Finite Element Study of Using Concrete Tie Beams to Reduce Differential

Settlement Between Footings

AMIN H. ALMASRI* AND ZIAD N. TAQIEDDIN**
*Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, J ordan University of Science and Technology,
Irbid, J ordan. Email: ahalmasri@just.edu.jo, corresponding author.
**Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Department, Applied Science University, Amman, J ordan.
Email: z_taqieddin@asu.edu.jo

Abstract:- Buildings footings are usually susceptible to soil settlement; uniform or differential. The latter
settlement is the one that causes higher stresses in building elements, and is classified as a main reason
for structural failures. Some codes suggest using tie beams to increase structural integrity and reduce
differential settlement. Hence, this paper investigates how tie beams between footings can improve
structural resistance to settlement using finite element analysis of three dimensional structural models. In
addition, seismic analysis is run to investigate tie beams behavior under earthquake loading in enhancing
structural performance of foundation system. Results indicate that tie beams can reduce differential
settlement greatly under both static and dynamic conditions.
Key-words: Tie Beams, Finite Element, Seismic Analysis, Differential Settlement, Earthquakes

1 Introduction
Soil is usually considered a heterogeneous material
with settlement behavior that is hard to be predicted
with any great accuracy. Since soil is a relatively
weak material compared to building materials such
as concrete, steel, and wood; footings are required to
transfer and distribute gravity loads of buildings to
soil layers. This load can be different from one
footing to another, causing a differential settlement
between the different footings. One practical way to
improve settlement resistance is to increase the
structural stiffness in the vertical direction by using
reinforced concrete tie beams. These beams usually
connect isolated footings and sometimes even strip
footings as shown in Fig 1.
Literature shows no closed form analysis
and design procedures when dealing with tie beams.
But despite that using tie beams is generally a
common practice rather than a structural
requirement, some codes and standards suggest
using them in specific conditions. For example,
Indian Standards IS 1893 (2002) state that spread
footings or pile caps shall be interconnected with
ties in some specific seismic zones for soil types
other than rocks. In addition, these ties shall be able
to carry an axial force (tension and compression)
equal to a seismic factor A
h
/4 times the larger of the
column or pile cap load. Massachusetts state
building code requires that all ties shall be capable
of resisting, in tension or compression, a force equal
to 10% of the larger column dead plus live load. The
force to be resisted by the ties in International
Building Code 2009 equals to the lesser of the
product of the larger footing design gravity load
times a seismic coefficient, S
DS
, divided by 10 and
25 percent of the smaller footing design gravity
Mathematical Methods and Techniques in Engineering and Environmental Science
ISBN: 978-1-61804-046-6 112
load. FEMA requires individual pile caps, drilled
piers, or caissons to be interconnected by ties
capable of carrying, in tension or compression, a
force equal to the product of the larger pile cap or
column load times a seismic factor S divided by 4.
Heidebrecht and Rutenberg [2] used the
travelling wave assumption to propose a simple
structural model to evaluate the axial force acting on
tie beams interconnecting spread footings due to
differential ground motion. The approach was
intended to find the percent of gravity load to be the
design axial forces on tie beams. The axial force
was rather modest, while shear forces between
footing and soil may be quite large depending on
maximum column displacements and superstructure
rigidity.
Thevendrana and Wanga [3] obtained a
solution, by two independent approaches, for the
optimal cross-sectional area of a simply supported
tie-beam that minimizes the maximum deflection,
subject to a volume constraint and the longitudinal
elongation of the tie-beam not exceeding a given
value.

2 Finite Element Analysis
Full three dimensional models of nine footings are
created. Every footing supports one column and the
nine columns support a solid slab that carries
distributed load of 50 kN/m
2
. Every footing has an
area proportioned to the load that is carried. Hence,
the center footing will have twice the area of an
edge footing, which in turn has twice the area of a
corner footing. Beneath the footing is a large soil
layer that is fixed at the lower surface and carries
the footings at top. Dimensions of all elements are
presented in Table 1. In order to simplify analysis,
both materials (foundation concrete and soil) are
assumed to be homogeneous, with properties listed
in Table 2. Two structural models are constructed as
shown in Fig 2; one without tie beams, and the other
with tie beams. The models are meshed using an 8-
node linear brick with reduced integration and
hourglass control, with total number of elements of
53822 and 57472 for model without tie beams and
with tie beams, respectively. Sweep meshing
technique is used to construct the models where
inter-element continuity is ensured. Full contact is
assumed between the soil elements and footings
elements. Results of displacement and stresses are
obtained through the center line of the models as
illustrated in Fig 3. The lower surface of soil layer is
fixed against translations and rotations as a
boundary condition.
After static analysis, seismic one is
performed using Koyna earthquake horizontal and
vertical acceleration record, as shown in Fig 4. Only
first 10 seconds of the record is considered in the
analysis to reduce the time needed for the
simulation, where peak acceleration reaches about
0.4g.

