STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF BRIDGES AND PILE FOUNDATION SUBJECTED TO SEISMIC LOADS

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 10 Issue: 02 | Feb 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 106
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF BRIDGES AND PILE FOUNDATION
SUBJECTED TO SEISMIC LOADS
Rajesh Kumar Singhal1, Pradyumna Dashora2
M Tech, PAHER University Udaipur
Assistant Professor, PAHER University Udaipur
---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - An Effect of various materials of pile foundation of bridges in response of the seismic loading condition has to be
monitored. Such an analysis was required to verify the performance of each structure acting under seismic loads. In this study, a
numerical model is developed to evaluate both bridges and pile foundation performance with respect to varying seismic loading
conditions. Specifically speaking to evaluate the performance of various structural materials used as pile foundation for bridges
against seismic loads. The vibrational behavior of the bridge was also evaluated on the basis of seismic loads on the structure.
Furthermore, pile foundation of the bridge was modeled along with combination of soil in order to analyze the behavior of the
structure with soil. Also the bridge pile foundation of different structural material namely structural steel, carbonfibre reinforced
steel and epoxy fibre reinforced steel were modeled using ANSYS software. It was observed that Carbonfibrereinforced structural
steel is superior in performance as compared to that of the structural steel and epoxy fibre reinforced structural steel in both pile
foundation as well as development of bridge structure. Maximum nodal displacement for bridge structure with respect to seismic
load conditions for different materials were Carbon fibre structural steel as 63.104 mm, Epoxy fibre structuralsteelas69.992mm
and Structural steel as 70.091 mm respectively.
Key Words: Carbon fibre structural steel, Epoxy Fibre Structural Steel, ANSYS.
1 INTRODUCTION
These soil pressures may come from pile settlement,soil swelling,orpassiveresistancesbroughton bylateral stresses
the superstructure transmits to the pile caps. If the earth directly beneath a building's base is incapable of supporting the
structure, piles may be used as a foundation. A pile foundation may be taken into consideration if the findings of the site study
indicate that the shallow soil is weak and unstable, or if the size of the predictedsettlementisunacceptable.Additionally,a cost
estimate can show that a pile foundation is less expensive than any other ground improvement costs that are being evaluated.
There are various ways to arrange piles so they can support loads that are placedonthem.Itispossibletobuildvertical pilesto
support both lateral and vertical loads. Raking heaps and vertical piles can be used in combination, as needed, to sustain both
horizontal and vertical forces. If a pile group is subjected to vertical force, the total load is considered to be divided by the
number of piles in the group, which is used to calculate the distribution of load on a single pile that is a part of the group. But if
a group of piles is exposed to lateral load, eccentric vertical load, or a combination of vertical and lateral load, the group may
experience moment force.
Due to the increase in urban population, underground rail transit has developed into one of the main modes of
transportation [1]. The majority of subway stations, which act as thehubsoftransportationforundergroundrail networks,are
situated in hilly, heavily populated urban regions. One of the biggest issues that regularly affects subway stations during
construction is ground surface settlement [2-4]. These buildings usuallyhavedeeppilingfoundations, whichmight impedethe
construction of pipelines and other underground constructions like subways [5]. Pile foundations have been constructed for
numerous projects, including high-rise structures. Itisfrequentlynecessarytousepilefoundationunderpinningtotransferthe
existing pile foundation's weight properly in order to maintain the stability of the top construction technology. Thus,
underground transport infrastructures, like subway tunnels, are progressing smoothly [6].
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
In order to get a actual knowledge of the various seismic design and pushover investigation approaches, various
research articles, design codes and relevant bookswerescrupulouslystudiedtounderstandtheeffectofseismicparameterson
design & detailing of RC buildings. This helped in deciding obligatory modeling methods and parameters to be used in seismic
investigation and comparisons. Kumar and Rao (2002) have carriedoutcorresponding stationaryinvestigationfora five(G+4)
storied RC building in order to match up to the variation of percentage steel when the building is designed for gravity loads as
per IS 456:2000 and when designed for earthquake forces in all the seismic zones as per IS 1893:2002. Samyog (2013) has
done a study which involves cost comparison of RCC Columns in identical buildings based on number of Stories and Seismic

