RANDOLPH, M. F. & WROTH, C. P. (1979).

zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ
Giorechnique 29, No. 4,423- 439

An analysis of the vertical deformation of pile groups

M. F. RANDOLPH* and C. P. WROTH*

A method of analysis is presented which permits the
settlement of a pile group under vertical load to be
calculated with reasonable accuracy, without the
expense of a full rigorous analysis. The method is
based on the superposition of individual pile displace-
ment fields, considering the average behaviour down
the pile shafts separately from that beneath the level
of the pile bases. The displacement fields are deter-
mined by means of a recently developed, approximate,
closed form solution for the problem of a single
vertically loaded pile. The analysis may be applied to
any general pile group, the only restriction being that
all the piles must be embedded to the same depth.
The soil is modelled as an elastic material character-
ized by a shear modulus which is assumed to vary
linearly with depth, and a Poisson’s ratio, assumed
constant. The paper outlines the analysis and com-
pares calculated load-settlement ratios for groups of
up to nine piles with those from more rigorous
numerical methods of analysis. Three field loading
tests on pile groups are studied and it is shown that
the settlements at working loads may be predicted
with good accuracy using soil parameters back-
analysed from the results of single piles load tested on
each particular site.
L’article prksente une mCthode d’analyse qui permet
de calculer, dans des limites de pr&zision raisonnables,
l’enfoncement d’un groupe de pieux sous une charge
verticale, sans qu’il soit ntcessaire de faire appel g
une analyse compltte rigoureuse qui serait onereuse.
La mCthode est fond&e sur la superposition de champs
de d&placement de pieux individuels et considkre
stparCment le comportement moyen du frottement
latitre et le comportement moyen sous la base des
pieux. Les champs de d&placement sont dCterminCs
au moyen d’une methode, approximative, rCcemment
mise au point pour un pieu unique g charge verticale.
L’analyse peut s’appliquer ti n’importe quel groupe
de pieux pourvu que tous les pieux soient encast&
ZXla meme profondeur. On admet que le sol est un
matdriau Clastique caract6ris.6 par un module de
cisaillement qui est supposC varier lineairement en
fonction de la profondeur, et par un coefficient de
Poisson supposC constant. L’article prksente l’analyse
dans ses grandes lignes et compare les rapports
charge-enfoncement calculCs pour des groupes
jusqu’g neuf pieux avec ceux obtenus & partir de
mtthodes d’analyse numkriques plus rigoureuses.
Trois essais de chargement in situ sur des groupes de
pieux sont BtudiCs et l’on voit qu’il est possible de
calculer assez pr&isCment les enfoncements sous des
charges de service g l’aide des parametres du sol
r&analysCs & partir des rCsultats obtenus pour des
pieux individuels soumis ii des essais de chargement
sur chaque site.

INTRODUCTION
Many different methods have been reported for the analysis of single vertically loaded piles
(e.g. Coyle and Reese, 1966; Poulos and Davis, 1968; Mattes and Poulos, 1969; Poulos and
Mattes, 1969; Banerjee, 1970; Ellison, D’Appolonia and Thiers, 1971; Baguelin zyxwvutsrqponmlkji
e t al. 1975).
To be of practical significance in the design of piled foundations, a method of analysis must
be capable of extension to the problem of a group of piles. The finite element method has
been used to analyse vertically loaded pile groups (Naylor and Hooper, 1975; Ottaviani, 1975)
but it is generally too expensive since a full three-dimensional analysis is required. To date,
only the method of integral equations (also known as the boundary element method) has
proved economically viable for the analysis of pile groups (Poulos, 1968; Butterfield and
Banerjee, 1970 and 1971; Banerjee and Davies, 1977; Banerjee and Butterfield, 1978) and even
this method is cumbersome and expensive to use in the early stages of design.

Discussion on this Paper closes 1 March, 1980. For further details see inside back cover.
* University Engineering Department, Cambridge.
424 M. F. RANDOLPH AND C. P. WROTH

/-pile Upper layer

of soil
/
/
/
/
*-----_---_-_ -----_---_-__B
Lower layer
of soil

/
/
/:
,: ps
//
/
/
AI--------- /--------- Bl zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedc

Fig. 1. Uncoupling of effects due to pile shaft and base: (a) upper and lower soil layers; (b) separate deformation
patterns of upper and lower layers

A more attractive approach for pile groups is based on the principle of superposition (Cooke,
1974). The displacement of a pile is increased if the pile is within the displacement field of a
neighbouring pile. Interaction factors’ between two piles at any particular pile spacing may
be calculated from integral equation analysis. A pile group may then be analysed by forming
a matrix of interaction factors for every pair of piles in the group. The matrix may be inverted
to give the load distribution within the group for say, a given displacement of each pile,
corresponding to a rigid pile cap (Poulos, 1968). Poulos (1977) presents a useful summary of
the analysis of pile groups; charts are given showing how the solution for the settlement of an
isolated pile may be modified, for application to groups of piles, by the use of suitable inter-
action factors.
Recently, it has been shown that a single vertically loaded pile may be analysed very simply
by considering the load-deformation characteristics of the pile shaft separately from those of
the pile base (Randolph, 1977; Randolph and Wroth, 1978a). It will be shown below how the
same approach may be used for the analysis of pile groups. In particular, the analysis shows
how the different amounts of interaction between the shaft and base displacement fields leads
to a greater proportion of load being transferred to the pile base when there are neighbouring
piles. Ghosh (1975) has shown this result from studies of model pile groups.

