Modelling bored pile row in multi-layered soil through Embedded Beam Row element in Plaxis 2D

Dear Muhammad,

I can try to assist here.

1. This is something only you can answer as it involves knowing the project and how you expect your piles to behave. Do you expect any lateral resistance or not? Then, you can understand whether you need to configure this property or not. If the piles are mostly working in compression, then you can run a test case where you do not include any lateral resistance and see if the results deviate from any data you have from this or another similar project.

Note that by implementation the embedded beam is considered working primarily under axial loading. Any lateral behaviour is considered as a secondary effect due to soil movement in that direction and the special interface the element has.
You can also check this validation: https://communities.bentley.com/products/geotech-analysis/w/plaxis-soilvision-wiki/46081/validation-of-plaxis-embedded-piles-for-lateral-loading3

2. Unlimited means that PLAXIS will not apply any resistance in the case of the lateral direction. That is the default option in which you disregard this behaviour.

3. The logic is the same as when working with an interface in any other case. What would be the value you would use? This highly depends on the materials involved, of course, such as concrete and sand or concrete and clay, etc..

4. If you determine the axial skin resistance manually then you directly define the behaviour of the embedded beam, so the Rinter is not considered. You can confirm this with a simple test in which you use Rinter = 1.0 and one with Rinter < 1.0.

Dear Muhammad,

I can try to assist here.

1. This is something only you can answer as it involves knowing the project and how you expect your piles to behave. Do you expect any lateral resistance or not? Then, you can understand whether you need to configure this property or not. If the piles are mostly working in compression, then you can run a test case where you do not include any lateral resistance and see if the results deviate from any data you have from this or another similar project.

Note that by implementation the embedded beam is considered working primarily under axial loading. Any lateral behaviour is considered as a secondary effect due to soil movement in that direction and the special interface the element has.
You can also check this validation: https://communities.bentley.com/products/geotech-analysis/w/plaxis-soilvision-wiki/46081/validation-of-plaxis-embedded-piles-for-lateral-loading3

2. Unlimited means that PLAXIS will not apply any resistance in the case of the lateral direction. That is the default option in which you disregard this behaviour.

3. The logic is the same as when working with an interface in any other case. What would be the value you would use? This highly depends on the materials involved, of course, such as concrete and sand or concrete and clay, etc..

4. If you determine the axial skin resistance manually then you directly define the behaviour of the embedded beam, so the Rinter is not considered. You can confirm this with a simple test in which you use Rinter = 1.0 and one with Rinter < 1.0.

Hi Stefanos, 

I see, thank you very much for your clarification, it's very clear. In the case of axial skin resistance, I think it would be a better approach to determine the axial skin resistance manually then. I wish you a nice weekend.

Regards,

M. Rayyan