<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.7//EN" "https://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/ncbi/pubmed/in/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>Papyrus Press</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Advance Researches in Civil Engineering</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2645-7229</Issn>
				<Volume>6</Volume>
				<Issue>4</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>12</Month>
					<Day>01</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Comparative Analysis of Embedded Beam Rows and Volume Elements in the Modeling of a Pile-Supported Bridge Pier</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle></VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>49</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>59</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">250672</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.30469/arce.2026.571519.1093</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>EN</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Mohsen</FirstName>
					<LastName>Seyedi</LastName>
<Affiliation>Department of Civil Engineering, School of Engineering and Architecture, Altınbaş University, 34218 Istanbul, Turkey</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Hassan Abdulmawlay Hassan</FirstName>
					<LastName>Salama</LastName>
<Affiliation>Department of Civil Engineering, School of Engineering and Architecture, Altınbaş University, 34218 Istanbul, Turkey</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2026</Year>
					<Month>01</Month>
					<Day>09</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>This study investigates the differences between modeling piles as Embedded Beam Rows and Volume Elements in supporting a pier foundation under dynamic loading. Using PLAXIS2D, the system was analyzed under uni-directional and bi-directional excitations derived from the Northridge earthquake. The results show that both modeling approaches captured the vertical load transfer mechanism; however, the foundation settlement in the Volume Element model was found to be about five times larger due to its explicit representation of pile-soil contact, allowing for soil yielding and nonlinear deformation. The Embedded Beam Row model, using simplified linear springs, produced a stiffer response and smaller settlements. Additionally, the horizontal acceleration at the tower head was higher than at the foundation, mainly due to dynamic amplification and the tower’s flexible cantilever behavior. The study highlights the strengths and limitations of each modeling technique, offering insights for future seismic analyses of pile-supported structures.</Abstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Soil-pile-structure interaction</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Embedded Beam Row</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Volume Element</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">finite element modeling</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Plaxis2d</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://www.arce.ir/article_250672_043108a1bf7538b2f49e9beaf9e1c396.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