Zones. This work presents that the detailing of columns of a building covering certain plinth area varies for a combination of
storey and seismic zone. Another facet of this study involves performance evaluation of the designed buildings for various
seismic zones and detailing provisions using computer based “PUSH-OVER” Analysis. The need of such an exercise has been
well illustrated by Ghosh and Munshi (1998) in which it has been stated that the aim of the design codes is cardinally to
minimize the life hazards and Athanassiadou analyses two ten-storeyed plane stepped frames and one ten-storeyed regular
frame which were designed as per Euro code 8 for the high and medium ductility classes. In this work the Inter-storey drift
ratios of the frames and plastic hinge formation in columns were monitored.Inthiswork,theresultsofpushoveranalysiswere
presented using "uniform” load pattern as well as "modal‟ load pattern.
Lu et al. [8] discovered that the SAP consolidation settlement is positively correlated with the PSSR. The settlement
characteristics of the stratum in the construction process are studied and determined the reasons for the difference between
the numerical and field monitoring results [13]. Experimental study and DEM simulation carried out of thepush-up loadtests,
where sand plugs inside steel pipe piles were pushed upwards using a rigid platen; test results showed that the push-up force
increased significantly with increasing aspect ratio and sand relative density [15]. Xu et al. [20] conducted a series of
theoretical analysis and numerical simulations of the entire construction process to verify the rationality oftheschemeandto
reduce the potential construction risk of the technology. Park et al. [21] proposed and verified the application of the modified
underpinning method, which can reduce the construction period by 1.5 times and theconstructioncostby1.2times compared
with the conventional pile cutting technology. Horikoshi et al. [36] carried out a series of centrifuge tests on piled raft models
embedded in sand subjected to horizontal and vertical loadings to study the load settlement behaviour and the load sharing
characteristics between the piles and the raft. The effect of the rigidity at the pile head connection on the piled raft behaviour
was also explored. Finn and Fujita [49] used an equivalent linear model for soil and beam elements for piles in their 3D finite
element simulations of piles in liquefiable ground. Cheng and Jeremic [50], Lu et al. [51] and Chang et al. [52] used plasticity
models [53,54 ] for sand in their simulation methods and used various different techniquestoconnectthebeamsrepresenting
the piles to the soil elements in order to reflect the geometric properties of the piles. Wang et al. [55] developed a fully 3D
simulation method for piles in liquefiable ground by using second-order hexahedron elements for piles to capture both its
physical geometry and bending and used a unified plasticity model forlargepostliquefactionsheardeformationofsand[56] to
give a good account for the behaviour of saturated sand under seismic loading. The simulation method developed by Wang et
al. [55] was validated against a series of centrifuge shaking table tests on single piles in liquefiable ground, and the numerical
simulation results showed good agreement with the test measurements.
3 OBJECTIVES AND PROBLEM STATEMENT
Efficiency of pile foundation of bridges againsttheaction ofseismicloadshasalwaysbeena majorproblem.Duetolack
of interpretation and knowledge of parameters effecting performance of bridges foundation structuresunderseismicloading,
design of the bridges under earthquake is hampered. Development of a numerical model becomes very essential which can
illustrate the phenomenon of earthquake properly and with less cost it makesbuildingreactapproximatelytosameconditions
it has to undergo at practical level.
 To study performance of bridge pile foundation of structural steel against seismic loads in different zones.
 To study performance of bridges under seismic loads
 To study the vibration behavior of the bridges under seismic loading conditions
 To evaluate the performance of various structural materials used as pile foundation for bridges against seismic loads
4 METHODOLOGY
The bridge is modeled first with seismic loads in order to analyze different behaviour of the structure with regardsto
seismic loads. The vibrational behaviour of the bridge was also evaluated on the basis of seismic loads on the structure.
Furthermore, pile foundation of the bridge was modeled along with combinationofsoil inordertoanalyzethebehaviourofthe
structure with soil. Also the bridge pile foundation of different structural material namely structural steel, carbon fibre
reinforced steel and epoxy fibre reinforced steel were modeled using ANSYS software. Different bridge structures were
individually subjected to strong and typical earthquakes, or seismic stresses, from various zones in India. Seismic loads of
various zones were tabulated, along with a graph of their time-acceleration. Such values servedastheboundaryconditionsfor
the loading conditions applied to the structure used in the relevant study. It was noted that seismic research was carried out
with the understanding that the building's foot was securely planted in the ground and that its terminal connections were
fastened. The seismic investigation of the building revealed that gravity loads also had a significant impact.

