Assessment on Different Arrangement of Grouping of Piles

Assessment on Different Arrangement of

Grouping of Piles by Response Spectrum

Method

Mansi Jajoriya1, Dimple Khalotiya2, Arvind Vishwakarma3

1M. Tech. Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, Oriental University, Indore, M. P., India

Email- [email protected] 2,3Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Oriental University, Indore, M. P., India

Email- [email protected] , [email protected]

Abstract

In accordance with the requirements of the current construction, many projects are carried out, such as the

construction of the metro, bridges, high-rise buildings, industry, etc. In this type of construction, where the soil

bearing capacity (SBC) is very low, it is necessary to provide a pile foundation. Dynamic analysis also needs to be

done for different groups of earthquake piles. The action at rest is enhanced with the group action of piles. The paper

summarizes about the use of pile groups on a weak and expansive soil such as clayey soil which have a weaker

bearing capacity. The present study describes about group action of pile group, modeling of four piles were taken for

study. In study, spacing between pile groups are taken as 2.5D and 3.5D (D-Diameter of pile).0.8 is the diameter of

four pile group. Different pile arrangements are taken such as rectangular, square, staggered; diamond 1 and

diamond 2. Analysis for different shapes of pile groups are done by response spectrum method using software

approach. Displacement, Shear force and bending moment and three types of stresses are evaluated under the

analysis of models.

Keywords – Diamond 1, Diamond 2, Pile groups, Rectangular, Square, Staggered

Introduction

Seismic analysis is related to calculation of the response of a building or other structures under earthquakes. During

earthquake many of the buildings collapse due to lack of understanding of the inelastic behavior of structure.

Earthquake or seismic analysis is a subset of structural analysis which involves the calculation of the response of a

structure subjected to earthquake excitation Major seismic input includes, ground acceleration,

velocity/displacement data, magnitude of earthquake, peak ground parameters, duration etc. Pile foundation falls

under the category of deep foundation. Pile group is a combination of pile having pile cap that is normally in contact

with soil. Load applied on pile cap is distributed to individual pile. The ultimate capacity of pile group is the

addition of the individual capacity of Piles Pile foundations are mainly used transfer to the column. foundation is

mostly used that places ,where weak layer of the soil example marshy area, tall building, offshore platform, defense

structure, dams and lock structures , transmission towers .The pile foundation proves advantageous in reduce,

permeability, shrinkage, consolidation, swelling, swelling pressure, improve soil bearing capacity. The pile

foundation causes of lateral forces in wind action, wave action, traffic and wind movement, water pressure, with

stand blasts, lateral pressure, ground movements, earthquakes.

Pile Group Analysis

The well and significant arrangements of a group of piles such that it resist the load and stresses are acting on it are

termed as group action of piles. Resisting capacity under load acting on a pile group is of higher than instead of

providing single pile. The group action property is having more stress resisting bulb than a single pile with stress

bulb. It shows that load acting on group of piles and a combined stress bulb is formed which is summation of

individual pile stress bulb. Pile and pile group are in different spacing and parameters which based on use of

different types software like Staad pro, Esafe, Midas etc. The pile group arranged in series of 2 piles, 3 piles, and

4piles at a spacing of 2D, 3D, 4D, 5D and 6D,D (diameter).for analysis cohesion less soil is taken. The authors made

Journal of Xi'an University of Architecture & Technology

Volume XII, Issue V, 2020

ISSN No : 1006-7930

Page No: 469

mailto:Email-%20%20%[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

use of finite element method using software. Parameters taken for analysis are deflection, axial force (AF), shear

force (SF) and bending moment (BM) for pile in group. The behavior of pile foundation for a bridge pier in cohesion

less soil, piles arranged in group of 3 and 4.The shape of pile cap consist of triangular and square for 3 and 4

respectively. The pile systems are subjected to lateral loads. The piles are arranged in series and non-series and

comparison is carried out between the two. The parameters of study are axial force, shear force and bending moment

