European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol.29 No.2 (2009), pp.194-205 EuroJournals Publishing, Inc. 2009 http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr.

htm

Lateral Behavior of Single Pile in Cohesionless Soil Subjected to Both Vertical and Horizontal Loads
Zamri H. Chik Department of Civil and Structural Engineering Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia E-mail: irzamri@vlsi.eng.ukm.my Tel: +60389216228 Jasim M. Abbas Department of Civil and Structural Engineering Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia E-mail: jasimalshsmary@yahoo.com Tel: +60176384641 Mohd Raihan Taha Department of Civil and Structural Engineering Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia E-mail: drmrt@vlsi.eng.ukm.my Tel: +60122356942 Qassun S. Mohammed Shafiqu Civil Engineering Department/ Nahrain University Al Zadrea, Baghdad, Iraq E-mail: qassun@yahoo.com Tel: +9647705333805 Abstract A numerical investigation based on 3D finite element analysis of the behavior of single pile under pure lateral and combined loadings is presented in this paper with different water table elevations. The linear elastic model is used for modeling of the pile material while the Mohr-Coulomb model is used to simulate the surrounding soil. The pile - soil interaction composed of 16-node interface elements. Assessments are made on the lateral soil pressures with respect to pile width and depth. The results have shown that the lateral pile response influenced by the water table elevation is to significantly increase the capacity in dry soil condition and marginally decrease the capacity in fully saturated soil. It was found that the axial load intensity affects on the lateral pile response; the great lateral pile displacement occurred at vertical load increment 12 and 16 which means that the lateral response is sensitive under the influence of large amount of vertical load. Keywords: Single pile, Lateral response, Water table elevation, Combined load, 3D finite element method

Lateral Behavior of Single Pile in Cohesionless Soil Subjected to Both Vertical and Horizontal Loads

195

1. Introduction
In general, the water table elevation changes during different times of the year which influences the behavior of pile foundations. In addition, there is also a need to assess the behavior of piles under simultaneous vertical and horizontal loadings because piles are commonly designed to carry combined horizontal-vertical loads. The ground water table invariably fluctuates depending on the environmental condition and also affected piled foundations which are always used to transfer vertical (axial) forces which are result from the weight of superstructure. For long buildings such as bridges abutments, offshore structure, transmission towers, etc., the piles not only carry axial load but also lateral (horizontal) forces. In the design of pile subjected to lateral load, the ultimate lateral resistance of pile is required to satisfy two criteria (Poulos & Davis, 1980, and Patra & Pise, 2001), (i) pile should be safe against failure; and (ii) normal deflection at working loads should be within the permissible limit. The finite element method is most widely used to perform the analysis of piles under different type of loading. The first attempt to study the lateral behavior of piles included two-dimensional finite element model in horizontal plane (Poulos & Davis, 1980). Anagnostopoulos & Georgiadis (1993) attempted to explained the influence of vertical load on the lateral response through an experimental model supported by two-dimensional (2D) finite-element analysis. A two-dimensional analysis could only provide a very rough approximation because the problem of piles is truly three-dimensional and should be analyzed as such. Certainly, a 3D finite element is powerful method to simulate laterally loaded piles (Tahghighi & Konagai, 2007). Therefore many investigations have been made to study the behavior of pile under pure lateral load through 3D finite element analysis (Yang et al. 2005, Johnson et al, 2006). Other 3D finite element studies included the effect of various load combinations on the lateral response of piles (Trochanis et al., 1991, and Karthigeyan et al., 2006 & 2007). In this paper an analysis of pile under different water table elevation and combined loads is carried out to evaluate the lateral soil resistance with respect to pile width as well as pile depth. Other consideration includes the load intensity and its distance from the surface.

