OTC 3310
EXAMPLE OF SOIL-PILE COUPLING UNDER SEISMIC LOADING
by Hudson Matlock, Stephen H. C. Faa and Lino C. C. Cheang,
University of Texas
., Copyright 1978, Offshore Technology Conference
This paper was presented at the 10th Annual OTC in Houston, fex" May 8-11,1978, The material Is subject to correction by the author. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words,
Abstract
An example problem is presented to demonstrate
a new soil-pile coupling method, and to show some of
the behavior of a pile foundation under seismic
loading. Computed ground motions based on an
existing earthquake record were employed in this
problem. To properly represent the soil-pile
coupling under earthquake motions, a nonlinear,
hysteretic and degrading support model, which is also
capable of formation of a gap zone near the soil
surface, is used in the analysis.
Introduction
One important aspect in the design of a pile-
supported offshore structure for a seismically active
site may be the coupling of the pile to the support-
ing foundation. A dynamic beam-column program,
SPASM (.eismic 1:ile ~nalysis with .upport !:lotion) has
been developed to analyze the behavior of a laterally
loaded pile under severe earthquake motion.
of the method are presented in a parallel paper (Ref
5)
Basically, the pile is modelled by a discrete-
element mechanical analog. All input data for both
pile and soil can be freely variant along the' length.
Structural effects are simulated by rotational
restraints at specific joints, with additional stiff-
nesses and masses lumped at individual nodes or
distributed along the member. An implicit type
(Crank-Nicolson) operator is used in formulating the
d.ynamic analy6i6.
References and illustrations at end. of paper.
The nonlinear-inelastic soil-pile coupling model
is capable of simulating various aspects of the
probable behavior of a laterally loaded pile under
large earthquake motions. This includes the possible
formation of a molding-away zone near the mudline,
hysteresis with strength degradation under full
reversals of displacements in the range beyond an
initially elastic condition, and psuedo-elastic
response wherever the relative displacements between
the soil and the pile are small. This soil model
uses an assemblage of elastic coulomb sub-elements,
and is based conceptually on observations of previous
physical experiments on laterally loaded piles,
especially in soft clay (Ref 4). In sands and silts,
both free-field and local liquefaction around the
pile head may occur under seismic loading (Ref 2).
To further the realism of modelling the soil-pile
interplay for this condition, the incorporation of
pore-pressure effects into the present model would be
Details appropriate, but is not yet accomplished.
Problem Description
A 320-ft-long steel pipe pile with a 48-inch out-
side diameter and a 1.5-inch wall thickness is
considered in this example problem. A general des-
cription of the pile and its beam-column representa-
tion is shown in Fig 1. The pile is assumed to be
embedded in a 200-ft clay deposit, and grouted inside
a 64-ft-high leg of a jacket structure. It is also
assumed that the jacket leg is rotationally
constrained at three structural brace points and at
the deck level. To further represent the structural
 3 2
effects in the model, a mass equal to 3 X 10 lb-sec I
inch is lumped at the pile top (station 0) to repre-
2 Ground displacements are used as input excitation
sent the top deck. A total mass of 179 lb-sec linch
is distributed along the member between the top deck
and the jacket structure. To represent an appropriate
portion of the jacket structure, a total mass of 914
2
lb-sec /irich is distributed along the composite leg-
pile member. A portion of the above two distributed
masses is meant to represent the inertial effects of
the water. Also, increased stiffness is used for this
leg-pile member. An axial compressive force equal to
5
7.0 X 10 lb decreases uniformly from the mudline to
a value of zero at the pile tip. To represent rate
effects, a viscous damping coefficient is arbitrarily
selected which approximates 1 to 2 percent of the
critical damping of the system.
Soil Profile
The soil used in this example problem is assumed
to be a medium strength clay deposit. The simplicity
of the soil profile is intended to facilitate assess-
ment of the results. The shear strength versus depth
and G versus depth for this profile are illustrated
max
in Fig 2. The total unit weight is taken as 120
3
lb/ft
The backbone p-y curve employed in this problem
is the predicted initial static loading path. To
represent the possible formation of gaps near the
scourline, all the sub-elements of the support curve
at this location are designated as gap elements.
number of gap elements is then linearly reduced to
none at a depth roughly equal to the depth of reduced
resistance, x (Ref 4), which is at about 35 ft
r max
below the mudline. Beyond this depth, the overburden
pressure is large enough to force the soil against the
pile as the system undergoes oscillation. A cyclic
minimum strength of 40 percent is assumed for each
sub-element of all soil curves along the profile.
The formulation of the initial loading path, and the
computation of the cyclic minirwrns are generally in
agreement with the soft clay criteria as recommended
by the American Petroleum Institute (Ref 1). Degra-
dation in strength is performed on each individual
sub-element at each station upon a full reversal of
direction of slip. A detailed description of this
degradation process and a definition of gap elements
are discussed in Ref 5.
2262
Ground Motions
in the present analysis. There are two ways in which
these ground displacements can be input; one is to
describe the displacement-time histories along the
soil profile as a series of sinusoidal curves.
Several curves with various amplitudes, periods and
phasing may be superposed at anyone point along the
profile. This can be done successively at any desired
number of points along the profile. The information
at points between these input stations are then
obtained by linear interpolation inside the program.
The second type of input is to describe displacement-
time histories in a numerical array. Values for
intermediate stations are again obtained by a linear
