Acta Geotechnica

, Volume 13, Issue 6, pp 1405–1418 | Cite as

Centrifuge shaking table tests on 4 × 4 pile groups in liquefiable ground

  • Xing Liu
  • Rui WangEmail author
  • Jian-Min Zhang
Research Paper


A series of centrifuge shaking table model tests are conducted on 4 × 4 pile groups in liquefiable ground in this study, achieving horizontal–vertical bidirectional shaking in centrifuge tests on piles for the first time. The dynamic distribution of forces on piles within the pile groups is analysed, showing the internal piles to be subjected to greater bending moment compared with external piles, the mechanism of which is discussed. The roles of superstructure–pile inertial interaction and soil–pile kinematic interaction in the seismic response of the piles within the pile groups are investigated through cross-correlation analysis between pile bending moment, soil displacement, and structure acceleration time histories and by comparing the test results on pile groups with and without superstructures. Soil–pile kinematic interaction is shown to have a dominant effect on the seismic response of pile groups in liquefiable ground. Comparison of the pile response in two tests with and without vertical input ground motion shows that the vertical ground motion does not significantly influence the pile bending moment in liquefiable ground, as the dynamic vertical total stress increment is mainly carried by the excess pore water pressure. The influence of previous liquefaction history during a sequence of seismic events is also analysed, suggesting that liquefaction history could in certain cases lead to an increase in liquefaction susceptibility of sand and also an increase in dynamic forces on the piles.


Centrifuge shaking table test Dynamic load distribution Inertial and kinematic effects Liquefaction Pile group Vertical ground motion 



The work in this paper was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 51708332 and 51678346) and the State Key Laboratory of Hydroscience and Engineering Project (2018-KY-04). Dr. X. D. Zhang, Dr. Z. T. Zhang, J. H. Liang, X. H. Song, J. M. Wu, and S. H. Xing at the Centrifuge Modelling Lab in Institute of Geotechnical Engineering provided assistance with the centrifuge shaking table tests.