.
Figure 1 Design morphology of Bridge pile foundation subjected to seismic loads
Figure 2 Collapse mechanism of structure under seismic loading
Figure 4.1 shows the morphology of the design that is it represents the methodology of the project it was eventually
observed that the beginning and the most important step of analysis of any bridge is modeling of the bridge with its cross-
sectional frame and piles. In this stage it was realized that three different forms or shapes of bridge pile structure were
presented in the work It was observed that the column size is of 0.35 m x 0.45 m, and the beam size is 0.23mx0.45 m.material
to be used was presented in the form of:
Unit weight of RCC: 25 kN/m3
Unit weight of Masonry: 20 kN/m3 (Assumed)
Modulus of elasticity, of concrete: 5000
Poisson's ratio: 0.17
The depth of foundation is 2 m and the height of bridge is 5 m.
Figure 3 Isometric view of bridge structure

Figure 4 Pile foundation inside soil
Figure 5 Meshed model of Bridge

Figure 6 Meshed model of piles with soil
Figure 7 Boundary condition of Pier for simulations
Figure 8 Boundary condition of Bridge for simulations

Figure 4.8 shows a boundary and loading condition of bridge structure which was also subjected to seismic loads in
order to analyze the performance of such a structure under such varying and conditional loadconditions.The bridgestructure
was made up of structural steel.
Figure 9 Loading conditions of pile with soil foundation
Figure 4.9 shows a loading condition of pile with interaction of the soil which was also subjected to seismic loads in
order to analyses the performance of such a structure and alsotoevaluatehowtheinteractionbetweenthesoil andpileusually
happens at the time of loading and varying conditions. Furthermore, pile is made up of different structure like structural steel,
carbon fibre reinforced steel and epoxy fibre reinforced steel.
4.1 Boundary Conditions
One of the most important ways to pre-process a simulation task is to provide boundary conditions. The
frame system boundary conditions assumed the base of the column to be fixed. Adhesive contact was provided
between all faces of the frame pillars that werejoinedtogether.Separationbetweenthejointsofthestructureisnot
allowedso that the load is fully transmitted throughout the structure. A gravityloadwasappliedtothestructureto
account for the effects of buildinginertiaandgravityduringtheseismicanalysis.Seismicanalysiswasperformedas
an explicit dynamic analysis. Building frame loads were provided in the form of time acceleration history plots for
different seismic zones.
Figure 10 Time vs acceleration graph for Zone III

Figure 11 Time vs acceleration graph for Zone IV
Figure 12 Time vs acceleration graph for Zone V
Above graphs represent the time acceleration graph used for a particular Indian regional earthquake zone namely Zone III,
Zone IV and Zone V.
5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Bridge structure and pile foundation with soil were subjected to seismic loading conditions. Bridgestructureandpile
foundation with soil are the two different conditions of the structures which were subjected to high dynamic seismic loads.
Seismic loads applied were also varied in the structure with the aid of time acceleration graph obtained from the history of
different zones of earthquake in India.
5.1 Modes of Deformation of Bridge Structure
It was observed that bridges start to behave very nonlinearly under the influence of very dynamic seismic loads.
Structural nonlinearity occurs in tall bridges regardless of the shape of the building. In case of seismic loading of the structure
resulting from different earthquake zones, the non-linearity of the structure remains almost the same, only the size of the
deformation varies.

