Effect of Eccentric Loading On Footings PDF

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)
Volume 9, Issue 3, March 2018, pp. 200–220, Article ID: IJCIET_09_03_023

Available online at http://http://www.iaeme.com/ijciet/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=9&IType=3
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316
© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed
EFFECT OF ECCENTRIC LOADING ON

FOOTINGS CONNECTED WITH TIE BEAMS
Elsamny M.K
Civil Engineering Department, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt
Ezz-Eldeen H.A
Elbatal S.A
Elsayed M.M
Faculty of Engineering, Sinai University, North Sinai- ElArish-El Masaid, Egypt
ABSTRACT
The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of thickness and width of tie beams
on footings under eccentric loading. The chosen model contains 16 footings connected
with tie beams. However the effect of thickness and width of tie beams on vertical and
horizontal displacement as well as the contact pressure, moment and shear have been
investigated. The footing dimensions are (2.0*2.0) m for corner footings, (2.50*2.50)
m for edge footings and (3.0*3.0) m for middle footings). The model contains three
critical footings with dimensions as follows: - (2.50 * 1.50) m, (2.0 * 1.0) and (1.0 * 1.
0) m respectively. Isolated footings have fixed depth (D) =0.5m connected with tie
beams with variable width (b=0.6D, 0.7D, 0.8D, 0.9D and 1.0D) m and thickness
(h=1.0D, 1.5D, 2.0D and 2.5D). A finite element package of the PLAXIS 3D-
foundation version 15 has been used to simulate theoretically the model. All of the
above assumptions have used with variable depth of footing (Df =0.0D, 0.5D, 1.0D
and 1.5D). For eccentric loading it was found that the vertical displacement
(settlement) and horizontal displacement under footings connected with tie beams
decreases with increasing the thickness and width of tie beams by about (20 to 40)%.
The settlement becomes almost uniform along axis and increasing the thickness and
width of tie beam decrease the differential settlement. Also it was found that the values
of the total normal stress (contact pressure) decrease with increasing width of tie
beam and tie beam thickness by about (30 to 40)%. It was also found the bending
moment as well as shear force values decrease with increasing the thickness and
width of tie beams by about (30 to 40)%.
Key words: Tie beam, Settlement, Contact pressure, Plaxis, Finite element, Eccentric,
Footing
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 200 [email protected]

