Quantcast
Channel: RAM | STAAD Forum - Recent Threads
Viewing all 23543 articles
Browse latest View live
↧

RE: regarding error ** SECTION IS NOT ADEQUATE WARNING:Reinforcement % exceeds maximum limit

November 12, 2015, 9:59 pm
$
0
0

[quote user="Sye"]Which software is this related to ? Can you please upload the file ? On a general note, even before you get into the design part, please check the column forces and see if you are getting any unrealistic values or not. Check the displacements too and see if there are any abnormal values. If these are OK then check the controlling parameters for the design. If all of these look OK and the design is still failing, you may have to go for a bigger section. However one can only comment on that after taking a look at the model file.

(Please visit the site to view this file)

[/quote]

↧
Search

RE: regarding error ** SECTION IS NOT ADEQUATE WARNING:Reinforcement % exceeds maximum limit

November 12, 2015, 10:03 pm
$
0
0

(Please visit the site to view this file)

↧
↧

RE: regarding error ** SECTION IS NOT ADEQUATE WARNING:Reinforcement % exceeds maximum limit

November 13, 2015, 1:03 am
$
0
0

The span between the frames are quite considerable The model has also considerable DL and LL. I would recommend to use 500 mm x 500 mm column sections instead of 450 mm x 450 mm. This ensures strong column in the model. Please refer to the revised model. You can see that all the columns are getting designed.

(Please visit the site to view this file)

↧

RE: regarding error ** SECTION IS NOT ADEQUATE WARNING:Reinforcement % exceeds maximum limit

November 13, 2015, 2:03 am
$
0
0
thank you very much
i have one more doubt regarding seismic load definations in staadpro , how do i define joint weight do i need to calculate each joint weights or is there any other way to get it done? and how to apply live load as there is no option for it.
↧

RE: Truss member not being tensioned

November 13, 2015, 2:07 am
$
0
0

Problem solved!

So the main error was to model using truss instead os plane?

when shall I use truss then?

I am amazed by the level of support provided by bentley

well done!

Thanks very much!

↧
↧

RE: regarding error ** SECTION IS NOT ADEQUATE WARNING:Reinforcement % exceeds maximum limit

November 13, 2015, 3:50 am
$
0
0
In the older days STAAD.Pro was able to consider joint Weights only to define seismic weight. The option still remains there. Now, you have many others options like- Member Weight, Element weight, Floor Weights along with reference loads. You can simply use them. The most sophisticated method is Reference Mass load case.

If you are interested to calculate joint weights, you need to assign pinned support to all the nodes except the supported nodes. In this model, you need to apply DL and required amount of (some % ) LL for which you want to calculate seismic weight. The support reaction in FY is the joint weight of the model
↧

RE: regarding error ** SECTION IS NOT ADEQUATE WARNING:Reinforcement % exceeds maximum limit

November 13, 2015, 4:42 am
$
0
0
as i have already used member and floor weights and selfweight will these be sufficient for these

thanks for ur reply u were very helpful
↧

regarding error ** SECTION IS NOT ADEQUATE WARNING:Reinforcement % exceeds maximum limit

November 11, 2015, 5:15 am
$
0
0

** SECTION IS NOT ADEQUATE
WARNING:Reinforcement % exceeds maximum limit

what should i do now i have already increased a col sectionfrom 230x450 to 450x450 and 300x600 still getting the same error

if there is any other way to do  please let me knw

thank you

↧
Search

RE: RAM Frame - Unbraced Length of Beams in Braced Frame

November 13, 2015, 9:47 am
$
0
0

You are correct, that is one place where the program can be unconservative. It's always been this way, but I'll make sure the change request is noted.

It's worth mentioning, in some codes like AISC 341-10 seismic provisions, it is required to have a short beam or brace point at the apex of the chevron braces.

↧
↧

RAM Frame - Unbraced Length of Beams in Braced Frame

November 13, 2015, 9:22 am
$
0
0

I have noticed that in RAM Frame, the location of a brace framing into a beam is considered to be a braced point for the beam in both axes of the beam. However this is not real - the intersecting braces will not brace the beam in the weak axis. I know that I can manually override the un-braced length of the beams, but is there any way in RAM Frame to correct this so that RAM will not assume a weak axis braced point for the beam?

↧

RE: Truss member not being tensioned

November 13, 2015, 9:53 am
$
0
0
You should only use TRUSS when due to the structural arrangement and loading, the members are only supposed to carry axial loads. Typically loads should only be nodal loads at joints and not member loads like concentrated load within the span of the member or UDL. For many trusses that we find in the real world, where the members are subjected to bending and shear in addition to axial force for example trusses in which top and bottom chords are subjected to bending, one should use SPACE or PLANE and assign TRUSS specification individually to certain members like braces.

The kind words about Bentley technical support is much appreciated.
↧

RE: AASHTO design error message

November 13, 2015, 10:21 am
$
0
0
Sye,
 
Attached is my staad file for the issue I mentioned yesterday. My take on this issue….The design module will not design certain rolled shapes that have slender elements. Reviewing the clause in the aashto code rolled-shapes can be excluded from this check. If this is the case, where can designate these as rolled shapes: Is there a way?
 