Figure 13 Displacement variation in Bridge structure
Figure 14 Stress variation in bridge structure
It was observed that for bridge structure with structural steel seismic analysishastobeperformedbydynamicmodes
then only accurate results were possible. Figure 5.2 shows the modes of deformation of the structurewhensubjectedtohighly
unstable seismic loads. It was observed that structure undergoesa toandfromotioninthehorizontal directionwithtime while
the magnitude of the displacement was directly proportional to the intensity of the earthquake. It was clearly visible that the
structure (of any shape) has higher deformation in bridge structure with structural steel as comparedto bridgestructurewith
conventional structural steel.
Figure 15 Stress variation in bridge structure of carbon fibre reinforced steel

Figure 16 Displacement variation in carbon fibre reinforced steel Bridge structure
5.2 Bending Moment
When the magnitude of the seismic loads applied were as per that of time acceleration graph of Zone III. All three
different types of the bridge structure normal structural steel, carbon fibre steel and epoxy fibre structural steel bridges were
subjected to same earthquake load as per Zone III according to IS codes. It was evident that structural steel bridgeframetends
to have maximum bending moment on comparison to other two types of structure.
Figure 17 Bending moment in buildings in Zone III
5.3 Shear Forces in Seismic Loads
When the magnitude of the seismic loads applied were as per that of time acceleration graph of zone III. All three
different types of the bridge structure normal structural steel, carbon fibre steel and epoxy fibre structural steel bridges was
subjected to same earthquake load as per zone III according to IS codes. It was evident that structural steel tends to have
maximum shear force on comparison to other two types of structure.

Figure 18 Maximum shear force in Zone III
5.4 Displacement in Bridges When Subjected To Seismic Loads
When the magnitude of the seismic loads applied were as per that of time acceleration graph ofzoneIII.All
three different types of the structure bridge structure normal structural steel, carbon fibre steel and epoxy fiber
structural steel bridges as subjected to same earthquake load as per zone III according to IS codes. It was evident
that structural steel tends to have maximum displacement on comparison to other two types of structure.
Table 1 Nodal displacement in x direction
MAXIMUM NODAL DISPLACEMENT (mm) IN ZONE III
TYPE OF STRUCTURE IN X DIRECTION
Carbon fibre str.
Epoxy Fibre
steel
Structural
steel
Bridge structure 63.104 69.992 70.091
Table 2 Nodal displacement in z direction
MAXIMUM NODAL DISPLACEMENT (mm) IN ZONE III
TYPE OF STRUCTURE IN X DIRECTION
Carbon fibre str.
Epoxy Fibre
steel
Structural
steel
Bridge structure 63.104 64.928 70.091
It was observed from Table 5.1.and 5.2 that the maximum displacement of the structural steel frametendstohavethe
largest nodal displacement in both the x and z directions compared totheothertwostructural types.Thestructural steel frame
therefore begins to behave more unstable when exposed to high dynamic seismic loads, while the other two frame types
remain more stable.
Factor of Safety of the structural steel bridge structure wasfoundouttobeminimumof2.1whichwill beconsideredat
the situation of the seismic load. Furthermore, the carbon fibre reinforced steel structure and epoxy fibre reinforced steel
structure will have factor of safety of 3.8 and 3.1 respectively. Figure 5.7 shows the factor of safety pattern of the structural
steel structure with respect to seismic loads.
Carbon fibre steel Structural steel Epoxy fibre steel

Figure 19 FOS pattern for Structural Steel Bridge
5.5 Design of Pile Foundation with Soil
In this case, the design of pile foundation used in the bridge has been separately analyzed in order characterize the
behaviour of the pile foundation with soil under the action of seismic loads. The soil model was modeled with the form of a
cuboidal box of 1mx1mx1m and the pile foundation rod of 1 m length and 350 mm diameter. The pile was characterized with
different materials. Loading condition of pile with interaction of the soil which was also subjected to seismic loads in order to
analyses the performance of such a structure and also to evaluate how the interaction between the soil and pile usually
happens at the time of loading and varying conditions. Furthermore, pile is made up of different structure like structural steel,
carbon fibre reinforced steel and epoxy fibre reinforced steel.
Figure 20 Stress pattern in piles and soil with foundation for structural steel

Figure 21 Displacement pattern in piles and soil with foundation for structural steel
Figure 22 Displacement pattern in piles and soil with foundation for structural steel (Close view)

