r

3825 March, lu-t SM 2

Journal of the
SOIL MF.CHANICS AND FOUNDATIONS DIVISION
Proceedings of. the American Society of Civil Engineers

LATERAL RESISTANCE OF P1LES IN COHESIVE SOILS

By Bengt B. Broms.J M. ASCE

SYNOPSIS

Methods ar e presented for the calculation of the ultimate lateral resist•

ance and lateral defiection.s at worlcing loads of alngle piles and pile group.,
driven into saturated cohesive sotls. Both tree and fixed headed piles have
been consfder ed. The ultima.te later al r estatanc e has be encalculated aasumtng
that !allure takes place either when one or two plastic hinges form along eacb
Indlvtdual pile or when the lateral resistance of the supporting soil is ex•
ceeded along the total length of the laterally loaded pile. La.tera.l deflections
at working loads have been calculated using the concept of subgrade reaction
ta.klng into account edge etrects both at the ground surface and at the bottom
of each individual pile.
The results from the proposed design methods have been compared with
available test data. Satisfactory agreement has been found between measured
and calculated ultimate lateral resistance and between calculated and meas•
ured de!lection.s at working loads. For design purposes, the proposed analyaes
should be used with caution due to the Umlted amounts of teat data.

Note.-DlscUBslon open until August 1, 196-4. To extend the clostng date one month,
written requeat must be filed with the Executive Beo r-eta ry, ABCE. ThJa paper ls part
1.
of the copyrighted Journal of the Soll Mechanic• and Founde tf ona Divillon, Pr ooe edlnga
t
(
of the American Sootety ol Civil ·Englneen, Vol. 90, No. SM2, Maren, 196-4.
1 Assoc. Prof. of Civ. Engrg., Cornell Unlv., Ithaca, N. Y.

l
I
27
 SM 2
28 March, 1964

INTRODUCTION

Single plles and pile groups are frequently subjected to high later al force!!.
These rorces may be caused by ear thquakes , by wave or wind forces or by
lateral earth pressures. For _ua.rnple, structures constructed off-shore, in
the Guii of Mexico, the Atlanttc o.r Paclfic Oceans, are subjected t.o the later al
Ior c ea caused by wavee and wind.2 The safety of these structures depends on
the ability o! the supporting piles to r eatat the resulting lateral forces.
Structures built in such ar eas as the states of California, Oregon, and
w astungton, or 1n Japan, may be subjected to high lateral acc el er atlons
c aus ed by earthquakes and the supporting piles are called upon to resist the
r e sultlng Iat e r al !.crcei,. For example, tho butldlng codes governing the design
of structures in theae areas specify fr equently that the piles supporting such
a tructures should have the ability to r e stst a lateral force equal to 10% of the
applied axial load.3 ,4
Pile supported retaining walls, abutments or lock structures frequently
r e e lst high lat er al forces. These Iat er al forcee may be caused by lateral
earth pr e ssur es acting on retaining walls or rigid frame bridges, by dirter•
entia.1 fluid pressures acting on lock structures or by ho r tz.ont al thrust loads
acting on abutments of rued or hinged arch bridges.
The lateral bearing capacity of vertical pllea driven into cohesive and
c ohealonles s soils will be investigated in two papers. Thia paper is the first
in that ser les and is concerned with the lateral resistance of piles driven
into cohesive soils. Methods will be presented for the calculation o! lateral
defl ecttons , ultimate lateral r eatstanc e s and maximum bending moments in
that order.
In the analyses developed herein, the following precepts have been aasum ed:
(a} the deflections at working loads of a laterally loaded pile should not be so
excessive aa to Imparr the proper function o! the member and that (b)
Ha ultimate strength ehould be sufficiently high as to guard against
complete collapse even under the most unfortunate combination of !actors.
Therefore, emphasis has been placed on behavior at working loads and
at failure (col laps e).
The behavior at working Ioads has been analyzed by elastic theory assum•
ing that the laterally loaded pile behaves as an ideal elastic member and that
the supporting ao l l behaves as an ideal elastic material. The valid.lty of these
assumptions can only be establlahed by a comparison with test data. The
behavior at failure (collapse) has been analyzed assuming that the ultimate
strength of the pile section or the ultimate strength of the supporting soil has
been exceeded. ,
It should be noted that the methods developed in this paper to predict
behavior at working loads are not applicable when local yielding of the 8011
or of the pile material takes place (when the applied load exceeds about half
the ultimate strength o! the loaded member).

2 Wiegel, R. L., Beebe, K. E., arid Moon, J., "Ocean-Wave Forces on Circular Cy•
lindrical Piles," Trarurnctlon.a, ASCE, Vol. 124, 1959, pp. 89-113.
3 "Recommended Lateral Force Requirement.a," Sel smology Committee, Structural
Engr s. Aasoc.. San F'rane le co, CalU., July, 1959.
4 "Unlform Btllldln.g Code," Pa.clflc Coast Bldg. (){flclala Con!., Loa Angeles, Calil.,
1960.
 BM 2 PILE RESISTANCE 29

BEHAVIOR OF LATERALLY LOADED PILES

A lar ge number of lat er al load testa have been curled out on piles driven
into cohesive l!loile.5-27
� Berve!t; A., "The Axla l and Later al Load Bearing Capactty, and Failure by Buck•

I
ling of Plle11 In Soft Clay.• Proo&edl?K"· Fourth Inte rna tl . Con!. on Soll Meoh.uuci, and
:round.ation Engrg., Vol. II, London, England 1967, pp. 8-13.
6 Browne, W. H., "T'eata of North C-!.!'']!�!'.!!. P(:1�:: fo, t!o0triuiii Di11i.ribution Line 1, �
North Carolina St.ale College of Agriculture and Eng1ne-erl.ng Ex�rlment BtAUon Bul•

I letin. No. 3, Raleigh, North Carolina August, 1929.

,_,,,.-- Evans, L. T., "Bearing Plies Subjected lo Horlr.ontal Loads. • Symposium on Lat•

enl Load Teets on Piles, ASTM Specls.1 Teohnlc11! Pu.b!!c!!t!cn, No. 154, 1953, pp. 30-35.
6 Gaul, R. D., "Model Study o{ 11. DynainloaIIy Ll.tenily Loitded Pile,• JQUrnal of t.h�
Boll Meehan.lea and Foundations Dtvtston, ABCE, Vol. 8,ol, No. SMl, Proc. Paper 1536,
February, 1958.
9 Krynlne, D. P., • Land Slidee 11.Dd Pile Action," Enginoorl.ng News Record, Vol. 107,
November, 1931, p. 860.
10 Lazard, A .• "Moment limlte de renvereement de Iondatrona cyl lndr lques et
pBrallele-plpoolquM iaoleee," Annalee de l 'lnsUb.lte Technique du Bat:lment et dell
Travawt PublJcs, January, Par la, France 1955, pp. 82-110.
11 La:r.ard, A., "Df ac us s lon, • A.ruu.lee de l'Inetltute TeochnJque du &limont et de11
J'ravawt Publics, July-August, Par Ie , Fra.noe 1955, pp. 786-788.
12 La z a rd , A., and Gallera.nd, G., •shallow Foundat lons ," Proceedlnge, Fl.ftb lnter•
natl. Con!. on Soll Mechanics and Foundation Eng'rg., Vol. III, Padl'I, F'rltllce 1961, pp.
228-232.
13 Lorenz, H., "Zur Trag{Abigkeit star re r Spuodw!l.nde und Maatgrtlndungen,"
}38.utechnik-Archlv, Heft 8, Berlin, Germany 1952, pp. 79-82.
14 Matlock. H., and Ripperger, E. A., "P'rocedur ea a.nd ln.etrumenLI.Uon for Tut.
on a Lat.erally Loaded Pile,"' Proceedl.ngs, Eighth Texas Conf. on Boll Mechantcs and
Foundation Engr g , Re sear-eh, Univ. of Texas, Austin, Tex., 1956.
15 Matlock. H., and Rlpperger-, E. A., "Measurement of Soll Pr eaaur e on a L&.terally
Loaded Pile," Proceedlngl'I, Amer. Boe. of Teating Materials. Vol. 58, 1958, pp. 1245-
1259.
16 McCammon, G. A., and Aecherman, J. C., "Resistance of Long Hollow Piles to
Applied Lateral Loada;" Symposium on Lateral Load T'es ta on Piles, ASTM Special
Technical Publication, No. 154, 1953, pp. 3-9.
17 McNulty, J. F., "Thrust Loadlngs on Piles," Journal of the Soll Mechanici, and
Foundatlona Division, ASCE, Vol. 82, No. SM2, Proc. Paper 940, April, 195tL
18 Oater berg, J. 0., • Lateral Slllbllity of Poles Embedded in a Clay Sol l," North•
western University Project 208, Bell Telephone Laba., Evanston, UL, Dec e rnbe r 1 1968.
Hll>arrack, A. L., •Ao Investigation of Lateral Loads on a Test Pile,• Texaa A i. M
Research Foundation, Research Foundation Project No. 31, College Stat.lon , T8)(U
Auguet, 19�2. .
20 Peck. R. B., and Ireland, H. 0., '"Full-Scale Lateral Load Teet of a Retaining
Wall Foundatlon," Fllth lnternatl. Coma oe Sell M�ol-.;nlcs ii.nd Foundation Eng rg.,
P!lrl1, France, Vol. II, 1961, pp . .,153-.,158.
21 Peck, R. B., and Davisson, M. T., diecuealon of "De algn and Stabrltty Consider•
ations for Unlque Pier," by James Mlohalos and David P. Billington, Tran.aactions,
I
ASCE, Vol. 127, Part IV, 1962, pp. 413-42-4.
22 Bandeman, J. W., •Experiments on the Resistance to Horizontal St r es e of Timber
Piling," von Nostrand's En�eertng �zine, Vol. XX.III, 1880, pp. -493-497.
23 Seiler, J.E., nEffect oDepth oEmbeciment on Pole Stability," Wood Preserving
N624, Vol. 10, No. 11, 1932, pp. 152-161, 167-168. J

Shll!.B, W. L., Graves, L. D., and Drtscnll, C. G., •A Report on Field and Labora•

tory Tests on the Stability of Posts Against Lateral Loa.de," Prooeedin&s, Second Inter•
natl. Con!. oo Soil Mech.a.oles and Foundation Engri,, Rotterdam, Holland Vol. V, 19-48,
p. 107.
25 Terr..aghi, K., "Theoretical Soll Meobanlca," John Wiley li Son.s, Inc., New York,
N. Y., 1943.
!Q March, 1964 SM 2