’ An interaction factor is the fractional increase in displacement of one pile due to the presence of a similarly
loaded neighbouring pile.
VERTICAL DEFORMATION OF PILE GROUPS 425

SUMMARY OF SOLUTION FOR SINGLE PILE

The analysis of a single vertically loaded pile is described in detail by Randolph (1977) and
by Randolph and Wroth (1978a). The relevant steps in the solution will be summarized here.
The analysis is based on an elastic soil characterized by a shear modulus G, which may vary
with depth, and a Poisson’s ratio v. The soil surrounding the pile is divided into two layers
by a line AB drawn at the level of the pile base (see Fig. 1). Initially it is assumed that the soil
above AB will be deformed solely by the stresses transferred from the pile shaft and that the
soil below AB will be deformed solely by the stresses at the pile base. Some modification of
this assumption is necessary in order to take account of the interaction between the upper and
lower layers of soil; the interaction will serve to limit the deformation of the upper layer of
soil, reducing the deformations to negligible size at some radius zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSR
r,,,.
From considerations of vertical equilibrium, it may be shown (Cooke, 1974; Frank, 1974;
Baguelin et al., 1975) that the shear stress in the soil around the pile shaft decreases inversely
with the radius from the pile. This leads to a logarithmic variation of the deformation w with
radius r. The deformation may be written as

(1)
I
w(r) = zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
0, zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK
r>r,

where r0 is the shear stress at the pile shaft, r. is the radius of the pile and r,,, is the limiting
radius of influence of the pile. The deformation of the pile shaft may be written (Frank, 1974;
Baguelin et al., 1975)

ws=5y . . . . . . . . . .

where c=ln 2
0
The pile base acts as a rigid punch on the surface of the lower layer of the soil. The deforma-
tion of the pile base is given by the Boussinesq solution (see Timoshenko and Goodier, 1970),

P,(l - 4
Wb==T . . . . . . . . . (3)

At some distance from the pile base, the loading will appear as a point load. The settlement
around a point load decreases inversely with the radius and is given by

P(l -v)
w(r)== . . . . . . . . . (4)

The ratio of the settlements in equations (3) and (4) for a given load is

w(rj 2 r.
--=- - . . . . . . . . . (5)
wb n r

From St Venant’s principle, the settlement caused by the pile base at large radii should equal
that due to a point load. Thus the settlement profile at the top of the lower layer of soil in
Fig. 1 may be approximated by zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCB

w(r)= w,c2 . . . . . . . . .
r
426 zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
M. F. RANDOLPH AND C. P. WROTH

l.OI - settlement profile round rigid punch

2 rO
x- -x - --x approximate expression i =T/ T_

I.5 I
I(
WlWb
t

Fig. 2. Comparison of actual and approximate surface settlement profiles for a rigid punch

where c = 2/7t (from equation (5)). The profile given by this equation is compared to the true
settlement profile around a rigid punch in Fig. 2. It may be seen that the agreement is very
good for r>2r,, which is the area of interest. The effect of the base loading falls off more
rapidly than that of the shaft loading given by equation (1).
For a rigid pile, the shaft settlement is constant down the pile and equal to the settlement
of the pile base. Assuming that the shear strain in the soil next to the pile shaft is constant
with depth (see Frank, 1974), the shear stress z. will be proportional to the shear modulus at
that depth. For soils where the shear modulus varies linearly with depth, it is convenient to
introduce a factor p, giving the degree of homogeneity, where

P = GdG, . . . . . . . . . (7)

where G,,, and G, are the values of the shear modulus at pile mid-depth and pile base respec-
tively. The total load transferred to the soil from the pile shaft may now be written (using
equation (2))
2rt
P, = 2m-,,l(TO)av = 2nl F G1,2 = r lw,pG, . . . .

Thus the overall load-settlement ratio for a rigid pile may be written in dimensionless form

-= pt Pb PS =-+--4 2rtp 1
. . . . .
-+-
Glr,w, G/row, Glrew, l-v [ r.

This equation has been found to give good agreement with the results of finite element and
integral equation analyses. A suitable value for rm has been found to be (Randolph, 1977;
Randolph and Wroth, 1978a)
r, = 2.5 pl(1 -v) . . . . . . (10)

for piles in a deep stratum of soil. Curve 1 in Fig. 3 shows a comparison between results from
equation (9) and corresponding results (from Banerjee, 1970) obtained by integral equation
analysis for a rigid pile in an homogeneous incompressible soil. Good agreement is obtained
for a wide range of I/r,-the pile slenderness ratio.
The solution given by equation (9) for a rigid pile may be extended to the case of compres-
sible piles (Randolph and Wroth, 1978a). It is also possible to apply the same solution with
VERTICAL DEFORMATION OF PILE GROUPS 421

-s-
o 01
00 i

6’5,
02

es-
0 0

.
I pile

\ . ,0,2ro

-!L - Integral equation (Banerjee. 19701

Grow
. Analytical model

Rigid piles in incompressible soil lV=O,5)

Pile spacing is s = Sr,

Fig. 3. Comparison of load-settlement ratios for symmetric pile groups containing up to four rigid piles

minor modifications to underreamed piles and also to end-bearing piles. In the latter case, the
maximum radius of influence of the pile zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK
r,,, is reduced (see Randolph and Wroth, 1978b).

