Interaction-Based Design Formulas for Transfer Beams:

Box Foundation Analogy

J. S. Kuang1 and Shubin Li2

Abstract: The design and analysis of transfer beams that support in-plane loaded shear walls have been receiving added emphasis of late
due to their importance in connection with the design of tall buildings. The current practice in designing the transfer beam–shear wall
systems does not generally consider the significant interaction of the transfer beam and the upper shear walls, thus leading to an
unreasonable design for the internal forces of structural members and the corresponding steel reinforcement detailing. This paper presents
interaction-based design formulas, which are derived by use of a box foundation analogy, for determining the bending moment and axial
force of the transfer beams that support the in-plane loaded shear walls. The design formulas have been shown to provide practicing
engineers a very simple and efficient, yet accurate, means of calculation of the bending moment and axial force in the transfer beams.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲1084-0680共2005兲10:2共127兲
CE Database subject headings: Beams; Shear walls; Buildings, high-rise.

Introduction interaction effect between the transfer beam and the supported
shear walls on the structural behavior of the beam. The proposed
Shear wall configuration in tall buildings makes access difficult to design formulas have been shown to provide practicing engineers
public lobby areas at lower levels of these buildings, and the large a very simple and efficient, yet accurate, means for determining
openings are generally achieved by use of large transfer structures the bending moment and axial force in the transfer beams.
共Stafford Smith and Coull 1991; Taranath 1997兲, such as transfer
beams, to collect loadings from the upper shear walls and then Box Foundation Analogy
distribute them to the widely spaced columns that support the
transfer girders. One of the complexities in the use of transfer Fig. 1共a兲 shows a typical transfer beam–shear wall system. An
structures arises from the interaction between the transfer-girder in-plane loaded shear wall of height H is subjected to a uniformly
and upper shear walls 共Kuang and Puvvala 1996; Kuang and distributed load w and supported by a transfer beam of a total
Atanda 1998兲. In the current practice, the design of a transfer span L. It has been observed 共Kuang and Puvvala 1996兲 that there
beam–shear wall system is still based largely on the experience of is a strong interaction between the transfer beam and the sup-
designers and the simplification of the structure, where the trans- ported shear wall. The interaction effect is shown to cause signifi-
fer beam and support columns are modeled as an equivalent por- cant stress redistributions both in the transfer beam and in the
tal frame. As a result, the significant structural interaction be- shear wall within an interactive zone. The structural response of
tween the transfer beam and the supported shear walls cannot be the beam-wall system can be studied by considering the transfer
included appropriately in the analysis. This may lead to an unrea- beam and the shear wall replaced by a box foundation and the
sonable design for the internal forces of structural components upper structure, respectively.
and the corresponding steel reinforcement details. In general, a box foundation 共Tomlinson 1995兲 supports upper
In this paper, a set of interaction-based design formulas are structures by displacement of the soil. The development of box
derived, by use of a box foundation analogy, for calculation of the foundations for supporting heavy buildings has been reported
bending moment and axial force of the transfer beams that sup- 共Skempton 1955兲. Fig. 1共b兲 shows a box foundation with the
port the in-plane loaded shear walls. Two new structural param- upper structure, where the vertical loading is transferred from the
eters, the effective span of the beam, Le, and the nominal height upper structure to the basement through structural walls. It is well
of the wall, He, are introduced in the analysis, and these reflect the known that, in the design of a box foundation, the total moment
caused by applied loading will be taken partly by the upper struc-
1
Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Hong Kong Univ. of ture and partly by the basement 共Meyerhof 1949兲, as shown in
Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong. Fig. 1共b兲. The total moment caused by a uniformly distributed
2
Formerly, Graduate Research Assistant, Dept. of Civil Engineering, load could be distributed to the upper structure and the box foun-
Hong Kong Univ. of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, dation according to the stiffness ratio of the upper structure and
Kowloon, Hong Kong. the box foundation. Thus, the moment taken by the box founda-
Note. Discussion open until October 1, 2005. Separate discussions tion, M b, can be written as
must be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by
one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing E bI b
Mb = Mo 共1兲
Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and pos- E j I j + E bI b
sible publication on April 8, 2003; approved on January 21, 2004. This
paper is part of the Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Con- where EbIb and E jI j = flexural stiffnesses of the basement and the
struction, Vol. 10, No. 2, May 1, 2005. ©ASCE, ISSN 1084-0680/2005/ upper structures, respectively; and M o = total moment caused by
2-127–132/$25.00. applied loading, given by