ln many ell-ff the utll..a.ble data ar e d:1.tt1cult to interpret. Frequently,

Jaw t es ts have be-en carried out for the po rpos e o! proving to the satlsbction
or the owner or the �ii!l encineer that the loa.d c ar rylng capac ity o! a pile
or a pile gr oup 1..1'1 8Ufflciently Iar g e to resist a prescribed lateral design load
Under a spect.nc condition. In general, sufficient data ar e oot available con•
cer ning the strength :rrJd defor matfon properties, the average rel.ative denslty
und the angle of Internal !riction of cohes ionles a so lls or the average uncon•
fined cornpr esalve str ength o! the cohesive soil. It Is hoped that thls paper
will stimulate the collecUon of additional teat data. . \
The load-deflection r elattonshlps o'f lat er al ly loaded piles dr iv en into
cohesive soils 11'1 stmtlar to the stress-strain r e lattonshlpa as obtained trom
can.:,clida.ted=U.'1dr2-ined tcntE.28 At loads leoa than one-half to one-Lhlr d the
ultimate Iater al r es iatance of the pile, the defl ect iona increase approximately
bne:.u-ly with the applied load. At hlghe r load levels, the load-defiectlon re•
.tatlonBh.ips become non-linear and the maximum resistance Is in general
xeacned when the deflection at the ground surface Is approximately equal to
,!0% of the diameter or side or the pile.
The ultimate atenJ re•IJ.t..a.nce ol a pile ls governed by either the yield
_3,tren.gtb of the pi le e ectton or by the ultimate lateral r eatstance of the sup•
oor'ttng soil. It will be assumed that Wlure take s place by transforming the
rplle into a mechanism through the formation ot plastic hinges. ThUB the same
prlnclplea wUl be used for the analysts o! a laterally loaded pile as !or a
3 tatfca.Ily Indet er mlnate mambar- or st ructur e and it will be assumed that the
rnoment at a plasttc hinge r emaina constant once a hinge forms. (A plasttc
hinge can be cornpar ed to an ordlnary hinge with a constant friction.)
The possible modes ot failure of lat er al ly loaded piles are Illust r ated in
figs. 1 and 2 for tree headed and restrained piles, respectively. An unr e•
.gtralned pile, which 1..1'1 free to rotate around ill, top end, is defined herein as
o. free-headed plle.
P'a.llure of a tree-he11.C™! pll� (Fig. 1) t.a.ke:s place whm (a.) the maximum
banding- moment in the pile e-xce&dJI the moment cRu•lnlt yiel� or Wlure
c,! the ptle sectton, or (b) the remtltl.ng Iater al earth preuuru exceed the
.,Lateral rui.6b.nce of the ,rupporling aoil along the tull length of the pile and it
�· u a unit, around � point located at some distance below the ground ,
surb.ce l Fig. 1 (b)]. Consequently, the mode of Wlure depends on the pil@ '
!.,�, on the .u.ttn ...- of the pile •&etion, and on the load-ckform.A.t.ion cha.r•
c).Cteristic• of the· IJOil. Failure caused by the formation of a plastic hinge at
the section of maximum bendtng moment [ Fig. 1 (al] takes place when the pile j
-penetration ls relatively Iar ge, Failure caused by . exceeding the bearing
ca pa.city of the surrou� supporting soil [ Fig. 1 (b)] takes place when the
length o! the pile and ltl'J penetration depth are small.
The Wlure modes of restrained piles are Ulustrated in Fig. 2. Fixed•
l1\eaded piles may be r eatr alned by a pile cap or by a bracing syetem, aa is
trequently
I
the case !or br Idge piers or !or oft-shore structures. In the caae

26 Wagner, A. A., • Later al Load Tests on Piles for Design Informatlon, • Symposium
-n La te ra l Load Tests on Pllee, ABTM Spe,cl.B.l Publlcat!oo, No. 16.(, 1953, pp. 59-72.
27 Wal11enk.o, A., "Overturning Propertfoi of Short Piles,• thesis presented to the
/nlverslty of Utah, •l 88.lt Lake, Utah, In 1958; ln partial ful!llrnent of the requJrementa
-ir the d&Vee of Ma.at.er or Bcleooe.
U3 McCleU.od, B., •nd Focht, J. A., Jr., "Sol l Modu lus for Laterally Loaded Pf Ies ;"
"rnns actl oas , ABCE, Vol. 123, 1958, pp. 1040-1063.

I
 SM 2 PILE RESIBTANCE 31

wben the length of the piles and the penetration depths ar e luge, Wlure may
h.ke p lac e whan two pl.aat ic hinge9 form at the Iocattons o! the maximum
posttive and maximum negative bendlng moments. The maximum positive
moment i!I located at some depth below the ground surfac e, 'Whlle the maxi•
mum negative moment is located at the level of the r estr alnt (at the bottom
o! a pile cap or at the level o! the lower bracing syst em !or pile benda) .
For truly nxect-headed conditions, the maximum negative moment is lar g e r
'r t!'� th� »�uiT1 p01:1ii.ive moment and hence, the yield strength o! the pile

I section ls generally exceeded nnrt at the top or the pile. However, the pile
. is still able to resist additional lateral Ioads alter !ormation of the !lrst
1--J.J-
p11u:n11,.;
\....I--- --...1

!Ull!'.',C <LIIU
l .... i1 •• --
l,UlUI t' UUt'O
.-J.--- --•"--'----'---··-j,Jl - -----...ll , .a.J-
IJU� LA.JI..C !JL!.1,.;C Ulll11 .._ lH!CUllU IJ!.c..lHlC
LJ .:._ _ _.
1W�t, J.UI"lilJ
_

at the point or maximum positive moment. The second hinge forms when the
magnitude o! this moment is equal to the moment causing yielding or the pile
section ( Fig. 2(a))
Failure may also lake place after the formation or the f1rst plasttc hinge
at the top end of the pile 1! the lateral soil reactions exceed the bearing ca•
pacity or the a oil along the run length of the pile as shown in Fig. 2 (b), and
the pile rotates around a point located at sorn e depth below the ground sur•
face. The mode of failure, shown in Fig. 2(b), takes place at intermediate
pile lengths and intermediate penetration depths. When the lengths or the
piles and the penetration depths ar e small, failure takes puce when the ap•
plied lateral load exceeds the r es lstanc e of the supporting sotls, as shown in
Fig. 2(c). In this caae, the a.ction ofa pile can be compar ed to that o! a. dowel.
Methods of computing the di.Btribution of bending moments, deflections and
aotla reactions at working loads (at one-lul.11 to one-third the ultimate lateral
r eststance) are reviewed in the following section and a method !or the calcu•
Iation of the ultimate lateral r eatatance of tree and r e str alned piles is pre•
sented in a succeeding section.
Notativn.-The symbols adopted !or use in this paper are defined where
they first appear and are arranged alphabettcally in Appendix I.

BEHAVIOR AT WORKING LOADS

At working loads, the deflections of a atngl e pile or of a pile group can be
considered to Iner ease approximately linearly with the applied load. Part of
the lateral deflection la caused by the shear deformation of the soil at the
time of loading and part by consolidation and creep subaequent to loading.
(Creep is deflned as the part of the shear deformations which take puce alter
loadlng.) The defor rnatton caused by consolidation and creep inc;eues with
time.
It will be assumed in the ioliowing analysis, that the lateral «Hfieetton.
and the di.tri.buUoo of bend.in� moment. and ahear forces can be calculated
at work� loads by me ana of the theory of� ru..cti.on. Thus, it will
be aasumed that the unit �11 reactloo p (in pounds per squar e inch or. tons
per square !oot) a.c� on a laterally J.o&d.ed pile increue• in proportion to
the lateral defiection Y. (in inches or feet) expr eaaed by the equation

>t!Jt) '!f6(f,'µJ) P '"' k Y . . . . . • . . . . • . . . . . . . . (1)

t where the coefficient k (in pounds per cubic inch or tons per cubic foot) is
t de!lned a..a the coefficient or subgr ade reaction. The numerical value o! the

�
�
 - ....
p p p p

r·, ·A ... "7. .. ··A -<1· --

I
I 7- r, . .
. ;,n
� ·. I 7
I I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I
I

I
I
f
I I
I

I I I
I I
I
�
( 0) ( b) I I
I
I (')
:::r
.....
I co
t �

( 0) ( b) (c)

FIG. 1.-FAILUR.E MODES FOR FREE• F1G. 2.-FAILURE MODES FOR R.ESTRAIN:E:D PILES
HEADED PILES
 SM 2 PILE RESISTANCE 33

coefficient of l'Ubgrade rn.ctlon va.rte.a with the width of the loaded uea. and
Ha. 10!.d di=tribu� u well u with t.he diJt.J..oce from the ground suru..ee.29-33
The corresponding sotl reaction per unit length Q (in pounds per inch or
tone per !oot) can be evaluated from

(2)

'I !� -:;,�..!di D Is t.i,c waineier or width of the laterally loaded pile. l! k: D is de•
noted K (in pounds per squar e inch or tons per square !oot), then

Q ., K y . . • . • . . . • • . . . . . . . •
Method8 tor the evaluation of the coemctent K for piles driven into coheaive
(3)

solta have been discussed by Ten.aght27 and will be summarized subse•

quently. However, the numerical value or this coetticient is affected by con•
solidation and creep.
In the following analysis, it will be assumed that the coet!iclent of subgr ade
reaction ls constant within the signi!ica.nt depth. (The sign1!1cant depth
Ia denned as the depth wherein a change o! the subgr ade reaction will not affect
the lateral deflection at the ground surface or the maximum bending moment
by more th.an 10%.) · ·
However, the coefficient of subgr ade reaction is seldom a constant but

r
I
varies frequently as a function of depth. It will be shown that the coefficient
of subgrade reaction for cohesive soils 1B approximately proportronal to the
unconnned compr esstve strength of the soH.34 As the uncont1.ned ccmpr eaalve
strength of normally consolidated ca.lys and silts increases approxlnutely
linear with depth, the coefficient of subgrade reaction can be expected to
Increase in a similar manner as indicated by field data obtained by A. L.
Parrackl9 and by Ralph B. Peck, F. ASCE and M. T. Davisson.21 The uncon•
fined compressive strength of overconsoUd.ated clays may be approximately
constant with depth l!, for example, the overconsolldation of the soil has been
caused by glaciatlon while the uncon.tlned compressive strength may decrease
with depth 1! the overconaolidation has been caused by desiccation. Thus, the
coetticlent of subgrade reaction may, !or an overconsolldated clay, be either
approximately constant or decrease as a function o! depth.

·-zg- Bolt, A. M., "Bending of an lnllnite Beam on an Elastic Foundatton," Journal of

Ap�lied Moohanlc11, Vol. 4, No. I, Al-A 7, 1937.
O De Beer , E. E., "Computatfon of Bearna Resting on Soll," ,Proceedlng11, Beoood
lnternaU. Con!. OD Soil MecbanJoa and FoundAUoo Engrg., Vol. 1, 1948, Rotterdam·, Hol•
land, pp. 119-121.
31 Terzaghl, K., •Evaluation of Coefficients of Bubgrade Beactron," Geotechnlque,
London. E[!.gland, Vol. V, 1955, pp. 297-326.
32 Ve11l�. A. B., "Bendlng of Beams Resting on Isotropic Elastic Solid,• Journal of
the Engineer� Mechanics Dlvlston, ASCE, Vol. 87, No. EM2, Proc. Paper 2800, April,
1§61, pp. 35- .
33 Ve.ale, A. B., •Beam11 on Elastic SUbgra.de a.nd the W1nkler'11 Hypotbests," Pro•
ceedtngs, Fifth lnt.ernati. Conf. on Boll Meohanlol!I and Foundation Engrg., Vol. I, 1961,
Parl11�nnoe pp. 8'15-850.
34 Skempton, A. W., •The Bearing Capacity or Clays;" Building Besearcb Congrees,
London, England 1951, pp. 180-189.
 Mar-oh, 19M SM 2