2. Numerical Model and Constitutive Relationship

Finite element analyses were performed using the software PLAXIS 3D FOUNDATION version 1.1. In the finite element method a continuum is divided into a number of (volume) elements. Each element consists of a number of nodes. Each node has a number of degrees of freedom that correspond to discrete values of the unknowns in the boundary value problem to be solved. In order to perform the finite element calculations, the geometry has to be divided into elements. A composition of finite elements is called finite element mesh. The basic soil elements of a 3D finite element mesh are represented by the 15-node wedge elements as shown in Fig. 1. These elements are generated from the 6-node triangular elements. The 15-node wedge element is composed of 6-node triangles in horizontal direction and 8-node quadrilaterals in vertical direction. According to Karthigeyan et al. (2006 & 2007), the soil mass dimension depends on the pile diameter and length. The width of soil mass is taken as 40B, in which, B is the pile diameter or pile width. The soil mass affection the pile response diminishes when the width is greater than 40B. The height of soil mass is L+20B, in which, L is the length of pile.

196

Zamri H. Chik, Jasim M. Abbas, Mohd Raihan Taha and Qassun S. Mohammed Shafiqu

Figure 1: 3D finite element mesh for soil mass and location of pile, (b) 15-node wedge element, and (b) 3DFE mesh
y

Pile

L+20B

(a)

40B

40B L= pile length B= pile width

(b)

In order to model the pile structural material, Linear elastic model (perfect-plasticity) is used to model the pile. This model used represents Hooke's law of isotropic linear elasticity used for modeling the stress-strain relationship of the pile material. The model involves two elastic stiffness parameters, namely Young's modulus, E, and Poisson's ratio, . It is primarily used for modeling of stiff structural member for example piles in the soil. On the other hand, Mohr-Coulomb model is used to model the non-linear performance of surrounded soil. This elasto-plastic model is based on soil parameters that are known in most practical situations is used in this study. The model involves two main parameters, namely the cohesion intercept, c and the friction angle, . In addition three parameters namely Young's modulus, E, Poisson's ratio, , and the dilatancy angle, are needed to calculate the complete behavior. Mohr Coulombs failure surface criterion (Potts & Zdravkocic, 1999). The failure envelope as referred by Johnson et al. (2006) only depend on the principal stresses (1, 3), and is independent of the intermediate principle stress (2). Finally Interfaces element is modeled as 16-node interface elements. Interface elements consist of eight pairs of nodes, compatible with the 8-noded quadrilateral side of a soil element. Along degenerated soil elements, interface elements are composed of six node pairs, compatible with the triangular side of the degenerated soil element. Each interface has a 'virtual thickness' assigned to it which is an imaginary dimension used to obtain the stiffness properties of the interface. The virtual thickness is defined as the virtual thickness factor times the average element size.

3. Verification of Numerical Models

Two case studies were used for verification the finite element model of the whole geotechnical structure. First include a full scale axial load and second deals with a full scale lateral load tests. The first case study consists of a large diameter bored piles of 1.2m diameter which were used for the construction of a new 2.2km road dual carriageway viaduct on an existing road (Jamaludin & Hussein, 1998). The road project is situated in Port Klang, and links the West Port to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The piles were tested vertically to assess the axial bearing capacity of the designed piles. The length of each bored pile is approximately 75m with steel casing being used for the top 30m. The bored piles were designed to carry loads ranging from 300 to 600 kN. The generalized subsoil properties consist of very soft silty clay with traces of sea shells with depth of about 20m. Below this layer is a 10m of soft silty clay followed by a layer of medium dense to dense silty sand and medium stiff silty clay of about 20m and 7m depth, respectively. Finally the lowest layer consists of very dense fine grained sand.