Effect of Eccentric Loading on Footings Connected with Tie Beams
Cite this Article: Elsamny M.K, Ezz-Eldeen H.A, Elbatal S.A and Elsayed M.M,
Effect of Eccentric Loading on Footings Connected with Tie Beams. International
Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 9(3), 2018, pp. 200-220.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=9&IType=3
1. INTRODUCTION
In civil engineering constructions, foundations may be subjected to eccentric loads. Footing
located at property lines and machine foundation are some examples where the foundations
experience eccentric loading. If the load is eccentric-inclined, the stress distribution below the
footing will be non-uniform causing unequal settlement at the two edges. Tie beams resting
directly on soil are widely used to connect shallow footings, including strap or eccentric
footing, in two directions. Practically, strap beam for eccentric footings are used with other tie
beams. However, this system of beams and footings is considered as rigid and must be treated
as one entity, where the tie beams play important role for redistribution of column loads
between footings through it. El-Kasaby, E.A.A. (1993) [6] investigated the behavior of strap
footings with tie-beam resting on soil. The effects of soil flexibility and beam stiffness on
contact pressure, settlement and bending moment of strap foundation was presented. The
finite difference technique was used and the elastic subgrade reaction theory was applied to
study and solve the footing beam system. Partra, C. R., et all. (2005) [10] reported the results
of model loading tests performed on an eccentrically loaded strip foundation supported by
multi-layered geogrid-reinforced sand. Only one type of geogrid and sand at one relative
density of compaction were considered. Based on the laboratory test results, an empirical
relationship for the reduction factor was developed. This relationship can be used to estimate
the ultimate bearing capacity under eccentric loading. Almasmoum A.A. (2009) [1] studied
the influence of strap beams connected with eccentric footing and tie beams connected with
centric interior footing on the contact pressure. The percentage of column loads transmitted
by tie beams and the percentage ratio of vertical displacement to length of tie beam as well as
maximum percentage ratio of differential displacement to length of tie beam were
investigated. Sadoglu, E., et al. (2009) [13] investigated the decrease of the ultimate loads
with increasing eccentricity and compare the experimental results with commonly used
approaches. An experimental system was produced and used to run the tests. The
experimental system consists of a tank, model footing, sand, loading mechanism, etc. A single
woven geotextile sheet was placed horizontally below the footing‟s base at a depth of half of
the footing‟s width. The measured decreases in ultimate loads with increasing eccentricities in
the unreinforced tests within the core were in good agreement with Meyerhof‟s approach,
while customary analysis is a little on the conservative side. Outside the core, Meyerhof‟s
approach is on the conservative side in this case. Nawghare, S.M., et all. (2010) [9]
investigated the bearing capacity of eccentrically loaded footing. Footings of different size
and shape were used for testing. Testing for bearing capacity of centrally loaded footing and
then for eccentrically loaded footing with different „e/B‟ ratio was carried out. For every
footing bearing capacity and settlement were found out for central as well as eccentric
loading. These results of central and eccentric loading were compared with each other for
same footing. The results of different footings were also compared for central and eccentric
loading. By comparing these results effect of eccentricity, size and shape of footing on
bearing capacity were investigated. Elsawaf, M. and Nazir, A. (2012) [8] presented an
experimental study of the behavior of an eccentrically loaded model ring footing resting on a
compacted replaced layer of soil that overlies on extended layer of loose sand. Load
configuration was designed to simulate ring footing under vertical loads and overturning
moment caused by lateral loads. The effect of the depth and relative density of the replaced
sand layer were investigated. The results indicate that the behavior of an eccentrically loaded

Elsamny M.K, Ezz-Eldeen H.A, Elbatal S.A and Elsayed M.M
ring footing significantly improved with increasing the depth and the relative density of the
replaced compacted sad layer. Patra et al. (2012) [12] conducted a number of laboratory
model tests to determine the ultimate bearing capacity of strip foundation on sand subjected to
vertical and inclined eccentric loads. Based on some of those laboratory test results, an
empirical relationship has been developed to estimate the average settlement of the foundation
while being subjected to an average allowable eccentric load per unit area, where the applied
load is vertical. The empirical relationships presented were for embedment ratio Df/B varying
from zero to one, and the eccentricity ratio e/B varying from zero to 0·15. Atalar, C., et al
(2013) [2] determined the bearing capacity of shallow strip foundation subjected to
eccentrically inclined load rested on dense sand. The embedment ratio (ratio of the depth of
embedment Dƒ to the width of the foundation B) was varied from zero to one. Load
eccentricity (e) was varied from zero to 0.15B and the load inclination with the vertical (α)
was varied from zero to 20 degrees. An empirical nondimensional reduction factor was
developed. This reduction factor was the ratio of the bearing capacity of the foundation
subjected to an eccentrically inclined load (average eccentrically inclined load per unit area)
to the bearing capacity of the foundation subjected to a centric vertical load. Dhar, P., et al.
(2013) [4] presented the results of laboratory model tests on behavior of a model footing
resting on sand under eccentric – inclined load. Initially, the behavior of footing subjected to
axial load was studied to compare with the shape factors at the surface footings. The influence
of shape of footing on ultimate load carried capacity due to the different shape of model
footings were investigated using bearing capacity ratio (BCR) a non-dimensional factor. The
load settlement characteristics of footings of different shapes rested on the surface of sand of
same area were also investigated through the load settlement curves. Pusadkar, S.S., et al
(2016) [11] evaluated the effects of eccentricity and inclination of load along with eccentric-
inclined load on performance of square footing resting over sand. A laboratory load tests were
conducted on the model footing with eccentric load and/or inclined load. The results showed
that the bearing capacity decreases with increasing the load eccentricity and load inclination.
Dhatrak, A.I., et al (2016) [5] presented the results of laboratory model tests on behavior of a
model footing resting on sand under eccentric load. The ultimate load carrying capacity of a
circular and ring footing resting on surface dense sand was investigated. The conventional
method of footing design requires that footing must possess sufficient safety against failure
and settlement was kept within the allowable value. Benayad, S., et al (2017) [3] examined
the stresses distribution and contact pressure underneath eccentric footing subjected to the
variation of its thickness and eccentricity using 2D finite element modeling. The FEM
analysis was carried out using ABAQUS software program. The results indicated that stresses
were higher along edges of footing than at center when footing is subjected to the variation of
its thickness and eccentricity. The increase in footing thickness caused a decrease of
maximum contact pressure and an increase in contact area. However, it could found that the
maximum contact pressure increased proportionally with the increase in eccentricity, while
contact surface decreased. Elsamny, M. K., et al (2017) [7] investigated the behavior of two
isolated footings of different dimensions connected with tie beam. The dimensions of one
footing were fixed. The width of the two footings was fixed (B=1.0m). The thicknesses of the
two footings have variable (t=0.3B,0.4B,0.5Band0.6B). The tie beam between footings have
variable lengths (Ltie=0.5B,1.0B,1.5B and 2.0B). The height of the tie beams was variable
(h=1.0t,1.5t,2.0t and 2.5t) and the width of tie beam was fixed (b=0.25m). All of the above
assumptions have used with variable effect of depth of footing (df=0.0B,0.5B,1.0B and 1.5B).
In addition, the angle of internal friction in sandy soil was taken (Ø=30°,35°,40°and 45°).
However, cohesion for clayey soil was taken as (ϲ=10,15,20and 25) kN/m2. It was found that
the vertical and horizontal displacement increased with increasing the length of tie beam.
Also, the vertical and horizontal displacement decreased with increasing the angle of internal

friction in sandy soil as well as cohesion in clayey soil. The vertical and horizontal
displacement decreased with increasing the height of tie beam.
2. FINITE ELEMENT PROGRAM

A finite element package of the PLAXIS 3D-foundation version 15 has been used for in order
to simulate the chosen model. Mohr-Coulomb model has been used to represent the soil
behavior. The material properties for soil, tie beams and foundations which have been used in
the finite element model are shown in table (1) and table (2).
Table 1 The material properties for the used soil

Parameters sandy soil unit
Unsaturated soil weight 17 (kN/m3)
Saturated soil weight 20 (kN/m3)
Modules of elasticity of soil 20000 - 70000 (kN/m2)
Poisson ratio 0.30
Thickness of footing 0.50 (m)
Angle of internal friction 30˚, 35˚, 40˚ and 45˚ ˚
Dilatancy 0,5,10 and 15 ˚
Table 2 Investigated cases of study

Case No. Tie Beam Dimensions [m]
Breadth Thickness
1 1.00 D
2 1.25 D
3 0.6D 1.50 D
4 1.75 D
5 2.00 D
6 1.00 D
7 1.25 D
8 0.7D 1.50 D
9 1.75 D
10 2.00 D
11 1.00 D
12 1.25 D
13 0.8D 1.50 D
14 1.75 D
15 2.00 D
16 1.00 D
17 1.25 D
18 0.9D 1.50 D
19 1.75 D
20 2.00 D
21 1.00 D
22 1.25 D
23 1D 1.50 D
24 1.75 D
25 2.00 D
In the present study, a theoretical analysis has been done for model of neighbors from two
sides contains 16 footings connected with tie beam. Figs. (1) and (2) presented the chosen
model. The footing dimensions are (2.0*2.0) m for corner footings, (2.50*2.50) m for edge
footings and (3.0*3.0) m for middle footings. The model contains three critical footings (F1,
F2 and F3) with dimensions (2.50 * 1.50) m, (2.0 * 1.0) and (1.0 * 1. 0) m respectively.
Isolated footings have fixed depth =0.5m connected with tie beams with variable width

(b=0.6D, 0.7D, 0.8D, 0.9D and 1.0D) and variable thickness (h=1.0D, 1.5D, 2.0D and 2.5D).
The angle of internal friction in sandy soil has been taken (Ø=30°, 35°, 40°and 45°). All of
the above assumptions have done with variable effect of depth of footing (Df =0.0D, 0.5D,
1.0D and 1.5D).
Figure 1 Model of neighbours from two sides
Figure 2 Isolated footings connected with beams model
3. RESULTS OF FINITE ELEMENT

Figs from (3) to (5) show the deformed mesh of soil and vertical displacement of soil as
contour lines as well as shading at depth of footing=0.50D, thickness of tie (ht)=1.0D, width
of tie(bt)=0.6D and angle of internal friction(φ)=300. From these figures, it can be shown that
the footings act as one combined footing.
Figure 3 Deformed mesh of soil at depth of footing (0.50)D and angle of internal friction (φ) = 30˚ for sand soil
bt =0.6D and ht =1.00D)

Figure 4 Total displacements in soil as contour lines for angle of internal friction (φ) = 30˚, bt =0.6D, Df =
(0.50)D and ht =1.00D) at axis (D)
Figure 5 Total displacements in soil as shading for angle of internal friction (φ) = 30˚, b t =0.6D, Df = (0.50)D
and ht =1.00D) at axis (D)
Figures from (6) to (8) show the deformed mesh of soil and vertical displacement of soil
as contour lines as well as shading at depth of footing=0.50D, thickness of tie (ht)=1.50D,
width of tie(bt)=0.6D and angle of internal friction(φ)=300. From these figures, it can be
shown that the footings act as one combined footing.
Figure 6 Deformed mesh of soil at depth of footing (0.50D) and angle of internal friction (φ) = 30˚ for sand soil
bt =0.6D and ht =1.50D)
Figure 7 Total displacements in soil as contour lines for angle of internal friction (φ) = 30˚, b t =0.6D,
Df = (0.50)D and ht =1.50D) at axis (D)

Figure 8 Total displacements in soil as shading for angle of internal friction (φ) = 30˚, bt =0.6D, Df =
(0.50)D and ht =1.50D) at axis (D)
Figures from (9) to (11) show the deformed mesh of soil and vertical displacement of soil
as contour lines as well as shading at depth of footing=1.50D, thickness of tie (ht)=1.0D,
width of tie(bt)=1.0D and angle of internal friction(φ)=300. From these figures, it can be
shown that the footings act as one combined footing.
Figure 9 Deformed mesh of soil at depth of footing (1.50)D and angle of internal friction (φ) = 30˚ for
sand soil bt =1.0D and ht =1.00D)
Figure 10 Total displacements in soil as contour lines for at depth of footing (1.50)D and angle of
internal friction (φ) = 30˚ for sand soil bt =1.0D and ht =1.00D)
Figure 11 Total displacements in soil as shading at depth of footing (1.50)D and angle of internal
friction (φ) = 30˚ for sand soil bt =1.0D and ht =1.00D)
Figures (12) and (13) show the settlement under footing (F2) at different tie beam
dimensions at depth of footing Df=0.0D along x-axis. From these figures, it can be shown that
the settlement decreases with increasing the dimensions of tie beams by about (20 to 40)%.