INTERACTION BETWEEN SIMILARLY LOADED RIGID PILES

When there are similarly loaded neighbouring piles, the overall displacement of a pile may
be obtained by superimposing the individual displacements fields (Cooke, 1974). Due account
must be taken of the different amounts of interaction along the pile shaft and at the pile base.
It will be assumed that equation (1) gives the settlement profile at the pile mid-depth and
equation (6) that at the pile base.
Considering two rigid piles, the overall settlement of one pile may be written as the sum of
the settlement due to its own loading plus that due to the neighbouring piles displacement
field. Thus

w=w,+w, . . . . . . . (11)
At the pile mid-depth

wS=wl+wz=~[ln($+ln(~)] , . . . . . (12)
428 M. F. RANDOLPH AND C. P. WROTH zyxwvutsrq

Fig. 4. Interaction factors for pairs of rigid piles: (a) homogeneous soil, Y = 0.4; (b) non-homogeneous soil,
Y = 0.4

where s is the pile spacing, defined as the distance between the centre-lines of the piles. Thus s
is the average radius of one pile as seen from the other pile. The load-settlement ratio for each
pile shaft is now

Similarly, the settlement of the pile base is

whence
%I= w,+wz =
pqoI+$O
4r,G

( > ...... (14)

Pb
-=-_
4
-
s
. . . . . . . . (15)
WC+, l-v r&+s

Thus, the overall load-settlement ratio for each of two similarly loaded piles is

4 s 2np I
(16)
=l-vr,c+s+~+ln(r,/s)< ’ . ’ ’ . ’

This result may readily be extended to symmetrical groups of equally loaded piles. The
expression for piles in a group of three (at the corners of an equilateral triangle of side s) and a
group of four (at the corners of a square of side s) are respectively

4 s 27rp 1
. (17)
= 12v2r,c+s+i+21n(r,/s)r, . . .

and

4 s 2nP I
(18)
= l-v 2*707r,c+s+[+ln[r,3/J(2)s3] < ’ ’ .

In Fig. 3, results obtained from equations (16) to (18) are compared to the results of integral
equation analyses obtained by Banerjee (1970), for rigid piles in homogeneous, incompressible
soil, at a pile spacing of s = jr,. As for the case of a single pile, good agreement is obtained.
VERTICAL DEFORMATION OF PILE GROUPS 429

It is possible to use equation (16) to obtain interaction factors between two piles. Such
factors could then be applied in the manner of Poulos (1968) to analyse rigid pile groups. The
interaction factor between two particular (similar) piles may be calculated from the inverse of
the load-settlement ratio. Thus the increased settlement for a given load may be written as

(~)2=(l+a”)(~)l . . . . . . . (19)

where ~1,is the interaction factor. This factor may be calculated from equations (9) and (16)
for a variety of pile slenderness ratios and different spacings. Figure 4(a) shows typical results
for piles in homogeneous soil with Poisson’s ratio of 0.4. A comparison with corresponding
results from integral equation analysis shows reasonably good agreement, particularly for pile
spacings of practical relevance (5 <s/r, < 20). The semi-analytical model tends to underpredict
the interaction between piles compared to the integral equation method, especially for piles
of Z/r,, < 40. However, in a real soil, the non-linear nature of soil deformation will lead to less
interaction than predicted from a linear elastic analysis, since the deformation will be confined
more to the immediate vicinity of the pile. Thus the method presented here may provide more
realistic predictions of pile interaction than a rigorous integral equation analysis.
Another reason why interaction factors predicted by elastic analyses tend to be higher than
those measured experimentally is that, historically, the factors have been calculated for piles
in homogeneous soils (Poulos, 1968; Banerjee, 1970) whereas the stiffness of soil usually
increases with depth. The interaction between piles decreases as the degree of homogeneity
decreases (i.e. p varies from 1 down to 0.5), as has been pointed out by Banerjee and Davies
(1977). This decrease reflects, in part, the higher fraction of load taken by the base of a pile
in soil whose modulus is proportional to depth, compared to a pile in homogeneous soil.
Figure 4(b) shows typical variation of interaction factor ~1, against pile spacing for piles of
slenderness ratio zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
I/r, = 40, embedded in soils of different degrees of homogeneity (v = 0.4). It
is of interest to note that, from the form of equations (10) and (16), the interaction factor for
a pair of piles of a given slenderness ratio in a soil with p = 0.5 is the same as that for a pair
of piles of twice the length (for the same spacing and pile radius) in an homogeneous soil
(P = 1).
Although interaction factors are useful for giving some indication of the increase in settle-
ment of one pile due to a neighbouring pile, they neglect an important feature of the result in
equation (16), which is the transfer of a higher proportion of load to the pile base than occurs
for a single pile (Ghosh, 1975). This is due to the greater interaction which occurs between the
shaft displacement fields than between the base displacement fields; thus more load is trans-
ferred to the pile base in order that the shaft and base displacements of each pile should be
compatible. To account for this feature, a more sophisiticated analysis is needed for general
groups of piles.