As a check, I ran the same file using aisc unified 2010 with no issues and the stresses quite low. However, I need to design per AASHTO specs. Please advise
 
Thanks,
James (Jim) M. Rosgony, P.E.
Civil & Structural Supervisor

Cimation logo
D:  724.743.3795
O: 724.743.3700

4600 J Barry Court, Ste 100
Canonsburg, PA 15317
LinkedIn | Twitter | Facebook
 
↧

AASHTO design error message

November 12, 2015, 8:13 am
$
0
0

I am wanting to design a pony-truss bridge structure in accordance with AASHTO LRFD specs. There are seven floor beams at the main panel points along the span. The interior floor beams cannot be designed due to this error message; "** WARNING** EITHER FLANGE WIDTH-THICKNESS RATION OR WEB HEIGHT-THICKNESS RATIO is more than the limiting ratio specified by code, clause 6.9.4.2. The floor beam at each end of the span does not give this error message.  Anyone know what is happening?

↧
↧

RE: Create Wind Definition & Assign Wind Load for Bridge (AASHTO 2012)

November 13, 2015, 12:44 pm
$
0
0

Sorry if the instructions were not clear enough. Within the Reference Materials in that same help page, the last item is the Wind Load tab. If you click on that you will find details on how to apply the load. That page also refers to section 5.32.12 of the technical Reference which explains the command syntax.

Here is a list of steps for your ready reference

Once the wind definition is complete, add a new load case from within Load Case Details.
Select the newly defined load case and click on the Add button.
The Add New : Load items dialog box will pop up.
Choose the Wind Load option from with that box and define the inputs as explained in the above help documentation and click on Add.

By default the software considers the structure to be made of closed panels and would calculate the wind load at each node based on the influence area for each node. The load will be applied at each node on the face of the structure that is loaded by the wind. On the other hand if you choose the Open Structure option when applying the wind load, the software would calculate the wind load as an udl on the individual members.

↧

RE: Why are my foundation forces so much higher when using semi-rigid diaphragm instead of rigid?

November 13, 2015, 1:32 pm
$
0
0

If the diaphragm is a 2-way deck, there is a critical difference in how the out-of-plane stiffness is treated (it's considered when the diaphragm is semi-rigid only in v14.7 and later). See RAM Frame Semirigid Diaphragms.

The other, more basic thing to check is the total base shear. If the total base shear is going up it could be an issue with the distribution of the load, wind loads on semi rigid diaphragms get applied to multiple windward and leeward edges, see:

It could also be an issue with the building period which, in turn, affects the total shear. 

↧
Search

Why are my foundation forces so much higher when using semi-rigid diaphragm instead of rigid?

November 13, 2015, 11:46 am
$
0
0

I have a building which has some diaphragms which could be considered rigid and others which are certainly semi-rigid.  For the sake of curiosity, I tried running the model one time with all diaphragms rigid and then another time with all diaphragms set to semi-rigid.  The resulting footings in RAM Foundation for ALL columns are MUCH larger in the semi-rigid example when compared to the rigid example.  Does anyone have insight as to why this might be?  I can understand why some specific footings may increase, but all of them seem to have done so.

↧

Error inFLOOR LOAD CASES

November 13, 2015, 2:10 pm
$
0
0

[View:/cfs-file/__key/communityserver-discussions-components-files/5932/5148.CHANGE.std:940:0]After analysis I found in the staad example which is attached that

Summation force-y

Load case 1                 95123.36kN

Load case 2                0.00kN

Load case 3                0.00kN

Which is not correct since there is a floor load of 6.5kN/sq.m and roof ll of 1.5kN/sq.m.

When I do without seismic load case eqz+ there is no error in summation.If I input the seismic load case EQZ+ and EQX-ve and EQZ-ve the error comes.

Can someone help to trace out the error?

Also when I input the GEN PIN the program shows erro sayin that there is a spring support.

How to add the PIN support for the shear wall. The input is now blocked with * remark.[View:/cfs-file/__key/communityserver-discussions-components-files/5932/CHANGE.std:940:0]

↧
↧

RE: How to resolve error in staadpro such as *WARNING- ZERO STIFFNESS IN DIRECTION 2 AT JOINT 482 EQN.NO. 2780

November 13, 2015, 11:08 pm
↧

How to resolve error in staadpro such as *WARNING- ZERO STIFFNESS IN DIRECTION 2 AT JOINT 482 EQN.NO. 2780

November 13, 2015, 10:13 pm
$
0
0

how to make this warning right what steps should i follow please let me know

*WARNING- ZERO STIFFNESS IN DIRECTION 2 AT JOINT 482 EQN.NO. 2780

↧

RE: REFERENCE LOADS IN STAAD PRO

November 13, 2015, 11:16 pm
$
0
0
Do you want to specify the seismic load or seismic mass under reference load case? Seismic load cannot be directly specified under Reference load. You need to create a primary load case to use the program generated Seismic load option. What type of load (eg. nodal load, member load etc) you have specified under reference load case to assign seismic load? Can you upload your STAAD model?
↧
Viewing all 23543 articles
Browse latest View live
Search
<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>