analyzed on software using finite element method. It is concluded that maximum value of taken parameters are

obtained for series arrangement. The analysis on pile foundation in black cotton soil. As black cotton soil shows

anonymous behavior with temperature variations. It has a tendency to shrink during summers and expands a lot

during monsoon which affects the super structure. In this paper authors have designed a foundation which will

protect the structure from ill effects of black cotton soil. For study G+ 2 storey were chosen and analysis is done by

both software and manually. Pile modeled on G+5 building in a clay and sandy soil taking live, dead load and

weight of structure. Using software approach, modeling and foundation design has done. The support reactions

derived from software is applied in. It was concluded from their research that sandy soil possesses more bearing

capacity than clayey soil. Also in clayey soil the vertical settlement in isolated footing is more than embedded pile.

Pile foundation of sandy soil shows more vertical settlement as compared isolated footing. Various methods to

analyze the vertical and horizontal loads applied on structure. To calculate vertical load-Y curve and Vesic’s method

are used taking cohesion less and cohesive soil.

Modeling and Analysis

The primary aim of the present study is to analyze the piles in group under dynamic condition. The pile diameter is

considered as 0. 8m with spacing between the piles as 2m center to center of the piles. The length of pile is taken as

10 m from cap till the end of pile. The modeling is performed using software. The model consists of 4 piles arranged

with different pattern 1.Rectangle pattern 2.square 3. Staggered 4.Diagonal with pile to pile spacing as 2.5D& 3D,

where D is diameter of the pile.

Model 1 (Square)

In model 1 all four piles placed in square pattern having a center to center inner distance 2.5D and 3D and edge

distance 1m (inner distance/2). Fig 1 shown that Model 1 (Square) – Top, 3D & front views

Model 2 (Rectangle)

In model 2, all four piles are placed in rectangular pattern having a center to center inner distance 2.5D and 3D

(meter) and edge distance 1m (inner distance/2). Fig. 2 shown that Model 2 (Rectangle) – Top, 3D & front views.

Figure 1. Model 1 (Square) – Top, 3D & front views Figure 2. Model 2 (Rectangle) – Top, 3D & front view



ISSN No : 1006-7930

Page No: 470

Model 3 (Staggered)

In model 3 all four piles placed in diagonal pattern having a center to center inner distance 2.5D and 3D (meter) and

edge distance 1m (inner distance). ). Fig. 3 shown that Model 3(staggered) – Top, 3D & front views.

Model 4 (Diamond 1)

In model 4 all four piles placed in staggered pattern having a center to center inner distance 2.5D and 3D (meter)

and edge distance 1m (inner distance/2). Fig. 4 shown that Model 4 (Diamond 1) – Top, 3D & front views.

Figure 3. Model 3 (Staggered) – Top, 3D & front views Figure 4. Model 4 (Diamond 1) – Top, 3D & front view

Model 5 (Diamond 2)

In model 5 all four piles placed in rectangle pattern having a center to center inner distance 2.5D and 3D (meter) and

edge distance 1m (inner distance/2). Fig. 5 shown that the model 5 (Diamond 2)– Top, 3D & front views.

Figure 5. Model 5 (Diamond 2) – Top, 3D & front views Figure 6. Rendering Images of model 1 to 5

Load & Seismic data:

The load application on the model is considered as per IS 1983: 2016. The loads are considered as dead load,

Seismic load. For seismic load the earthquake load in X direction i.e. EQX and earthquake load in Z direction EQZ

Following shows the basis consideration for seismic load calculation:-



ISSN No : 1006-7930

Page No: 471

Table 1. Seismic data undertaken

S. No. Element Name Description

1 Steel HYSD 500

2 Concrete M25

3 Pile Length 10

4 Pile Spacing 2.5D,3D

5 Pile Diameter 0.8

6 Pile Cap Thickness 1.8

7 Is Code 1983 (2002)

8 Zone 3

9 Zone Factor 0.16

10 Importance Factor 1.2

11 Response Reduction Factor 4

12 Damping Ratio 0.5

Result & Discussions The Following results are to be obtained from the modeling and analysis of structures.

