## 4 Conclusions  
The following are the main conclusions of the study:  
* Comparing the pile group and pile raft responses under the same vertical and lateral load with the same pile configuration, it is evident that the piled raft stiffness is more in all cases because of the raft contribution in addition to the piles. * By comparing the responses of the piled raft and the pile group with the same number of piles under the same vertical and lateral load, it was concluded that the piled raft response to the lateral and vertical load was much stiffer than the pile group response. The lateral deflection and vertical settlement of the piled raft were less than those of the pile group with the same pile configuration. This effective response of the piled raft to the vertical and lateral loads was due to the raft contribution in resisting \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Type** & **Stiffness Difference** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Piled Raft** \\ **displacement (mm)** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Pile Group** \\ **Stiffement (mm)** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Maximum Vertical Load (N)** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
4-Piled raft vs. 4-Pile group & 4.50/1.60 = 2.81 & 1.60 & 4.50 & 1920 \\ \hline
6-Piled raft vs. 6-Pile group & 1.34 & 3.01 & 4.02 & 2786 \\ \hline
9-Piled raft vs. 9-Pile group & 2.52 & 5.14 & 12.97 & 5250 \\ \hline
13-Piled raft vs. 13-Pile group & 1.65 & 5.62 & 9.28 & 5250 \\ \hline
17-Piled raft vs. 17-Pile group & 1.40 & 4.60 & 6.45 & 5250 \\ \hline
21-Piled raft vs. 21-Pile group & 1.57 & 4.00 & 6.28 & 5250 \\ \hline
25-Piled raft vs. 25-Pile group & 1.27 & 3.61 & 4.60 & 5250 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Stiffness difference in pile Group vs. pile raft under vertical load. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Type** & **Stiffness Difference** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Piled Raft** \\ **displacement (mm)** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Pile Group** \\ **displacement (mm)** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Maximum Lateral Load (N)** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
4-Piled raft vs. 4-Pile group & 39.16 & 0.12 & 4.70 & 462 \\ \hline
6-Piled raft vs. 6-Pile group & 5.13 & 0.39 & 2.00 & 600 \\ \hline
9-Piled raft vs. 9-Pile group & 5.80 & 0.25 & 1.45 & 600 \\ \hline
13-Piled raft vs. 13-Pile group & 6.20 & 0.42 & 2.60 & 693 \\ \hline
17-Piled raft vs. 17-Pile group & 2.29 & 2.67 & 6.11 & 1520 \\ \hline
21-Piled raft vs. 21-Pile group & 2.51 & 2.43 & 6.09 & 1448 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Stiffness difference in pile group vs. pile raft under lateral load. Figure 27: Effect of number of piles on contribution of raft to lateral loads in piled raft system. the vertical and lateral loads. It was found that, unlike the pile group, the piled raft provides considerably high stiffness to both types of loads, and the difference between the stiffness of both systems decreases as the number of piles increases. Moreover, with the increase in the number of piles, the vertical and lateral contribution of the raft decreases. It was observed from the results of the piled raft tests under the vertical and lateral load that an increase in the number of piles causes a decrease in the vertical and lateral contribution of the raft. The increased vertical contribution causes an increase in the stiffness of the soil beneath the raft, which leads to an increase in the lateral contribution of the raft. Conceptualization, I.A., M.A. and M.M.S.S. ; Data curation, I.J. and W.U. ; Formal analysis, I.J., W.U., M.A. and A.M.; Funding acquisition, M.M.S.S. ; Investigation, I.J., I.A., M.A. and A.M.; Methodology, I.J., M.M.S.S. and A.M.; Project administration, I.A. and M.M.S.S. ; Resources, M.M.S.S. ; Validation, W.U. ; Writing--original draft, I.J. and W.U. ; Writing--review & editing, I.A., M.A., M.M.S.S. and A.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.