Figure 23 Variation between Carbon fibre reinforced steel pile and structural steel pile design
It is clearly evident from the figure5.11 that the structure foundation of piles with respect to the different materials
performs in different forms. It was observed that the pile foundation made up of carbonfibre mixedstructural steel performed
much better as compared to that of the conventional structural steel.
Figure 24 Structural performance of piles with different materials in different earthquake zones
It is clearly evident from the figure 5.12 that the structure foundation of piles with respect to the different materials
performs in different forms. It was observed that the pile foundation made up of carbonfibre mixedstructural steel performed
much better as compared to that of the conventional structural steel and that of epoxy fibre reinforced steel. The structures
were subjected to different forms of loading conditions with respect to differentseismic loadingconditions.Energy absorption
characteristics and maximum deformation characteristics of the structure was performed and compared to each other under

variable loading conditions to estimate the performance of the structure. It was observed that the energy absorbed byCarbon
fibre reinforced structural steel absorbs the maximum amount and energyandundergoeslessdeformation. Therefore,Carbon
fibre reinforced structural steel is superior in performance as compared to that of the structural steel and epoxy fibre
reinforced structural steel.
Figure 25 Structural performance of piles with different materials in different earthquake zones
6 CONCLUSION
The effectiveness of piling foundations for bridges against seismic loads has long been a significant issue. Design of the
bridges under earthquake is impeded bya lack ofinterpretationandknowledgeofthe characteristicsaffectingthe performance
of bridge foundation structures under seismic loading. The creation of a numerical model that can accurately depict the
earthquake phenomenon and do so at a low cost while simulating situations that real-world buildings would experience is
crucial. Even though dynamic analysis is a laborious and time-consuming endeavor, practicality becomes crucial for a
structure's performance and evaluation at its best. It is necessary to consider how different pile foundation materials for
bridges respond to seismic loading conditionswere monitored.Suchananalysiswasrequiredtoverifytheperformanceof each
structure acting under seismic loads. In this study, a numerical model isdevelopedtoevaluatebothbridgesandpile foundation
performance with respect to varying seismic loading conditions.
 Carbon fibre reinforced structural steel is superior in performance as compared to that of the structural steel and
epoxy fibre reinforced structural steel in both pile foundation as well as development of bridge structure.
 Carbon fibre structural steel pile foundation undergoes a maximum displacement of 9 mm, 13.5 mm and 21 mm
respectively in Zone III, Zone IV and Zone V.
 Epoxy fibre structural steel pile foundation undergoes a maximum displacement of 8.5 mm, 12 mm and 18.5 mm
respectively in Zone III, Zone IV and Zone V.
 Structural steel pile foundation undergoes a maximum displacement of 7.5 mm, 11 mm and 17 mm respectively in
Zone III, Zone IV and Zone V.
 Factor of Safety of the structural steel bridge structure was found out to be minimum of 2.1 which will be considered
at the situation of the seismic load. Furthermore, the carbonfibre reinforcedsteel structureand epoxyfibrereinforced
steel structure will have factor of safety of 3.8 and 3.1.
 Maximum nodal displacement for bridge structure with respecttoseismicloadconditionsfordifferentmaterialswere
Carbon fibre structural steel as 63.104 mm, Epoxy Fibre structural steel as 69.992 mm and Structural steel as 70.091
mm respectively.