Maximum Displacement of Pile Group:

The maximum displacement can be carried out by applying the axial load 500 KN & 1000 KN on the pile groups

under 2.5 D & 3D Spacing of piles with different arrangements. The maximum value obtained is shown in table 2.

Its graphical representation is plotted in fig.7 & fig 8.

Table 2. Maximum Displacement of Pile Group (mm)

As per the table 2 the minimum value of displacements for 500 KN with 2.5D & 3D are gets under the model with

Square pattern which is 0.046 mm and the maximum value are obtained under model 5 with 1.935 mm. Similarly

minimum value of displacements for 1000 KN with 2.5D & 3D are gets under the model 4 with Square pattern.

Figure 7. Maximum Displacement of Pile Group under 500 KN load (mm)

Maximum Displacement of Pile Group ( mm)

S. No. Model No. 500 KN 1000 KN

2.5D 3.0D 2.5D 3.0D

1 Model 1 ( Square) 0.046 0.046 1.296 1.296

2 Model 2 ( Rectangle) 1.02 1.213 1.356 1.541

3 Model 3 (Staggered) 1.411 1.787 1.729 2.104

4 Model 4 ( Diamond 1 ) 1.2 1.482 0.047 1.801

5 Model 5 ( Diamond 2 ) 1.51 1.935 1.827 2.251



ISSN No : 1006-7930

Page No: 472

The bar chart Cleary shows that the minimum Value are obtained under model 1 having the pile group arrangement

as a square forms. The maximum value is obtained under the model 5 having a diamond pattern 2nd arrangement in

it. The above obtained value are seems that 2.5D spacing value under 500 KN axial load are lower than that 3D

Spacing models. The bar chart gives that square and rectangular pattern are much better that other arrangement but

show how diamond 1 pattern can also be consider when spacing are required in diamond pattern on the field.

Figure 8. Maximum Displacement of Pile Group under 1000 KN load (mm)

The bar chart Cleary shows that the minimum Value are obtained under model 4 having the pile group arrangement

as a diamond forms. The maximum value is obtained under the model 5 having a diamond pattern 2nd arrangement

in it. The above obtained value are seems that 2.5D spacing value under 500 KN axial load are lower than that 3D

Spacing models. The bar chart gives that square and rectangular & diamond pattern are much better that other

arrangement.

The both chart clearly show that when axial load are be increases the value of displacement also increases.

Maximum Shear Force of Pile Group

The Maximum Shear Force of Pile Group can be obtained by applying the axial load 500 KN & 1000 KN on the pile

groups under 2.5D & 3D Spacing of piles with different arrangements. The obtained value is tabulated in table 3. Its

bar chart representation is plotted in fig. 9 & fig 10.

Table 3. Maximum Shear Force of Pile Group (KN)

Maximum Shear Force of Pile Group ( KN)

S. No. Model Type 500 KN 1000 KN

2.5D 3.0D 2.5D 3.0D

1 Model 1 ( Square) 9.212 11.376 12.819 14.969

2 Model 2 ( Rectangle) 5.209 11.334 7.271 14.868

3 Model 3 (Staggered) 7.995 10.449 10.048 12.486

4 Model 4 ( Diamond 1 ) 6.609 8.446 8.66 10.491

5 Model 5 ( Diamond 2 ) 8.683 30.216 10.734 35.596

As per the table 3 the minimum value of shear force for 500 KN with 2.5D & 3D are gets under the model 4 with

diamond-1 pattern which is 6.609 KN and the maximum value are obtained under model 5 with 30.216 KN.

Similarly the minimum value of shear force for 1000 KN with 2.5D & 3D are gets under the model 2 with rectangle

pattern which is 8.66 KN.



