pier by the ship. The installation of the piles was unique in that all the piles, including the ?super-longs?, were fabricated to-length offsite, delivered to the site via truck and barge, and installed in one piece, eliminating the need for field splicing. The Pier 86 reconstruction will be completed within an extremely aggressive 18 month schedule, from January 2007 through June 2008. The refurbished aircraft carrier Intrepid will return home in September 2008, and the grand re-opening of the pier will be on Veteran?s Day 2008. This paper provides a case history for owners, government agencies, engineers, and construction professionals that will be faced with the challenges of designing and building new piers.

Jan 1, 2008

By M. D. Riegel, Brian T. Felber

"Construction of foundation elements in an urban environment is often complicated by multiple constraints such as existing foundations, utility conflicts, maintenance and protection of traffic on high volume roadways, low overhead clearances, and vibration and displacement monitoring to reduce risks of impact to existing facilities. Micropiles are commonly a preferred foundation alternative in an urban setting to mitigate some of these risks. This paper presents examples in which micropiles helped reduce risk in an urban setting on the two subject infrastructure improvement projects. The case studies presented include the Verrazano Narrows Bridge HOV and Bus Ramp Improvements in Brooklyn, NY and the Kosciuszko Bridge Replacement in Queens and Brooklyn, NY. The paper details the micropile design, how risks were mitigated, and the complications to each of these projects associated with the urban setting.INTRODUCTIONThe paper begins with background information about the Verrazano Narrows Bridge HOV and Bus Ramp Improvements Project, followed by background information for the Kosciuszko Bridge Replacement Project. This introductory background information is followed by discussion of the urban site constraints, which controlled the foundation type selection for both projects. In closing, the paper discusses the micropile design process, load testing, and construction.VERRAZANO NARROWS BRIDGE HOV & BUS RAMP IMPROVEMENTS BACKGROUNDProject ScopeThe project consists of two new ramps; one designated for HOV / Bus traffic between Staten Island and the Gowanus Expressway, and one to be utilized for storing the barrier transfer vehicle. Also included is the complete reconstruction of Ramps B and F to accommodate horizontal and vertical alignment clearances from the new ramps, removal of the median of the upper level to add one lane, utilities improvements, stormwater improvements, and miscellaneous structural repairs. The new HOV / Bus Ramp was designed for reversible traffic flow to accommodate the demand of the peak traffic direction by movable barrier.Geotechnical / Foundation Engineering ScopeThe geotechnical work included a desk study review of existing plans, geotechnical reports, and geologic maps. This data was subsequently supplemented with a subsurface exploration program. Once completed, foundation design was performed for 25 proposed bridge substructures. Four existing battered pilesupported foundations and two shallow foundations were evaluated for increased loading. Upon completion of the foundation design, foundation plans, specifications, and an engineer’s estimate were prepared. Foundation installation was observed on a part-time as needed basis."

Jan 1, 2016

By Antal Partos

ATLAS Processing Company Shrevesport, LA initiated a major plant expansion in 1980. SITE Engineers, Inc. provided engineering consultation regarding the foundation of the vacuum unit. Four test borings were drilled and laboratory testing completed for shear strength and compressibility. Vertical drains were proposed to accelerate time rates of settlements. Steel erection was completed by May 22, 1981 with very small < 0.1 in., settlements. Hydrotesting was initiated on July 9, 1981 and completed on August 27, 1981. An average rebound of 0.3 in. was computed resulting into an average net settlement of 0.5 in. This paper describes in detail soil behavior during load testing.

Jan 1, 1992

By Sanket Rawat, Ravi Kant Mittal, Vikash Prasad

"The understanding of the response of pile foundations under various types of loads is a necessary prerequisite to analyze and design them properly. Therefore, this paper highlights and compares the provisions available in Indian Standard IS 2911:2010 to estimate the capacity of laterally loaded pile foundation with the provisions available in different country codes and existing literature. Comparisons are made between the Indian standard method, Broms method and Matlock & Reese method for the analysis of laterally loaded piles due to popularity and prevalence of the later methods in design offices worldwide. This has been achieved using a parametric study on pile embedded in pre-consolidated clay and sand for both fixed head and free head case in terms of displacement and ultimate load capacity. It has been found that there are various limitations to the Indian Standard method associated with various cases such as short pile analysis, complete moment distribution etc. Therefore, suitable recommendations have been made on the basis of the above comparison to improve the accuracy of the design in Indian perspective. The proposed comparison and subsequent area of improvements will present the design engineers all across the globe, a broad sight of design specifications of laterally loaded piles.INTRODUCTIONPiles in groups are very often subjected to both axial and lateral loads. In the 1960’s, designers used to assume that the piles could carry only axial loads and the lateral load is to be carried by batter piles. However, later, a large number of load tests authenticated that vertical piles also can transfer lateral loads through shear, bending, and lateral soil resistance rather than purely acting as axially loaded members. Initial attempts to analyze laterally loaded piles used the finite-difference method, as described by Howe (1955), Matlock and Reese (1960), and Bowles (1968). Matlock and Reese (1956) used the finite difference method to get a series of non-dimensional curves to enable the user to input the appropriate curve with the given lateral load and estimate the ground-line deflection and maximum bending moment in the pile shaft. Later, Matlock and Reese (1960) extended the earlier curves to include selected variations of soil modulus with depth."

Jan 1, 2017