The llmil.lttlon.s impoe ed on the proposed anAly1Jia by t.be as sumptton of a

ronatant co,ef!lclent ol. subg rade r eacttoa CM b4 ove rcorne. It can be shown
H1:i.t the lateral deflections can be pr edtcted at the ground surface when the
Urefflclent of subg rad e reaction tncr eaaes -with depth 11 thts coetflclent tau•
ciuned to be constant and if tts nume rtcal value ts taken SB the average wlthln
depth equal to 0.8 f3 L.
Lateral Deflection.s.-For the c1U1e when the coe!flclent of subg rade reac-
.,. ,. •• •- • .._. ...,.. , . . . •-• ._'-'Y-•J -•'-' ----�.& &-----• "-- . _._. _,. -..a. '-'-"-'&.AU-'-1.�•�p -o•....._..11�

rl�r. la ,-..n-••ni-• ...al+--l,. Al..a.�h f.�..,. Al ... -thu�·...,._ rJ ln,.f..-,..1 A..-1'1 .... nf.1.,..,.-- h ..... -.r11 .
r,,.·omentJI and aoll r eacttons can be calculated numerically,35,36,37 anal yt t•
):Uly,38,39 or by means � models. 40 Solutions ar e aJIJo available for the cue
u:·,en a laterally loaded pile h.u been d rtveri into a laye r ed system conal atlng
)i· a n upper stlff c r-us t and a }(l'Wer layer crl �cit cl�yB_41
The deflecttons , bending momenta and soil reactlon.e depend primarll.y on
-------- --------
f3 L,
. ��--
wb\ch f3 � equal to Vkfi/4Eplp.35-39 In this
.
("he dtmenstonless Length ln
)1, pr es ston, Eplp ll!J the stUfness of the plle s ectton, k the coefficient of a sub•
�·r'ade reaction, and D the diameter or wldth ol the laterally loaded pile. A. B.
Vea(c,32 M. ASCE has shown that the coefflclent of subg r ad e reaction can be
�\laluated as sumtng that the pile length la large when the dimensionless length
�L la larger th.an 2.25. In the caae when the dlmenalonless length of the pile
�L ls lees than 2.25, the coefficient o! subg r ade reaction depends prl mar lly
FJ n the diameter o! the test pll�and on the penetration depth.29,30,31,32,33
It can be shown that lateral deflection y0 at the ground surface can be ex•
ipteased as a function ol the di mena ioul es s quantlty Yo le. D L�fThls quantity
·1) plotted ln Fig. 3 a.11 a Iunctton ol · the dt rnens lonle a a pile length f3 L. The
'.oteral defl ecttona a.a shown ln Flii. 3 have been calculated for the two cases
,,Yh·en the plle ls fully free or fully Ilxed at the_ ground surface. Frequently,
the htcrally loaded plle Ti-only pa.rtly�e•tralned and the lateral defl ecttons at
the ftuund surtace will att.aln values between thos e corresponding to fully
fixed rc:lfully !ree condltlons.
The lateral de!le-ctlona at the "round surf ace can be calculated for a free•
�ed pile u can be seen from Flg. 3 assumlng that the plle Is lnllnltely
itiff when the dimensionless length fl L la leas� For this case, the

.e ·t
·, . . pc�--;
(qteral deflection ls equal to:

4 P ( 1 + 1.5 �) ,;

I
.i :··ri..
! .. ·(,\.
y
o
..
k D L . • . . . .. :: . ,,_
. (4a')
···--- ...:";.·

35 Gl e ser , 8. M., "Later-a l Load T68U on Vertical Flxed-Head and Free-Head Pllee,"
'-lTM Sp;_;cliol PubUoiitloa, No. 15,, Hl5S, pp. 75-95.
·35 Howe, n.
J., *A Numer tcal Method for Pr edf c tlng the Behavior o! Laterally
·lflded Piling," &!ell Oil Co., TB Memorandum 9, Houston, Tex., MRy, 1955.
37 N6'WU18.rk. N. M., "Numerical Prooedure for Computing Defl ee tlons. Moments,
,d Buck ltng Loads ;" TransactioOJ, ABCE, Vol. 108, 1943, pp. 1161-1188.
1
38 Chang, Y. L., dtecuaalon ol. Lateral Pile-Loading Testa," by Lawreooe B. Feagin,
ru naac tl one , ASCE, Vol. 102, 1937, pp. 272-27·8.
· 39 Hetenyl, M .• "Bee.ma on El.utic Founda tion, • Univ. of Michigan Presa, Ann Arbor,
ich., 1946.
40 Thome, R. L., • A Model A.nA..lysls of a Laterally Loaded Plle," the e t a presented to
e Unlverelty o{ Te:x-.11, at Au.aUn, Tex., 1n 1957, In pe.rtiB.I ful1llment of the requl r e•
enta for the de&T&e ol. lu..ater of Bclence.
41 O.vl111!1ot1, M. T., and 0111, ff L.; "Late ra lly Loaded Pl lea In a Layered System,"
-u rna l of the Boll MechAn.!01 aod Foundat tona Dlvhton, ASCE, Vol. 89, No. 8M3, Proc.
ipe r 3509, May, IM3, pp. 63-94.
SM 2 PILE RESISTANCE 35

A re..wtnined pile with a dimen.eionleu length {3 L lM1 than 0.6 be.a&Tu u

an inllnitely 1till ptle ( Fig. 3) and the latenl deflection at the g� S\lrlau
can be calculated directly from the equation

p )
1o • k D L .... ' .... · · · · · · · ' ( 4b

n �hc-1!d be ��ed ��:;t ;.;-, i11Cri::aiie oi ihe pile length decr eaaes appredably
the l.ateral deflection at the ground surface for short piles ( f3 L Ies a th.an 1.5
and 0. 5 for free-hea.ded and restrained piles, respectively). However, a chang e
cl. the plle stlffneBL'I has only a amal l effect on the lateral deflection for such
plles. The late r al defl ecttons a t the ground surface cl. short fixed ptles are
theoretically one-fourth or less of those for the corresponding free-headed
piles ( Eqs. ·fa and 4b).
Thus, the provision of end restraint la an ef.Iectlve means o! decr eas lng
the lateral deflections at the ground :.s.�.tl-1-¥--!._0a.ded p\le. This
has been shown cl ear ly he tests reported by G. A. ammon, F.
ASCE, and J.C. Aache an, M. ASCE.16 These tests lndlcate that t lat•
eral deflectlon of a fr e pile driven into a soft clay deClected at the s a e
lateral load on t � 2.6 times as much as the corresponding partiall
restrained e. <,
The tera.I def lecttona at the groond surf ace cl. a. free-beaded pile can be
cal cul ed aeBumtng that the pile i.. infinitely long ( Fig. 3) when the dlmen•
alonle • length {3 L exceede J. 5. Fur thts case ( f3 L larger than 2. 5) the lat
e ral d llectlon can be computed dtrict1y from
2P.t3(e.t3+l)
1o • k D . . . (5a)
00

in which kO(J ls th
nltely long pile.
A re.-tra.lned ptle behaves u an infinitely long pile when the dtmenalonleas
length f3 L exceeds 1. � u can be •een from Flg. 3. The corresponding lateral
deflection ( .8 L larger than 1.5) can be calculated from

. p /3
Yo • kD (5b)
eo

The lateral deilectlons at the ground surface depends on the value o( the
coeff lc lent of aubg r ade reaction wtthin the crtttcal depth. Thl s depth can be
determined from the following considerations. It can be seen from Fig. 3 that
the lateral deflections at the ground surface are approximately 10% larger
than those calculated assuming that the pile is Infinitely long when the dlrnen•
stonleas pl le length or embedment length f3 L la equal to 2.0 and 1.0 for re•
strained and free-headed piles, respectively. Thus the propertles of the piles
or ol the soil beyond these dimensionless depths have only a small effect on
the lateral deflections at the ground surface. The dimensionless depths f3 L
o! 2.0 and 1.0 are therefore the critical depths for restrained and free-headed
piles, r espectrvaly.
 w
p m

a. 10
<,
...J
0
(;
� �

�
I-
o
- 8 ';}_V
Q.. 0
·•\v
O'

(a) AXIAL AND LATERAL LOADS

w
...J
LL 6
w
0
_,
<(
0::
w 4
I-
�
...J Eq (4o)
en
en
w 2
..J
z
0
en
z
w
�
0 2 3 4 5
01 MEN SHON LESS LENGTH, PL ( b) OVERTURNING MOMENT

FIG. 3.-COHESIVE SOILS-LATERAL DEFLECTIONS AT FIG. 4.-DISTRIBUTION OF 80lL REACTIONS

GROUND SURF ACE
era a we IC ass
SM 2 PILE RESLSTANCE 37

Cos!ftctmt of Suhgrade Reactunc.:�- In the following analyats, the coefiicient

d subg rade reaction has been computed assuming th.at it 1• equal to that o! a
str lp founded on the surface of a semi-infinite, ideal elastic medium. Th\115, it
has been assumed that the distribution cl. bending moments, shear f or c es , sotl
reacttons, and def lecttons are the aame tor the horizontal and the vertical
members shown in Fig. 4. However, the actual dlstributlon of these quanttttes
wlll be different for these two members although •om� � the dt!fa:.EiiCci:i ienci
to cancel each other. For example, due to edge eff ecta, the coe.tficient ol sub•
grade reaction at the head of the vertical member will be less than the aver•
age coefficient of subgrade reaction for the horizontal member. Furthermore, ,
atnce the vertical member ii, sur rounded on i..ll aides by the elasttc medium, 1'
the average coefficient cl. lateral subgrade reaction wm be larger than that
cl. the horizontal member. Thus, the de!ormatlons at the head of the laterally
loaded vertical members, calculated by the !ollowln.g method, a.re only ap•
proximate and can be us ed only as an estimate. U it is required to determine
the lateral deflections accurately, then fleld tests are required.
LongPil•• (fJ L > 2.25.k-Veslc32,33 has shown that the coefficient of aub•
grade reaction, k, (or an infinitely long strip with the width D, (such as a wall
footing founded on the surface of a. semi-infinite, ideal elastic body) ls pro•
portional to the factor a and the coefficient of eubgrade reaction Ko for
a square plate, with the length equal to unity. The coe.fflclent k00 can be eval•
uated from

aK 0
k IC = [) (6)

The factor a is equal to 0.52

12/K71
VYF where Ep Ip la the stlffness of the

loaded strlp or plate. In the following analysis, it wlll be assumed that the
coefficient of lateral subg rade reaction can be calculated from Eq. 6 and that
this coeff lcient can be used for the determination cL. the distribution of bendl.ng
moments, shear forces and deflections in laterally loaded plies.
Numerical calculations by the writer have indicated that the coefficient a
can only vary between narrow. limits for steel, concrete or timber piles. It
can be determined appl'CJl(l�y trom t.b.e apr ... 100

a • n1 "2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7)

in which n1 and ni a.re functiona o( the wicootiruKl compreaa1Ye atrf111&1h c.. the
aupportl.PC 80ll and of the pile materW, reapecUvely, as indlca.ted In Tables
1 and 2. The coelflclent a has been evaluated for steel pipe and H-plles as
well as for cast-in-place or pr ecast concrete piles with cylindrical cross
sections. The minimum value of 0.29 was calculated for steel H-piles driven
into a very so!t clay and loaded in the dlrectlon of their largest moment re•
sistance. The maximum value of 0.5-4 was calculated for timber piles driven
into very stiff clays.
AB an example, the factor a is equal to 0.36 ( 1.00 x 0.36) as calcula.ted
from Eq. 7 for a 50 ft long steel plpe pile driven into a clay with an uncon-
 Much, 1964 SM 2

ned compr esetve ,trencith ol. 1.0 ton per 1-q It. The corresponding coeHiclent
· Mubgrade r esctfon La equA.l to 18.0 (,O.�S X W) tons per sq It when the co•
r!clent Ko 1• equal to 50 ton. p;er 9,q fl The coefficient Ko cor r esponds to
,o coefficient d. 1ubirade reaction ol a plate with a diameter ci 1.0 fl
Tbe coofilclent ol �rade reaetton Lncreues frequently with depth. Cal•
u attons have indtcated t.h.At the lateral dafl ecttons can be calculated i! it is
isumed that the coet1.lct..nt IX aubg rade reaction iii a constant and that its
rrner ical value ls equal' to that cor respoodlng to the dtrnenstonless depth /3 L
r DA. For the case when the coemcrent ol •ubgra.de reaction decreases wun
-pth, the method developed by Davtaaon and H. L. Glll, 41 A. M. ASCE can
ri used,
For long piles, the calculated later al deflections ar e Inaenstttve to the aa•
urned value cl. the coefficient of aubgr ade reaction. Ii, ior example, the co-

TABLE 1.-EVALUATION OF THE COEFFICIENT n1 (EQ. 7)

Unconf'Ined Comprenlve Strength Clu• too_B

Coefficient n1
per equA.re foot

Lea a than D. 5 0.32

0.5 t.o 2.0 0.36
Larger than 2.0 0,40

TABLE 2.-EVALUA'IlON OF THE· COKFFIClENT nl (EQ. 7)

Pile Mat..erl11.I Coefflolent n2

�I 1.00
Cooorete 1.15
Wood 1.30

!ficlent ol subg r'ade reaction la half the as su med value, then the deflections
t the ground surface will exceed the calculated deflections by about 20%. As
r esult, lt ls, ln general, sulflcient to estimate the magnitude of the coeffi•
rent o! au�ade reaction.
Short Ptles ( f3 L < 2.25). -The coerf lc lent of subg rade reaction for later•
liy loaded short pttes with a lenath fJ L le•• than 2.25 may be calculated ap•
r oxlrnately by the followlng method ..
Short ptl es wlll behave under lateral load as lf they are inflnltely stiff and
lateral load P acttng at mld-height wlll cause a pure tr anslatton of the pile
1 shown in Ftg, 5(a). A moment Ma.cling at mld-helght of the plle will result

, a pure rotation with respect to the center of. the plle and the distribution at
.te r al earth pr-eaaur es will be a.pproximately triangular as shown in Flg. 5(b)
.s sumtng a constant coefflclent IX subg rad e reaction). It should be noticed
,at any force system acting on a pUe can be resolved into a single lateral
-r ce and a moment acting at the center of the embedded section of the loaded
---· ·---·-···-----,........----....--------,...,,...,.,.,...,a
.....,...,._;a , &Ulll-lilW-&iJlllll!JIIIC"IQlmlll!IISNEt!fl9'1r
1 114
1 i;�l Jf "�"'' �'��--
191.1•
1'1ii

, T
ASSUMED I
!
I

!
I

4 r r ; r
(o) TRANSLATION SOIL REACTION
I

LtJ
. 3 )
y,,,-
<,
L/10, L'
0
A. 1'- • 0. :5
.ilf

1 2
I f a::
0
/\ I-

I L u
�

�:r
ACTUAL
LL
I 1.0
ASSUMED/

1.0 2 4 S

0.1 O.� 0.6

D \_ I

u
---i.t�l! 0.73

0.2 !O
f \
LIIO•L'

(b) ROTATION SOIL REACTION RATIO L/D

FlG. 5.-CALCULATION or LATERAL DEFLEC•

TIONS ron A BlEIORT PIL.E
-10 March, 19M SM 2

pile. The lateral deflection at the 1round 1uiia.ce can be calculated by the
principle ol superposttion with the 1.1.d ol the coefftctents ol 1ubgrMie r eac -
Uoo kp and k.m. The coelllcient kp iOVerM the lateral deflections caused by
the lateral Iosd P whereas the cou!lclent km iOVtirn.t the llllera.l deflecttons
caused by the moment M. The dlatr ibutton of the applied load as well as the
size and shape at the loaded area affect the coe!.licients kp and km. It should
be noted that numerical values of the two coe!.liclenta kp and km are not the
.R::lnHL

The lateral deflection Yp [equal to P /( DLkp)J caused by the lateral 102.d

P acting at mld-helght of the laterally loaded pile, depends on the projected
area LD and the co.lflclent cl la.t.r�-lt-UIO#C>a kp.. The numerical value
o( the co entctent kp depends in lts turn on the shape of the ioaded area and
can, at low load levels when the de!lecttons are proportional to the applied
load, be evaluated from theory of ela.sticlty-42 by the equation

k
p
(8)

In Eq. 8 E8 la the modulus ol elutlc1ty ol the 1011, µ8 the Poisson' a ratlo of

TABLE 3.-NUMERICAL VALUE OF COEFFICIENT m

-·
Ra tl o, L/D 1.0 1.5 2 3 5 10 I 00-

Coeff lc lent, m 0.95 0.94 0.92 0.88 0.82 0.71 0.37

the soil, LD the projected area of the pile and m a numerical factor which
depends on the shape of the loaded area. The coefficient m le tabulated ln
Table 3 as a functlon of the ratio L/.D.
TI1e factor kpD /Ea has been plotted in Fig. 6 as a function of the ratio L/D
asaurnlng that the Poisson's ratio of riie soil µs is equal to 0. 50. It can be
seen, for example, that the dtmens+onleae quantity kpD/E8 attains a value of
0.73 at a value of L/D equal to 5.. 0. ·
The lateral deflection Ym at the ground surface caused by a moment M
acting at mid-height of a laterally loaded plle has been assumed to be the
same aa the edge deflection of a plat e located on the ground surface and loaded f
by the same moment M as shown in Elg, 4(b). The rotation and deflections of
a etlff plate wlth an arbitrary shape and size located on the ground surf ace
can be calculated by a method proposed by G. F. Weissmann and S. R Whlte.43
Cal cul att ona have lndlcated that thla method can be approxtmated by assumlng
th.at the eoll reactions are unlfor rnly distributed along 1 /10 the total length of
the member l Fi.i. 5(b)] and that the coefficient of subg rade reaction km le
governed by the shape and size of the reduced area. For the apecUic case
42 Tlm.oahenko, S. and Goodier, J. N., "Theor y of Elasticity,• Second Edition,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York. N. Y., 1951.
43 Weissmann, G. F., Md White, 8. R., •smsll Angular DeCTectlons of Rigid Founda•
tions, .. Geotechnlque, London, England, Vol. XI, No. 3, September , 1961, pp. 186-202.
I
SM 2 PILE RESISTANCE "1
when the total length L la equal to the width D, the rotation and the deflection
predicted by the proposed simplified method ( assuming that the equivalent
width of the loaded area Is 1 /10 the total length) are 3% smaller than those
calculated by the more accurate method proposed by Welasma..nn and White. -43
The deflections at the center of each of the equivalent ar eas Is equal to
Pm/km, in which Pm la the equivalent uniformly distributed pressure acting
at top and bottom of the pile. The equivalent pressure Pm is equal to lOM/
G.ii i} i,2 since the internal moment arm is 0.9L and the sotl reactions ar e
distributed over 1/10 the total length o! the pile. The lateral deOectlon.s at
the ground surface is equal to 1/0.9 the deflections at tbe center o! the loaded
equivalent area. For theae condlttons . the l?.-t�!"al �ect�..: jrrf :.:,...u--..---1
aurace iJ equal to 12.35 M/ (DL2km ).
The coefficient km, which ia the coefficient of sub.grade re!Mltion eor'r e s•
ponding' to the shape and 11ize o! the two equivalent rectangula.r areu,, Ctn
be evaluated from Eq. 8 or directly trom Fig. 6. It should be noted that the
squivalent length L' {Fig. �) 1• 1/lOth the toW Length o! the plle.
The coe!flcient of subgrade reaction Lncreases trequently with depth. Cal•
culations have inclicated that the lateral deflections at the ground sur!ace cm
be calculated assuming a constant value of this coetricient i! its numerical
value is taken as that corresponding to a depth o! O.:il5L and 0.5-0L for tree•
headed and restrained short piles, respectively.
The calculated lateral deflections are inversely proportional to the as•
surned value of the coefiiclent at subgr ade reaction. I! it required to predict
closely the defl ecttons o! a laterally loaded short pile, then an accurate es•
timate or the coefficient o! subgr ade reaction is required.
Plate Load Teats.-The coefficient o! aubgrade reaction ko and the mod•
ulus of elasticity Ea may be evaluated approximately by plate load teats with
the aid of the theory o! elasticity. However, 1t should be noted that the initial
modulus or elasticity of the soil varies trequently with the ctirectlon o! load•
ing. W. H. Ward, S. G. Samuels and M. E. Butler, 44 for ex.ample, have found
for the heavily overcorumlidated London clay that the initial modulus of elas•
tlclty in the lateral directions exceeded the initial modulus Ln the vertical
direction on the average by a !actor of 1.6. Thus , !or a heavily overcon•
solidated clay, the results of plate loading teats may underestimate the initial
modulus o! elasticity of the soil and the coetriclent o! lateral subgr ade re•
action. The initial modulus or elasticity ls, for a cohesive soil, approximately
proportional to its unconfined compressive atrength.34 The shearing strength
of a normally consolidated clay incr eaaes ln general with depth whlle the
ahear ing strength 01' an overconsohdated ciay may increase or decrease with
depth. There!ore, the initial modulus o! elasticity may also Iner ease or de•
crease with depth.
In the analysis of plate load tests, it is, Ln general, as surned tor cohesive
soils that the modulus of elasticity o! the Boll ls a constant. For this asaurnp•
tlon, plate load teats will underestimate the efiectlve lateral coefficient of
subgr ade reaction if the -sheartng strength and the modulus o! elaatlc lty in•
creases with depth since the deflections for the plate load test depend ma1nly
on the modulus of elasticity o! the soil within a distance o! approximately
two plate diameters below the ground surface. On the other hand, the coef-

« Ward, W. H., Samuels, S. G., and Butler, M. E., "Further- Studies o! the Proper•
ties of London Clay," Geot.echnique, London, England, Vol. IX, 1959, pp. 33-58.
 Much, 1964 SM 2

!icient will be ov er e sttmated t! the ahear ing strength and the 8-011 modulus
de<:,e..sa w-lth depth.
Remolcllilt' of the 9-011 (u 1. result of pile driving) caus e a decreiue of the
lnitW modulus And the 8&eant mooutue to • dl at anc e of approxl.nutely one
pile dtam eter from the wrfa.ce of the pile. Conaolrdatton on the other hand '
c sus es a substantial increue with time of the shear Ing str ength, of the Initial
and of the 1&CM1t moduli for corrnally or lightly over consolidated clays. Haw•
ev er , t...�� �h�1H·� t1lrength and the secant modulus !or heavily over consolr•
dated c lay s �Y deer ease 'With time.
The deflecttous �t world.xii 1oa.da (approximately one-half to one-third the
u ltfrnat e bear ing capactty) ar e proportlonlll to the secant modulus of the so ll ;
"'1hen the rnodulUJI 11'1 determined a.t lo9..d!I cor r espondlng to between ons-hait•
and one-third the ultimate strength of the soll.34 Thift secant modulus may be
cons lder ably leu than the WUa.l tangent modulus of el.a.sticity ·of the soil. 45
In the following analy als , the secant modulus E50 corresponding to half the
ultimate strength of the soil will be assumed to govern the later al dettecttons
at worlc.lng loads. (The as sumptton la.e been made al.so by A. W. Slcempton34
In the analy s ls of the 1.nitul deilection.11 of spread footings founded at or close
to the g r ound lNr!.ace.) The deflection do or a circular plate CII.Il then be cal•
culatetl trom the equa.tlon42

d (9)
0

in which B ls the diameter o! the loaded area, q denotes the intensity of the
applied load and µ8 r efer s to Potascn'e ratio. Since q/do is equal to the co ef•
!icient of subgr ade reaction ko, it can be seen that the coe!r1cient of subgr ade
reaction Is Indlr ectly propontlonal to the diameter o! B of the loaded area. If
k.oB ls deOned aJJ Ko and the Pofoson'8 ratio 11'1 taken as 0.5, then
K
0
= 1. 67 E
50
(10)

Skempton34 has found th.at the secant modulus E50 is approximately equal
to 25 to 100 times the unconfined compr esalve strength o! a cohesive sotl.
Analyata of test data reported· by Peck and Davil'lson21 on the behavior of
a laterally loaded H-pHe driven into a normally consolidated, highly organic
a Ht indlcates , at the maximum applied load, that the secant modulus load is
approximately equal to 100 times the cohesive strength aa measur ed by field
vane tasta (50 ttrn es the unconfined compressive strength of the eoll).
Uaing a value of E50 equal to 25 to 100 times the unconfined compreeslve
atr ength, the coefficient Ko can be expr eaaed in tar ma of the unconfined com•
pressive qu (Eq. 10) as

K. == (40 - 160) � (11)

0

-l5 Te r zag hl , K., and Peck, R. B., • Soll MeohAnlc• lo Eogineerlng PraoUoe," John
Wiley II Bon.PJ, Inc., New York, N. Y .• 'uMa.
 PILE RESISTANCE

range ot values compares well with those pr opos ed by Kar l Terr:J.gh.1,31

� clays with unconnried compr eastve str engths o! 1.0, 2.0, lUld -'.O tons per
.: tt, the calculated values oLthe co erncrents ot lJUbg-rade rea..ctlon N•lni th•
.... Iatronahlp Ko• 80qu) ar e 80, 160 and 320 tons/sq t't, r e ep ectrv e ly. The s e
Nluee compare well with the values 75, 160 and 300 ton; per sq rt, pr opoae d