Figure 12 Distribution of settlement under footing for different thickness of tie beam at (b T1 =0.6D) and
Df=0.0D along x-axis
Figure 13 Distribution of settlement under footing for different thickness of tie beam at (hT1 =1.0D) and
Df=0.0D along x-axis
dimensions at depth of footing Df=0.0D along z-axis. From these figures, it can be shown that
the settlement decreases with increasing the dimensions of tie beams by about (20 to40)%.
Figure 14 Distribution of settlement under footing for different thickness of tie beam at (b T1 =0.6D) and
Df=0.0D along z-axis
Figure 15 Distribution of settlement under footing for different thickness of tie beam at (hT1 =1.0D)
and Df=0.0D along z-axis

Figures (16) and (17) show the contact pressure under footing (F2) at different tie beam
dimensions at depth of footing Df=0.0D along x-axis. From these figures, it can be shown that
the contact pressure values decrease with increasing the dimensions of tie beams by about (30
to 40)%.
Figure 16 Distribution of contact pressure under footing for different thickness of tie beam at (bT1
=0.6D) and Df=0.0D along x-axis
Figure 17 Distribution of contact pressure under footing for different thickness of tie beam at (hT1
=1.0D) and Df=0.0D along x-axis
dimensions at depth of footing Df=0.0D along z-axis. From these figures, it can be shown that
the settlement decreases with increasing the dimensions of tie beams by about (30 to40)%.
=0.6D) and Df=0.0D along z-axis
=1.0D) and Df=0.0D along z-axis

dimensions at depth of footing Df=0.0D. From these figures, it can be shown that the
settlement decreases with increasing the dimensions of tie beams by about (20 to40)%.
Figure 20 Distribution of settlement under footing for different thickness of tie beam at (bT1 =0.6D)
and Df=0.0D
Figure 21 Distribution of settlement under footing for different thickness of tie beam at (hT1 =1.0D)
and Df=0.0D
dimensions at depth of footing Df=0.0D.
From these figures, it can be shown that the contact pressure values decrease with
increasing the dimensions of tie beams by about (30 to40)%.
=0.6D) and Df=0.0D
=1.0D) and Df=0.0D

4. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
Figures (24) and (25) show the effect of tie beam dimensions on settlement for footing (1).
These figures show that the settlement decreases with increasing tie beam thickness and
width. However, increasing tie beam dimensions decreases the settlement by about (20-40)%.
Figure 24 Comparison between thickness of tie beam and settlement for different angles of internal
friction (φ) at DF= 0.00D and bT1 = 0.6D
Figure 25 Comparison between width of tie beam and settlement for different depths of footing at
angle of internal friction Φ = 30° and hT1 = 1.0D
Figures (26) and (27) show the effect of tie beam dimensions on contact pressure values
for footing (1). From these figures the contact pressure values decrease with increasing the
thickness and width of tie beam. However, increasing the dimensions of tie beam decrease the
contact pressure values by about (30-40)%.
Figure 26 Relationship between contact pressure and thickness of tie beam for different depths of
footing at angle of internal friction Φ = 30° and bT1 = 0.6D

Figure 27 Relationship between contact pressure and width of tie beam for different depths of footing
at angle of internal friction Φ = 30° and hT1 = 1.0D
Figures (28) and (29) show the effect of tie beam dimensions and depth of footing on
settlement for footing (2). These figures show that increasing the thickness of tie beam from
1.0D to 2.0D decreases the settlement by about 20% as well as increasing tie beam width
from 0.6D to 1.0D decreases the settlement by about 40%.
Figure 28 Comparison between thickness of tie beam and settlement for different angles of internal
friction (φ) at DF= 0.00D and bT2 = 0.6D
Figure 29 Comparison between width of tie beam and settlement for different depths of footing at
angle of internal friction (φ) = 300 and hT2 = 1.0D
Figures (30) and (31) show the effect of tie beam dimensions at different depths of footing
on contact pressure values for footing (2). From these figures the contact pressure values
decrease with increasing the thickness and width of tie beam.

