1

FYP Final Presentation

Group-17

Experimental and Numerical

Modelling of Helical Piles-Subjected
to Axial Loading
Supervisor:
Dr. Muhammad Safdar Group Members:
Hamza Ahmad Qureshi
Internal Examiner: Adnan Sami Khan
Dr. Shahid Ullah Hamza Khan
Muhammad Ali Khan
External Examiner:
Dr. Muhammad Waseem .
Date: 17/August/2022
Presentation Contents
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

• Members Profile
• Problem Statement
• Literature Review
• Work Plan
• Experimental Testing
• Numerical Modelling
• Results and Discussion
• References
• Q/A Session

Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar 3

Members Profile
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Name Section/Roll no Registration No

Hamza Ahmad Qureshi A / 05 18PWCIV4995

Adnan Sami Khan A / 27 18PWCIV5099

Muhammad Ali Khan A / 22 18PWCIV5079

Hamza Khan A / 29 18PWCIV5109

4
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Problem Statement
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Population of the world is increasing day by day (8.5 Billion by 2030-UN 2015 Report),
so demand on the soil is increasing.

Real estates and governments are shifting from 2-3 storey houses to multi-storey high-
rise buildings.

Therefore, the need of deep foundation will increased more in the coming era.

Developed countries (USA, Canada, Japan, New Zealand) they are using Helical piles
as a deep foundation technique.

However in Pakistan we are still using conventional piles.

5
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Problem Statement
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Objective of our FYP Project ?

• Compare the axial capacity of helical piles with conventional piles…How much
the capacity is increased ?

• Effect of number of helix on the axial capacity of helical pile.

• Numerical Modelling of Helical Piles using Plaxis 3D software.

6
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Literature Review
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Helical pile

Helical pile is a prefabricated steel

pile, which consist of galvanized
steel shaft (square or circular)
having single or multiple helixes
attached to it.

Helical piles were for the first time

use by the Irish civil engineer
Alexander Mitchell in 1836 to
reinforce the foundation of light
house.

Light House (Perko,2009)

7
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Literature Review
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

So why the need of using Helical piles by developed countries ? It was because
of its

• Greater axial capacity

• Greater lateral capacity
• Better Seismic performance
• Ease of Installation >>[10 meter pile require 30
minutes using a two-person crew (Perko, 2009)]
• Its installation is Vibration free
• Cost Effective (Report by Almita Piling Inc. in 2015)
• Instant loading
• Lower mobilization costs

Source:https
://www.johnlawrietubulars.com/products/heli
cal-piles
8
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Literature Review
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Real Case Studies

A 22 story multi-purpose, Tallest building known to have been built on

high-capacity helical pipe piles on Oct 13, 2015 in Canada. 440 Kips
were the Ultimate Compression Load of each pile.
https://www.idealfoundationsystems.com/helical-pipe-piles-for-22-story-tower-in-long-i
sland/

9
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Literature Review
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Axial Capacity of helical piles

Full scale tests

(Clemence, 2000; El Naggar, 2008; Sakr, 2011; Elsherbiny, 2013; Fahmy, 2017; Li
and Deng, 2019; Shuman, 2021)…more axial capacity than conventional piles

Model scale tests

(Wang et al., 2013; El-Rahim et al., 2013; Spagnola et al., 2016; Abbase, 2017;
Kwon et al., 2019; Abbas and Ali, 2020)…more axial capacity than conventional
piles

10
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Literature Review
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Number of helix

Several researchers (Albusoda, 2017; Gupta, 2017; Dewi, 2020) find out that
increasing the number of helical plates, increase the compressive and uplift capacity
of helical piles.

The capacity of double helical pile was 1.10-1.50 % more than that of single helical
(Abbase, 2017)

11
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Work Plan
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

FYP Project

Experimental Testing Numerical Modelling

Instrumentation Soil Model

Model Testing Pile Raft Model

Meshing and Stage

Data Interpretation
construction Phase

Results/Graphs Numerical Analysis

12
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Experimental Testing
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Experimental Testing

13
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Experimental Testing
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Following are the instruments that were used during experimental testing

• Soil box
• Linear Variable Displacement Transducers (LVDT)
• Load Cell
• Data Logger
• Standing Rod
• Vertical Loads
• Helical Pile and Raft

14
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Experimental Testing
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Fig. LVDT
Fig. Soil Box

15
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Experimental Testing
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Fig. Load Cell

Fig. Standing Rod

Fig. Weights

Fig. Data Logger

Fig. Raft
16
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Experimental Testing
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Helical Pile and Pile Raft

Helical pile made of galvanized iron with a

helix welded to their shaft were modelled. A
total of 18 helical piles were fabricated in
which 9 were single helical piles and 9
were double helical piles
Helical Pile Dimensions
Length 18 inches
External shaft diameter 0.75 inches
Internal shaft diameter 0.5 inches
Helix diameter 2 inches
Thickness of the helix plate 0.1 inches
Pitch of the helix 0.3 inches.
Distance of the helix from the bottom of the pile 1.2 inches.