Lateral Behavior of Single Pile in Cohesionless Soil Subjected to Both Vertical and Horizontal Loads

197

The second case study deals with lateral load in which the deflection response of bored piles in cemented sand were examined by field test on single pile under lateral load (Ismael, 1998). All piles were 0.3m in diameter and had a length of 3m or 5m. The site of this load test was in Kuwait. The surface soil to depth of 3.5m was characterized as having both components of shear strength, both effective parameters. The soil profile consists of a medium dense cemented silty sand layer to a depth 3m. This is underlain by medium dense to very dense silty sand with cemented lumps to the bottom of the borehole. Ground water was not encountered within the depth of the borehole. The same load sequence as both pile tests was applied on the pile after completing the whole geotechnical model for vertical and lateral pile tests. Properties of soil in the both cases are listed in Table 1. The comparison between the finite element results and field test data is shown in Fig. 2. Comparable data were obtained between the experimental results of the three piles and the present simulation model in the case of axial test. The magnitude of deflection of the piles was not the same as the field test due possibly to the variability of soil properties. Also the numerical simulation is reasonably accurate for the problem of laterally loaded piles and pile soil interaction over a wide range of deformation for 3m and 5m piles in length. The pile with length 5m is highly resistance to the lateral load from the second pile length value.
Table 1: Geotechnical properties of the soil layers
Name unsat sat E c Soil 1 14 16 8500 0.3 10 21 Soil 2 16 18 10000 0.35 5 25 oil 3 19 19 13000 0.3 1 45 Soil 4 16 18 10000 0.35 5 25 Soil 5 17 20 14000 0.3 1 31 Soil 6 18 18 1.300 E+04 0.3 20 35 Soil 7 19 19 1.300 E+04 0.3 1 45 Pile 25 2 E+09 0.15 Unit kN/m3 kN/m3 kPa kPa -

Parameter Unsaturated soil weight Saturated soil weight Youngs modulus Poissons ratio Cohesion intercept Friction angle

Where:Soil 1: Very soft silty clay with traces of sea shells Soil 2: Soft silty clay Soil 3: Medium dense to dense silty sand Soil 4: Medium stiff silty clay Soil 5: Very dense fine grained sand Soil 6: Medium dense cemented silty sand layer Soil 7: Medium dense to very dense silty sand with cemented lumps

Figure 2: Comparison of finite element results with field test data

1400

180 Piles 0.3 D x 5m long

1200

Pile No.1

Pile No.2 Pile No.3

160

140

1000

120
800

Load (tons)

Load (kN)

100 Piles 0.3 D x 3m long 80

600

60
400

40
200

Jamaludin and Hussein (1998) Presen FE Simulation

20

Present FE Simulation Ismael (1998)

0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Settlem ent (m m )

0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Deflection (m m )

(a) 0

(b) 0

198

Zamri H. Chik, Jasim M. Abbas, Mohd Raihan Taha and Qassun S. Mohammed Shafiqu

4. Study Methodology
Laterally loaded piles usually carry vertical and lateral loads at the same time. The lateral soil resistance is one of the most important factors that directly effect on the pile response under such loads. This performance depends on the interaction between pile material and the surrounded soil. This study includes: (1) effect of changing the water table elevation due to the weather and environmental conditions on the behavior of pure laterally loaded pile, (2) effect of lateral load intensity on the behavior of pile under pure lateral load. Two load intensities were studied, i.e. 50 kN and 250 kN, (3) effect of increasing vertical loads on the lateral loaded pile response. These started from lowest value of 4H that represent 0.2Vult in which H is the lateral load and Vult is the expected ultimate vertical pile capacity. The maximum axial load reached 16H or 0.8Vult. This assessment was under fully saturation soil condition. 4.1. Analysis Layout The analysis consists of modeling of single short pile using linear-elastic model with 15-node wedge elements. The cross-section of the pile is circle with a diameter of 1.2m. The pile was loaded firstly under pure lateral load in two amounts. Then the pile was loaded with fixed lateral load (250kN) and gradually the vertical load was increased. The drained soil condition was used in this study which represents the case of dissipation of pore water pressure. Four soil conditions were studied with respect to the ground water table. The first soil condition was taken in this study was dry soil condition. Then the water table was set at the base of the pile and the middle length of the pile. Finally the whole soil was considered fully saturated. 4.2. Material Properties and Dimensions In this study, circular cast in place pile was used to simulate the behavior of piles under lateral and vertical loads. These piles were embedded into a sandy soil layer. The tested pile, dimensions and soil properties are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2: Pile and soil properties
Pile details 1200 mm D 10 m Concrete M25 25000 MPa 0.15 Soil details Friction angle () Dilation angle () Unit weight () Youngs modulus (Es) Earth pressure (k0) Poissons ratio () 300 0-100 18 kN/m3 20 MPa 0.5 0.3