7 REFERENCES
1. Luan, X., Cheng, L., Song, Y., & Zhao, J. (2020). Better understanding the choice of travel mode by urbanresidents:New
insights from the catchment areas of rail transit stations. Sustainable cities and society, 53, 101968.
2. Su, Z., & Li, X. (2020). Sub-system energy model based on actual operation data for subwaystations.SustainableCities
and Society, 52, 101835.
3. Wang, Z. Z., & Chen, C. (2017). Fuzzy comprehensive Bayesian network-based safety risk assessment for metro
construction projects. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 70, 330-342.
4. Ding, L. Y., Yu, H. L., Li, H., Zhou, C., Wu, X. G., & Yu, M. H. (2012). Safety risk identification system for metro
construction on the basis of construction drawings. Automation in construction, 27, 120-137.
5. Guo, X., Wang, Z., Geng, P., Chen, C., & Zhang, J. (2021). Ground surface settlement response to subway station
construction activities using pile–beam–arch method. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 108, 103729.
6. Li, Z., Chen, Z., Wang, L., Zeng, Z., & Gu, D. (2021). Numerical simulation and analysis of the pile underpinning
technology used in shield tunnel crossings on bridge pile foundations. Underground Space, 6(4), 396-408.
7. Guner, S., & Chiluwal, S. (2021). Cyclic load behavior of helical pile-to-pile cap connections subjected to uplift loads.
Engineering Structures, 243, 112667.
8. Lu, M. M., Xie, K. H., Wang, S. Y., & Li, C. X. (2013). Analytical solution for the consolidation of a composite foundation
reinforced by an impervious column with an arbitrary stress increment.International Journal ofGeomechanics,13(1),
33-40.
9. Kim, H. J., Mission, J. L., Park, T. W., & Dinoy, P. R. (2018). Analysis of negative skin-friction on single piles by one-
dimensional consolidation model test. International Journal of Civil Engineering, 16(10), 1445-1461.
10. Li, B., Yu, J., Zhou, Y., Cai, Y., Liu, S., & Tu, B. (2021). A computation model for pile-soil stress ratio of geosynthetic-
reinforced pile-supported embankments based on soil consolidation settlement. Alexandria Engineering Journal,
60(1), 39-48.
11. Zhuang, Y., & Wang, K. (2017). Analytical solution forreinforcedpiled embankmentsonelastoplasticconsolidated soil.
International Journal of Geomechanics, 17(9), 06017010.
12. Chen, R. P., Zhou, W. H., & Chen, Y. M. (2009). Influences of soil consolidation and pile load on the development of
negative skin friction of a pile. Computers and Geotechnics, 36(8), 1265-1271.
13. Li, B., & Wang, Z. Z. (2019). Numerical study on the response of ground movements to construction activities of a
metro station using the pile-beam-arch method. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 88, 209-220.
14. Liu, X., Liu, Y., Yang, Z., & He, C. (2017). Numerical analysis on the mechanical performance of supporting structures
and ground settlement characteristics in construction process of subway station built by Pile-Beam-Arch method.
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 21(5), 1690-1705.
15. Thongmunee, S., Matsumoto, T., Kobayashi, S. I., Kitiyodom, P., & Kurosawa, K. (2011). Experimental and numerical
studies on push-up load tests for sand plugs in a steel pipe pile. Soils and foundations, 51(5), 959-974.
16. Khoubani, A., & Evans, T. M. (2018). An efficient flexible membrane boundary condition for DEM simulation of
axisymmetric element tests. International Journal forNumerical andAnalytical MethodsinGeomechanics,42(4), 694-
715.
17. Shire, T., Hanley, K. J., & Stratford, K. (2020). DEM simulations of polydisperse media: efficient contact detection
applied to investigate the quasi-static limit. Computational Particle Mechanics, 1-11.

18. Sloan, S. W., & Randolph, M. F. (1982). Numerical prediction of collapse loads using finite element methods.
International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 6(1), 47-76.
19. Dijkstra, J., Broere, W., Bezuijen, A., & Van Tol, A. F. (2008). 44 DENSITY CHANGES NEAR AN ADVANCING
DISPLACEMENT PILE IN SAND.
20. Xu, Q., Zhu, H., Ma, X., Ma, Z., Li, X., Tang, Z., & Zhuo, K. (2015). A case history of shield tunnel crossing through group
pile foundation of a road bridge with pile underpinning technologies in Shanghai. TunnellingandUndergroundSpace
Technology, 45, 20-33.
21. Park, Y. H., Kim, J. P., & Cho, K. H. (2015). Stability analysis of subway box structure supported by modified
underpinning method. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 50, 199-208.
22. ZHANG, W. Q. (2006). Analysis on Settlement of Pile Foundation Underpinning Area Induced by Construction of
Overlapped Tunnels [J]. Tunnel Construction, 1.
23. Tao, D., Zhen-chang, G., Kai-liang, C., & Li-yong, L. (2015). Simplified calculation of jacking load in active underpinning
of bridge piles. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 36(11), 3259-3267.
24. Li, Z., Chen, Z., Wang, L., Zeng, Z., & Gu, D. (2021). Numerical simulation and analysis of the pile underpinning
technology used in shield tunnel crossings on bridge pile foundations. Underground Space, 6(4), 396-408.
25. Yu, Y., Richardson, D. C., & Michel, P. (2017). Structural analysisofrubble-pileasteroidsappliedtocollisional evolution.
Astrodynamics, 1(1), 57-69.
26. Poulos, H. G. (1976). Behaviour of laterally loaded piles near a cut or slope.
27. Schmidt, H. G. (1977). Large diameter bored piles for abutments. Proc., Specialty Session on the Effect of Horizontal
Loads on Piles, 9th ICSMFE, Tokyo, 1977, 107-112.
28. Bouafia, A., & Bouguerra, A. (1996). Centrifuge testing of the behaviour of a horizontally loaded flexible pile near to a
slope. In International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts (Vol. 3, No. 33, p.
135A).
29. Mezazigh, S., & Levacher, D. (1998). Laterally loaded piles in sand: slope effect on py reaction curves. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, 35(3), 433-441.
30. Chen, C. Y., & Martin, G. R. (2020). Effect of embankment slope on lateral response of piles. In FLAC and numerical
modeling in Geomechanics (pp. 205-213). CRC Press.
31. Chae, K. S., Ugai, K., & Wakai, A. (2004). Lateral resistance of short single piles and pile groups located near slopes.
International Journal of Geomechanics, 4(2), 93-103.
32. Georgiadis, K., & Georgiadis, M. (2010). Undrained lateral pile response in sloping ground.Journal ofgeotechnical and
geoenvironmental engineering, 136(11), 1489-1500.
33. Moayed, R. Z., Kamalzare, M., & Judi, A. (2013). Three-dimensional analyses of concrete piles in clayey soils.
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Geotechnical Engineering, 166(4), 399-407.
34. Ziaie-Moay, R., Kamalzare, M., & Safavian, M. (2010). Evaluation of piled raft foundations behavior with different
dimensions of piles. Journal of Applied Sciences, 10(13), 1320-1325.
35. Jesmani, M., Kasrania, A., Kamalzare, M., & Mehdipour, I. (2015). Undrained vertical bearing capacity of pile located
near soft clay slope. Journal of Engineering Research, 3(3), 21-38.
36. Horikoshi, K., Matsumoto, T., Hashizume, Y., Watanabe, T., & Fukuyama, H. (2003). Performance of piled raft
foundations subjected to static horizontal loads. International Journal of Physical Modelling in Geotechnics, 3(2), 37-
50.