PRACTICE PERIODICAL ON STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MAY 2005 / 127
Fig. 1. Box foundation analogy: 共a兲 Transfer beam–shear wall
system; and 共b兲 box foundation and upper structure

Fig. 3. Finite element model

1
M o = qL2 共2兲
8
Equivalent Box Foundation Model
In the simplest analogous box foundation model, the transfer
beam and the shear wall shown in Fig. 1共a兲 can be represented by According to the box foundation analogy described in the previ-
a box foundation and the upper structure, respectively. The mo- ous section, an equivalent model with effective beam span of Le
ment caused by the applied loading is resisted by moments of and nominal wall height of He is developed as shown in Fig. 4.
resistance of the shear wall and the transfer beam, i.e., By using this equivalent box foundation model, not only can the
effect of the wall-beam interaction be captured, but also the mo-
Mo = Mw + Mb 共3兲 ments of resistance of the transfer beam and the shear wall, which
are described by Eq. 共3兲, and the axial force in the transfer beam
where M w and M b = moments of resistance provided by the shear
can be accurately determined.
wall and the transfer beam.

Finite Element Modeling Interaction-Based Design Formulas

Consider a typical transfer beam–shear wall system, as shown in
Fig. 2. In order to investigate the interaction effects between the The finite element analysis and computations are conducted for
transfer beam and the shear wall on the structural behavior of the the model shown in Fig. 3 by employing the finite element code
system, the height of the shear wall, H, is larger than twice the SAP-2000 共SAP-2000 1997兲 to show the relationships of the flex-
total span of the transfer beam, L. The breadth of the beam is ural stiffnesses of the transfer beam EbIb and support columns
twice or three times the thickness of the shear wall. Owing to the EcIc to the effective span of the transfer beam Le and to the
complexities of the interaction between the transfer beam and the nominal height of the shear wall He.
upper shear wall, the finite element method 共FEM兲 is employed in
the analysis. A simple finite element model for the system is
shown in Fig. 3, in which four-node square plane-stress elements
are used to analyze the shear wall, the beam, and the support
columns.

Fig. 2. Typical transfer beam–shear wall system Fig. 4. Equivalent box foundation model

128 / PRACTICE PERIODICAL ON STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MAY 2005
 Nominal Height of Shear Wall, He
The nominal height of the shear wall is considered to describe the
interaction behavior of the beam-wall system and is generally
influenced by the flexural stiffness ratio of transfer beam to sup-
port column. Similar to the determination of the effective span of
transfer beam Le, while substituting different values of the flex-
ural stiffness ratio 共EbIb / EcIc兲 and span L into the finite element
code SAP-2000, the boundary condition is set for calculation that
beyond a height 共He,max兲 of the shear wall, the distribution of
vertical stresses in the wall becomes uniform 共Kuang and Puvvala
Fig. 5. Relationship between effective span of transfer beam and 1996兲, after considering the interaction behavior of the beam-wall
flexural stiffness ratio of beam to support column system.
When the breadth of the transfer beam is twice or three times
the thickness of the shear wall, the nominal height of the shear
wall is given by
Effective Span of Transfer Beam, Le
Based on the model presented in Fig. 4, by substituting different
values of the flexural stiffness ratio 共EbIb / EcIc兲 into SAP-2000, 冉
He = 0.47 + 0.08 · log 冊
E bI b
E cI c
L 共5a兲
the corresponding span ratio Le / Lo can conveniently be obtained.
Fig. 5 shows the relationship between the effective span of the with an upper limit of 0.54L, i.e.,
transfer beam and the flexural stiffness ratio of transfer beam to
support column. It can be seen from Fig. 5 that the effective span 共He兲max = 0.54L 共5b兲
of the transfer beam can be determined by
where L = total span of the transfer beam.
E bI b As the nominal height of the wall is used to describe the in-
L e = L o, when 艌 10 共4a兲 teraction effect of the beam and the wall, it can be seen that, by
E cI c
keeping the same value of total span L of the transfer beam, the

冉 冊
larger nominal height of the wall He represents the stronger struc-
E bI b E bI b tural interaction between the transfer beam and the shear wall.
Le = 0.9 + 0.1 · log L o, when 0.1 ⬍ ⬍ 10 共4b兲
E cI c E cI c
Midspan Moment of Transfer Beam
E bI b
Le = 0.8Lo, when 艋 0.1 共4c兲 The flexural stiffness of the shear wall in the equivalent box foun-
E cI c dation model shown in Fig. 4 can be calculated by
where Lo = clear span of the transfer beam; and EbIb and EcIc
= flexural stiffnesses of the transfer beam and the support column, 1 3
Iw = tH 共6兲
respectively. 12 e
It can be seen from Eq. 共4兲 that, if the flexural stiffness of the
transfer beam is much larger than that of the support columns, the where t = thickness of the shear wall.
beam behaves as a simply supported one, whereas, when the flex- By considering the box foundation analogy as shown in Fig. 1,
ural stiffness of support columns is much larger than that of the the midspan bending moment of the transfer beam is calculated
transfer beam, the beam can be analyzed as a fixed-end one. by

Fig. 6. 共a兲 Distribution of horizontal axial stress at midspan of transfer beam; and 共b兲 assumed linear distribution of tensile axial stress

PRACTICE PERIODICAL ON STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MAY 2005 / 129
 Fig. 7. Design charts of coefficient ␣ 共b = width of beam; t = thickness of wall兲

E bI b stress in the transfer beam or shear wall, as shown in Fig. 6共b兲.

Mb = Mo 共7兲 Based on the typical beam-wall structure shown in Fig. 4 and
E wI w + E bI b
using the finite element model presented in Fig. 3, values of ␣ can
where EbIb and EwIw = flexural stiffnesses of the transfer beams conveniently be determined with different combinations of hb / L
and the equivalent shear wall, respectively. The total moment and hc / L. The design charts for ␣ are then constructed and pre-
caused by the uniformly distributed load w is determined by sented in Fig. 7. The steps for determining the axial force of the
transfer beam are as follows:
1 1. Calculate the distance of the neutral axis to the bottom of the
M o = wL2e 共8兲
8 beam ho 关Fig. 6共b兲兴:
where Le = effective span of the transfer beam, determined by ho = ␣Lo 共9兲
Eq. 共4兲.
where the coefficient ␣ is the function of the ratios of hb / L
and hc / L and is determined from the design charts in Fig. 7.
Midspan Axial Force of Transfer Beam 2. Determine the axial force at midspan of the beam using
It has been indicated 共Kuang and Puvvala 1996兲 that, unlike or- 2ho − hb
dinary beams in bending, transfer beams supporting in-plane T = 6M b 共10兲
h2b
loaded shear walls are basically flexural-tension members, owing
to the significant structural interaction between the beam and the where M b = midspan bending moment of the transfer beam
wall. The general distribution of horizontal axial stress at the and is determined by Eq. 共7兲.
midspan of the beam is shown in Fig. 6共a兲, where an approxi-
mately linear distribution of longitudinal tensile axial stress in the
beam at midspan can be observed. It is then assumed that the Design Example
axial stress in the beam distributes linearly, as shown in Fig. 6共b兲.
From the linear assumption, the axial force at the midspan of To demonstrate the analysis of the transfer beam supporting an
the beam can be determined by introducing a coefficient ␣, which in-plane loaded shear wall using the derived design formula, the
is equal to ho / Lo, where ho represents the location of zero axial reinforced concrete transfer beam–shear wall structure shown in

130 / PRACTICE PERIODICAL ON STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MAY 2005
 Fig. 8. Transfer beam–shear wall system subjected to vertical uniformly distributed load

Fig. 8 is considered. The total span of the transfer beam L E bI b

= 11.2 m, with breadth b = 800 mm; the shear wall, with thickness Mb = Mo
E wI w + E bI b
t = 400 mm, carries a uniformly distributed load w = 3
⫻ 103 kN/ m. The size of the support columns is 1.2⫻ 1.2 m. The 0.8 ⫻ 1.63
= 24.57 ⫻ 103
heights of the transfer beam hb = 1.6, 2.4, and 3.2 m, respectively. 0.4 ⫻ 5.4423 + 0.8 ⫻ 1.63
Determine the bending moment and the resultant tensile axial
force at the midspan of the transfer beam, given Eb = Ec = Ew. = 1.19 ⫻ 103 kNm
• Step 3: Determine the axial force at the midspan of the beam:
Procedure of Calculation hb / L = 1.6/ 11.2= 0.143; hc / L = 1.2/ 11.2= 0.107; b / t = 800/ 400
The beam with a height of hb = 1.6 m is chosen for demonstrating = 2. From Fig. 7共a兲, ␣ = 0.181; then, using Eq. 共9兲, ho = ␣Lo
the detailed procedure of calculation: = 0.181⫻ 8.8= 1.582 m. The axial force at the midspan of the
• Step 1: Calculate the structural parameters. Clear span of the beam is determined by Eq. 共10兲:
beam Lo = L − 2hc = 11.2− 2 ⫻ 1.2= 8.8 m. Flexural stiffness
ratio EbIb / EcIc = 共0.8⫻ 1.63兲共1.2⫻ 1.23兲 = 1.58; the effective
span of the beam is then determined using Eq. 共4b兲: 2ho − hb
T = 6M b
h2b