footing at angle of internal friction Φ = 30° and bT1 = 0.6D
at angle of internal friction Φ = 30° and hT1 = 1.0D
settlement for footing (3). These figures show that the settlement decreases by 20% with
increasing thickness from 1.0D to 2.0D as well as increasing the width of tie beam from 0.6D
to 1.0D decreases the settlement by about 40%.
Figure 32 Comparison between tie beam thickness and settlement for angles of internal friction (φ) at
Df= 0.00D and bT1 = 0.6D
Figure 33 Comparison between width of tie beam and settlement for different depths of footing at Df=
0.00D and hT1 = 1.0D

Figures (34) and (35) show the effect of tie beam dimensions for different depths of
footing on contact pressure values for footing (3). From these figures the contact pressure
values decrease with increasing tie beam thickness and width by about (30-40)%.
footing at angle of internal friction Φ = 30° and bT1 = bT2 = 0.6D
at angle of internal friction Φ = 30° and hT1 = hT2 = 1.0D
horizontal displacement in x and z direction. From these figures the horizontal displacement
in x and z directions decreases with increasing the thickness and width of tie beam. However,
increasing the tie beam dimensions decreases the displacement by about (20-40)%.
Figure 36 Comparison between thickness of tie beam and displacement in x- direction for different
angles of internal friction (φ) at DF = 0.00D and bT1 = 0.6D

Figure 37 Comparison between width of tie beam and displacement in z- direction for different depths
of footing at Df= 0.00D and hT1 = 1.0D
Figures (38) to (40) show the relationship between settlement and distance along axis's (D
, 2 and 4) for different thickness of tie beam at width of tie beam (bT1) =0.6D, depth of footing
Df = 0.0D and angle of internal friction=300. From these figures increasing the thickness and
width of tie beam decrease the settlement. However increasing thickness and width of tie
beam decrease the differential settlement and almost uniform settlement has been obtained.
Figure 38 relationship between settlement and distance along axis (D) for different thickness of tie
beam at angle of internal friction = 300, bT1= bT2=0.6D and DF=0.0D
Figure 39 Relationship between settlement and distance along axis (2) for different thickness of tie
beam at angle of internal friction = 300, bT1 =0.6D and DF=0.0D
Figure 40 Relationship between settlement and distance along axis (4) for different thickness of tie beam at
angle of internal friction = 300, bT1 =0.6D and DF=0.0D

Figure 41 relationship between settlement and distance along axis (D) for different widths of tie beam
at angle of internal friction = 300, DF= (0.0) D and hT1= hT2=1.0D
Figure (41) shows the relationship between settlement and distance along axis (D) for
different widths of tie beam at thickness of tie beam (hT1) = (hT2) =1.0D, depth of footing Df =
0.0D and angle of internal friction=300. From this figure increasing the width of tie beam
from 0.6D to 1.0D decreases the settlement by about 40%.
Figures (42) to (44) show the relationship between contact pressure and distance along
axis's (D, 2 and 4) for different thickness of tie beam at width of tie beam (b T1) =0.6D, depth
of footing Df = 0.0D and angle of internal friction=300. From these figures increasing the
thickness of tie beam from 1.0D to 2.0D decreases the contact pressure values by about 30%.
Figure 42 Relationship between contact pressure and distance along axis (D) for different thickness of
tie beam at angle of internal friction = 300, bT1 = bT2 = 0.6D and DF=0.0D
Figure 43 Relationship between contact pressure and distance axis (4) for different thickness of tie
beam at angle of internal friction = 300, bT1=0.6D and DF=0.0D