ANALYSIS OF RIGID PILE GROUPS

In a general group of piles, each pile may take a different share of the total load and may
also be of different radius (although only groups of piles all of the same length will be con-
sidered here). The concept of summing the settlement contributions of each pile must be
generalized. For the zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
jth pile of a group of iz piles, the shaft settlement is

CWS), = i$l Cws)ij = A jl (zcJi(ro)i In (?) zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQP

. . + . . .
IJ
430 hf. F. RANDOLPH AND C. P. WROTH

where sij = r0 for i = j. The zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGF

n different values of w, may be related to the n values of r0 by
equation (20) to give a matrix equation
w, = [FJZ, . . * . . . . , . * (21)
In a similar manner, the base settlements may be evaluated from

Cwb)j = i$l
Cwb)ij = F ii1gII . . . . . . (22)

where Sij = cr,, for i = j. This leads to a second matrix equation, relating the base settlements
wb to the base loads P,
w,, = [F,,]Pb . . . . . . . . . (23)

For rigid or very stiff piles ((EA),/(GZ,‘)> IO), w, N wb and, for a rigid pile cap, (w,)~ =
(w,)~. Thus equations (21) and (23) may be inverted to give values of r0 and P, for a given pile
cap displacement. From these values, the overall and average load-settlement ratio for the
pile group may be calulated.
When applying this method, care must be taken over the choice of r,, the limit of influence
of a pile. Clearly a group of piles is going to have a more extensive zone of influence than a
single pile of the same length. The value of Y, is related to the amount of interaction between
the upper and lower layers of soil in Fig. 1 (see Randolph, 1977). If the base of the pile group
is considered as a single large rigid punch, then the deformation of the lower soil layer will
decrease more gradually with radius, thus reducing the amount of interaction, leading to
larger values of r,. It has been found that r, should be increased by an amount rg related to
the dimension of the pile group. Thus

rm = 2*51p(l- v) + rg . . . . . . . . . (24)

For rectangular groups of piles, rg may be taken as the radius of the circle of equivalent area
to that covered’ by the pile group. The precise value of rg is not critical as it only contributes
to logarithmic terms in equation (20).
Calculated values of the load-settlement ratios of individual piles in a 3 x 3 pile group are
shown in Fig. 5(a) for an incompressible, homogeneous soil. The pile spacing is s = 5r, and
rg has been taken as 6r,. Agreement with curves obtained by Banerjee (1970) is reasonable,
although there is some discrepancy for shorter piles. As discussed above, the analytical model
underpredicts the interaction between piles by comparison with the integral equation method,
hence leading to higher values for the load-settlement ratios of the piles in the group. The
equivalent results for a 3 x 3 rigid pile group in a soil whose stiffness is proportional to depth
are shown as full lines in Fig. 6. It may be seen that the range of loads taken by the three pile
types is less, for a given slenderness ratio, than for the pile group in homogeneous soil. As for
the case of only two piles, the interaction amongst a group of piles of a given length in homo-
geneous soil, is the same as that for an equivalent group of piles, but of twice the length, in a
soil where p = 0.5. ‘Although the integral equation method has been extended to the analysis
of piles in the latter type of soil (Banerjee and Davies, 1977; Banerjee and Butterfield, 1978),
lack of appropriate published results precludes comparison with such an analysis.

ANALYSIS OF COMPRESSIBLE PILE GROUPS

In general, the approach outlined above (i.e. equations (20) to (23)) may be used to analyse
compressible pile groups. However, some modification to the method is necessary since the
values of w, and wb will be different (due to compression of each pile) and, even for a rigid pile
 VERTICAL DEFORMATION OF PILE GROUPS zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHG
431

-IO0 20 40 60 80 loo l/r.

- _,oo 20 40 60 80 100 J/k
I I I I I I I I I I

40-
S
Grow ,

T6%%
io’ 0 0, Pile spacing
= is 5 = 5, - Integral equation b3anorjeo. 19701

Lo: 0: Y Isoil) 0.5 l Analytical model zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWV

0,
---I I--2ro

Fig. 5. Comparison of load-settlement ratios for piles in a 3 x 3 pile group in homogeneous soil: (a) rigid piles;
(b) compressible piles, A = EJG = 6000

- Rigid piles Analytical

_--+E,~~-
Ge

Pile spacing is s=Sr,

Soil properties are G=mz [Gl= me)

Y =o.s
Fig. 6. Load-settlement ratios for piles in a 3 x 3 pile group in a soil with stiffness proportional to depth
432 zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYX
M. F. RANDOLPH AND C. P. WROTH

cap, the individual terms of the vectors will be different. Equation (20) will be taken to refer
to the conditions at the pile mid-depth. For a given distribution of the deformation of the pile
heads, w,, additional equations must be generated in order to relate w, and w,, to wt in terms
of the load taken by the pile. The analysis will be carried out assuming that the displacement
of the pile heads is given by the vector w, The terms in this vector may be chosen to correspond
to a rigid pile cap (all terms equal) or a flexible pile cap. In the latter case, some iteration will
be necessary in order to choose values of w, which are compatible with the calculated loads in
each pile. zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

Compressible pile groups in homogeneous soil

Randolph and Wroth (1978a) have shown that the distribution of deformation down a single
compressible pile embedded in homogeneous soil is given by

w(z) = wi, cosh[/@-- z)] . . . . . . . . (25)

where (I# = (2/m) (I/r,J* and il = EJG,.
The stiffness of the pile is represented by Ep, which is an equivalent stiffness, such that

E, = (EA),/(~r,,*) . . . . . . . . . (26)

Since $$I, equation (25) provides approximate expressions for w, and w, of

w, N wJl+$/1*1*) . . . . . . . . . . . (27)

w, = w(1/2) N w,(l +@P) , . . . . . . . . (28)

