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

RE: RAM Concept - Punching Shear Question

March 28, 2017, 7:52 am
$
0
0

Thank you for uploading the model. I reviewed in the current version of the program v06.02.00.014.

In the model, ACI 318-11 is selected for the design code. For ACI, RAM Concept uses the average effective depth of the critical sections. See screen captures below showing the critical section (lengths of the perimeter section are in yellow) and output from the Auditor. The punching shear section is defined with a cover of 1.5", which corresponds to d = 4.5" and 7.5" for the 6" thick slab and 9" thick slab, respectively. The 6" slab area is roughly 8" in width.

The perimeter length is 8.13 + 7.75 + 39.5 + 15.75 = 71.13"

The effective depth is calculated as [8.13*4.5 + 7.75*7.5 + 39.5*7.5 + 7.75*7.5 + 8*4.5]/71.13 = 6.82 in 

The discussion in the original forum post was associated with the AS 3600 design code. If I change the design code and then re-run the model, I see that the 4.5" (the thinnest effective depth) is used in the calculation:

↧
Search

RAM Concept - Punching Shear Question

July 12, 2016, 8:44 pm
$
0
0

Hi Seth, Karl, 

I'm having a slight issue with the punching shear check for a tricky slab arrangement with many different Top Of Concrete levels and thicknesses. 1000 x 400 RC column with V* = 800 kN and Mv* = 200 kNm each direction. N40 concrete. AS3600 code. 

Essentially the problem I'm having is the punching check isn't considering the larger thicknesses in the audit sections by only taking the smallest thickness of 160 (200 - 40mm cover). The program should be attempting to average out the different thickness in proportion to how much each thickness contributes to the shear perimeter?

One potential reason why the program may be having difficulty is that each slab segment and the column centroid share a common FEM node. But I moved the column slightly off this node and re-positioned and rechecked the punching shear calc yet the same issued occurred. 

I've gone through the calc manually by hand and can see it's on the verge of not working, however it would be good if I can get the program to confirm this. 

Thanks in advance for the help. Cheers

↧
↧

RE: Against a same Load why Beam Reactions are varied?

March 28, 2017, 10:39 am
$
0
0
Joty : If you have the wall modeled then the beam is not going to develop the high negative moments for reasons I mentioned in my last post. So if you just have the 2 corner bars which you would require anyway for the shear reinforcements and as long as the minimum reinforcement criteria is satisfied at that location, you should be good.
↧

RE: STAAD Pro file not recognized

March 28, 2017, 11:41 am
↧

STAAD Pro file not recognized

March 28, 2017, 11:34 am
$
0
0

Why my STAAD Pro analysis saying that my first line is not starting with "STAAD" while it's clearly showing STAAD SPACE ..... in the first line. Here is what shown in the output file of that run.  I see there are some symbols in front of my first line, which is invisible in the Editor and I don't know how to get rid of. Please help!
 

 
     1. STAAD SPACE 24FT STANDARD CO MODULE ASSEMBLY
INPUT FILE: C:\Users\Xiaoxia\Documents\JMI\STAAD FILES\Module24ft.STD
 
   *** ERROR *** ABOVE COMMAND IS NOT RECOGNIZED. LINE IGNORED.
 
   DATA-CHECK MODE IS ENTERED.
 
 
 
             *********** END OF THE STAAD.Pro RUN ***********
 

↧
↧

RE: Isolated Footing as Design to Corner lot footing and Footing on Property Line

March 28, 2017, 11:47 am
$
0
0
The options that I mentioned should be available in STAAD.Foundation as well but we certainly do not recommend using it as it is a very old version of the product and has been replaced by SFA. I would suggest that you consider upgrading to SFA.
↧

Code check using AISC Unified vs LRFD 3rd edition of T members

March 28, 2017, 12:47 pm
$
0
0

When I was checking my structure using AISC Unified, I noticed some of the T members were failing. I tried to increase the size with little effects. So I looked into the details and saw that the demand was not that high, which led me to switch to LRFD and found those T members are well below the capacity. Could someone take a look at the files and let me know what is going on here? I am uploading my files here. Thank you![View:/cfs-file/__key/communityserver-discussions-components-files/5932/Asheville42.std:940:0][View:/cfs-file/__key/communityserver-discussions-components-files/5932/Asheville41.std:940:0]

↧

Load Values is showing in on different unit system.

March 28, 2017, 6:28 pm
$
0
0

In my model current Input unit is taken as Foot and Kilopound.Load is also in Kip/ft.But when I want to see the load values it is showing me on different unit system as kN/m.

How can I fix the problem? Please help me out.....