Figure 44 Relationship between contact pressure and distance along axis (2) for different thickness of
tie beam at angle of internal friction = 300, bT1=0.6D and DF=0.0D
Figures (45) to (47) show the relationship between contact pressure and distance along
axis's (D,2 and 4) for different widths of tie beam at thickness of tie beam (hT1) = (hT2) =1.0D,
depth of footing Df = 0.0D and angle of internal friction=300. From this figure increasing the
thickness of tie beam from 0.6D to 1.0D decreases the contact pressure values by about 40%.
Figure 45 Relationship between contact pressure and distance along axis (D) for different widths of
tie beam at angle of internal friction = 300, DF = 0.0D and hT1 = hT2 = 1.0D
Figure 46 Relationship between contact pressure and distance along axis (4) for different widths of tie
beam at angle of internal friction = 300, hT2=1.0D and DF=0.0D
Figure 47 Relationship between contact pressure and distance along axis (2) for different widths of tie
beam at angle of internal friction = 300, DF = 0.0D and hT1=1.0D

Figures (48) to (51) show the distribution of bending moment of beam- footing system
along axis's (D, 2 and 4) and dimensions of tie beam at angle of internal friction = 300. From
this figure the bending moment values decrease with increasing the dimensions (thickness and
width) of tie beam. However, increasing the dimensions of tie beam decrease the bending
moment values by about (30 to 40)%.
Figure 48 Distribution of bending moment of beam- footing system along axis (D) for different
thickness of tie beam at angle of internal friction = 300 and bT1 = 0.6D
Figure 49 Distribution of bending moment of beam- footing system along axis (D) for different
widths of tie beam at angle of internal friction = 300 and hT1 = 1.0D
Figure 50 Distribution of bending moment of beam- footing system along axis (2) for different
thickness of tie beam at angle of internal friction = 300 and bT2 = 0.6D
Figure 51 Distribution of bending moment of beam- footing system along axis (4) for different widths
of tie beam at angle of internal friction = 300 and hT2 = 1.0D

Figures (52) to (54) show the distribution of shear force diagram of beam- footing system
along axis's (D and 2) and dimensions of tie beam at angle of internal friction = 300. From
these figures the shear force values decrease with increasing the dimensions (thickness and
width) of tie beam. However, increasing the dimensions of tie beam decrease the bending
moment values by about (30 to 40)%.
Figure 52 Distribution of shear of beam- footing system along axis (D) for different thickness of tie
beam at angle of internal friction = 300 and bT1 = 0.6D
Figure 53 Distribution of shear of beam- footing system along axis (D) for different tie beam widths
at angle of internal friction = 300 and hT1 = 1.0D
Figure 54 Distribution of shear of beam- footing system along axis (2) for different tie beam widths at
angle of internal friction = 300 and hT1 = 1.0D
5. CONCLUSIONS
From the present study the followings are concluded:-
 The settlement under footings and horizontal displacement in both x and z directions decrease
with increasing thickness and width of tie beams by about (20 to 40)%.
 Increasing the thickness and width of tie beam decrease the settlement. However, increasing
the thickness and width of tie beam decrease the differntial settlement and almost uniform has
been obtained.
 The contact pressure values decrease with increasing the thickness and width of tie beam by
about 30 to 40%.

 The bending moment values decrease with increasing the thickness and width of tie beams by
about 30 to 40%.
 The shear force values decrease with increasing the thickness and width of tie beams by about
30 to 40%.
REFERENCES
[1] Almasmoum A.A. (2009) "influence of tie beams on the shallow isolated eccentric footing
system" Journal of Engineering Sciences, Assiut University, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp.51 -61,
January 2009
[2] Atalar, C., C. R. Patra, C.R. and Sivakugan, N (2013) "Bearing capacity of shallow
foundation under eccentrically inclined load" Conference: 18th International Conference
on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, At Paris, France, Volume: 4
[3] Benayad,S., Berga, A., Sadek, Y. (2017) " Influence of eccentric footing thickness on
contact pressure and stress distribution at interface" International Journal of Civil
Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)- http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
[4] Dhar, P., Roy, S.and chattapadhyay, B. C. (2013) "Behavior of Rigid Footing under
Inclined and Eccentric Loading" Annals of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 5, No.1,
2013, 71-81, ISSN: 2279-087X (P), 2279-0888(online), www.researchmathsci.org
[5] Dhatrak, A.I. and Poonam Gawande (2016) "Behaviour of Circular and Ring Footing on
Reinforced Sand" ISSN XXXX XXXX © 2016 IJESC, Volume 6 Issue No. 8
[6] El-Kasaby, E. A. A. (1993), "Behavior Of Strap Footings With Tie-Beam Resting On