�T��;o���.1:: �;��f���:��n �lv��t;::�t��.:t: �Jc:

• Teru.gb.1.31 .
1

I� �:e�o�=�h�� !��\�r =r�! ��::���:.{ ���:!:�:���

corresponding coefficient of subgr ade reaction (Eq. 6). .
The secant modulus as determined .tram Eq. 10 can be Wied for calculatton

·ri!ACtlon has been assumed to be the same in the vertical u in the later al
directionB a.nd that it does not vary with the depth below the ground surface,
Lateral Load Testa.-Coerocienta o{ lateral subgr ade reaction can be M•
termined also from lateral load tests on long piles with a dimenaionleas
-length f3 L larger than 2.25. The coefficient o! lateral subgr ade reaction
(ust1mlng a constant value of thla coefficient within the stgntrtcant depth) can
then be calculated trom Eqs . 4a, 4b, 5a. or 5b.
Deformations Caused by Consolidation s=Ks a result of con.solidation and
creep of the soil surrounding a laterally loaded pile, an Inc r ease of the lateral
deflections and a redistribution of soil r eacttons will occur with ti.me. The
writer is not aware or any test data concerned with the behavior ot laterally
loaded piles under long-time loading. The !olloving analysis is there!ore only
approximate and has not been substantiated by test data. The defor matlona
caused by consoltdatlon depend on the nature o! the applied load, on the re•
dlstr ibutlon of soil reaction along the pile, on the str eas Iner ease in the soil
to a distance of approximately two to three pile diameters fr om the pile BU.r•
b.ce and on the compressibility o! the so11.
It will be assumed that the increa.ae of deOectione of ll Iat er a.lly loaded
pile caused by consolidation is the same as the increase of deflections (settle•
ments) which take place with time !or spread footings and rarts founded at
the ground surface or at some depth below the ground surface. Test dat.a,(6
indicate that the total settlement (the sum o! the ln1tla.l compression and con•
solldatlon) of footings and ra!ts located on stlf! to very stiff clays is approxi•
mately equal to two to four tlrnes the initi.al settlements caus ed by shear
defor mattons of the soils. It ls therefore rea.sonable to aasume that the ap•
parent coetticient of subgrade reaction for the se soils which governs the
long-time lateral deflections and the long-time distribution of later al earth
pressures should be ta.ken as 1/2 to 1/4 the initial coefficient of subgr ade
reaction.
For normally consolidated clays, A. W. Skempton and L. Bjerrum46 !ound
that the total aett l e ments are approximately three to alx ttrnes the Inltial set•
tlements which take place at the time o( loading. The corresponding apparent
coefficient of subgrade reaction governing the lon.g-tlme pressure distribution
of piles driven into sort and very sort clays may, therefore, be taken as 1/3
to 1/6 the initial value (Eq. 11).

-46 Skempton, A. W., and Bjer rurn, L., •A Contribution to the Settlement Analy11l11 oC
Foundatl ona on Clay," Geoteohnique, London. �. Vol. Vil, 1957, pp. 168-178.
« March, 196-4 SM 2

Conaol idatron and cr e ep CIUlJII an tncr eaae in lat er al deflecttons ot short

piles (/3 L leu than 1.5 and 0.5 for tree-headed and r e str alned piles, r e spec-
t lv e ly) which is Inver aely pr opor-ttonal to the decrease in the coettlcient of
lateral subgr-ade reaction u indlcated by Eqs , -4a and 4b. A decr eas e or thls
coeuicient, !or example, to one-thlrd itB Inlttal value will cause an Incr saae
o( the initial lateral deflections at the ground surface by a factor o! three. In
the case of a long pile (/3 L lar g er' than 2.5 and 1.5 !or a tree-headed and a .
re-strained pile, r espectlvely) the Incr-eaae of lateral deflection (Eqs , Sa and
5b) caused by consolidation and creep ts Ieas than that of a short pile.
The increase in lateral deflecttons caused by consolidation may also be
calculated by means o! � settlement :rn:ilyBl.8 ba,ie<l on the assumption that the
distribution of soil r eactlons along the laterally loaded piles le governed by
a reduced coert1clent o! lateral son r eactton, that the distribution of the soil
pressure withln the sotl located in front of the laterally loaded pile can be
calculated, !or example, by the 2: 1 method or by any other suitable method
and that the compreeslbil1ty of the soil can be evaluated by consolidation tests
or from empirical r elat lonshlpa. (The 2: 1 method assurn es that the applied
load ls d1stributed over an area .,,,bH:� tncr eaae s in proportion to the distance
to the applied load. This method c loae ly appr oxtrnates the stress dl st r ibut lon
calculated by the theory of e lasttctty along the axis ot loadlng.) Because these
proposed methodB of calculating lateral deflections have not been substantiated
by test data they should be used with caution.
Comparison with Test Data.-The lateral deflect ions at workrng loads can
. be calculated by the hypothesis previously presented I! the atittneas of the
pile aect lon, the pile diameter, the penetration depth, and the average uncon•
fined cornpr es slve strength of the sotl are known within the signi!icant depth.
Frequently only fr agmentar-y data concerning the strength properties of the
supporting sotl ar e available.
The Iat e r al deflections calculated from Eqs. 4a, 4b, 5a and 5b have been
compared ln Table '4 wlth te st data reported by W. L. Shilts, F. ASCE, L. D.
Graves, F. A.SCE and C. G. DrlscoU,24 by Parrack,19 by J. F. McNulty,17 F.
ASCE, by J. 0. Oaterber g.Lf F. ASCE, and by Peck and Daviseon.21 In the
analysis of these teat data, it has. been assumed that the moduli of elasticity
for the pile mater Ials wood, concrete and steel are 1. 5 x 106, 3 x 106 and
30 x 106 pal, r espectlvely, and that the ratio E50/qu is equal to 50. The test
data are examined in detail in Appendix II. It can be seen from Table 4 that
the measured later al deflecttons at the ground surface varied between 0.5 to
3 .0 times the calculated deflecttons.
it should be noted that the calculated later al deflections are for short plies
inversely proportional to the assumed coetflclent or subgr ade reactions and
thus to the measured average unconfined compressive strength o_! the support•
ing soil. Thus small variations o! the measured average unconfined compree• a
l v e strength will have large etrecta on the calculated lateral deflections. It
should also be noted that the agr eernent between measured and calculated
lateral deflecttons improves with .'dec r ea slng shearing strength or the soil.
The cohesive soils reported with a high unconfined compressive strength have.
been preloaded by desiccation and it is well known that the shearlng strength
or such soils is erratic and may vary appreciably within short distances due
to the presence of shr lnkage c r acks.
The test data ind1cate that the proposed method can be used to calculate
the lateral deflections at working loads (at load levels equal to one-half or
 BM 2 PILE RESISTANCE

I TABLE 4.-LATERAL DEFLECTIONS

Average

I
Me&l!Ul'ed Calculated
Depth of Applied Unconfined
Pile
Pile n•---6--
Eccen-
u'i� �i.y
Embed- loarl l'!nmn..-••••ILI
----.----· . - Lateral
Defl ectfoo
Later al
De!leotioa
iutio

I
a.J�'Q.-.OJ.
Teat ment L, P, In Streo,i'lb Y te1 tlY oa.lo
D, In Ieet e, Ln Yte!!t, Yoruo•
feet
l.n f o,e,t ldpe <\i. In tons In lnches In Inches
pe r sq ft
( l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
Shill.ff, Oravee and Drl!!coU,24 1948
g.a 1.17 9.0 6.5 2.1 0.95 0.35 2.71
10 2.0 10.0 5.0 2.0 1.53 0.40 0.34 1.1 B
H 2.0 l 0.0 6.0 3.0 0.20 0.42 0.48
Parracl(.19 1952
2.0 _b 75.0 20 0.37 0,098 0.107 0.92
40 0.214 0.219 0.98
60 0.418 0,324 1.29
BO 0.658 0.428 1.53
McNulty,171956

A 1.0 _b 50.0 5 l.20C 0.05 0.15 0.3J

10 0.21 0.29 0.72
15 0,50 o.« 1.13
20 0.86 0.68 1.48
B 1.0 _b 50.0 '5 l.20C 0.08 0.15 0.53
10 0.27 0.29 l. 0-4
, 15 0.57 0.4--4 1.29
20 0.95 o.s s 1.63
Oet erber g, 18 1958
Tl 0.90 15.0 6.00 2.91 2.22 0.82 0.400 2.07
T2 0,\10 I �.O 6.00 2.42 2.22 1.2� 0.333 3.U,
T3 0.90 l 5.0 4.00 1.42 2.22 0. 71 0.324 2.19
T4 0.90 15.0 4.00 1.42 2.22 0.71 0.324 2.19
TII 0.90 15.0 7.79 4.90 2.22 0.83 0.501 1.66
T!I 0.90 15.0 9.50 3.91 2.64 0.42 0.272 1.55
T7 0.90 15.0 5.84 2.91 2.37 1.07 0.385 2.97
Tl! 1.50 15.0 6.00 4.87 1.84 0.53 0.601 0.88
n 2.00 15.0 6.00 5.81 2.40 0.25 0.466 0,54
TlO 2.00 15.0 6.00 4,87 3.03 0.37 0.311 1.19
Tll 2.67 14.0 6.00 9.78 3.05 0.32 0.489 0.65
Tl2 3.09 13.2 6.00 12.75 3.05 0.49 0.471 !.07
Tl3 l.50 15.0 6.00 6.27 2.25 0.77 0,535 I.«
TU 0.90 15.0 6.16 3.41 3.05 0.94 0.326 3.09
Peck and Dav1ssoo,21 1962
l H-plle 32.6 64,3 1.0 o.4 ood 0.6 0.63 0,95
(14BDB9) 1.5 1.4 0.94 1.49
2.0 1. 7 l.26 l.36
2.5 2.5 I.SB 1.58
3,0 3.5 1. 89 1.85
11. In contact with r emolded soil
b Pile r eatr-alned
o E11tirru.t.ed Crom standard penetration t.eet
d Calculated Crom field vane teata
 ! '·er. · \ �i- · � Yc::C
-�

46 March, 196'4 SM 2

one-third the ultimate lateral capactty or a pile) when the unconfined com•
pressive •trength of the »oil u less than about 1.0 ton per aq ft. However,
when the unconfined compr esetve atr ength of the soil exceeds about 1.0 ton
per sq n, it le �t&d that the actual defl ecttons at the ground surface may
be consider ably Iar ger than th� ca.lculat ed lateral defl ecttons due to the er•
ratic nature of the 81.lppidrtln.i 1011.
However, it sbould be noted also that only an estimate or the lateral de•
Il ections ii required tor most problems and that the accuracy o! the proposed
method of aiulysl.JI 1• probably llll..fflcient !or this purpose. Additional test
data are requi.r&d before tb.e accuracy and the limitations of the pr-opoe ed
method can be e•tabll•hed.