These expressions enable a simple relationship to be established giving w, in terms of w, and

wb
w, N gwt+ 3w,) . . . . . . . . . WJ)
In addition, since the average load transmitted down the pile is given by

P,” = +(Pb+PJ . . . . . . . . . (30)

the compression of the pile may be expressed as

1
W,- Wb N P,, 7 =&(p,+P,) . . . . . (31)
nro E, 0

The most straightforward way to proceed with a solution is to follow an iterative procedure.
From a solution assuming rigid piles, where w, = wb = wt, values of P, and P, are obtained.
Equations (31) and (29) then enable new estimates to be made of w, and wb. These values are
substituted into equations (21) and (23) to obtain a new solution. The procedure is repeated
until convergence is achieved-normally after four or five iterations.
The method has been used to analyse the same 3 x 3 group of piles as above, but with com-
pressible piles where 1 = E,/G = 6000. The load-settlement ratios for the three different pile
types are compared in Fig. 5(b) with those given by Banerjee (1970). Agreement between the
two sets of results is reasonably good, particularly at large pile slenderness ratios. The compres-
sibility of the piles has the effect of reducing the range in loads taken by the different piles
within the group.

Compressible piles in soil with st@ ness proportional to depth

The same general approach may be adopted for pile groups in soil where the shear modulus
VERTICAL DEFORMATION OF PILE GROUPS 433

is proportional to depth. Equation (20) still applies at the pile mid-depth, thus the relevant
values of G and z0 are the average values down the pile. Since less load is transferred to the
soil in the upper region of the pile shaft compared to the case of piles in homogeneous soils,
equations (29) and (31) no longer apply. Randolph (1977) has shown that the relevant equa-
tion are now
w, N 3(2w,+w,) . . . . . . . . . (32)

and
1
(2P,+Pb) . . . . . . . (33)
wt- wb = 3~,~1G,

The procedure of solution is identical to that for piles in homogeneous soil, equations (32)
and (33) being used instead of equations (29) and (31) to provide new estimates for w, and wb
after each iteration.
The broken lines in Fig. 6 show the calculated load-settlement ratios for the piles in a 3 x 3
pile group in an incompressible soil where the modulus is proportional to depth. The pile
compressibility (taken as 2 = E,/G, = 6000) has had the effect of further reducing the range of
load taken by the different pile types for a particular slenderness ratio. Note, however, that
the corner piles still take nearly twice as much load as the mid-side piles. zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfed

Compressible piles in a general vertically non- homogeneous soil

In general, the stiffness of a soil stratum will increase with depth, although the stiffness may
not be proportional to depth. For soils modelled by a linear variation of stiffness, it is possible
to generalize the two sets of equations for calculating w, and wb. The factor p varies from
0.5 to 1 as the degree of homogeneity increases. It is sufficient to interpolate linearly between
the two extreme soil types to give, in place of equations (29) and (32)

w, = &[(7+2p)w,+(5-2p)w,] . . . . . . . (34)

and, in place of equations (31) and (33)

1
wb= wt-6nr,2~~, [(5-2p)P,+(l+&?)Pb] . . . . .

Although an iterative method of solution has been suggested, it is possible to combine

equations (20) to (23) and (34) to (35) to yield a single equation relating w, and P, (see Appen-
dix). This approach is little cheaper, computationally, than the iterative method which con-
verges rapidly. However, the forming of a single stiffness matrix relating the displacements
and loads at the tops of the piles in a group has particular advantages in the general analysis
of pile groups loaded through a pile cap of finite stiffness. By combining the stiffness matrix
with one for the pile cap (obtained, for example, from a finite element analysis of the cap) a
complete solution of the piled foundation is possible.

COMPARISON OF ANALYTICAL SOLUTION WITH EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

There is a paucity of good quality field data on the load deformation behaviour of pile
groups, particularly of data where an independent estimate of the soil stiffness profile may be
made. In the absence of direct laboratory or in situ measurements of the soil stiffness, it is
necessary to deduce values from the results of pile load tests. Three cases of field tests on piles
are considered below. In each case, a shear modulus profile for the soil will be deduced,
434 M. F. RANDOLPH AND C. P. WROTH

0 4 I2 16 20 rh

Pile lood = 40 kN
0.2 x---x- --I( Experimental results
Analytical model
1d Pile
0.3 top

ImWml

0.4 o-4
Totol load on group = 94 kN Load = 31 kN per pile

t
CmWmI 1
CmWmI
(i 1 Rigid pile cop (ii) Equal pile loads

x---x----~ experimental results - analytical model

Fig. 7. Comparison of theoretical and measured displacements for piles in stiff clay (data from Cooke, 1974):
(a) hack-analysed settlement profiles for test on single piles; (h) comparison of displacements for tests on row of
three piles

following the procedure described by Randolph and Wroth (1978a), from the results of load
tests on a single pile. The analytical solution will then be used to estimate the performance of
pile groups tested in the vicinity of the single piles. Comparison of such estimates with the
measured performance of the pile groups will enable the accuracy of the analytical method to
be assessed.

