Influence of vertical loads on lateral response of pile foundations in sands and clays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the load applied to pile foundations is usually a combination of vertical and lateral components, there have been few investigations on the behavior of piles subjected to combined loadings. Those few studies led to inconsistent results with regard to the effects of vertical loads on the lateral response of piles. A series of three-dimensional (3D) finite differences analyses is conducted to evaluate the influence of vertical loads on the lateral performance of pile foundations. Three idealized sandy and clayey soil profiles are considered: a homogeneous soil layer, a layer with modulus proportional to depth, and two-layered strata. The pile material is modeled as linearly elastic, while the soil is idealized using the Mohr–Coulomb constitutive model with a non-associated flow rule. In order to confirm the findings of this study, soils in some cases are further modeled using more sophisticated models (i.e. CYsoil model for sandy soils and modified Cam-Clay (MCC) model for clayey soils). Numerical results showed that the lateral resistance of the piles does not appear to vary considerably with the vertical load in sandy soil especially at the loosest state. However, the presence of a vertical load on a pile embedded in homogeneous or inhomogeneous clay is detrimental to its lateral capacity, and it is unconservative to design piles in clays assuming that there is no interaction between vertical and lateral loads. Moreover, the current results indicate that the effect of vertical loads on the lateral response of piles embedded in two-layered strata depends on the characteristics of soil not only surrounding the piles but also located beneath their tips.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".