ULTIMATE LATERALJt:ESlSTANCE

General. -At low load Ieval.a, the deff ecttona of a later ally loaded pile or
pole Iner es..H approxlmately · llne:i.rly with the applied load. Aa the ultimate
capacity 111 approached, the fater:il..l deflections Iner ease very rapidly with
increasing applied load, Faflure of tree or fixed-headed plles may take place
by any or the Wlure mechanl sma ahown ln Ftgs. 1 ·and 2. These failure modes
ar e dtscuased b el ow.
Unrestrained Piles .-The Wl.lJ..re mechanism and the resulting distribution
of lateral earth pr easur ea along a Iater ally loaded free-headed pile driven
into a. cohesive sotl is •bown in Fig. 7. The soil located ln front of the loaded
pile close to the ground 8,,1.r:ia.ce moves upwards ln the direction of Ieast re•
statance, while the soil located at some depth below the ground surface moves
ln a. lateral direction from the front to the back aide of the pile. Furthermore,
it has been observed that the soil separates from the pile on its back aide
down to a certain depth below the gr ound sur Iace.
J. Bri.nch-Han.sen47 baa shown that the ultimate soil reaction agatnst a
laterally loaded pile driven into a cohesive material (baaed on the assumption
that the shape of a circular aect ion can be approximated by th.at of a square)
var-Ies between 8.3cu and llAc.u, w_here the cohesive strength cu is equal to
hill the unconfined compr eaatve strength of the soil. On the other hand, L. C.
Reese, 48 M. ASCE has Indlcat ed that the ultimate soil reaction increases at
failure from approxima.tely 2 cu at the ground surface to 12cu at a depth of
a.pproxima.tely three pile dtameter s below the ground surface. T. R. McKen•
zie49 hall found from experfments that the maximum lateral resistance is
equal to a.pproxima.tely 8 cu,' whll.e A. G. Dast1dar50 used a value of 6.5 cu ·
when calculating the restra..lnJn·g effects of piles driven into a cohesive soil.
The ultimate lateral reeia��.,j ha.s been calculated ln Appendix Ill a.s a func•
tion of the shape Ill the cr-oaa-necttonal area and the roughneas of the pile

47 Br lnch-i He naen, J . , "The Btabillr.l.ng Effect ot Pi lea In Cle.y, • C. N. Po s t, Novem-

ber, 1948. (Publ Iahed by Chr latlanr Ii Nielsen, Copenhagen, Denmark).

48 Roose, L. C., dlecueelon of. "Soll Modulus for Laterally Loaded Pf lea ," by B. Mc•
Clelland and J. A. Focht, Jr., Tr-ansact.loua, ASCE, Vol. 123, 1958, pp. 1071-IOH.
49 McKenzie, T. R., "Strength ol Deadma.n Ancho r s In Clay," thes ls pr e e ented to
Princeton University, at Princeton, N. J., In 1955, In partial fulff lrnent of the requl re•
ment.a for the degree of M.11-st.er,of Science.
50 DaeUdar, A. 0., • Pilot 1.\:ib'Ui to Determine the Effect of Plies Ln Re st r a lnlng
Sh-0!\r Failure In Clay," Pr lnc eton Unlv., Princeton, N. J., 1956 (unpublished).
 PILE RESISTANCE 47
9\ltface. The calculated ultimate lateral r eststanc e e var led between 8.28 cu
. ,. and 12. 56 cu as can be aeen irom Table 0. · · .. : '
- Repetitive loads, J!!'UCh u thou caused by wave torc e s, cause a gr adual
decr eas e of the shear str ength or the S-Oil located in the irnmedlate vicinlty
of the loaded pile, Th.; spplf ed lat er al load may cause, l.11 tha cue 'Where ™
I
soil is overvconsoltdated, a decre:ue o! the pore pr eesur ea and Ill! a r esult,
era.dual swelling and Ion in shear strength may take place u water JJ ab•
=�:-�� !:i"vui sn y avia.iiwie source. Unpublished data collected by the author

I
1ug-gei,t that repetitive loading could dec r eas e the ultimate lateral r es ls tance o(
- the soil about one-half tts initial value. A.ddltlonltl data a.re however required.

LATERAL
LOAD,P APPROXIMATELY 30

(o) DEFLECTIONS
w
8 TO 12 cuD
( b) PROBABLE
LJ
(c ) ASSUMED DISTRIBUTION
DISTRIBUTION OF OF SOIL REACTIONS
SOIL REACTIONS

FIO. 7.-DISTRIBUTION OF LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE8

The ultimate lateral r eetstance ot a. pile group may be conalder ably less
than the ultimate lateral r eatstance calculated as the irum o! the ultimate
resistances or the individual piles. N. C. Donovan, 51 A. M. ASCE found no
- reduction in lateral resistance when the pile spacing exceeded !our pile di•
arneter s. When the piles were closer than approximately two pile dlameter s,
the piles and the soil located within the pile group behaved as a unit.
51_ Donovan, N. C., • A.nalyale of Pile Or oupa," thee ls presented to Oh.lo State Unlver•
slty, at Columbus, Oh.lo, in 1959, In parttal fulfllment of the requirement. for the d�re,e
cl Doctor of Philosophy.
 March, l\HH SM 2

The probable distribution o! lateral soil reactions la shown in Fig. 7 (b).

On the bi:a..el..8 of the measured and calculated lateral resistances, the probable
dlstr ibution has been approximated by the rectangular dlstr Ibution shown in
Fig. 7(c). It hu been usurin�d that the lateral aoil reaction is equal to zero
to a depth ot 1-1/2 pile diarnet er s and equal to 9.0 cuD below this depth. The
r e sult ing calculated maximum bending moment and required penetration depth
(a ssumlrtg the r ectsngular distribution of later al earth pressures shown in
F'Ig. ?12) �!! t-e .e�!'!!e--::!"-..;:.t_ �g.:;;: t!-J.41, t_.Lu;.t eor r espondlng to the pr ooabi e

pressure dlstrlbuUon at Ia l lur e. 11ru1' the as sum ed pressure di.stribution will

yield r e sulta which ar e on thi: safe side.
Short Pil�.f,1.-The dlstrtbutton or sotl r eae tlons and bending moments along
a relatively .. sbort pl.le at failure 1.B shown in Fig. 8. Failure takes place when
the soil yields along the total length of the pile, and the pile rotates as a unit

D
--..
I I
I I
I .
I /
I /. 1.5 D

LJ
FIG. B.-DEFLEC'TibN, SOIL REACTION AND BENDING
MOMENT DIBTRIBUTION FOR A SHORT FREE•
HEADED P.ILE

ar ounn a point located at aome depth below the ground surface. The maximum
moment occurs at the level where the total shear !orce in the pile is equal to
I
zero at a depth (f + 1.5 D) _;below the ground surface. The distance f and the
maximum bending moment M:: can then be calculated from the two equations:

p
f = .,,----
9 c D . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . (12)
u

and
 SM 2 PILE RESISTANCE

Mpos ,. P (e + 1.5D + 0.5!) (13)

max

,. in wh.lch e is the eccentricity of the appl.l ed load u d�!1ne-d in Fig. 8. Th6

nart of the pl le with the length g (located below the point o! maxlrnurn bending

'I'ABLE 5.-ULTIMATE LATERAL RESISTANCE

I SLIP FIELD
PATTERN SURFACE
ULTIMATE LATERAL
RESISTANCE, qui/ Cu

ROUGH 12.56

ROUGH 11. 4 2

SMOOTH II. 4 2

SMOOTH 9.14

men ts

Mpos = 2.25 D 2
max g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (14)

The ultimate lateral r eststance of a short pile driven into a cohesive soil
can then finally be calculated from Eqs. 12, 13 and 1-4 11 it is observed that
 SM 2

L • ( 1.I 5 D + f + g} • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (15)

The ultimate lateral re•18t.ance can alao be determined directly from Fig. g
where the di..m6naionlen ultimate Weral r e sl stance Pu1t/cun2 has been plot•
t ed ai! a runcttoo of the dim�ionlef!!.! embedment length L/D. It should be
ernphaaiz.ed that it hu been aasumed in this analysts that failure takes place
when the pile r otatea a,.a a unit, and that the corresponding maximum bending
moment Mpvii calculated from Eqs , 13 and 1,4 ls less than the ultimate or
max
yield moment r eaiatance of the pile section Myteld,

�o

...,
0
=> RESTRAINED
�40

w -
� 30
1-
(f')
(I)

�
20
_J

�
�
�
-' 10
w
�
�

; o. ....-.i;:...-.c:1-�� .L--��_._��--.J��---'
0 4 8 12 16
EMBEDMENT LENGTH, L/0

no. 9.-COIIEBIVE BOilB- ULTIMATE

LATERAL R.EBIBTANCE

Long Plles.-The mecharuam of fa.Bure for a long pile when a plasttc hinge
forms at the location of the maximum bending moment is shown in Fig. lO(a).
Failure takes place when the maximum bend.ing moment as calculated from
Eq. 13 is equal to the moment resistance of the pile section. The assumed
dlstrfbutton of lateral earth pr easur es and bending moments is shown in Figs.
1 O(b) and lO(c). Thu• 1t hat been usumed that the lateral detlecttona ar e
large enough to develop the tu1l paaalve r e slatance o! the soll down to the
depth corresponding to the location of the maximum bending moment in the
 SM 2 PILE RESISTANCE �1

pile. The cor r espondlng dimensionless ultimate lateral r eststanc e Pu1t/cuD2

hu been plotted in Fig. 11 u a function of the d.imen.sionleu moment resist-
111ce o! the pile section Myie1ct/cuo3 where Myield is the yield strength o!
the pile section, D the diameter o! the pile and cu, the cohesive strength o!
the soil.

I �:���%gw;:.:����:;:�.�.p;:�:�;
It can be seen !ram Fig. 11 that the ultimate lateral resistance incr eaae s
:t:11e1:;:�:� t�fe �iu:ile section and with in-

1 I
I
/"'"'-I.
I

l/
e
H/2 D

PLASTIC
HINGE

(a) DEFLECTION {b) SOIL REACTION (c) BENDNG MOMENT

FIG. 10.-DEFLECTION, SOIL REACTION AND BENDING MOMENT

DISTRIBUTION FOR A LONG FREE-HEADED PILE

Restrained Piles.
Short Pile11.-The mode o! fa1lure for a. very short restrained plle
111 shown in Fig. 12. Failure takes place when the applied lateral load la equal
to the ultimate lateral resistance of the soil, and the pile moves as a unit
through the sotl. The cor r espondlng aHume<l dlatr ibutlona of later al earth
pressure! and bending momenta are shown in Figs. 12(b) a.nd 12(c), respec•
tively. The ultlrrrate lateral r eaistanc e can be calculated from equilibrium
requirements as
 SM 2
52 March, 196'4

100

60 AEST�AINED

"b, 40 t
�20�

�
z
ct
I- 10
!£!
r.n
w
ex:

6
..J
ct
a: •
w 4
I-
4
..J

w
I-
� 2
I- D
..J
::)

3 4 6 10 20 40 60 IOO 200 400 600

:,
YIELD MOMENT, Myleld le uD
lD t-)tA. f( c>
FIG. 11.-COHESfVE SOILS-ULTIMATE LATERAL RESISTANCE

(o) DEFLECTION (b)SOIL REACTION (c)BENDING MOMENT

FIG. 12.-DEFLECTION, SOIL REACTION AND BENDING MOMENT

DlSTRIBUTION FOR A SHORT RESTRAINED PlLE
 BM 2 PILE RESISTANCE

Pult • 9 cu D (L - 1.5D) (16)

hl order !or the later ally loaded pile to !ail as shown, it is nec easary !or the
maximum negative bending moment M:':X to be Ie ss than or equal to the yield

I moment resistance of the pile section. Thus

I
Pult (0.5L + 0.75 D) 5 Myleld (17)

Intermediate Length Piles.-The !;1.J.lure mode o! Inter mediate Iength re•

I
strained piles is illustrated in Fig. 13 (a). At failure, the r estr aintng moment
Myield
--[)P
Myield
: v . : . v· : . · '. _. . , ·.•
. : .·�·_r:.,:: ·.
I I
n
I II
I
I I
I I
I
I
I

LJ L
9�0 Mmax

(a) DEFLECTION (b)SOll REACTION (c) BENDING MOMENT

FIG. 13,-DEFLECTION, SOIL REACTION AND BENDING MOMENT

DISTRIBUTION FOR A RESTRAINED PILE OF INTERME•
DIATE LENGTH

at the head o! the pile ls, equal to the ultimate moment resistance or the pile
section Myteld, and the plle rotates around a point located at some depth be•
low the ground surface, The corresponcUng assumed distribution of lateral
earth pressures and bending momenta is shown in Figs. 13 (b) and 13 (c), re-
spectively. The maximum positive bending moment Mpos occurs at a section
. max
located at a depth (1.5 D + f) below the ground surface. The depth {1.5 D + !)
can be determined from the requirement that the total shear !orce at the pile
section located at this depth must be equal to zero. The ultimate lateral re•
sistance can then be calculated .from Eqs. 12 and 13. The cor r espondlng max-
 i
l·�Jl'I

. ,. i
.
Ma..rch, 19M

mu
SM 2

l
8
imum poeitlve bendin,i moment Mpo determined from equ111brium require•

:Mpoa = P( 1.5 D + 0.5!) - Mneg .•........ (18)

ti .
( ments is equal to
mu mu

I
I-

�: Th9 "y:...-t �! L�� p!li, J�s;i,ted below the section of maximum positive moment

I i ' resisu the nuu:imum bending moment Mpos calc�lated from Eq. 14. With a.

u ...
ax .