Size Length Type of pile Grade of concrete Youngs modulus Ep Poissons ratio (s)

5. Results and Discussion

The magnitude of the lateral load was applied in two stages i.e. 50kN and 250kN. This section includes studying the lateral soil pressure at three levels measured from the apex of the pile (e=0L), (e=0.2L) and (e=0.4L), where e is the distance from the pile head. This section also deals with studying the side shear stresses and lateral pile deformation shape. 5.1. Lateral Soil Pressure The review of existing methods for predicting the ultimate lateral resistance to pile in cohesionless soil was detailed by Zhang (2005). The upper part of pile is the most critical part of pile in case of laterally loaded pile (Poulos & Davis, 1980) because of its greater deflection and its ability to carry higher lateral loads than the lower pars as shown in Fig. 3. The short pile assumption assume that the point of

Lateral Behavior of Single Pile in Cohesionless Soil Subjected to Both Vertical and Horizontal Loads

199

rotation is near to the base of pile which means that soil failure criteria will take place without fracture that occurs in the case of long pile as shown in Fig. 3a & 3b, respectively.
Figure 3: Failure Modes of Vertical Piles under Lateral Loads (Poulos & Davis))
H e1 Point of fracture H e1

Point of rotation

(a) Short pile

(b) Long pile

According to Zhang et al. (2005) the lateral soil resistance distributes uniformly between two pile sides in the opposite part of lateral load as shown in Fig. 4. The lateral soil distribution within the pile width was assessed three elevations as shown in Fig. 5. The first elevation was close to pile tip (and/or to soil surface). The other two elevations are 0.2D and 0.4D from the top of pile to show the distribution of lateral soil pressure with depth.
Figure 4: Distribution of earth pressure subjected to lateral load (after Zhang, 2005)
e=0.2D p p p D H e=0.4D

Figure 5: The elevations where the lateral earth pressures are evaluated
Side shear stresses xy p = Distribution of lateral soil resistance

Pile

H=Lateral load

200

Zamri H. Chik, Jasim M. Abbas, Mohd Raihan Taha and Qassun S. Mohammed Shafiqu

The results (Fig. 6a) shows a generally smooth increment of the lateral soil pressure at the surface (e=0) across the width of the pile under pure small lateral load (50 kN) for different water table elevation. Little difference in the distribution of soil pressure appeared at the edge of the pile for fully saturated soil condition, partially saturated and dry soil conditions. The lateral soil pressure increased almost uniformly from the edge reaching the maximum values at the middle of the pile (0.5 D) cross section. In the case of 250kN loading, the lateral soil resistance appeared to be more complex in distribution and more irregular increase from the edge to the middle of the pile. The lateral soil resistance with respect of pile width can be described in three parts. Slightly increasing from the edge to about 0.15D then after it increases sharply until 0.25D and from 0.25D to the middle (0.5D) with no change in lateral soil pressure between them as shown in Fig. 6b except for the case of water table at the pile base.
Figure 6: Distribution of front soil pressure with pile width at e=0.
14 12
50
Lateral soil pressure
Lateral soil pressure

60

10 8 6 4 2 0 0
0.1D 0.1 0.2D 0.2 Pile width 0.3D 0.3 0.4D 0.4 0.5D 0.5
p

40 30
p H

20
Dry soil condition

Dry soil condition W.T. at the base of pile W.T. at the middle of pile depth Fully saturation soil condition