Spacing between the two helix 3.7 inches.

17
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Experimental Testing
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Test Layout

6 Model Test were conducted, in which 3 test were of single helical pile and 3 test
were double helical pile.

4 pile configuration 6 pile configuration 9 pile configuration

18
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Experimental Testing
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Steps of Model Testing

Weight
Weight
Weight
LVDT Weight Data Logger
Load cell
Raft

Laptop (Using
Soil Box MATLAB Software)

Schematic View of Model Tests

19
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Experimental Testing
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Steps of Model Testing

Step 1: First we remove all the soil from the box by opening small door at the side of
box.

Step 2: Then with the help of mobile Pulviator we start raining soil in the box.

Step 3 : Once the box is filled ¾ we put helical pile raft model, and start air pulviation
again.

Step 4: When half the pile were dipped in the sand, then we remove the raft and start
pulviation again.

Step 5: Once the piles were completely submerged in the sand, then we connect raft
again to the piles.

20
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Experimental Testing
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Steps of Model Testing

Step 6: Now pile raft model is ready for test.

Step 7: We place four LVDT on the corners of raft in vertical direction and connect them
to data logger.

Step 8 : Similarly we place load cell on the raft and connect it to data logger.

Step 9: After that standing rod was placed on the load cell.

Step 10: Data logger was connected to laptop using MATLAB software.

Step 11: We press start button and thus start placing load slowly.

Step 12: After putting all the load (512 kg )we press stop button, and thus the model test
completed here.

21
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Experimental Testing
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Fig. LVDT Connected to Raft

22
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Experimental Testing
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Fig. Helical Pile Raft Model Test

23
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Numerical Modelling
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Numerical Modelling

24
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Numerical Modelling
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Researchers has used several finite element software’s like

• ABAQUS (Elsherbiny and Naggar 2013, Fahmy and Naggar 2017),
• LPILE Plus 5 (Sakr 2009),
• Plaxis 3D Foundation (Livneh and Naggar 2008),
• Plaxis 2D (Salhi and Deyrat 2013, Rawat and Gupta 2017),
• Plaxis 3D (George 2017, Spagnoli 2019)

But in this study, we have used Plaxis-3D because;

• It is open access

• User friendly

• Geotechnical related

25
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Numerical Modelling
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Modelling Phases:

In PLAXIS we have five phases;

• Soil model phase
• Structure model phase
• Meshing phase
• Flow condition phase
• Staged construction phase

In our analysis we used all the phases except flow condition phase (as this phase is
used when we have to encounter multiple phreatic levels.

26
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Numerical Modelling
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

1. Soil Model Phase

We assign soil properties to the model. Hardening soil model (HS) was selected because the HS
Model is an advanced soil model that is able to generate more realistic results than Mohr Columbs
The hardening soil gives the better simulations.
Soil Properties
Model Type Hardening Soil (HS)
Drainage Type Drained
Length (in) 48
General properties
Width (in) 36
Depth (in) 60
Unit weight (lbf/in3) 0.05894
E50 (lbf/in )
ref 2
2465.64
Eoedref (lbf/in2) 2465.64
Stiffness parameters
Eurref (lbf/in2) 7396.92
m (Power) 0.5
Cohesion (c’) 0°
Angle of internal
34°
Strength parameters friction (φ’)
Dilatancy angle (ψ) 4°
R-inter 0.71

Table. Soil Properties (Jamil,2021)

27
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Numerical Modelling
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Structural Properties
2. Structure Model Phase
Material Used Galvanized Iron
Type of Material Elastic
In this phase raft, helix and piles Type of Model Plate Element
were modelled as a plate Shaft Young’s modulus (lbf/in2) 10.01 × 106
element. Unit Weight (lbf/in3) 0.09837
Poisson’s Ratio 0.29
We select all the objects and Thickness (in) 0.25
Material Used Galvanized Iron
assign positive and negative
Type of Material Elastic
interfaces in order to stimulate Type of Model Plate Element
soil-structure interaction. Helix Young’s modulus (lbf/in2) 10.01 × 106
Unit Weight (lbf/in3) 0.09837
We applied uniform surface load Poisson’s Ratio 0.29
Thickness (in) 0.1
of 7.805 lbf/in2 (5000N) in this Material used Aluminum
phase on the raft. Type of material Elastic
Type of model Plate element
Raft Young modulus (lbf/in2) 10.01 × 106
Thickness (in) 0.9996 (1)
Unit Weight (lbf/in3) 0.09780
Poisson’s Ratio 0.31

Table. Structural Properties (Jamil,2021)

28
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Numerical Modelling
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

2. Structure Model Phase

Fig. Four Single Helical Pile Raft (SHPR) Model in Plaxis 3D.