冉
Le = 0.9 + 0.1 · log
E bI b
E cI c
冊Lo
= 6 ⫻ 1.19 ⫻ 103
2 ⫻ 1.592 − 1.6
1.62
= 共0.9 + 0.1 ⫻ 1.58兲 ⫻ 8.8
= 4.41 ⫻ 103 kN
= 8.095 m
The results of the midspan bending moment and axial force for
The nominal height of the wall is determined by use of the transfer beams with heights of 2.4 and 3.2 m, which are de-
Eq. 共5a兲: termined by the proposed design formulas, are also presented in

冉 冊
Table 1.
E bI b
He = 0.47 + 0.08 · log L
E cI c

冉
= 0.47 + 0.08 · log
0.8 ⫻ 1.63
1.2 ⫻ 1.23
冊
⫻ 11.2
Table 1. Comparison of Results from Proposed Design Formulas and
= 5.442 m ⬍ 0.54L Finite Element Analysis
= 0.54 ⫻ 11.2 = 6.046 m. Mb T
• Step 2: Determine the bending moment at the midspan of the 共⫻103 kN m兲 共⫻103 kN兲
beam. From Eq. 共8兲, the applied moment is hb Design FEM Design FEM
共m兲 formulas analysis formulas analysis
1 1
M o = wL2e = ⫻ 3 ⫻ 103 ⫻ 8.0952 = 24.57 kNm 1.6 1.19 1.17 4.41 4.42
8 8 2.4 3.24 3.13 4.43 4.45
The bending moment at the midspan is determined using 3.2 6.36 6.10 3.95 3.98
Eq. 共7兲: Note: FEM⫽finite element method.

PRACTICE PERIODICAL ON STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MAY 2005 / 131
Comparison Acknowledgment
A finite element analysis for the example transfer beam–shear
The support of the Hong Kong University of Science and Tech-
wall system is also conducted by employing the finite element
nology under Grant No. HIA02/03.EG01 is gratefully acknowl-
code SAP-2000 共SAP-2000 1997兲. A comparison of results be-
edged.
tween the proposed design formulas and the finite element
method is made and presented in Table 1. It can be seen from
Table 1 that the results of the proposed design formulas show
References
very good agreement with those of the computer analysis.
Kuang, J. S., and Atanda, A. I. 共1998兲. “Interaction based analysis of
continuous transfer girder system supporting in-plane loaded coupled
Conclusion shear walls.” Struct. Des. Tall Build., 7, 285–293.
Kuang, J. S., and Puvvala, J. 共1996兲. “Continuous transfer beams support-
Based on the box foundation analogy, a set of interaction-based ing in-plane loaded shear walls in tall buildings.” Struct. Des. Tall
design formulas for calculation of the bending moment and axial Build., 5, 281–293.
force of the transfer beam are derived. Two new structural param- Meyerhof, G. G. 共1949兲. “Some recent foundation research and its appli-
cation to design.” Struct. Eng., 31, 151–167.
eters, the effective span of the transfer beam, Le, and the nominal
SAP: 2000 analysis reference. 共1997兲. Comput. Struct.
height of the shear wall, He, are introduced in the analysis and
Skempton, A. W. 共1955兲. “Foundations for high buildings.” Proc.-Inst.
reflect the interaction effect between the transfer beam and the Civ. Eng., 4共3兲, 246–269.
upper shear wall on the structural behavior of the beam. The Stafford Smith, B., and Coull, A. 共1991兲. Tall building structures: Analy-
proposed design formulas are very simple to use and provide an sis and design, Wiley, New York.
efficient, yet accurate, means of determining the bending moment Taranath, B. S. 共1997兲. Steel, concrete, and composite design of tall build-
and axial force of the transfer beam. The results of the proposed ings, 2nd Ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
design formulas for the example structure agree very well with Tomlinson, M. J. 共1995兲. Foundation design and construction, 6th Ed.,
those of the finite element analysis. Longman, Harlow, U.K.

132 / PRACTICE PERIODICAL ON STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / MAY 2005