Table 1: Model geometry and dimensions
Geometry Depth or
height (m)
Length (m) X
width (m)
Soil layer 4 30 X 30
Center footing 0.5 2 X 2
Edge footing 0.5 1.4 X 1.4
Corner footing 0.5 1 X 1
Columns 3 0.5 X 0.5
Tie beams 0.5 8.55 X 0.3
Slab 0.25 20 X 20

Table 2: Material properties
Property Foundation
Concrete
Soil
Modulus of
elasticity (GPa)
25 0.04
Poisson ratio 0.15 0.33
Unit weight
(kN/m
3
)
24 17






Strip
footing
Isolated
footings
Tie beams
Mathematical Methods and Techniques in Engineering and Environmental Science
ISBN: 978-1-61804-046-6 113

Figure 1: Tie beams between footings

(a)

(b)
Figure 2: Structural models (a) without tie beams,
and (b) with tie beams

Figure 3: Path line where settlement and stresses are
obtained

(a)

(b)
Figure 4: (a) Horizontal and (b) vertical ground
acceleration record of Koyna earthquake.

3 Results and discussion
Vertical displacement of the structure is
illustrated in Fig 5-a, and normal stress is illustrated
in Fig 5-b under static loading along the centerline
of the model. Results show that using tie beams
reduces both absolute settlement and differential
settlement. Total settlement of middle footing
without using tie beams is about 0.043m compared
with 0.027m for the edge footing, with differential
settlement of 0.016m. This is reduced to 0.002m
differential settlement when using tie beams in
addition to reducing total settlement to about
0.025m or 42% for the center footing. On the other
hand, the variation between normal stress under the
different footings is almost negligible. Using tie
beams reduces the maximum normal stress under
footings by about 30%, but increases the stress
between the footings since it applies some pressure
on soil. It should be noted that the columns transfer
some moments from the slab to the footings, which
introduces some nonuniformity to the stress beneth
the footings. The vertical displacement contour is
shown in Fig 6 for structural model with tie beams
for illustration purposes.

0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0 2 4 6 8 10
H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l

A
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
,

g
Time(sec)
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0 2 4 6 8 10
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l

A
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

g
Time(sec)
Mathematical Methods and Techniques in Engineering and Environmental Science
ISBN: 978-1-61804-046-6 114

(a)

(b)
Figure 5: (a) Settlement of footings and (b) normal
stress under footings with and without using tie
beams under static conditions

Figure 6: Settlement contour for half of the model

Seismic analysis is carried out using Konya
horizontal and vertical ground acceleration records.
Normal stress along the centerline of the models is
obtained with time as shown in Fig 7. The results
show that normal stress oscillates highly during
earthquake in the absence of tie beams. This
oscillation is reduced significantly when using tie
beam as illustrated in Fig 7-b, in addition to
reducing the normal stress value itself. Normal
stress envelope (maximum and minimum) due to
earthquake is shown in Fig 8, where the difference
between the maximum and minimum stress under
footings is clear to be about 400 kPa when no ties
are used, compared to less than 50 kPa when tie
beams are present. It is obvious that tie beams
eliminate the effect of earthquake to a large degree
and keep the stress envelope close to the static
results.

(a)

(b)
Figure 7: Normal stress along distance during
earthquake (a) without and (b) with tie beams

0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
,

(
c
m
)
Distance,(m)
withouttiebeams
withtiebeams
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
N
o
r
m
a
l

S
t
r
e
s
s
,

(
K
P
a
)

Distance,(m)
withouttiebeams
withtiebeams
1
0
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
T
im
e
(s
e
c
)
3
0
2
5
2
0
1
5
1
0
5
D
is
ta
n
c
e
(m
)
0
0
250
250
500
500
750
750
1000
1000
1250
1250
N
o
r
m
a
l

S
t
r
e
s
s

(
K
P
a
)
N
o
r
m
a
l

S
t
r
e
s
s

(
K
P
a
)
1
0
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
T
im
e
(s
e
c
)
3
0
2
5
2
0
1
5
1
0
5
D
is
ta
n
c
e
(m
)
0
0
50
50
100
100
150
150
200
200
250
250
300
300
350
350
400
400
450
450
500
500
N
o
r
m
a
l

s
t
r
e
s
s

(
K
P
a
)
N
o
r
m
a
l

s
t
r
e
s
s

(
K
P
a
)
Mathematical Methods and Techniques in Engineering and Environmental Science
ISBN: 978-1-61804-046-6 115

(a)

(b)
Figure 8: Normal stress envelope during earthquake
(a) without and (b) with tie beams

4 Conclusions
Tie beams have been used to increase the
integrity of foundation systems for a long time. Its
effect in improving foundation resistance to
settlement was investigated under static and
dynamic loading. It was found that tie beams can
really reduce both total and differential settlements
under static loading. However, bigger advantage for
tie beams was found under seismic conditions,
where it can reduce the effect of earthquakes
significantly, which is the reason why they are a
requirement in building codes for buildings in high
seismic activity zones.

5 References
[1] The massachusetts state building code, users
guide, to 780 cmr, sixth edition
[2] A. C. Heidebrecht and A. Rutenberg,
Evaluation of foundation tie requirements in
seismic design, Canadian J ournal of Civil
Engineering, 1993, 20:73-81, 10.1139/l93-008
[3] V. Thevendrana and C.M. Wanga, Optimal
design of tie-beams, International J ournal of Solids
and Structures, Volume 22, Issue 11, 1986, Pages
1343-1356

0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 10 20 30
N
o
r
m
a
l

s
t
r
e
s
s

(
K
P
a
)
Distance(m)
min
max
static
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 10 20 30
N
o
r
m
a
l

s
t
r
e
s
s

(
K
P
a
)
Distance(m)
min
max
static
Mathematical Methods and Techniques in Engineering and Environmental Science
ISBN: 978-1-61804-046-6 116