↧
Search

RE: Supports Specifications

March 28, 2017, 11:15 pm
↧
↧

Supports Specifications

March 28, 2017, 6:12 pm
$
0
0

What is the difference between Fixed and Enforced Support?

Please explain it with proper example.....

    

↧

RE: Supports

March 29, 2017, 12:09 am
$
0
0

Hi Rupam,

As STAAD is a general purpose program, so mostly it depends on the user's design intent where he/she wants to use a particular option, though there are some recommendations.

Just for example; compression-only supports can be used when the superstructure simply rest on the foundation while tension-only can be used where an anchoring support needed. For more details, please refer article 5.27.5 of technical reference manual.

The non-linear behavior of the soil (such as when its behavior in tension differs from its behavior in compression) can be modeled using multi-linear supports. For more details, please refer article 5.27.4 of technical reference manual.

Please note here that these supports presents a non-linear condition so, they will initiate an iterative analysis and convergence check cycle. There may not be any PDELTA, NONLIN, dynamics, CABLE, or TENSION/COMPRESSION analysis included with these support specifications.

Just to illustrate the use of multi-linear springs, a sample file is included where a sliding support (displacement of about 20mm is allowed in x-direction only) is modeled. An anchoring support example is also included.

(Please visit the site to view this file)

(Please visit the site to view this file)

↧

Supports

March 28, 2017, 6:18 pm
$
0
0

When we have to use Multi linear spring support and Tension/Compression only springs support?

Please explain it.....

Please tell me how we can create a multi linear spring support.....

↧

RE: STAAD Pro file not recognized

March 29, 2017, 12:45 am
$
0
0
You may also try to change the UTF-8 format of the input file into ANSI format. To do that open your model with the Notepad, then go to File -> Save As and change Encoding from UTF-8 to ANSI next to the Save button. After this, you should be able to open STAAD.Pro model without errors.
↧
↧

RE: OpenSTAAD | Property.CreateMemberPartialReleaseSpec

March 29, 2017, 1:16 am
$
0
0

The CreateMemberPartialReleaseSpec command generates the partial moment release command which needs to be assigned to the relevant member. The command that you have used for the release specification assignment is not correct. AssignBeamProperty command is used to assign member property, not member specification. You need to use the following command –

 Property.AssignMemberSpecToBeam beamno, specification

 You need to modify your code and replace the following command line –

 objOpenSTAAD.Property.AssignMemberSpecToBeam beamno, Spec1

↧

RE: staad pro foundation

March 29, 2017, 1:19 am
$
0
0

(Please visit the site to view this file)hi ,

thank you for your reply but know the file is working, I don't know why.

But I have an other problem on staad pro, when i start the anylisis I have this error message : error in analysis. Check Output (.anl) file

thank you for your time

↧
Search

RE: Error in member sections

March 29, 2017, 2:02 am
↧

RE: staad pro foundation

March 29, 2017, 2:07 am
$
0
0
1) Delete wind load definitions as it do not have any data (intensities) defined.
2) Go to Select -> By Missing Attributes -> Missing Property and the select the sections to the members highlighted.
↧
↧

RE: Error in member sections

March 29, 2017, 2:08 am
$
0
0

(Please visit the site to view this file)

↧

RE: Error in member sections

March 29, 2017, 2:15 am
$
0
0

(Please visit the site to view this file)

can you open the file? it keeps bouncing back... 

↧

RE: Error in member sections

March 29, 2017, 2:27 am
$
0
0

Hi,

Please note that all the design parameters should be defined before any Design Commands (Design Beam, Design Column etc.) otherwise the design parameters will not be considered in design. So, it should look like:

START CONCRETE DESIGN

CODE ACI

CLB 40 MEMB............

CLS 40 MEMB..................

CLS 25 MEMB.....................

CLB 25 MEMB.....................

CLT 40 MEMB......................

CLT 25 MEMB.....................

FC 37 MEMB........................

FYMAIN 500 MEMB...................

FYSEC 500 ALL

MAXMAIN 25 ALL

MINMAIN 12 ALL

MINSEC 12 ALL

DESIGN BEAM...............................

DESIGN COLUMN.............................

DESIGN ELEMENT.................................

CONCRETE TAKE

END CONCRETE DESIGN

I hope in Steel Design, your intention is to use AISC2010 code and to check the members for code specifications. But you have several redundant design commands which has been commented out in input file.

All the above mentioned changes applied in the attached file, please go through closely in the input file.

(Please visit the site to view this file)

Additionally as your main structure is of concrete, please re-check if PINNED support conditions are applicable for your structure. 

↧
Viewing all 23543 articles
Browse latest View live
Search