Tests on tubular steel piles in stay clay, reported by Cooke (1974)

Cooke (1974) has reported the results of vertical load tests on a row of three piles embedded
in London clay. The piles were tubular steel piles (external radius = 84 mm, wall thickness =
6.4 mm) embedded to a depth of 4.5 m (giving l/r, = 53.6). The pile spacing was s = 6r,.
Taking Young’s modulus for steel as 210 000 MN/m’, an equivalent stiffness for the piles may
be calculated from equation (26) and the dimensions given above of EP = 30 800 MN/m’.
The central pile of the row of three piles was load tested before the two flanking piles were
installed. From the results of this test, it is possible to estimate a shear modulus profile in the
soil. Assuming a value for Poisson’s ratio of O-5, the deduced (linear) variation of shear
modulus is from 10 MN/m2 at the ground surface up to 45 MN/m2 at the level of the pile base
(a depth of 4.5 m). This gives values for p = G,,JGI of O-61 1 and for I = E,/G, of 684. The
VERTICAL DEFORMATION OF PILE GROUPS 435

Measured curve (single pile)

_ Fitted theoretical curve

(G = 20 MN/m*, p=O.7)

m
(tons)
I20

wt (mm1 wt (mm) zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXW

cpt ZPt
Theoretical
(tons) ’ (tons)’
300- 300-

Theoretical
200-

wt (mm) wt (mm) zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcba

Fig. 8. Comparison of theoretical load-settlement ratios with those measured in tests on pile groups reported by
Berezantzev et al. (1961)
436 M. F. RANDOLPH AND C. P. WROTH

Table 1. Load distribution among piles in

a 3 zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED
x 3 group (test results from Koizumi
and Ito, 1967)

Pile load/Average load

Pile position Theoretical Measured

Centre 044 0.46

Mid-side 0.86 0.89
Corner 1.28 1.25

deduced values of the shear modulus are somewhat higher than those reported by Marsland
and Randolph (1977) from the results of plate loading and pressuremeter tests and by Windle
and Wroth (1977) from the results of self-boring pressuremeter tests. Both types of in situ test
gave average values of shear modulus between 20 and 25 MN/m2 at a depth of 3 m. The higher
values deduced from the pile load test may reflect the higher effective stress level existing around
the driven pile once the pore pressures generated during installation, have dissipated (Wroth,
Carter and Randolph, 1979).
Figure 7(a) shows a comparison of the measured pile and soil displacements (taken from
Cooke, 1974) with those calculated for a single pile using the deduced values of shear modulus.
It should be noted that the model provides good agreement not only at the pile head, but also
at points down the pile and in the soil at the level of the pile mid-depth. The analytical solution
tends to overpredict the extent of influence of the pile in that the measured displacements in
the soil decrease to zero more rapidly than the calculated values. Keeping the same shear
modulus profile the performance of the row of three piles loaded as a group may now be
predicted. Figure 7(b) shows the predicted displacements for conditions of a rigid pile cap or
equal pile loads respectively. (Since the group is symmetric, only half the group is shown.)
It may be seen that, in both cases, good agreement between predicted and measured displace-
ments is obtained. In the case of the rigid pile cap, the analytical solution predicts that 29%
of the load is taken by the centre pile; this compares well with the measured value of 26%
(Cooke, 1974).

Tests on tubular steel piles in soft clay, reported by Koizumi and Ito (1967)
Koizumi and Ito report the results of tests on a 3 x 3 group of piles embedded in soft silty
clay. The clay was lightly overconsolidated and highly sensitive with Atterberg limits of
PL-40-50 %, LL- 80-l 10 % and liquidity index between 1 and 1.3. The piles were tubular
steel piles with external radius of 150 mm, wall thickness 3.2 mm, embedded to a depth of
5.55 m (giving Z/r0 = 37). The equivalent pile stiffness is E, = 8860 MN/m’.
Load tests were conducted on an isolated pile and also on a 3 x 3 group of piles at a spacing
of s = 6r,. Because of the sensitivity of the soil, it will be assumed that, after installation of
the piles, the soil stiffness will be proportional to the depth below ground level (i.e. p = 0.5).
Back-analysis of the test on the single pile then yields a value for the shear modulus of the
soil at the level of the pile base of G, = 7 MN/m2 (thus A= E,/G, = 1270). This value of G,
gives a load-settlement ratio for the single pile of P,/w, = 38 kN/mm, which is equivalent to a
settlement of 3.9 mm under a load of 15 t (just over half the failure load).
The 3 x 3 pile group failed at a load of about 150 t. At 91 t, the settlement was 7.1 mm,
giving a measured load-settlement ratio of 128 kN/mm. The analytical solution yields a pre-
dicted load-settlement ratio of 125 kN/mm (a settlement of 7.3 mm at 91 t). The total load
VERTICAL DEFORMATION OF PILE GROUPS 437

on the (rigid) pile cap is shared unevenly amongst the nine piles, depending on their position
(whether at the centre of the group, at the mid-side or at the corner). Table 1 shows a com-
parison of the predicted and measured load distribution as a function of the average load per
pile. There is encouragingly good agreement between the two sets of values. It should be noted
that the assumption that the soil stiffness is proportional to depth has led to less extreme
variation of the loads in the different piles than would be the case for piles in a homogeneous
soil (see, for example, Poulos (1974), where the same pile group is analysed but assuming a
homogeneous soil deposit).

Tests on concrete piles in dense sand, reported by Berezantzev, Khristoforov and Golubkov (1961)
Berezantzev et al. (1961) report the results of an extensive series of tests on groups of con-
crete piles of radius 140 mm embedded to a depth of 5.6 m into dense sand. The authors were
intent on investigating the manner in which the settlement of a pile group varied with the gross
enclosed area of the group. As such, average load-settlement relationships were given for
different pile groups occupying the same overall area (e.g. a 3 x 3 group at spacing of s = 9r,
and a 4 x 4 group at s = 6r,). Values of soil modulus are quoted ranging from 7.5 to 10 MN/m2
at the ground surface up to 35 MN/m2 at a depth of 10.7 m. These values suggest that, for
piles of length 5.6 m, p N 0.7, and the soil modulus at the level of the pile base is about
22.5 MN/m2. Unfortunately, no mention is made by Berezantzev et al. of what sort of soil
modulus is referred to (although Young’s modulus may be presumed) nor of how the values
were obtained. However, from the results of a test on an isolated pile (see Fig. 8(a)), a value
of G, = 20 MN/m2 gives a reasonable fit to the measured load-settlement curve (retaining
p = 0.7). It should be noted that the soil stiffness is likely to be considerably increased over
its original value by the compacting effect of pile installation.
For the above value of G,, theoretical load-settlement ratios may be calculated for the other
pile configurations tested by Berezantzev et al. The theoretical results are compared to those
actually measured in Figs 8(b) to 8 (e). For all seven of the pile groups that were tested, the
predicted load-settlement ratios give a good estimate of the measured settlement at likely
working loads. It may be noted that, for pile groups occupying the same gross area, the
stiffness increases with the number of piles in the group. zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUT

CONCLUSIONS

The approximate analytical model presented by Randolph and Wroth (1978a) for the analy-
sis of single vertically loaded piles has been extended for the analysis of groups of piles, using
the principle of superposition. For a general pile group (the only restriction being that all
piles must be of the same embedded length), the analysis is conducted in terms of the settle-
ments of the pile mid-depth and pile base, the mean shear stress down the pile-soil interface
and the load on the pile base. As in the case of a single pile, the main assumption is that the
load transfer characteristics of the pile shafts may be considered independently from those of
the pile bases. Compatibility of displacements is maintained by means of approximate equa-
tions relating the differential settlement at different points on the pile shaft to the load carried
by the pile and the distribution of shear stress down the pile shaft.
Comparison of the analytical model with rigorous integral equation analyses of pile groups
in homogeneous soil has shown generally good agreement, although the interaction between
piles has tended to be underestimated by the approximate method. It is considered that this
lower interaction may be more relevant in practice where the non-linear nature of soil tends to
concentrate deformations close to the pile.
438 M. F. RANDOLPH AND C. P. WROTH

The analysis has been used to compare predicted and measured load deformation behaviour
of pile groups. Lack of accurate information concerning the soil stiffness profile for the test
sites studied has necessitated estimating values of the shear modulus of the soil by back
analysing load tests conducted on isolated piles. Values of shear modulus deduced in this
manner tend to be higher than best estimates of the in situ values before installation of the
piles. This may be partly due to disturbance occurring when obtaining the estimates of in situ
shear modulus or may reflect the higher effective stress levels existing in the soil once a pile
has been installed. The accuracy with which pile group behaviour may be estimated, using
values of shear modulus deduced from tests on single piles, suggests a possible procedure for
design of piled foundations large enough to justify a full-scale pile test.
Although the analysis presented is based on the assumption that the stiffness of the soil
varies linearly with depth, the solution for the settlement of a single pile (Randolph and Wroth,
1978a) is developed in such a way that it is straightforward to modify in order to allow for a
layered soil profile. The degree of interaction of piles in a group is relatively insensitive to the
detailed soil stiffness profile provided the trend of soil stiffness variation is reflected by an
appropriate choice of the parameter p and hence of the maximum radius of influence r,,,. Thus,
once the solution for an isolated pile in a layered soil has been obtained, the analysis presented
in this paper may be used to estimate the settlement of a pile group in the same soil.
In conclusion, it should be emphasized that the method presented, since it is based on
elastic soil, suffers from the limitations associated with ignoring plastic deformation in the
soil. In addition, several simplifying assumptions have been made concerning the interaction
of pile and soil. However, the resulting method is versatile, in that it can cope simply with
variations in soil stiffness with depth; it is also cheap enough to be used in the design stages of
a piled foundation, since many potential designs may be analysed for the cost of a single,
rigorous, elastic analysis.

REFERENCES
Baguelin, F., Bustamante, M., Frank, R. & Jezequel, J. F. (1975). La capacite portante des pieux. Annales de
I’lnstitutTechnique du Bdtiment et des Travaux Publics. Suppl. 330, Strie SF/l 16, l-22.
Banerjee, P. K. (1970). A contribution to the study of axially loadedpile foundations. PhD thesis, University of
Southampton.
Banerjee, P. K. & Butterfield, R. (1978). Boundary element methods in geomechanics. In Finite elements zyxwvutsr
in
xeomechanics. (Gudehus, G., Ed.). John Wiley and Sons.
Baierjee, P. K. & Davies, T: G..(l977). Analysis-of pile groups embedded in Gibson soil. Proc. 9th Int. Conf.
Soil Mech. Fdn Engng, Tokyo.
Berezantzev, V. G., Khristoforov, V. & Golubkov, V. (1961). Load bearing capacity and deformation of
piled foundations. Proc. 5th Int. Co& Soil Me&. Fdn. Engng, Paris, 2, 1l-15. _ _
Butterfield. R. & Baneriee. P. K. (1970). A note on the nroblem of a oile-reinforced half-soace. GPotechniaue
20, No: 1, lOC-103.- ~ ’
Butterfield, R. & Banerjee, P. K. (1971). The elastic analysis of compressible piles and pile groups. Geotech-
nique 21, No. 1, 43-60.
Cooke, R. W. (1974). The settlement of friction pile foundations. Proc. Conf. on Tall Buildings, Kuala Lumpur.
Coyle, H. M. & Reese, L. C. (1966). Load transfer for axially loaded piles in clay. J. Soil Mech. Fdn Div. Am.
Sot. Civ. Engrs 92, SM2, l-26.
Ellison, R. D., D’Appolonia, E. & Thiers, G. R. (1971). Load deformation mechanism for bored piles. J. Soil
Mech. Fdn. Div. Am. Sot. Civ. Engrs 97, SM4, 661-678.
Frank, R. (1974). Etude thiorique du comportement des pieux sous charge vertieale, introduction de la dilatance.
Dr-Eng. thesis, University Paris VI (Pierre et Marie-Curie University).
Ghosh. N. (1975). A model scale investieation of the workina load stiffness of sinale oiles and _.wouzIs
_ of._ piles in
clay under centric and eccentric vertical loads. PhD thesis, Univer&y of Southampton.
Koizumi, Y. & Ito, K. (1967). Field tests with regard to pile driving and bearing capacity of piled foundations.
Soil Fdn 7, No. 3, 30-53.
Marsland, A. & Randolph, M. F. (1977). Comparisons of the results of pressuremeter tests and large in situ
plate tests in London clay. Gbotechnique 27, No. 2, 217-243.
VERTICAL DEFORMATION OF PILE GROUPS 439

Mattes, N. S. & Poulos, H. G. (1969). Settlement of single compressible piles. J. Soil Mech. Fdn Div. Am. Sot.
Ciu. Engrs 95, SMl, 189-207.
Naylor, D. J. & Hooper, J. A. (1975). An effective stress finite element analysis to predict the short and long-
term behaviour of a pile-raft foundation on London clay. Symp. on Settlement of Structures, Cambridge.
Ottaviani, M. (1975). Three dimensional finite element analysis of vertically loaded pile groups. GPotechnique
25, No. 2.
Poulos, H. G. (1968). Analysis of the settlement of pile groups. Geotechnique 18, No. 4, 449-471.
Poulos, H. G. (1974). Some recent developments in the theoretical analysis of pile behaviour. In Soil mechanics
-new horizons (Lee, I. K., Ed.). London : Newnes-Butterworth, pp. 237-279.
Poulos, H. G. (1977). Estimation of pile group settlements. Ground Engng zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVU
10, No. 2, 40-50.
Poulos, H. G. & Davis, E. H. (1968). The settlement behaviour of axially-loaded incompressible piles and piers.
Geotechnique 18, No. 3, 351-371.
Poulos, H. G. & Mattes, N. S. (1969). The behaviour of axially loaded end-bearing piles. GPotechnique 19,
No. 2, 285-300.
Randolph, M. F. (1977). A theoretical study of theperformance ofpiles. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.
Randolph, M. F. & Wroth, C. P. (1978a). An analysis or the deformation of vertically loaded piles. J. Geotech.
Engng Div. Am. Sot. Cia. Engrs 104, GT12.
Randolnh. M. F. & Wroth, C. P. (1978b). A simple approach to pile design and the analysis of pile tests.
Pro;. kmerican Society for Testing and Materials Syt&. Behaviour of Deep Foundations, Boston.
Timoshenko, S. P. & Goodier, J. N. (1970). Theory of elasticity. New York: McGraw-Hill, 3rd edition.
Windle, D. & Wroth, C. P. (1977). In situ measurement of the properties of stiff clays. Proc. 9th Znt. Conf. Soil
Mech. Fdn Engng, Tokyo.
Wroth, C. P., Carter, J. P. & Randolph, M. F. (1979). Stress changes around a pile driven into cohesive soil.
Preprints-Recent developments in the design and construction of piles, London.

APPENDIX-DERIVATION OF STIFFNESS MATRIX RELATING P, AND w,

From equation (21)
w, = [F,]T, = a,[F,]{P,-P,} . (36)
where a, = 1/(2xrJ).
From equation (23)
wb = ElPb . . . . (37)
Equations (34) and (35) may be written as
w, = blwb+bZwt . . . . . . (38)
and
Wb = wb+crP,+czPb . . . (39)
where b, = (7+2p)/12, b, = (5--2p)/l2, c1 = -1(5-2p)/(6 sro2AG,) and c2 = -I(1 +2p)/(6rrroZXG1).
Substitution of equations (i) and (ii) into equations (iii) and (iv) yields
bzwI = altF,IP,- {b,[F,]+a,[F,]]P, . . . . . . . (40)
and
wt = -c,P,+{[Fb]-c,[r]P, . . . . . (41)
where [I] is the unit matrix.
Equations (40) and (41) may be combined, eliminating P,,, to give
~b~~b~~F~l+a~~F,l~~‘+~~F~l--c,t~l~~’l wt = ~~~~~~~Fbl+a,~F,l~-‘~F,l--c,~IF~l--c~~ll~-’l~, (42)
Finally, P, = [S,]w, where
El = Ia, @J&l +~,[F,l~-‘[F,l-cI {[Fbl-c2t~l~-11--l
x[b~{bl[F~]+at[F,]}-1+{[F,]-c2[Z]}-1]. . . . . . . (43)