Soil", Civil Engineering Research Magazine, Faculty Of Engineering Al-Azhar University
Cairo Egypt, Vol. 15, No. 6, PP. 47-59.
[7] Elsamny, M. K., Ezz-Eldeen, H.A.,ELbatal. S.A. and kamar, A. M.(2017), “Effect of tie
beam dimensions on vertical and horizontal displacement of isolated footing” ,
International Journal of Engineering Research&Technology, Faculty of, Vol. 6 Issue 04,
April-2017.
[8] Elsawaf, M. and Nazir, A. (2012)"Behavior of eccentrically loaded small-Scale ring

footing resting on reinforced layered soil" DOI:
10.1061/(ASCE)GT.19435606.0000593.@2012 American Society of Civil Engineers.
[9] Nawghare, S.M., Pathak, S.R., Gawande, S.H. (2010) "Experimental investigations of
bearing capacity for eccentrically loaded footing" S. M. Nawghare et al. / International
Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, Vol. 2(10), 2010, 5257-5264
[10] Partra, C. R., Das, B.M. and Shin, E.C. (2005)" Ultimate bearing capacity of eccentrically
loaded strip foundation on sand reinforced with geogrids" Archived with Dspace@nitr,
http://dspace.nitrkl.ac.in/dspace, 8to 9 December 2005, Bangkok.
[11] Pusadkar, S.S., Navkar, Y.S. (2016) "Performance of Square Footing Subjected to
Eccentric-Inclined Load" International Journal of Engineering Research Volume No.5,
Issue Special 1 pp : 44-46, ISSN:2319-6890(online),2347-5013(print) 8 & 9 Jan 2016
[12] Partra, C. R. (2012)" Behaviour of eccentrically loaded shallow foundations on granular

soil" A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master

of Technology in Civil Engineering, department of civil engineering national institute of

technology rourkela-769008, may 2013
[13] Sadoglu, E., Cure, E., Moroglu, B. and Ulzuner, B.A. (2009)" Ultimate loads for
eccentrically loaded model shallow strip footings ongeotextile-reinforced sand"
Geotextiles and Geomembranes 27 (2009) 176–182, journal
homepage:www.elsevier.com/locate/geotexm

Effect of Eccentric Loading On Footings PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Effect of Eccentric Loading On Footings PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Effect of Eccentric Loading On Footings PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)

Volume 9, Issue 3, March 2018, pp. 200–220, Article ID: IJCIET_09_03_023

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

EFFECT OF ECCENTRIC LOADING ON

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 200 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 201 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 202 [email protected]

2. FINITE ELEMENT PROGRAM

Table 1 The material properties for the used soil

Table 2 Investigated cases of study

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 203 [email protected]

Figure 1 Model of neighbours from two sides

Figure 2 Isolated footings connected with beams model

3. RESULTS OF FINITE ELEMENT

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 204 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 205 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 206 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 207 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 208 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 209 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 210 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 211 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 212 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 213 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 214 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 215 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 216 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 217 [email protected]

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 218 [email protected]

[6] El-Kasaby, E. A. A. (1993), "Behavior Of Strap Footings With Tie-Beam Resting On

[8] Elsawaf, M. and Nazir, A. (2012)"Behavior of eccentrically loaded small-Scale ring

[12] Partra, C. R. (2012)" Behaviour of eccentrically loaded shallow foundations on granular

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 219 [email protected]

of Technology in Civil Engineering, department of civil engineering national institute of

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 220 [email protected]

You might also like