ISSN No : 1006-7930

Page No: 473

Figure 9. Maximum Shear Force of Pile Group under 500 KN load (mm)

Figure 10. Maximum Shear Force of Pile Group under 1000 KN load (mm)

Bending Moment of a pile group:

The obtained value of Bending moment can be tabulated in table 4 and it is platted in the form of bar chart in fig. 11

& 12 under the load of 500 & 1000 KN with pile spacing 2.5 D and 3D.

Table 4. Maximum Bending Moment of Pile Group (KN.m)

Maximum Bending Moment of Pile Group ( KN.m)

S.

No. Model Type

500 KN 1000 KN

2.5D 3.0D 2.5D 3.0D

1 Model 1 ( Square) 7.249 8.826 10.091 11.725

2 Model 2 ( Rectangle) 5.321 9.864 7.335 11.513

3 Model 3 (Staggered) 7.937 10.32 9.939 12.316

4 Model 4 ( Diamond 1 ) 6.592 8.379 8.6 10.378

5 Model 5 ( Diamond 2 ) 3.148 16.896 10.601 19.906



ISSN No : 1006-7930

Page No: 474

As per the table and bar chart the maximum value obtained under model 3 having a staggered pattern and Model 5

diamond 2 pattern are 7.937 KN.m and 16.896 KN.m respectively for 500 KN 2.5 D and 3 D Spacing. Similarly the

maximum value of BM obtained under Model 5 diamond 2 pattern in both cases are 10.601 KN.m and 19.906 KN.m

respectively for 1000 KN 2.5 D and 3 D Spacing.

This is Cleary shown that when increment in spacing between the pile group are diminished strength of piles. And

also the staggered patter are enough to takes the load through grouping.

Figure 11. Maximum Bending Moment of Pile Group under 500 KN load (mm)

Figure 12. Maximum Bending Moment of Pile Group under 1000 KN load (mm)

Stresses developed in pile group:

Three types of stress are to evaluate i.e. Maximum Absolute, Von Miss Top and Trescca Top. The result of

obtained stresses in the magnitude form can be shown in the table no 5 and can be plotted in the form of bar chart on

fig.13 to 16.



ISSN No : 1006-7930

Page No: 475

Table 5. Maximum Stress developed in Pile Group under 500KN & 2.5 D (N/mm2)

Maximum Stress developed in Pile Group ( N/mm2) under 500KN & 2.5D spacing

S. No. Model Type Maximum

Absolute VON MISS TOP

TRESCCA TOP

1 Model 1 -Square 0.00185504 0.00321303 0.00371008

2 Model 2 – Rectangle 0.0118626 0.013272 0.0143339

3 Model 3 –Staggered 0.0324476 0.0327605 0.0330646

4 Model 4 - Diamond 1 0.00345404 0.00508925 0.00584439

5 Model 5 -Diamond 2 0.0104226 0.00422637 0.0109445

The maximum stresses developed in the Model 3 with Staggered pattern having the magnitude 0.0324476,

0.0327605 & 0.0330646 in Maximum Absolute, Von Miss Top & Trescca Top respectively. The minimum value

obtained is in Model 1 with Square pattern having a value 0.00185504, 0.00321303 &0.00371008 respectively.

Figure 13. Maximum Displacement of Pile Group under 500 KN load & 2.5D (mm)

Table 6. Maximum Stress developed in Pile Group under 500KN &3D (N/mm2)

Maximum Stress developed in Pile Group ( N/mm2) under 500KN & 3D spacing


Absolute

VON MISS

TOP

TRESCCA

TOP

1 Model 1 (Square) 0.00588055 0.0101853 0.0117609

2 Model 2 (Rectangle) 0.0171245 0.0170589 0.0171245

3 Model 3 (Staggered) 0.167457 0.18103 0.192106

4 Model 4 (Diamond 1) 0.011715 0.0124101 0.0130045

5 Model 5 (Diamond 2) 0.0111833 0.040835 0.0115266



ISSN No : 1006-7930

Page No: 476

Figure 14. Maximum Displacement of Pile Group under 500 KN load & 3D spacing (mm)

Table 7. Maximum Stress developed in Pile Group under 100 KN & 2.5 D (N/mm2)

Maximum Stress developed in Pile Group (N/mm2) under 1000KN & 2.5 D Spacing


Absolute

VON MISS

TOP

TRESCCA

TOP

1 Model 1 ( Square) 0.00818739 0.0141803 0.016374

2 Model 2 ( Rectangle) 0.00601112 0.00675533 0.00731071

3 Model 3 (Staggered) 0.0370375 0.0373826 0.0377185

4 Model 4 ( Diamond 1 ) 0.0154377 0.0163818 0.0171857

5 Model 5 ( Diamond 2 ) 0.147609 0.1308363 0.147605

Figure 15. Maximum Displacement of Pile Group under 1000 KN load & 2.5D spacing (mm)



ISSN No : 1006-7930

Page No: 477

Table 8. Maximum Stress developed in Pile Group under 1000KN & 3 D (N/mm2)

Maximum Stress developed in Pile Group ( N/mm2) under 1000 KN & 3D spacing


Absolute

VON MISS

TOP

TRESCCA

TOP

1 Model 1 ( Square) 0.0077739 0.0134647 0.0155477

2 Model 2 ( Rectangle) 0.00441364 0.00460079 0.00477309

3 Model 3 (Staggered) 0.0281629 0.0278209 0.0281629

4 Model 4 ( Diamond 1 ) 0.0145821 0.0154463 0.0161854

5 Model 5 ( Diamond 2 ) 0.013216 0.0131095 0.01358993

Figure 16. Maximum Displacement of Pile Group under 1000 KN load & 3D spacing (mm)

Conclusions

The following conclusions are made on the basic of results obtained of the different pile group arrangements. All the

conclusions are valid only and only for this project only.

1. The square, rectangle & diamond pattern are efficient in all aspect of piles groups.

2. The increment in load on pile group ( in the form pile cap uniform loads ) the resulting parameters value also

increases.

3. Under 2.5 D & 3D spacing of pile group the 2.5D spacing pile group are more efficient in friction and end

bearing phenomenon.

4. The increment in maximum Displacement value under 500 KN & 2.5D are approx. 22 times , 30 times , 26

times & 32 times in Model 2 to model 5 respectively with respect to model 1 .

5. The increment in maximum Displacement value under 500 KN & 3D are approx. 26 times , 38 times , 32 times

& 42 times in Model 2 to model 5 respectively with respect to model 1 .

6. The increment in maximum Displacement value under 1000 KN & 2.5D are approx. 1.04 times , 1.33 times ,

1.4 times in Model 2 , Model 3 & model 5 respectively and decrement in 0.035 times in model 4 with respect to

model 1.

7. The increment in maximum Displacement value under 1000 KN & 3D are approx. 1.18 times , 1.62 times ,

1.34 times & 1.73 times in Model 2 to model 5 respectively with respect to model 1 .



ISSN No : 1006-7930

Page No: 478

8. The decrement in shear force value shown in model 2 to model 5 with respect to model1 (standard model) and

somehow in may increased in model 5 due large spacing between piles.

9. The decrement in maximum shear force value under 500 KN & 2.5D are approx. 43.45% , 13.21%, 28.25% &

5.74 % in Model 2 to model5 respectively.

10. The decrement in maximum shear force value under 500 KN & 3.0D are approx. 0.37% , 8.15%, 25.75% in

Model 2 to model4 respectively, but a huge increment in model 5 i.e. 165 % due large spacing with respect to

model 1.

11. The decrement in maximum shear force value under 1000 KN & 2.5D are approx. 43.27%, 21.61%, 32.44% &

16.26% in Model 2 to model5 respectively.

12. The decrement in maximum shear force value under 1000 KN & 3.0D are approx. 0.67% , 16.58%, 29.91% in

Model 2 to model4 respectively, but a huge increment in model 5 i.e. 137 % due large spacing with respect to

model 1.

13. The bending moment is also decrease in model 2 to model 5 in general but somehow increase in model 5 due

large spacing is provided.

14. The decrement in maximum bending moment value under 500 KN & 2.5D are approx. 26.59% , 9.06%, 56.57

% in Model 2 , model 3 & model 5 respectively, but there is a increment in model 3 i.e. 9.49%.

15. The increment in maximum bending moment value under 500 KN & 3D are approx. 11.76% , 16.92%, 91.43 %

in Model 4 & model 5 respectively, but there is a decrement in model 4 i.e. 5.06% with respect to model 1

which implies that diamond shape in moment resisting group.

16. The decrement in bending moment value under 1000 KN & 2.5D are approx. 27.37% , 1.5%, 14.77% in Model

2 to model 4 respectively, but there is a increment in model 5 i.e. 5.05% due to large spacing of piles with

respect to model 1.

17. The decrement in bending moment value under 1000 KN & 3D are approx. 1.8% , 111.48% in Model 2 &

model 4 respectively, but there is a increment in model 3 & model 5 i.e. 5.04% & 41% respectively due to

large spacing of piles with respect to model.

18. All stresses developed in pile group under different loading and spacing conditions are satisfied the permissible

limit of stress as per IS 456: 2000.

REFERENCES

1. Hazarika, P.J. andNath, U.K “Lateral resistance of pile cap–an experimental investi-gation.” International

Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 7(3):266- 272 (2013)

2. JoshiAparna, Khalotiya Dimple (et.al.) Seismic Resistant Multi-Storied Rcc Building on an Inclined Ground

with DifferentAngles.International Journal of Management,Technology And Engineering Volume IX, IssueVII,

JULY/2019ISSN NO : 2249-7455. (2019)

3. Jayarajan P, Kouzer K.M, “Analysis of Piled Raft Foundations”Indian Journal of Science pp 51-57.(2015)

4. kushal M. Panchal, sunil M. Rangari , Dynamic Analysis and Comparative Studyof Three Piles and Four Piles”

Journal for Research & Engineering, Volume 05, Issue 1, pp 1-13( 2019)

5. KanakeswararaoThadapaneni,SarikondaVenkatasivaraju, et.al “Analysis of pile foundation Simplified methods

to analyse the pile foundation under lateral and vertical loads ”IJEDR , Volume 5, Issue 3 , ISSN: 2321-9939,pp

991-1001.(2017)

6. K. Hemlatha Reddy ,K. Sai Kala comparision of vertical settlement a multi Storied Building in different

foundation of various soil” International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET) Volume 8,

Issue 1,pp 748–755. ,(2017)”

7. Mahdy Khari, KhairulAnuarKassim, and AzlanAdnanDevelopment of 𝑝-𝑦 Curves of Laterally Loaded Piles in

Cohesion less Soil”Hindawi Publishing. Corporation the Scientific World JournalVolume 2014, Article ID

917174,pp 1-8. (2014)”

8. Roberto Cairo, Andrea Chidichimo Nonlinear Analysis For Pile Kinematic Response”5 th international

conference of earthquake geotechnical Engineering pp 1-12. (2011)

9. Sreeshna K.S, “Analysis and Design of an Apartment building “IJISET – International Journal of Innovative

Science, Engineering & Technology, Vol. 3 Issue 3, pp456-479. (2016)

10. Sagar Jamle, Dr. M.P. Verma, Vinay Dhakad, (2017), “Flat Slab Shear Wall Interaction for Multistoried

Building Analysis When Structure Length is greater than width under seismic Forces”, International Journal of

Software & Hardware Research in Engineering (IJSHRE), ISSN: 2347-4890 Vol.-05, Issue-3, pp. 32-53.

11. Sagar Jamle and Roshan Patel, (2020), “Analysis and Design of Box Culvert- A Manual Approach in Structural

Engineering”, LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, Mauritius, ISBN: 978-620-0-78760-6.



ISSN No : 1006-7930

Page No: 479

12. Sagar Jamle and Shirish Kumar Kanungo, (2020), “Determination of Stable Underground Storage Reservoir

System- Recent Advancements in Structural Engineering Volume 1”, LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing,

Mauritius, ISBN: 978-620-2-51435-4.

13. Sagar Jamle, Dr. M.P. Verma, Vinay Dhakad, (2017), “Flat Slab Shear Wall Interaction for Multistoried

Building under Seismic Forces”, International Journal of Software & Hardware Research in Engineering

(IJSHRE), ISSN: 2347-4890 Vol.-05, Issue-3, pp. 14-31.

14. Sagar Jamle, Nirmal Delmiya, Rahul Singh, (2020), "Efficient Use of UPV Meter: A Non Destructive Test of

Concrete by Fragmentation Analysis", Journal of Xi'an University of Architecture & Technology, ISSN: 1006-

7930, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 3385-3394. https://doi.org/10.37896/JXAT12.04/1078

15. Teerawut Juirnarongrit and Scott A. Ashford “Analyses Of Pile Responses Based On Results From Fullscale

Lateral Spreading Test: To Kachi Blast Experiment” 13th World Conference on Earthquake

EngineeringVancouver, B.C., Canada,pp 1642. ,(2004)

16. Rollins, M.K., and A Sparks,. “Lateral resistance of full-scale pile cap with gravel backfill.” Journal of

Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol.128(9): 711-723. (2002).

17. Shen-Kun Yu, Zhi Zhang, and Honghua ZhaoThe Influence of Pile Cap to p-y Curves under Lateral Loads”pp

136-143. (2016)

18. IR.-Tan Yean Chin & Chow Chee MangGue& Partners SdnBhd, et.al “Design and consrucion of Bored pile

foundation”pp 19-33 (2003)

19. B. Manjula Devi, Chore H.S, V.A.Sawant,.”Analysis Of Laterally Loaded Pile Groups” Iosr Journal Of Civil

Engineering (Iosr-Jmce) Issn: 2278-0661 Isbn: 2278-8727, Pp: 60-64.

20. C.S Desai,.,Kuppuswamy, T., and A.R. Alameddine, Pile Cap- Pile Group- Soil Interaction”, Journal of

Structural Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 107, No. ST 5, pp. 817-834. (1981),

21. D.N. Buragohain, , N Raghavan., and Chandrasekaran, V.S. Interaction of Frames with Pile Foundation, Proc.

International Symposium on Soil- Structure Interaction, Roorkee (India), pp. 109-115.

22. A Vishwalkarma, S. Maru “Assessment of Human Comfort Criteria of Tall Building Under Dynamic wind

Loading”, International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE) ISSN: 2321-

9653; UGC Grade A, Scopus Index Journal, Impact Factor:5.54(2018), Volume-9 Issue-2, December 10,(2019)

23. H.G.Poulos and Grahame Bunce, “Foundation design for the Burj Dubai-the world’s tallest building,” 6th

internationalconference on case histories in Geotechnical engineering, Arlington,VA.

24. S. Bhattacharya ,S. P. G. Madabhushi,(2008)” A critical review of methods for pile design in seismically

liquefiable soils”pp 407-447.

25. ThadapaneniKanakeswararao, B.Ganesh Analysis of Pile Foundation Subjected toLateral and Vertical Loads”

International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume-46 Number-2,pp 113-127.

(2017)”

26. ThakurSona, Khalotiya Dimple, ChoudharyMayank” Effect of Steel Bracings on RC FramedStructure: A

review” International Journal ofManagement, Technology And Engineering ISSNNO : 2249-7455 Volume IX,

Issue VII,JULY/2019.

27. V. Suneetha D. S. V. Prasad “Design of Pile Foundation in Black Cotton Soil”IJIRST –International Journal for

Innovative Research in Science &Technology,Volume 4 ,Issue 1,pp 91-96. ,(2017).



ISSN No : 1006-7930

Page No: 480

https://doi.org/10.37896/JXAT12.04/1078

Documents

Assessment on Different Arrangement of Grouping of Piles