interpolation procedure.
A set of computed ground motions are used in this
example problem. These ground displacement-time
histories are computed by using Program CHARDRG, which
is a revised version of Program CHARSOIL (Ref 6) that
includes a degradation procedure similar to the one
discussed in Ref 3. For a uniform, single-layer soil
profile, ground motions are necessary only at a few
depths, since there are no dramatic changes in the
displacement values at various points along the pro-
file. A linear interpolation procedure is used in
the program to obtain displacement values at inter-
mediate time points between input values. However,
in the present problem, computed values are used at
The every time step in order to capture higher frequency
effects in the displacement-time curve.
In computing these time histories of ground
displacement; the G versus depth profile as shown
in Fig 2b is used, together with the degradation
parameter t versus strain as illustrated in Fig 3.
A time increment length of 0.00552 second is used in
this study.
The earthquake analyzed is the significant first
15 seconds of the San Fernando Earthquake as
reflected by the east-west component of the CalTech
Seismology Laboratory Record. The accelerogram of the
original record is shown in Fig 4a. This is used in
program CHARDEG to produce a set of six displacement-
time curves which, in turn, are used as input to
program SPASM. Displacement-time curves computed at
the soil surface and at a depth of 200 feet for this
problem are shown in Fig 4b and Fig 4c, respectively.
The peak acceleration at the base rock is scaled to
0.35 G. The peak acceleration at the soil surface is distributed along the jacket-pile member are believed
computed to be 0.129 G. to cause this stabilization in peak deflection values.
Certainly the hysteretic damping from the soil also
Presentation of Results tends to reduce amplification. However, after a few
cycles, as the soil is gradually molded away, and a
In Fig 5, the hysteresis loops at the mudline
gap zone is formed at this location, this hysteretic
(station 30) clearly indicate the formation of a gap
damping effect will diminish. From the same figure
zone. Further down the soil profile at a depth of 16
it can be seen that the first mode period of vibration
feet (station 34), the hysteresis loops plotted in
is roughly equal to 5 seconds. The initial natural
Fig 6 showed no gap zone being formed. It is also
period of the soil computed from CHARDEG is approxi-
shown that strength degradation effects are not very
mately 1 second.
pronounced. This is due to the fact that there is
The molding-away of the top layer of the soil is
only a very limited number of reversals of strain in
equivalent to an increase in the free standing length
the selected earthquake and their magnitudes are
of the pile. As a result, one would expect an
small. As a result, very few sub-elements have been
increase in the natural period of vibration of the
yielded in both directions so as to cause any signi-
system. Nevertheless, this effect is not significant
ficant strength degradation. Under larger earthquake
in this problem.
forces, as in the example problem in Ref 5, the pile
The gapping action and degradation phenomenon do
tends to undergo more deflection with respect to the
seem to have an effect in the computed base shear and
soil and more reversals of displacement will cause a
base moment as shown in Fig 10 and Fig 11, respective-
more significant reduction in the soil strength.
ly. In Fig 10, the base shear, or shear force trans-
As expected, an elastic response is observed at
mitted to the structure, reached a constant peak
a depth of 160 feet (station 70). As shown in Fig 7,
value after a few cycles of vibration. The base
the maximum relative displacement between the soil
moment, as shown in Fig 11, continued to build up in
and the pile is only 0.01 inch. This means that the
magnitude. This may be caused by the molding away of
pile is primarily riding with the soil at this dept~
the top layer of the soil mass.
as the ground shakes.
Moments along the pile are plotted for two time
In Fig 8, absolute pile deflections and soil
steps in Fig 12. At one second after the solution has
displacements are plotted for time steps 1150 and
started (time step 180), the moment values are very
1700, respectively. These two time steps correspond
small, as expected. This also indicates that the
to th~ maximum and minimum absolute ground displace-
solution has a smooth start. The moment values com-
ments computed from program CHARDEG. Two interesting
puted at about 15 seconds after the start of the
points are indicated in this figure. First, the
solution (time step 2700) are also plotted in the same
system is primarily oscillating in its first mode.
figure. The four notches in the moment diagram above
Second, below a depth of 56 feet, which roughly
the mudline are caused by the four externally applied
corresponds to station 44, there is essentially no
rotational-restraint couples.
relative displacement between the pile and the soil.
This concurs with static analysis predictions that
Conclusion
the significant responses occur in a zone close to
the soil surface. The results presented herein are intended as an
Pile deflections are plotted against time for initial demonstration of the uses of program SPASM to
two stations in Fig 9. It is shown in this figure simulate soil-pile-structure coupling under the
that there is a gradual increase in the peak influence of separately computed ground displacements.
deflections for station 0 which represent the top Although there is no independent solution which can be
deck. The relatively slender member between the used for comparison, the results appear to be consis-
jacket structure and the top deck seems to cause a tent and reasonable in all respects. Both high and
resonant amplification at the deck. The deflections low frequency effects are seen to be acting throughout
at station 30, which is located at the mudline, tend the system, except that the deck motion appears to be
to reach a constant peak value after the initial responding in a more or less resonant fashion to the
increase. The relatively higher stiffness values lowest frequency component.

2263
 ,.- ~._L_ _ .
..-J ,._ .S,.k :, -; .
,...3. ,,.. .. .

For the particular example chosen, the pile-soil
gapping near the surface was more significant khan che structive advice.
cyclic degradation of resistance. The example earth-
quake was not unusually severe and was of short
duration. Although a larger earthquake might produce
mere soil resistance, the gapping or molding-away
phenomenon appears likely to dominate in most cases.
The demonstrated behavior suggests that, with
further study, it may be possible to use the program
to do preliminary earthquake simulation for the
purpose of deducing simplified descriptions of the
pile-soil coupling characteristics. These might then
be introduced into other solutions of the complete
soil-pile-structure system.
However, since no significant feedback modifica-
tion of the basic soil motion ia expected, it may be
possible to perform calculations in a sequential
fashion, with the computed ground motions fed to the
soil-pile coupling solution as in the present example
and then the computed motions, or shear and moment,
transferred to the superstructure at the nudline.
alternative possibility would be to incorporate the
SPASM program completely within a comprehensive
solution for the whole system.
Regardless of ultimate utilization, the logical
next step is to select several typical cases and to
perform a series of solutions with variations of input
parameters through reasonably expected ranges. Such
solutions would necessarily be based on a number of
estimations and assumption about soil-pile coupling
but earlier static and cyclic laboratory and field
test results should provide reasonably satisfactory
guidance. In the absence of definitive field
observation of earthquake behavior of pile-supported
structures this approach appears to be appropriate.
motion used in the example problem, and other con-
The guidance of Dr. Larry M. Bryant in construct.
ing the structural effects for the pile model in the
example problem is also acknowledged.
References
1. American Petroleum Institute, Recommended
Practice for Planning, Designing, and
Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms, Eighth
Edition, Dallaa, Texas, April 1977.
2. Finn, W.D. Liam, Geoffrey R. Martin, and Michael
K.W. Lee, Applications of Effective Stress
Methoda for Offshore Seismic Design in Cohesion-
Iesa Seafloor Soils, accepted for publication,
1978 Offshore Technology ~onference, Houston,
Texas, May 1978, OTC 3112.
~
. Idriss, I.M., R. Dobry, E.H. Doyle, and R.D.
Singh, !!Behaviorof Soft Clays Under Earthquake
Loading Conditiona,u proceedings, 1976 Offshore
Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, May 1976,
OTC 2671.
~tlock, Hudeon, tCorrelationsfor the Design of
4.
An Laterally Loaded Piles in Soft Clay, Preprints,
1970 Offshore Technology Conference, Houston,
Texas, April 1970, OTC 1204.
5. Matlock, Hudson, Stephen H.C. Foo, and Larry M.
Bryant, !Isfmlation of Lateral Pile Behavior
Under Earthquake Motion, Proceedings, Am=vcican
Society of Civil Engineera, Specialty Conference
on Earthquakes and Soil Dynamics, Pasadena,
California, June 1978.
b
. Streeter, V.L., E.B. Wylie, and F.E. Richart, Jr
IICHARSOIL, Characteristic Methods Applied to
Soils, a computer program distributed by NISE_E/
Computer Applications, March 1974.

Acknowledgements

This paper is drawn from a research project

underway at The University of Texas at Austin. The
project is supported by twelve companies: Atlantic
Richfield Company, Brown and Root, Inc., Chevron
Oil Field Research Company, Continental Oil Company,
Earl and Wright, Getty Oil Company, Gulf Research and
Development Company, Marathon Oil Company, Mobil
Research and Development Company, Penzoil Producing
Company, Shell Oil Company, and Union Oil Company,
with Dr. Jamea Pearce being the general coordinator.
Mr. Ignatius Lam and Dr. Chan-l?enTsai of Fugro,
Inc. provided the CHARDEG analysis of the free-field
.- .

2264
.. .:
 LUMPED ROTATIONAL STATION
MASS RESTRAINT NUMBER
3X 103 lb-seC2/in, 1.5 x 10 in.-lb
u ~ p v -o
a

Sea Level ~ =
5

-lo
# 9.0x 108in.-lb
-15

$ 1.0x 109in.-lb -20

-25
1.2 x 109 in. -lb
& -30
NW: y
$.$+z$
35
- 48 in. O.D.
x 1.5 in. Wall
-40

45

Increment Length
-50
h=4ft

-55

-60

-65

-70

-75

80
FIG, 1 - GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EXAMPLE PROBLEM,

SHEAR STRENGTH, Su (ksf) GMAX (kSf)

o 1.0 2.0 o 1000 2000 3000 4000

50 50 -

.
.
+
: 100 : 100 -
Ill
$ n
0

150 150 -

200 1 I m~
(o) (b)

FIG, 2 - (A) SHEAR STRENGTH VS, DEPTH, (B) (jAX VSr DEPTH,
 ix
td
1-
W

~ 0.2
d
n.
+

0.1 -

o~ ,..
u ,.Q.5 - r.o I.5
SHE~~w6 STRAIN y (/.)
.,
FIG, 3- DEGRADATION PARAMETER T VS. SHEARING STRAIN Y .
f.=~ -;

,. :.:. 6.73
~ ,- 7
.7., - G
., : -L .. - [ A
-- 4.o~ l\

-98,4
r

L I I 11 6.0r
-
E 4.0
--L A
o- -W gl z 2.0
TIME (secl Z20
e ......
go
,*. (a) . - ~ 4
.
., . TIME (see)
,,+, :-2.0
,.
z
~ -v (c)
FIG, 4 - (A) A~CE&OGR& OF @-FERNANDO E!A~TH~UAKE (AFTER CALTECH SEISMOLOGY LAB-
ORATORY RECORD) , (B) COMPUTED D~jPMCEMENT-T IME HISTORIES AT THE SOIL SURFACE, (C)
COMpUTDDISPLACEM~ T-TIME HISTO~IES AT A DEPTH. OF 200 FEET,

DISPLACEMENT (in, )
. ..

\ --
.: +-5073

FIG, 5 - HYSTERI%; S LOO;S GENERATED AT PILE STATION 30,

..
...
 1637

*)

9737

FIG, 6 - HYSTERESIS LOOPS GENERATED AT PILE STATION 34,

DISPLACEMENT (in, )
-3.o-2.O-I.O O 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.05.0 6.07.0 8.0

4 -

8 -

12-

1173 16-

Ground
Mud line

DISPLACEMENT (in.)

~ 40-
g44-
$48-
:52-
Time .
Step 56- ~Time Step
1700
1150\
60-
64-
.1535 68-
72-
FIG, 7- HYSTERESIS LOOPS GENERATED AT PILE STATION 70, 76-
80-
FIG, 8 - GROUND DISPLACEMENT AND PILE
DEFLECTION PLOTTED ALONG THE PILE FOR
TIME STEPS 1150 AND 1700,
 &.
1!5 Pile Station O

Pile Station 30
(Mudline)

400

00 3200
IE STEP

Time Increment Len@h

ht = 5.52 x 10-3sec

-10

.,

~IGr 9 P]LE DEFLECTION

,.. . VS, TIME FOR PILE STATIONS O AND 30,
-. ,-
..
,
. . . . . .

.. .

.,,. 7
..

. .
,,, ,

-,..
40
.

20
n
a

m
6
-

Time Increment Length

ht= 5.52 x10-3 sec
-4C

 FIG, 11 - COMPUTED BASE MOMENT vs, TIME,

MOMENT x 105 (in.-lb)

-320 -240 -160 -80 0 80 160 240

I I

Mudline 29 -

~Tlme Step 180

FIG, 12- COMPUTED MOFIENT ALONG THE PILE FOR TIME STEPS
1.80AND 2700,