37. Lee, S. H., & Chung, C. K. (2005). An experimental study of the interaction of vertically loaded pile groups in sand.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 42(5), 1485-1493.
38. Cao, X. D., Wong, I. H., & Chang, M. F. (2004). Behavior of model rafts resting on pile-reinforced sand. Journal of
geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering, 130(2), 129-138.
39. Matsumoto, T., Nemoto, H., Mikami, H., Yaegashi, K., Arai, T., & Kitiyodom, P. (2010). Load tests of piled raft models
with different pile head connection conditions and their analyses. Soils and Foundations, 50(1), 63-81.
40. Ata, A., Badrawi, E., & Nabil, M. (2015). Numerical analysis of unconnected piled raft with cushion. Ain Shams
Engineering Journal, 6(2), 421-428.
41. El Sawwaf, M. (2010). Experimental study of eccentrically loaded raft with connected and unconnected short piles.
Journal of geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering, 136(10), 1394-1402.
42. Saeedi Azizkandi, A., Baziar, M. H., Rasouli, H., Modarresi, M., & Shahnazari, H. (2015). Centrifuge modeling of non-
connected piled raft system. International Journal of Civil Engineering, 13(2), 114-123.
43. Fioravante, V. (2011). Load transfer from a raft to a pile with an interposed layer. Géotechnique, 61(2), 121-132.
44. El Kamash, W., El Naggar, H., Nabil, M., & Ata, A. (2020). Optimizing the unconnected piled raft foundationforsoftclay
soils: Numerical Study. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 24(4), 1095-1102.
45. Chang-Yu, O., Shiau, B. Y., & Wang, I. W. (2000). Three-dimensional deformation behavior of the Taipei National
Enterprise Center (TNEC) excavation case history. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 37(2), 438.
46. Liu, L., Wu, R., Congress, S. S. C., Du, Q., Cai, G., & Li, Z. (2021). Design optimization of the soil nail wall-retaining pile-
anchor cable supporting system in a large-scale deep foundation pit. Acta Geotechnica, 1-24.
47. Wang, H. L., & Chen, R. P. (2019). Estimating static and dynamic stresses in geosynthetic-reinforced pile-supported
track-bed under train moving loads. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 145(7), 04019029.
48. Zhang, Q. Q., Liu, S. W., Feng, R. F., Qian, J. G., & Cui, C. Y. (2020). Finite element prediction on the response of non-
uniformly arranged pile groups considering progressive failure of pile-soil system. Frontiers of Structural and Civil
Engineering, 14(4), 961-982.
49. Finn, W. D. L., & Fujita, N. (2002). Piles in liquefiable soils: seismic analysis and design issues. Soil Dynamics and
Earthquake Engineering, 22(9-12), 731-742.
50. Cheng, Z., & Jeremić, B. (2009). Numerical modeling and simulation of pile in liquefiable soil. Soil Dynamics and
Earthquake Engineering, 29(11-12), 1405-1416.
51. Lu, J., Elgamal, A., Yan, L., Law, K. H., & Conte, J. P. (2011). Large-scale numerical modeling in geotechnical earthquake
engineering. International Journal of Geomechanics, 11(6), 490-503.
52. Chang, D., Boulanger, R., Brandenberg, S.,&Kutter,B.(2013). FEManalysisofdynamicsoil-pile-structureinteractionin
liquefied and laterally spreading ground. Earthquake Spectra, 29(3), 733-755.
53. Dafalias, Y. F., & Manzari, M. T. (2004). Simple plasticity sand model accounting for fabric change effects. Journal of
Engineering mechanics, 130(6), 622-634.
54. Wang, R., Zhang, J. M., & Wang, G. (2014). A unified plasticity model for large post-liquefaction shear deformation of
sand. Computers and Geotechnics, 59, 54-66.
55. Wang, R. (2016). A unified plasticity model for large post-liquefaction shear deformation of sand and its numerical
implementation. In Single Piles in Liquefiable Ground (pp. 25-53). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

56. Oh, E., Bui, Q. M., Surarak, C., Adamec, R., & Balasubramaniam, B. (2008). Parametric study on piled raft foundation in
sand using numerical modelling. Futur Mech Struct Mater, 261.
57. Baziar, M. H., Ghorbani, A., & Katzenbach, R. (2009). Small-scale model test and three-dimensional analysisofpile-raft
foundation on medium-dense sand.
58. Long, P. D., & Vietnam, V. W. (2010). Piled raft—a cost-effective foundation method for high-rises. Geotechnical
Engineering, 41(1), 149.
59. Al-Mosawi, M. J., Fattah, M. Y., & Al-Zayadi, A. A. (2011). Experimental observations on the behavior of a piled raft
foundation. Journal of Engineering, 17(4), 1-11.
60. El-Garhy, B., Galil, A. A., Youssef, A. F., & Raia, M. A. (2013). Behavior of raft on settlementreducing piles:Experimental
model study. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 5(5), 389-399.
61. Park, D., & Lee, J. (2015). Comparative analysis of various interaction effects for piled rafts in sands using centrifuge
tests. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 141(1), 04014082.

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF BRIDGES AND PILE FOUNDATION SUBJECTED TO SEISMIC LOADS

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF BRIDGES AND PILE FOUNDATION SUBJECTED TO SEISMIC LOADS

Similar to STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF BRIDGES AND PILE FOUNDATION SUBJECTED TO SEISMIC LOADS (20)

More from IRJET Journal

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF BRIDGES AND PILE FOUNDATION SUBJECTED TO SEISMIC LOADS