29
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Numerical Modelling
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

2. Structure Model Phase

Fig. Four Single Helical Pile Raft Model showing positive and negative interface in Plaxis
3D.
30
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Numerical Modelling
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

3. Meshing Phase:

In order to execute finite element computations, the geometry must be divided into
small elements. A well-developed mesh not only produces more realistic results. It can
also aid in the reduction of calculating time.

Fig. Meshing of Soil Model Fig. Meshing of Structural Model

31
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Numerical Modelling
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

4. Stage Construction Phase:

We did our analysis in three stages;

Initial stage: We checked soil model.
Construction stage: We checked soil model and pile raft model.
Vertical load stage: In this stage we checked soil model, pile raft model and vertical
load.

(a) (b)
(c)

Fig. (a) Initial Stage (b) Construction Stage (c) Vertical Load Stage
32
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Numerical Modelling
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

After stage construction we run analysis and get output results.

Fig. Total Displacement of 4-SHPR

33
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Results/Discussion
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Results/Discussion

34
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Results/Discussion (Experimental Data)
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

4-Pile Raft Configuration

We computed that with the addition of helix to conventional piles, settlement reduction was
30.64%. However, in case of double helical pile settlement reduction was 37.48 %.

4-Piled Raft Subjected to Vertical Load

6000

5000

4000
Load (N)

3000

2000

1000

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Settlement (mm)

4 pile raft (Conventional) 4 pile raft (Single Helix) 4 pile raft (Double Helix)

Fig. Curve of 4-Piled Raft Models Subjected to Vertical load

35
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Results/Discussion (Experimental Data)
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

6-Pile Raft Configuration

Similarly we observe that for 5000 N vertical load, settlement for conventional
piles was 6.71 mm, however for single helix it was 4.33 mm and 4 mm for double
helix.
6-Piled Raft Subjected to Vertical Load
6000

5000

4000
Load (N)

3000

2000

1000

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

Settlement (mm)

6 pile raft (conventional) 6 pile raft (single helix) 6 pile raft (double helix)

Fig. Curve of 6-Piled Raft Models Subjected to Vertical load

36
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Results/Discussion (Experimental Data)
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

9-Pile Raft Configuration

9-Piled Raft Subjected to Vertical Load

6000

5000

4000
Load (N)

3000

2000

1000

0
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50

Settlement (mm)

9 pile raft (Conventional) 9 pile raft (single helix) 9 pile raft (Double Helix)

Fig. Curve of 9-Piled Raft Models Subjected to Vertical load

37
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Results/Discussion (Experimental Data)
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Settlement Comparison of Model Test

Settlement Comparison of Model Tests

9

8 7.63

7 6.71

6
Settlement (mm)

5.28 5.27
5 4.77 CPR
4.33
4.00 SHPR
4 DHPR
3.33
2.94
3

0
4-Pile Raft Configuration 6-Pile Raft Configuration 9-Pile Raft Configuration

Fig. Settlement Comparison of Model Test

38
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Results/Discussion (Experimental Vs Numerical Data)
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

We found that our numerical results match clearly with our experimental results. The closeness of our
experimental and numerical results shows the accuracy and care taken during model testing. It also verifies
further that Plaxis 3D can be used successfully for the numerical modelling of helical piles.

4-Pile Raft Configuration

4-Single Helical Pile Raft (SHPR) 4-Double Helical Pile Raft (DHPR)
6000 6000

5000 5000

Load (N)
4000 4000
Load (N)

3000 3000
2000
2000
1000
1000
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Settlement (mm)
Settlement (mm)
Experimental Analysis Numerical Analysis
Expermental Analysis Numerical Analysis

Fig. Experimental vs Numerical Result of 4-Piled Raft Models Test

39
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Results/Discussion (Experimental Vs Numerical Data)
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

6-Pile Raft Configuration

6-Single Helical Pile Raft (SHPR)

6000

5000

4000
Load (N)

3000

2000

1000

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 6-Double Helical Pile Raft (DHPR)
Settlement (mm) 6000

Experimental analysis Numerical Analysis 5000

4000

Load (N) 3000

2000

1000

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

Settlement (mm)
Experimental Analysis Numerical Analysis

Fig. Experimental vs Numerical Result of 6-Piled Raft Models Test

40
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Results/Discussion (Experimental Vs Numerical Data)
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

9-Pile Raft Configuration

9-Single Helical Pile Raft (SHPR)
6000

5000

4000
Load (N)

3000

2000

1000
9-Double Helical Pile Raft (DHPR)
0 6000
0 1 2 3 4 5
5000
Settlement (mm)
4000
Experimental analysis Numerical Analysis

Load (N)
3000

2000

1000

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5

Settlement (mm)
Experimental Analysis Numerical Analysis

Fig. Experimental vs Numerical Result of 9-Piled Raft Models Test

41
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Results/Discussion
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Conclusion

1. On finding the average of all the three cases (4,6,9) we computed that with the
addition of single helix to conventional piles, 34.3% settlement can be
reduced.

2. Similarly for Double Helical Pile Raft (DHPR) this reduction was figured to be
41% on average, which state that Increasing the number of helix increase the
axial capacity of helical piles more.

3. Plaxis 3D can be used successfully for the Numerical Modelling of helical

piles

42
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
Results/Discussion
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Future Recommendations

1. We have studied only one parameter i.e., number of helical piles, there are
others parameters (like spacing of helix, helix diameter, shaft diameter,
spacing between piles etc.), which affect the axial capacity of helical piles.

2. Grouted Helical Pile (GHP) should be studied for greater axial capacity as
compared to non-grouted helical piles.

3. Tension capacity of helical piles should be studied.

43
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
References
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

• Foundation Construction Cost Comparison: Helical Pile, Driven Pile, and CIP Pile, link:
file:///C:/Users/HP%20PC/Downloads/cost_comparison_engage_report_final_version.pdf

• Howard A. Perko,2009. Helical Piles A Practical Guide to Design and Installation.

• J. S. Pack, "Design of Helical Piles for Heavily Loaded Structures," in American Society of Civil Engineers, Denver, Colorado,
United States, 2000.

• D. Vito, "Highly loaded helical piles in compression and tension applications: A case study of two projects," in Pan-Am CGS
Geotechnical Conference, Ontario, Canada, 2011.

• Sakr M (2011) Installation and performance characteristics of high-capacity helical piles in cohesionless soil. DFI Journal The
Journal of the Deep Foundations Institute, 5(1): 39-57.

• Bushra S. Albusoda, 2017. Performance assessment of single and group of helical piles embedded in expansive soil. Geo-
Engineering (2017) 8:25.

• Ratna Dewi, 2020. Effect of Helical Geometry on the Axial Compressive Capacity. International Journal of Innovative Science
and Research Technology.

• Rawat, Saurabh, and Ashok Gupta. 2017. "Numerical modelling of pullout of helical soil nail." Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering 9 (4).

• G.. Spagnoli; K.. Gavin, “Helical Piles as a Novel Foundation System for Offshore Piled Facilities”, Abu Dhabi International
Petroleum Exhibition and Conference, 2017.

• Balu E. George, Shailesh R. Gandhi et al “Numerical analysis of helical piles in cohesionless soil”, International Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, 2019.

44
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
References
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session
• Ashok Kumar Gupta, 2017.Numerical modelling of pullout of helical soil nail. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical
Engineering 9 (2017) 648-658.

• Fahmy A and Naggar MHE (2017) Axial Performance of Helical Tapered Piles in Sand. Geotechnical and Geological
Engineering 35(1).

• Elsherbiny Z and Naggar MHE (2013) Axial compressive capacity of helical piles from field tests and numerical study.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal 50(12).

• Li W and Deng L (2019) Axial load tests and numerical modeling of single-helix piles in cohesive and cohesionless soils.
Acta Geotechnica 14(1).

• Sakr, Mohammed. 2009. "Performance of helical piles in oil sand." Canadian Geotechnical Journal 46: 1046–1061.

• Livneh, Ben, and M. Hesham El Naggar. 2008. "Axial testing and numerical modeling of square shaft helical piles under
compressive and tensile loading." Can. Geotech. J (45): 1142–1155

• Salhi, L., and C. Deyrat. 2013. "Numerical Modeling of Single helical pile behavior under compressive loading in sand."
Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering (18): 4319-4338.

• Jamil, Irfan. 2021. Response of piled raft foundation : An Experimental and Numerical study. Ph.D. Thesis, University of
Engineering and Technology Peshawar

45
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar
References
Members Problem Literature Work Plan Experimental Numerical Results/ References
Profile Statement Review Testing Modelling Discussion Q/A Session

Thank You

Any Question(s) ?

46
Department of civil engineering, Uet Peshawar