  1. 1.
    Abdoun T (1997) Modeling of seismically induced lateral spreading of multi-layered soil and its effect on pile foundations. Ph. D thesis. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abdoun T, Dobry R, Rourke TDO, Goh SH (2003) Pile response to lateral spreads: centrifuge modeling. J Geotech Geoenviron 129:869–878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baziar MH, Rafiee F, Saeedi Azizkandi A, Lee CJ (2018) Effect of super-structure frequency on the seismic behavior of pile-raft foundation using physical modeling. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 104:196–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bouferra R, Benseddiq N, Shahrour I (2007) Saturation and preloading effects on the cyclic behavior of sand. Int J Geomech 7(5):396–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brandenberg SJ, Boulanger RW, Kutter BL, Chang D (2005) Behavior of pile foundations in laterally spreading ground during centrifuge tests. J Geotech Geoenviron 131:1378–1391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brandenberg SJ, Fletcher J, Gingery JR, Hudnut KW, McCrink T, Meneses JF, Murbach D, Rockwell T, Stewart JP, Tinsley J (2010) Preliminary report on seismological and geotechnical engineering aspects of the April 4 2010 mw 7.2 El Mayor-Cucapah (Mexico) earthquake. Report of the National Science Foundation-Sponsored Geoengineering Extreme Events Reconnaissance (GEER) TeamGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brown DA, Morrison C, Reese LC (1988) Lateral load behavior of pile group in sand. J Geotech Geoenviron 114:1261–1276Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brown DA, Reese LC, O’Neill MW (1987) Cyclic lateral loading of a large-scale pile group. J Geotech Geoenviron 11:1326–1343Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chang D, Lin B, Cheng S (2008) Lateral load distributions on grouped piles from dynamic pile-to-pile interaction factors. Int J Numer Anal Methods 33:173–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chau KT, Shen CY, Guo X (2009) Nonlinear seismic soil–pile–structure interactions: shaking table tests and FEM analyses. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 29:300–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Collier CJ, Elnashai AS (2001) A procedure for combining vertical and horizontal seismic action effects. J Earthq Eng 5:521–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cubrinovski M, Bray JD, Taylor M, Giorgini S, Bradley B, Wotherspoon L, Zupan J (2011) Soil liquefaction effects in the central business district during the February 2011 Christchurch Earthquake. Seismol Res Lett 82:893–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cubrinovski M, Green R, Allen J, Ashford S, Bowman E, Bradley B, Cox B, Hutchinson T, Kavazanjian E, Orense R, Pender M, Quigley M, Wotherspoon L (2010) Geotechnical reconnaissance of the 2010 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 43:243–320Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cubrinovski M, Henderson D, Bradley BA (2012) Liquefaction impacts in residential areas in the 2010–2011 christchurch earthquakes. Japan Association for Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo, pp 811–824Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Elgamal A, He L (2004) Vertical earthquake ground motion records: an overview. J Earthq Eng 8:663–697Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Finn WD, Bransby PL, Pickering DJ (1970) Effect of strain history on liquefaction of sand. J Soil Mech Found Div 96(SM6):1917–1934Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Haeri SM, Kavand A, Rahmani I, Torabi H (2012) Response of a group of piles to liquefaction-induced lateral spreading by large scale shake table testing. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 38:25–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hamada M (2000) Performances of foundations against liquefaction-induced permanent ground displacements. In: 12th world conference on earthquake engineering Auckland, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hamada M, O’Rourke TD (1992) Large ground deformations and their effects on lifelines: 1964 Niigata earthquake. In: Case studies liquefaction and lifeline performance during past earthquakes: Japanese case studies 1992. US National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (NCEER), pp 1–123Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ishihara K, Okada S (1978) Effects of stress history on cyclic behavior of sand. Soils Found 18(4):31–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ishihara K, Okada S (1982) Effects of large preshearing on cyclic behavior of sand. Soils Found 22(3):109–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ishihara K (1999) Terzaghi oration: geotechnical aspects of the 1995 Kobe earthquakeGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jennings PC (1971) Engineering features of the San Fernando Earthquake of February 9, 1971Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kawamura S, Nishizawa T, Wada H (1985) Damage to piles due to liquefaction found by excavation twenty years after earthquake. Nikkei Archit 27:130–134Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kishida H (1966) Damage to reinforced concrete buildings in Niigata city with special reference to foundation engineering. Soils Found 6:71–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Liu L, Dobry R (1995) Effect of liquefaction on lateral response of piles by centrifuge model tests. Natl Cent Earthq Eng Res: NCEER Bull 9(1):7–11Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mandolini A, Russo G, Viggiani C (2005) Pile foundations: experimental investigations, analysis and design. In: The international conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, vol 16, pp 177–213Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Motamed R, Towhata I, Honda T, Tabata K, Abe A (2013) Pile group response to liquefaction-induced lateral spreading: e-defense large shake table test. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 51:35–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Motosaka M, Mitsuji K (2012) Building damage during the 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku Earthquake. Soils Found 52:929–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Olson SM, Green RA, Obermeier SF (2005) Geotechnical analysis of paleoseismic shaking using liquefaction features: a major updating. Eng Geol 76(3–4):235–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Papazoglou AJ, Elnashai AS (1996) Analytical and field evidence of the damaging effect of vertical earthquake ground motion. Earthq Eng Struct D 25:1109–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rollins KM, Gerber TM, Lane JD, Ashford SA (2005) Lateral resistance of a full-scale pile group in liquefied sand. J Geotech Geoenviron 131:115–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rollins KM, Olsen KG, Jensen DH, Garrett BH, Olsen RJ, Egbert JJ, Egbert JJ (2006) Pile spacing effects on lateral pile group behavior: analysis. J Geotech Geoenviron 10:1272–1283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ross G, Seed H, Migliacio R (1964) Performance of highway bridge foundations in the great Alaska earthquake of 1964. Committee on the Alaskan Earthquake of the Division of Earth Sciences National Research Council. The Great Alaska Earthquake of 1964Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ruesta PF, Townsend FC (1997) Evaluation of laterally loaded pile group at Roosevelt Bridge. J Geotech Geoenviron 12:1153–1161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Seed HB, Mori K, Chan CK (1977) Influence of seismic history on liquefaction of sands. J Geotech Geoenviron 103:257–270Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sims JD, Garvin CD (1995) Recurrent liquefaction induced by the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake and 1990 and 1991 aftershocks: implications for paleoseismicity studies. Bull Seismol Soc Am 85(1):51–65Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Su D, Li XS (2006) Centrifuge investigation on seismic response of single pile in liquefiable soil. Chin J Geotech Eng 28(4):423–427 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tang L, Ling X (2014) Response of a RC pile group in liquefiable soil: a shake-table investigation. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 67:301–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tokimatsu K, Oh-oka H, Satake K, Shamoto Y, Asaka Y (1998) Effects of lateral ground movements on failure patterns of piles in the 1995 Hyogoken-Nambu earthquake. In: Dakoulas P, Yegian M, Holtz RD (eds) Geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics III, ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication (GSP) 75, Washington, United States, pp 1175–1186Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tokimatsu K, Suzuki H, Sato M (2005) Effects of inertial and kinematic interaction on seismic behavior of pile with embedded foundation. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 25:753–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Toyota H, Takada S (2016) Variation of liquefaction strength induced by monotonic and cyclic loading histories. J Geotech Geoenviron 143:4016120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Uzuoka R, Sento N, Kazama M, Zhang F, Yashima A, Oka F (2007) Three-dimensional numerical simulation of earthquake damage to group-piles in a liquefied ground. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 27:395–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wahyudi S, Koseki J, Sato T, Chiaro G (2015) Multiple-liquefaction behavior of sand in cyclic simple stacked-ring shear tests. Int J Geomech 16:C4015001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wang R (2016) Single piles in liquefiable ground: seismic response and numerical analysis methods. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wang R, Fu P, Zhang J, Dafalias YF (2016) DEM study of fabric features governing undrained post-liquefaction shear deformation of sand. Acta Geotech 11:1321–1337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wang R, Liu X, Zhang J (2017) Numerical analysis of the seismic inertial and kinematic effects on pile bending moment in liquefiable soils. Acta Geotech 12:773–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wang Z, Dueñas-Osorio L, Padgett JE (2013) Seismic response of a bridge–soil–foundation system under the combined effect of vertical and horizontal ground motions. Earthq Eng Struct D 42:545–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Wilson DW, Boulanger RW, Kutter BL, Abghari A (1995) Dynamic centrifuge tests of pile supported structures in liquefiable sand. In: National seismic conference on bridges and highways San Diega, California, pp 10–13Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Yamashita K, Hamada J, Onimaru S, Higashino M (2012) Seismic behavior of piled raft with ground improvement supporting a base-isolated building on soft ground in Tokyo. Soils Found 52:1000–1015CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Hydraulic Engineering, State Key Laboratory of Hydroscience and EngineeringTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations