Evaluation for Ultimate Horizontal Load Capacity and Subsurface Hinge Depth in Sand-RC Pile Foundation Systems

This study verified the accuracy of a simplified estimation method for the ultimate horizontal load capacity of soil-RC pile foundation interaction systems by comparing it with a numerical model that simulates nonlinear behavior of the ground and pile members. The analysis considered various pile diameters (0.5 m, 1.0 m, 1.5 m, 2.0 m) and ground relative densities (30%, 60%, 90%). In the model, the pile bottom was fixed, and the head was constrained to rotation only. A pushover analysis was performed until the pile exhibited a two-hinge bending failure. Comparison with Broms’s evaluation method revealed that the ratio of the numerical analysis results to the simplified estimates increased as pile diameter decreased and ground density increased. For smaller pile diameters (0.5 m and 1.0 m), the ratio ranged from 1.0 to 1.5, whereas for larger diameters (1.5 m and 2.0 m), it ranged from 0.9 to 1.2. Furthermore, when the relative density of the soil was 30%, the simplified estimation results significantly underestimated the ultimate horizontal capacity compared to the numerical results.

Publication Details

Journal
Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)
Published
2025-11-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202566801001/pdf
Primary Topic
Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation for Ultimate Horizontal Load Capacity and Subsurface Hinge Depth in Sand-RC Pile Foundation Systems

Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)
Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
article

Evaluation for Ultimate Horizontal Load Capacity and Subsurface Hinge Depth in Sand-RC Pile Foundation Systems

article en

Abstract

This study verified the accuracy of a simplified estimation method for the ultimate horizontal load capacity of soil-RC pile foundation interaction systems by comparing it with a numerical model that simulates nonlinear behavior of the ground and pile members. The analysis considered various pile diameters (0.5 m, 1.0 m, 1.5 m, 2.0 m) and ground relative densities (30%, 60%, 90%). In the model, the pile bottom was fixed, and the head was constrained to rotation only. A pushover analysis was performed until the pile exhibited a two-hinge bending failure. Comparison with Broms’s evaluation method revealed that the ratio of the numerical analysis results to the simplified estimates increased as pile diameter decreased and ground density increased. For smaller pile diameters (0.5 m and 1.0 m), the ratio ranged from 1.0 to 1.5, whereas for larger diameters (1.5 m and 2.0 m), it ranged from 0.9 to 1.2. Furthermore, when the relative density of the soil was 30%, the simplified estimation results significantly underestimated the ultimate horizontal capacity compared to the numerical results.

Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 46%
Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.