Behavior of large piled raft foundation on different soil profiles for different loadings and different pile raft configurations

  • Shivanand MaliEmail author
  • Baleshwar Singh
Technical Paper


In the present study, 3D numerical model is employed to understand the settlement, load-sharing, bending moment and shear force behavior of large piled rafts, founded on homogeneous soil profile and varying soil profile for different load configurations and different piled raft configurations (PRC). Thus, the effect of pile spacing and number of piles are studied. Results of study show that as the pile spacing increases, average settlement decreases significantly for varying soil profile as that of homogeneous soil profile and it is noted to be lesser for uniform PRC. For any soil profile, with an increase in pile spacing differential settlement increases and is observed to be lesser in ‘V’-shaped PRC. Further, load-sharing ratio increases with increases in pile spacing and is noted to be maximum in ‘W’-shaped PRC. It is observed to be more for varying soil profile and equivalent point loads as compared to homogeneous soil profile and uniformly distributed load, respectively. Maximum bending moment and maximum shear force are noted to be lesser for varying soil profile and homogeneous soil profile, respectively. It is observed to be lesser in ‘V’-shaped PRC.


Piled raft Numerical modeling Clay Load configurations Piled raft configurations 


  1. 1.
    Franke E, El-Mossallamy Y, Wittmann P (2000) Calculation methods for raft foundation in Germany. In: Hemsley JA (ed) Design applications of raft foundation. Thomas Telford, London, pp 283–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Burland J (1977) Piles as settlement reducers. In: Proceedings on 19th National Italian geotechnical conference Padova, Italy, vol 2, pp 21–34Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Viggiani C. (2001) Analysis and design of piled raft foundations. First Arrigo Croce Lecture, Rivista Italiana Di Geotechnica, pp 47–75Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mandolini A, Di Laora R, Mascarucci Y (2013) Rational design of piled raft. Procedia Eng 57:45–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    El-Mossallamy Y, Lutz B, Richter Th (2006) Innovative application and design of piled raft foundation. In: 10th international conference on piling and deep foundations, Amsterdam, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nguyen DDC, Kim DS, Jo SB (2013) Settlement of piled rafts with different pile arrangement schemes via centrifuge tests. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 139:690–1698Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Akl AY, Mansour MH, Moustafa HK (2014) Effect of changing configurations and lengths of piles on piled raft foundation behaviour. Civ Eng Urban Plan 1(1):49–65Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mali S, Singh B (2018) Behavior of large piled–raft foundation on clay soil. Ocean Eng 149:205–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cho J, Lee JH, Jeong SS, Lee J (2012) The settlement behavior of piled raft in clay soils. Ocean Eng 53:153–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Poulos HG, Devdas AJ (2005) Foundation design for the Emirates twin towers, Dubai. Can Geotech J 42:716–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Poulos HG, Bunce G (2008) Foundation design for the Burj Dubai: The world tallest building. In: Proceedings on the sixth international conference on case histories in geotechnical engineering, Arlinton, VA, pp 11–16Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Poulos HG, Small JC, Chow HSW (2011) Piled raft foundation for tall buildings. Geotech Eng J SEAGS AGSSEA 42:78–84Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rabiei M, Choobbasti AJ (2016) Piled raft design strategies for high rise buildings. Geotech Geol Eng 34(1):75–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Reul O (2004) Numerical study of the bearing behavior of piled rafts. Int J Geomech 4:59–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sanctis LD, Mandolini A (2006) Bearing capacity of the piled rafts on soft clays. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 132:1600–1610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chow HSW, Small JC (2005) Behaviour of piled rafts with piles of different lengths and diameters under vertical loading. Adv Deep Found.
  17. 17.
    Brinkgreve R, Swolfs W, Engin E (2015) PLAXIS user’s manual, version 6.1, Balkema, Rotterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gandhi SR, Maharaj DK (1995) Behavior of piled raft under uniform loading. In: Proceedings on Indian geotechnical conference (IGC-95), Bangalore, vol 1, pp 169–172Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tran TV, Teramoto S, Kimura M, Boonyatee T, Vinh LB (2012) Effect of ground subsidence on load sharing and settlement of raft and piled raft foundations. Stress 1:N3Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sheil B (2017) Numerical simulations of the reuse of piled raft foundations in clay. Acta Geotech 12(5):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jeong S, Lee J, Lee CJ (2004) Slip effect at the pile-soil interface on dragload. Comput Geotech 31(2):115–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sinha A, Hanna AM (2016) 3D Numerical model for piled raft foundation. Int J Geomech 17(2).
  23. 23.
    Ranjan G, Rao ASR (2007) Basic and applied soil mechanics. New Age International, ChennaiGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Reul O, Randolph MF (2004) Design strategies for piled rafts subjected to nonuniform vertical loading. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 130:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Liew SS, Gue SS, Tan YC (2002) Design and instrumentation results of a reinforcement concrete piled raft supporting 2500 ton oil storage tank on very soft alluvium deposits. In: Ninth international conference on piling and deep foundations, Nice, 3rd–5th JuneGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology GuwahatiGuwahatiIndia

Personalised recommendations