,. �
:· m
I
. I
""y ,. , cJ

. '1
...,I

; !!":
; I

9 Cu D

(o) DEFLECTION (b) SOIL REACTION (c) BENDING MOMENT

f.
t FIG. H.-DEFLECTION, SOIL REACTION AND BENDING MOMENT
I DISTRIBUTION FOR A LONG RESTRAINED PILE
knowledge of the maximum positive bending moment, the ultimate lateral
resistance can finally be calculated from Eqs. 12, 14 and 18. The ultimate
lateral resistance can also be determined directly from Flg. 9 in which the
dtmenstonleea quantity Pu1t/cuD2 has been plotted as a function of the dimen•
sionless length L/0. However, it should be noted that it ls necessary !or the
maximum positive moment Mpos to be leas than the yield or ultimate mo-
mu
ment retihrtance of the pUe section Myield,
. !M 2 PILE RESISTANCE

Long Pilea.-The mode o! !a.llure of a long r eatr alned laterally loaded pile
.; driven into a cohesive !Oil !!I ehown in Fig. U. Failure u.ka: place when two
:- plutlc hinges form along the pile. The first hinge is loca.ted at the section
of the maximum negative moment (at the bottom of the pile ca.p) and the sec•
t,od hinge at the section of maximum positive moment at the depth (1.5 D + {)
l: below the ground surface, The corresponding aasumed dlstr ibuttons o! the
i TABLE 6.-MAXIMUM BENDING MOM.ENT

Meas ur ed Calculated
Applied
M.a.xlmum Ma.x.lmum.
Teet Lateral Ratio

t
Moment Moment
�alr'
�
.., - - J
n,,_ r, Mt.eat, In MteatlMcuo
ln
Cl.lO LUaLI kip-feet \d.p- eet
Ln kipe
(l) (2) (3) (4) (5)

Parrack, 19 1952

1 20 147a 137a,b l.07

40 336 309 1.09
60 556 497 1.12
80 800 707 1.13

McCammon a.nd Ascher-man, 16 1953

1 5.0 385a 46()8. 0.84

10.0 915 930 0,98
15.0 1375 1405 0.98
2 12.0 4008 4108- 0.98
24,0 1021 1045 0.98
36.0 1730 1780 0.97

Oet.erberg,18 1958

Tl 2.91 44.4 47 .8 0.93

T2 2.42 38.5 39. 7 0.97
T3 1.42 22.5 23.3 0,97
T4 1.42 21. 7 23.3 0.93
T5 4.90 74.5 BO. 7 0.92
T6 3.91 62.0 64.3 0,96
T7 2.91 -15.0 47.8 0.9,,i
T14 3 • .U 52.5 56.2 0.94

Average o. 9-45

I. A Sum of maximum posttrve and net{atlve hooding momenta

b Average unconfined compree slve strength taken a.s 0,500 tone per 11q ft

1011 reactions and bending moments are shown in Figs. H(b) and 14(c), re•
spectively. The ultimate lateral resistance can be determined from Eqa. 12
0

i.Dd 18 if it is noted that the maximum bending moment Mpoa Ia equal to the
TlUlX
ultimate moment r eal stance or the pile section Myteld, The re8Ulting ultimate
lateral resistance is equal to
 l
1
56 ·Yueh, 19M

� Myield
-� ult .• r{. ,. .1.-,5=1)�-o-=-..5. -=rcr . . . . . .
SM 2

(19)

The d.imen.si.cnlel!II qua.ntlty P�t/euo2 h1 plotted in Fig. 11 as a function of

the u.._11con !in� .compr eaalve ruen..,crth Chi, the pile diameter D and the yield
j
,,
I

l
I
re�iatance of the plle section Myield· 1·
Comparison with Test .Data.-The ma.ximum bending momenta calculated
1
ii
r i.:,y Eqz;. 13 ...u<l .:.e �-:� been compar ed L� Table (I with those determ1ned ex•
q
·.'
perimentally by Parrack, 19 by McCammon and Ascher ma n16 and by
Osterberg.18
\l1, The test r esulta presented by Parrad,19 and by McCammon and Ascher•
J I
manl6 were obtained from load test on partially r estr alned piles. The degree
.1
of end restra.int for the test piles is not Jcnown. The degree of end restraint J

:• affects the numerical values of both the positive and the negative maximum ]
bend1ng moments. However, it should be noted that the BUll1 of the positive
and negative maximum bending momenta is independent of the degree of end
restraint and that this sum can be determined directly from the equation

Mpoa + Mneg "' P ( 1.5 D + 0.5 {) (20)

max · max

The sum (Mpos

max
+ Mneg ) depends only
max
on the dimensions o! the test pile,
on the applied lateral load and on the cohesive strength of the supporting soil.
For the 1nvestlgations carried out by Par rack.lf and by McCammon and
Ascherman,16 the sum of the posttlve and negative bending moment has been
compared with the measured value in Table 6. For the investigation carried
out by Osterberg,15 the maximum bending moments have been calculated
from Eq. 13. The test data are examined in detail 1n Appendix II.
It can be aeen from Table 6 that the agreement between measured and
calculated bending moments is good. The main reason for this very satis•
factory agreement is the fact that the calculated maximum bending moment
is not very senatttv e to small varlatlons in the assumed distribution o! lateral
earth pr easur es or to small var latlons In the measured cohesive strength of
the soil. The teat data indicate that the proposed method of analysis can be
used with confidence to predict the maximum bending momenta for both un•
restrained and r eatr ained piles. However, it should be noted that the experi•
mental verilicatlon la limited. Additional test data are desirable.

SUM.MARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Methods !or the calculation of the lateral deflections at working loads and
the ultimate lateral resistance of laterally loaded piles driven into cohesive
saturated sotts have been presented. The lateral deflecttons at working loads
have been calculated uttltztng' the concept of a coefllclent of subgr ade reac•
tion. Methods for the evaluation of the coe!ficlent of subgr ade reaction have
been considered and the results have been presented in the form of graphs
and tables. The Iater al deflec tions at the ground surface has been expressed
 PILE RESISTANCE 57

in terms of a dimensionless deflection, a dim erialonl es s length, and the degr e e

o! end restraint of the loaded pile.
The ultimate lateral resistance of laterally loaded piles has been calcu•
lated assuming that the piles are transtor med into a rnechantam th.rough the
formation of plastic hinges. The ultimate lateral resistance of relatively
... ahort laterally loaded piiee has been aasum ed to be governed by the ultimate

I lat er al resistance of the surrounding cohesive soil whereas the ulttrnate lat•
eral resistance of relatively long piles has been as sum ed to be goverried by
the pi ast ic or yield resistance of the ptl e sections. The ultimate lateral re•

I sistances of free and restrained laterally loaded piles has been presented in
graphical form.
The calculated defiection at working loads and the calculated maximum
bending momenta have been compared with available teat data. Good agree•
ment was found between calculated and measured values. The available test
data are, however, limited and the proposed methods should be applied with
caution.

APPENDIX !.-NOTATION

The following notations have been adopted for use in this paper:

B = diameter or width of load plate, in inches;

c = cohesion determined from undrained triaxial, direct shear or vane

u
tests, ln pounds per square inch;
D = diameter or width of test pile, in inches;

d deflection of load plate, in inches;

0

:::: modulus or elasticity of pile material, in pounds per square inch;

:::: secant modulus corresponding to half the ultimate unconfined com•

pressive strength of the soil, In pounds per square lnch;
= distance from 1. 5 pile diameters below ground surf ace to location
of maximum bending moment ( F'Ig. B), In Inches:
:: distance from location of maximum bending moment to bottom o(
pile ( Fig. 8), in inches;
I
p
= moment o{ Inertia of pile section, ln in. 4;

K :::: k D, ln pounds per square inch;

K = k0B, in pounds per square inch;
0

.:: kooD, ln pounds per square Inch;

= coeff lcient of aubg rade reaction, in pounds l)€r cubic inch;

 i�
I '

; i1· 58 March, 1964 SM 2

I '1
!
.. I
k "' coefficient of lateral subg r ade reaction wlt.h respect to moment
m
•.. I
acting at mld-helght cl short laterally loaded piles ( Fi.g. 5b), in
pounds per cubic inch;
k "' coeff lc lent at subg rade reaction of square or circular plates, in
0
pound, per cubic inch;
k • coeff1clent of lateral aubira.de reaction with respect to load acting
p
at mtd-hetg ht of aho rt laterally loaded piles ( Ftg , 5a), In pounds
per cubic inch;
i
�- k ea = coefficient of lateral subgrade reaction !or a long laterally loaded
\ pile, In pounds per cubic Inch;
!I L length of e mbedment ( Flg. 5), in inches;
ti
I! L' "' equivalent length ,:i embedment ( Fig. 5), In Inches;
I
.''· = coefficient ( Table 1);

coefficient ( Table 2);

M = moment, In pounds per Inch;

= maximum positive bending moment, In pounds per inch;

M11eg = maximum negative bending moment, In pounds per inch;

max
M
yield = yield or ultimate moment resistance of pile section, in pounds per
Inch;
p = lateral load, In pounds;
pult ultlmate lateral resistance, In pounds;

Q = soil reaction per unit length of pile, In pounds per inch;

�!
q unit sol l reaction, in pounds per square Inch;
' � = unconfined compressive strength, In pounds per square Inch;
L.
�t = ultimate lateral resistance, in pounds per square Inch;
f. y = lateral deflection, in inches;
Yo x lateral deflection at ground surface, in inches;

ym lateral derlectlon at ground surface caused by moment acting at

mid -helght of short piles ( Flg , 5b), In inches;
yp = deflection at ground surface caused by load acting at mid-height of
short piles ( Fig. 5a), In inches ;
Y calc = calculated lateral deflection at ground surf ace, In inches;

y teat = mea..aured lateral deflection at ground surf ace, in inches;

 SM 2 PILE RESISTANCE 59

a " coefficient equal to n1n2;

f3 L = dimensionless length; and

µ :: polsson's ratio.

I A pp -...;-�---
J;'Nn TY .....
TT - ct
-·---....,
A n '--'
u.1.•J.r,,..1l.J.
,.... ""
vr
m �� �
.14.JUJ. � •
UF\1/\
- •

I A summary Is presented ln this Appendix of the soil condtttons, the prop•

erties of the test piles and of the aasurnpttons made In the analysis of the test
data r epo rted In Tables 4 and 6. Each lnveatlgatlon Is considered separately.
Shills, Gr-aves and Driscoll,21 1948.-The deflections of laterally loaded
poles placed in augered holes and backfilled with compacted material were
measured by Shilts, Graves and Driscoll. The soil at the test site consisted
oC a thin layer of lop soil underlain by a silty clay and a clayey silt with an
average unconfined compressive strength of 1. 53 tons per sq Ct. The lateral
deflections of the lest poles at the ground surface Increased approximately
linearly with the applied load. The lateral deflections of the teat poles have
been calculated assuming that the (E50/qu)-ratlo of the sotl is equal to 50 and
that the poles were rigid. Pole 9 was set in a pr ecaat concrete pipe with an
outs lde diameter of 2 ft and the space between the pole and the concrete pile
was filled with compacted soil. The lateral deflection of pole 9 has been cal•
culated assuming that the pole and the concrete pipe move as a unlL The dis•
crepancy between measured and calculated lateral deflections ( Table 4) for
pole 9 can probably be attributed to movement of the pole with respect to the
concrete plpe.
Parrack, 19 1952. - Parrack measur ed the lateral deflections :1.J1d the bend•
ing moment distrilrutlon for a partially restrained Inatrurne nt ed pipe plle wlth
an outalde diameter of 24 .0 in. The test pile was driven through a soft organic
saturated silty clay. The average cohesive strength cu (evaluated as half the
unconHned compressive strength) was 370 lb per sq ft, withJn the signllicant
depth,52 while the average cohesive strength cu measured by field vane tests
was 500 lb per sq ft. 53 The calculated dimensionless length /3 L of the test
pile was larger than 2.5 (/3 L = 10.4). Therefore, it has been aasurned in the

l calculations that the test pile behaved as an infinitely long pile. The lateral
deflections have been calculated assuming that the (E50/qu)=rat10 of the silt-y

l
>
clay is equal to 50, that the _cohesive strength as measured by the field vane
test is representative of the average cohesive strength of the sorl in place and
that the test pile was fully free at the ground surface. (The inflection point of

the pile was located approx.Jmately at the ground sur Iac e.)
The test pile wa.a subjected to several load cycles at each load level. The
deflection Ytest is the measured lateral deflection at the ground surface dur•
ing the first load cycle before any appreciable consolidation and creep have
52 • Foundation Inveatlgatlon, Bay Marchand •E • and .F,. Structur es ;" Greer «, Mc-·
Clelland, Consulting Engr-a., Houston, Texas, December, 1949.
5;3 "Supplementary Foundation InveetlgaUoo, Bay Marchand • E • Structure, La.fourch
Pariah, Loui stana," Greer &I McClelland, Consulting Engra., Houston, Texas, February,
1954.
 .,

t
"
,·
r
I
60 March, 196-4 SM 2

�·
I( l ...
.f' taken puce. The lateral deflections at working loads were found to be approx•
r imately equal to the calculated lateral deflection corresponding to the fully
II free condition as can be seen from Table 4. The measured lateral deflections
! Inc r eaaed rapidly as the maximum applied load was approached and exceeded
at the applied lateral load of 45 kips the calculated lateral deflections.
The maximum and negative bending moments in a laterally loaded re•
strained pile depends on the degree of end restraint which is unknown !or the

Ji test pile. It should be noted, however, that the sum of the maximum positive
.i.a!d the maximum ocg-d.t:iv� bt11UiT1g- moments iD i..r1Uepe1·n.ie1·1t oi l.he ciegree oi
end restraint and can be calculated dlrectly from Eq. 20. The shearing strength

lili of the soil cu within the s igniftcant depth has been taken as 500 lb per sq ft.
The calculated maximum bending moments are relatively insensitive to var I•
attons L, the assurned cohesive atr ength. I1 a value of 370 lb per sq rt Is taken
as the cohesive strength, then the calculated bending moments will be from
Ii 4% to 10% larger than those corresponding to a cohesive strength of 500 lb
d,
H. ,. per sq ft .
:r
'I

.
I Mc Cam mon and Asch e.r-han , l 6 1953. -The distribution of lateral bending

l 'i moment in a free-headed and a restrained laterally loaded pile with a diam•
•.
eter of 4. 5 !t was measured by McCammon and Ascherman.16 The test piles
were driven lnto the bottom of Lake Maracaibo, Venezuela and the soil within
the significant depth cons i at ed of a very sort gray clay with an average water
content of 150%, an average liquid limit of 85% and an average plasticity in•

f
dex ot '45%. No information is available concerning the deformation and
strength properties of the soil. Since the shallow bottom sediments probably
are normally cc.wolictated, it is reasonable to expect that the shearing
strength of the soil will rnc r ea ae linearly with depth corresponding to a cu/P
ratio of 0. 27. 54 The ca lculat ed average submerged unit weight of the soil is
21 lb per cu Ct, afrnumli,·t a unit specific weight of 2.7 for the solids and an
I! ,.
r .':
I
!1
��
average water content of. r50%. The maximum lateral bending moment for the
unrestrained pile denoted (1) has been calculated from Eq. 13. For the re•

strained pile denoted (2), the sum of the maximum positive and negative bend•
I! ing moments has been calculated from Eq. 20. The calculated and the measured

I
maximum bending moments have been compared in Table 6. Good agreement
was found between measured and calculated values. ·
The calculated maxlrnum bending moments are insensitive to variations in

the aasum ed cohesive strength of the clay. If it is assumed that the cu/p-ratio

I
t
la twice the value aaaumed previously, then the calculated bending moments
will decrease by about 2% and the ratio Mtest/Mcalc will increase by the

I
�
I �
I'
.
I :1 .•
I
I.
'
:

l. !I
I

I11 I

l·'
s sisting each of three vertical timber piles with a diameter of 12 in. was
a meaaured. The piles we:re restrained by a pile cap. The test piiea were driven
r
n through
e 9 ft of clay with an average s,tandard penetration resistance of 8 blowa per ft.
a The calculated significant depth ls approximately equal to 10 ft. The lateral
m resistance is governed by the average shear strength of the shallow clay
o
u stratum. The lateral deflections of the test piles has been calculated from
n Eq. 5(b) assuming that the piles were fully restrained and that the modulus o1
t
.
M 54 BJerrum, L .• and Simona, N. E., "Comparison of. Shear Strenglh,J:;haraclerlsllcs
c of Normally Coneoltdated Clays,'' Ree ea rch Con!. on Shear Strength of Cohesive Soils,
Boulder, Colo., June, 1960, pp. 711-726.
N
ul
t
y
,1
7
1
9
5
6.
-
T
h
e
.
l
a
t
e
r
a
l
r
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
of
t
w
o
pi
l
e
1-:,1
o
u
p
s
c
o
n
r
Ill. SM 2
TT t:"
P • ._, .c,
r,r.,c,Tr,r,,, 1. ,,...-,_
rvn.o Lu 11\..N 1..., t 61

elasticity of the pile material is 1.5 x 108 psi. The coe!ficlent of subgr ade
reaction has been calculated from Eq. 6 assurntng that the unconfined com•
pressive strength of the soil (in tons per square foot) is 1/5 the standard
penetration resistance N (in blows per foot). Since the average measured
standard penetration resistance was 6 blows per ft, the uncon!ined cornpr es-
stve str ength Qu of the soil has been ta.ken as 1.2 tons per sq ft. The calcu•

I lated lateral. deflections have been compared with the measured deflecttons
in Table 4. The calculated lateral deflections cornpar es 'i1c'el1 ?.'!t...� the meas-

I
ured values at half the maximum applied lateral load of 20 kips.
. The calculated lateral deflections ar e insensitive to the aasurned value of
. the coefficient of sub gr ade reaction. If the unconfined compressive strength
(in tons per square foot) is taken as 1/8 the atandar d penetr atton r eststa.nee

N (in blows per foot), then the lateral deflections calculated in Table 4
are increased by 13%.
Osterberg,18 1958.-0sterberg carried out an extensive aeries of tests on
laterally loaded poles placed in holes predrilled in a stiff to very atllf clay.
The diameter of the pre-drilled holes was approximately 2 in. larger than
the diameter of the corresponding test pile. The space between the test piles
and the aides of the predrilled holes was filled with sand which was compacted
in layers or vibrated by striking the aide o! the pile by a hammer. The dlm en•
aionl es a lengths of the test piles O L were less than 1.5. The deflections at
the ground surface have been calculated a ssurn ing that the test piles were
infinitely stiff. The tests were not carried out to failure and the ultimate lat•
eral resistances of the piles are therefore not known. The deflections at the
ground surface were calculated at working loads (one-third the maximum
lpplied lateral load).
The unconfined compressive strength used in the calculations of the lateral
deflections is the average strength measured for samples obtained from
the bore hole located closest to the test pile being conaidere<l. Stress-
strain relationships obtained from unconfined compression teats indicate
that the average (E50/cu)-rat10 of the soil was approximately 50. The agr e
ernent be• tween measured and calculate-cl lateral deflections ls considered
satisfactory. The average value of the ratio Yteat/Ycalc is 1.65. The deviation
between the measured and the calculated values may be partly attributed to
compression of the sand placed in the apace between the teat piles and the
sides of the predrilled auger holes.
A comparison between measured and calculated bending moments at the
maximum applied lateral load is made in Table 6. The maximum bending mo•
ments have been calculated from Eq. 13, assuming that the cohesive strength
of the soil is equal to half the average unconfined compressive strength meas•
ured for samples obtained from the bore hole located closest to the respective
test pile. Good agreement was found between measured and calculated maxi•
mum bending momenta.
I
Peck and Davisson ,21 1962. -The lateral deflections of a steel H-pile
f. driven to bedrock through approximately 30 ft of black to gr ay , or ganlc silt
l were measured by means of a slope indicator. The shearing strength cu of
! the organic silt, measured by field vane tests, increased from zero at the
tnudllne to approximately 400 lb per sq ft at a depth of 27 ft below the mud•

!'. line. The lateral deflections have been calculated by Eqa , 5a, 6, 7 and 11, at
the mudline assuming that the average shearing strength cu iB 200 lb per sq
t

�
I
Li.
62 March, 1954 SM 2

ft and that the secant modulus of the soil is 100 cu. The calculated lateral
deflec tlons compare !avorably with the measured values as shown in Table 4.

APPENDIX III ·

I
The lateral r estetance which developa along a laterally loaded pile moving
through a cohesive eon can be calculated approximately by mea.ns of the theory
of pla.aUcity. The ultimate lateral r ee lstanc e can be calculated assuming that
slip or rupture of the soil takes place along plane or spiral shaped failure
surfaces. 22, 55, 56
I
At failure, the soil located close to the ground surface to a depth of ap•
proximately three pile diameters moves in an upwards ctirection towards
the ground surface while the soil located below this depth, moves in the lateral
dlr ectlon from the front to the back side of the pile. The ultimate lateral re•
t1lBUJ1ce can be calculated, below a depth of approximately three pile diam•
et e r a, a1uruming plain strain condittons and that the soil iB weightless.
Slip or rupture of a soil with a ·cohesion c and friction angle ¢, can be as•
sumed to take place along two families of failure or rupture surfaces which
are inclined at an angle of (90° + ,) degrees with each other. When the soil
behaves as a weightless material the principal stresses are constant within
the area where the two families of slip surfaces are plane.
The variation of the major principal stresses along a spiral shaped failure
surface can be calculated from the equation:
-2vtan� ( -Zvtane
(Pi) (Pi) e + c e - 1 ) /tan, ..... (21)

i: .
a b

in which (p1)a la the major principal stress at point a, (p1)b the major prin•
cipal str eas at point b, and v the change of inclination (slope) of the failure
aur Iace when traveling from point a to point b. For a frictionless � = O) ma•
terial, Eq. 21 can be alrnplfn ed to

in which cu la the cohesive strength of the frictionless material.

The ultimate lateral r earatances of various pile sections with smooth or
rough surfaces have been calculated ln Table 5. The calculated lateral unit
r e alstanc e varied between 8.28 cu and 12.56 cu. It can be seen from Table 5
that the calculated ultimate lateral resistance· does not vary between wide
ltrntts. The calculated ultimate lateral r es iatanc es are not affected appre•
ciably by the roughness or by the shape at the pile section. A value of 9 cu
55 'Plasticity In E:nglneerlng, � by F. K. T. Hereon, Hafner Publishing Co., Inc., New
Yor k, IIM7 .
. 56 "Ea rth Pre asur e Cs lculutlon, "by J. Brinch-Hansen, The Danish T'echnlcal Presa,
Copenhagen, l!J53.
BM 2 PILE RESISTANCE 63

)u therefore been used in the calculations or the ultimate lateral unit resist•
·lnce of a cohesive soil.