10 0 0
0.1D 0.1 0.2D 0.2

W.T. at the pile base W.T. at the middle of pile depth Fully saturation soil condition

0.3D 0.3 Pile width

0.4D 0.4

0.5D 0.5

(a) lateral load=50kN

(b) lateral load=250kN

Fig. 7 shows the lateral soil resistance under 50kN lateral loading at e=0.2L. In fully saturated soil condition it was predicted that the pressures were lower than those in the other soil conditions and appeared to be almost uniformly distributed. In the case of 250 kN loading the magnitudes of lateral soil resistance were lowest in fully saturated soils and higher in the cases of dry soil condition and when the WT is at the middle of the pile length. In the case of WT at the base of the pile it was observed that the pressures were higher than those in the three soil conditions above, except at the 0.1D width.
Figure 7: Distribution of front soil pressure with pile width at e=0.2L
25

80
e=0.2L

70
20
Lateral soil pressure
p

60
Lateral soil pressure

15
e=0.2L

50 40 30 20 10 0
Dry soil condition W.T. at the pile base W.T. at the middle of pile depth Fully saturation soil condition

10
Dry soil condition

W.T. at the pile base W.T. at the middle of pile Fully saturation soil condition

0 0 0.1 0.1D 0.2 0.2D

Pile width

0.3 0.3D

0.4 0.4D

0.5 0.5D

0.1D 0.1

0.2D 0.2
Pile width

0.3D 0.3

0.4D 0.4

0.5D 0.5

(a) lateral load=50kN

(b) lateral load=250kN

Lateral Behavior of Single Pile in Cohesionless Soil Subjected to Both Vertical and Horizontal Loads

201

Finally, in the case of e = 0.4L shown in Fig. 8, the lateral soil resistance decreased nearly to 15% in the case of small loading (50kN) from the edge to the middle of pile. The highest value occurs at the edge which means that the pressure is concentrated on both side of the pile cross section in this depth. At 250kN loading the lateral pressure increases from the lowest value at the edge to the highest value at the pile center.
Figure 8: Distribution of front soil pressure with pile width at e=0.4
40 35 30 25
Lateral soil pressure

60 50 40
Lateral soil pressure

20 15 10 5 0 0
0.1D 0.1 0.2D 0.2 0.3D 0.3
Pile width
Dry soil Condition W.T. at the pile base W.T. at the middle of pile Fully saturation soil condition
p
e=0.4L

30
e=0.4L

20
Dry soil condition W.T. at the pile base
p

10 0

W.T. at the middle of pile Fully saturation soil condition

0.4D 0.4

0.5D 0.5

0.1D 0.1

0.2D 0.2
Pile width

0.3D 0.3

0.4D 0.4

0.5D 0.5

(a) lateral load=50kN

(b) lateral load=250kN

It is important to study the lateral soil pressure along pile depth in order to understand which part of the pile carry large soil pressure that may cause pile foundation collapse. Fig. 9 shows the distribution of the lateral soil pressure with depth of pile under different water table elevations. In the case of small lateral loading (50 kN) it was predicted that the pressures increased with depth in the four soil conditions with a maximum value of 68.5 kN/m2 at the base under dry soil condition. In the case when WT is at the base of pile it was noticed that at depth 0.4L the lateral soil pressure started to reduce and reached the minimum at about 0.6L as shown in Fig. 9a. When increasing the lateral load to 250kN, the soil performance changed as detailed in Fig. 9b. The figure show that maximum soil pressure concentrated at 0.2L and thus this point can be considered as the critical point in the design as well as the fracture point (0).

202

Zamri H. Chik, Jasim M. Abbas, Mohd Raihan Taha and Qassun S. Mohammed Shafiqu
Figure 9: Distribution of front soil pressure along pile length (depth)
0 1
Dry soil condition W.T. at the base of pile W.T. at the middle of pile depth Fully saturation soil condition 0.8 0.2L

01
Dry soil condition W.T. at the base of pile 0.2L 0.8 W.T. at the middle of pile Fully saturation soil condition

P i l e d e p th

H p L

H p L

0.4 0.6L

0.6L 0.4

0.2 0.8L

0.8L 0.2

L 0 -80 -60 -40 Lateral soil pressure -20 0

L0 -80 -60 -40 Lateral soil pressure -20 0

(a) lateral load=50kN

(b) lateral load=250kN

5.2. Lateral Behavior of Pile under Vertical and Lateral load This section deals with the effect of vertical load intensity on the lateral behavior of pile. The vertical load applied started from zero (no vertical load) to 16 times the lateral load and was increased in four stages. Lateral load was fixed during this stage at 250kN, and the soil is in fully saturated condition. 5.3. Development of Lateral Soil Pressure The comparison between pure lateral loaded pile and pile carrying both vertical and horizontal loads was detailed in Fig. 10. In the case of e=0 (near the surface) higher lateral soil pressure was observed when the applied vertical load is about four times horizontal load (Fig. 10a). When the ratio of vertical to horizontal load was 8, 12 and 16, the behavior changed resulting in reduced soil pressure and even lower than pure lateral loads. This may be due to the fact that the soil near surface is usually weak and could not carry higher loads compared to soil at deeper elevations. The lowest values were occurred at the edges of pile cross-section. The lateral soil pressure increased when moving from the edge of pile to the centre cross section and as shown in Fig. 10a.

P i l e d e p th

0.6 0.4L

0.4L 0.6

Lateral Behavior of Single Pile in Cohesionless Soil Subjected to Both Vertical and Horizontal Loads

203

Figure 10: Distribution of front soil pressure with pile width for different vertical load intensities, lateral load=250kN, (a) e=0.0, (b) e=0.2L and (c) e=0.4L
60
V = 0.0 H

100
V = 0.0 H V = 4.0 H

e=0.2L

V p

50 Lateral soil pressure 40 30 20

V = 4.0 H V = 8.0 H V = 12.0 H V = 16.0 H

80 Lateral soil pressure

V = 8.0 H V = 12.0 H V = 16.0 H

60

40

10 0 0 0.1D 0.1 0.2D 0.2 0.3D 0.3 0.4D 0.4 0.5D 0.5 Pile width

20

0 0 0.1D 0.1 0.2D 0.2 0.3D 0.3 0.4D 0.4 0.5D 0.5 Pile width

(a)
100
V = 0.0 H V = 4.0 H
e=0.4L

(b)
V p H

80 Lateral soil pressure

V = 8.0 H V = 12.0 H V = 16.0 H

60

40

20

0 0 0.1D 0.1 0.2D 0.2 0.3D 0.3 0.4D 0.4 0.5D 0.5 Pile width

(c)

The pile has special lateral soil pressure distribution when e=0.2L as shown in Fig. 10b. At higher vertical loads (12H and 16H) the pressure increased smoothly with depth from the edge in which its value is the lowest to the ultimate magnitude at locations between 0.2D and 0.4D. Also the magnitude of the lateral soil pressure depends on the depth below the soil surface. When moving downwards to e=0.4L and in the case of zero vertical load and also four times lateral load, the stress distributed shape closed to the linear in the region between the edge to the center of the pile width. The highest values of pressure at this pile depth occurred at 0.25D as shown in Fig. 10c. The distribution of lateral soil pressure with depth of pile for lateral load of 250 kN is represented in Fig. 11. This results show the variation of the distribution along the pile length and with respect to the applied vertical loads. One of the important phenomenon appeared is the changing in the direction of lateral soil pressure at the lower part of pile. This means that the pile suffer additional lateral load at the base of pile in the same direction of applied load due to the rotation of lower part of pile. This was not observed when vertical load of up to 4H was applied. It is appeared at the vertical load of 8H.

204

Zamri H. Chik, Jasim M. Abbas, Mohd Raihan Taha and Qassun S. Mohammed Shafiqu
Figure 11: Distribution of front soil pressure along pile length, lateral load=250kN
0
V = 0.0 H V = 4.0 H V = 8.0 H V = 12.0 H V = 16.0 H

0.2L

Pile depth

0.4L

V H p L

0.6L

0.8L

L -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

Lateral soil pressure

6. Conclusions
The following conclusions are drawn from the present investigation: The lateral soil pressure in the case of pure lateral load changed with pile width and depth depending on the intensity of load and water level elevation. For small value of pure lateral load, a small change in lateral soil pressure with pile width was predicted under different water elevation condition. The distribution of the lateral soil resistance became more complex and irregular and generally increase from the edge to the middle of the pile under large loading. Water table elevation influenced the lateral pile of the response. Dry soil condition gives higher lateral resistance than fully saturated soil condition. For the pile under combined loading, the vertical load affects the lateral soil pressure distribution along pile width. The highest pressure occurred when the applied vertical load is four times the horizontal load at the surface and occurred at 0.2L from the surface. At high vertical loads the direction of lateral soil pressure at the lower part of pile changes. The pile will apparently be subjected to additional to the applied lateral load.

Lateral Behavior of Single Pile in Cohesionless Soil Subjected to Both Vertical and Horizontal Loads

205

References
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] Anagnostopoulos, C. and M. Georgiadis, 1993. Interaction of axial and lateral pile responses. J. Geotech. Eng. Division, 119(4), pp.793798. Jamaludin, A. and A.N. Hussein, 1998. The performance of large diameter bored piles used for road project in Malaysia. Proceedings of the 3rd International Geotechnical Seminar on Deep Foundation on Bored and Auger Piles, Ghent, Belgium, 19-21 October, pp: 335-338. Johnson, K., P. Lemcke, W. Karunasena and N. Sivakugan, 2006. Modelling the load deformation response of deep foundation under oblique load. Environ. Model Software, 21, pp. 1375-1380. Ismael, N.F., 1998. Lateral loading tests on bored piles in cemented sands. Proceedings of the 3rd International Geotechnical Seminar on Deep Foundation on Bored and Auger Piles, Ghent, Belgium, 19-21 October, pp: 137-144. Karthigeyan, S., V.V.G.S.T. Ramakrishna and K. Rajagopal, 2006. Influence of vertical load on the lateral response of piles in sand. J. Comput. Geotechnol., 33, pp. 121-131. Karthigeyan, S., V.V.G.S.T. Ramakrishna and K. Rajagopal, 2007. Numerical Investigation of the effect of vertical load on the lateral response of piles. J. Geotech. Geoenvir. Eng. ASCE., 133 (5), pp. 512-521. Patra, N.R. and P.J. Pise, 2001. Ultimate lateral resistance of pile groups in sand. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. ASCE., 127 (6), pp. 481487. Poulos, H.G. and E.H. Davis, 1980. Pile Foundation Analysis and Design. First addition. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., United States. Potts, D.M. and L. Zdravkovic, 1999. Finite Element Analysis in Geotechnical Engineering: Theory. First addition. Thomas Telford Ltd., 1 Heron Quay, London, E14 4JD. Tahghighi, H. and K. Konagai, 2007. Numerical analysis of nonlinear soil-pile group interaction under lateral loads. Soil Dynamic Earthquake Eng., 27, pp.463-474. Trochanis, A.M., J. Bielak and P. Christiano, 1991. Three dimensional nonlinear study of piles. J. Geotech. Eng. Division ASCE., 117(3), pp. 429447. Yang, Z. and B. Jeremi, 2005. Study of soil layering effects on lateral Loading behavior of piles. J. Geotech. Geoenvir. Eng. ASCE., 131(6), pp.762-770. Zhang, L., F. Silva and R. Grismala, 2005. Ultimate lateral resistance to pile in cohesionless soils. J. Geotech. Geoenvir. Eng. ASCE., 131(1), pp. 78-83