Scribd
Upload
884 views

Foundation-Base Fixed or Pin in Modelling of Structure

The document discusses modeling the fixity of column bases that are supported by different types of foundations. It states that: - Rigid raft foundations and foundations supported by stiff piles can be assumed to have high rotational stiffness and a fixed column base. - Individual footing pads on deformable soil may have considerable rotational flexibility, so assuming a fixed column base could misrepresent the bottom storey column moments. - It is better to model the rotational stiffness of the foundation rather than assume a fixed base, to more accurately capture the partial fixity, especially for individual pads on deformable soil.

Uploaded by

Thiha Kyaw
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
884 views

Foundation-Base Fixed or Pin in Modelling of Structure

The document discusses modeling the fixity of column bases that are supported by different types of foundations. It states that: - Rigid raft foundations and foundations supported by stiff piles can be assumed to have high rotational stiffness and a fixed column base. - Individual footing pads on deformable soil may have considerable rotational flexibility, so assuming a fixed column base could misrepresent the bottom storey column moments. - It is better to model the rotational stiffness of the foundation rather than assume a fixed base, to more accurately capture the partial fixity, especially for individual pads on deformable soil.

Uploaded by

Thiha Kyaw
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

As Umar said the real response would stand somewhere in between a pin and fixed base, similarly

extent of column fixity at base depends upon the rotational flexibility of foundation that depends on
foundation stiffness and soil stiffness both.

In general it can be said that for rigid raft foundations, foundation supported on stiff piles or basement
walls this rotational stiffness is high and one can confidently assume fixity of column at base.

But in conditions of individual footing pads on deformable soil,foundation could have considerable
rotational flexibility and consequently assumption of fixed column base could show a considerable
variance with respect to distribution of column moments on bottom storey i.e in such case column
moments could be concentrated at top end of bottom most column rather than at base.

Therefore, It is recommended to model the rotational stiffness of foundation rather than assuming
fixity at base in cases of individual column pads on deformable soil to represent quite realistic partial
fixity available at column base.This methodology can be seen in "Seismic design of reinforced
concrete and masonary building by M.J.N Priestley" (page 466).
This depends on how you are designing your column/building, not necessarily the footing. If you are
required to fix the column at the base to transfer the lateral load down to the foundation or to stiffen
your structure, then you can design the footing to resist that moment, however if it is not required and
you can get away with pinned bases, then you can design the footing for a pinned base with no
moment on it (theoretically this works however in practicality there is no such thing as a truly fixed or
truly pinned connection). This is entirely dependent on what you have decided for your structure.
Obviously, if you are fixing the base, the base plate and footing will be larger than if you were just
pinning the base so it will be more expensive in that department. As for safeness, if you follow the
loads and design everything appropriately both options are equally safe in my opinion.

In my opinion, a building with a bunch of fixed based columns is safer. It provides a multitude of
redundant load paths for lateral loads and stability. However, I don't recommend this approach. As
structural engineers, our job is not to design the safest possible building. Our job is to design the
cheapest possible building that is safe enough.

I agree with Stenbrook that, in reality, all column bases are fixed to some extent. Even without the
extra detailing measures, you will get some fixity from the fact the the joint is somewhat prestressed
by the column axial loads. In renovation work, I will sometimes take advantage of this fixity to avoid
reinforcing overloaded columns.

I think that your real question here is "what is standard modelling practice for column/footing joints".
The answer to that question is that they should always be pinned unless you have a very good reason
for fixing them.

Following lines are being reproduced from SP43 {Handbook on structures with reinforced concrete
portal frames (without craned)} for understanding the support conditions at foundation level: -In the
case of isolated footing, the idealized support condition for the column can be fixed end condition or
hinged end condition depending on the soil strata. If the isolated footing is resting on hard rock, it can
be assumed as a fixed base because the rock will not deform much to allow the rotation of the
foundation, and if it is resting on normal soil, it can be assumed as hinged because due to the
compressibility of the soil, the foundation can undergo a rotation relieving off the moment. In the case
of the columns supported by a pile foundation, the base of the column should be assumed as fixed.

You might also like