Dear friends,
In my office we are using a very old software to design PT slabs called PostX.
We think its about time to use something modern.
Postx analyze and design using the equivalent frame method.
It is important to us the the new software will be able to use that method in addition to the FEM.
funny that before the FEM the only procedure to calculate PT slabs was with the EFM.
Now you design with EFM, check your analysis in FEM and add cables where you see some stresses that are of limits.
So using FEM you are less economic.
Anyway, I know four software's:
1. adapt
2. safe
3. cedrus
4. rapt
Any suggestions?
If you guys have any ideas about prices to.
Thanks a lot.
Hi, I use ADAPT mainly for postension of beams. It is very easy to use and the results are reliable.
For slabs I think you are better off using SAFE. It works really well for slab on grade and mat foundations.
For post tension slab you may try ram concept you can download it in the software section.
I have experience in using both Safe and Cedrus for PT Slabs.
My comments are, Safe is not very flexible compared to Cedrus when it comes to designing PT slabs (since Safe only release its PT module in the latest v12)
The control of Tendon profiles, definition of losses, stress check in Cedrus is quite mature.
i think Cedrus is better, even though graphically it is not as good as other softwares.
ADAPT is the best one I found for 3D.
You can use RAPT also but it is 2D.
Regards,
Visu
For 3D, we have a variety of selections such as Adapt, Ram Concept and Safe
For 2D, I think Rapt is still the best.
However, Unless you do the release columns in Etabs model and assign slab as a membrane, Rapt is just for concept design since it is impossible counted correctly in terms of column stiffness and lateral loads effects. Similarly, for Apapt and Ram Concept since there is still a "black box" interaction between Etabs with these software. Thus, back to traditional, Safe is still priority software for slab design with acceptable results.
Any ideas?
(09-02-2010, 07:29 AM)skyscraper Wrote: [ -> ]For 3D, we have a variety of selections such as Adapt, Ram Concept and Safe
For 2D, I think Rapt is still the best.
However, Unless you do the release columns in Etabs model and assign slab as a membrane, Rapt is just for concept design since it is impossible counted correctly in terms of column stiffness and lateral loads effects. Similarly, for Apapt and Ram Concept since there is still a "black box" interaction between Etabs with these software. Thus, back to traditional, Safe is still priority software for slab design with acceptable results.
Any ideas?
Dear skyscraper,
it caught my attention what you've said about that ram concept and Etabs have a "black box" interaction between them.
if you kindly please tell me what do you mean by this black box,is there a problem in the export/import ?
recently I've learned how to manage myself in ram concept for post tensioned slabs,it would be greatly appreciated if you tell us here,on private messages or recommend a link.
ty for your time.
Dear Deadlord
First, I am currently using Ram Concept version 3.1.1. I am wondering whether the current version support otherwise compared to the above mentioned version.
Secondly, as far I know, ram concept only allow for vertical static loads input not for dynamic seismic loads as well lateral loads
Thirdly, there is no option to import/export between Ram Concept and Etabs.
Fourth, Ram concept recommended not to model upper structures to the current slab design ==> ignore the stiffness of these elements
Fifth, To calculate the long term effects, we need to modify in Etabs in model analysis such as modulus, then do the different way to the Ram Concept as the different default values.
Sixth, the way of strip definition in Ram Concept is different to Etabs or Safe leading the different slab behaviour under actions.
Correct me if is am wrong.
Thank you all guys.
One more thing I forgot to mention is that the software have to be able to deal with ribbed and waffle slabs.
thanks again
And one more thing, I will be glad to understand which method is generally used, 3d or 2d?
which one is better and more easy to handle?
thanks
Quatermain,
If you want to design 2D PT Beam, RAPT is still the best option.
However, if you want to design a 3D plate with Irregular Slabs and support conditions, i still think Cedrus is much better choice compared to Safe or Adapt.
I have to agree with kuporakuen. It is generally harder to control the PT profile in Safe as compared to Cedrus. Especially when you have to define the design strip before you draw your Tendon in Safe. else, you have to determine the support, maximum high point and low point of your Tendon one by one. It is so much harder to control the graphical interface in Safe (try it yourself if you don't believe me). Give some time for CSI to improve Safe because this is only their first version of Safe incorporating PT design.
As a conclusion,
RAPT - 2D Beam, Regular 1 way/2way slabs
Safe - 3D Regular Slabs
Cedrus - 3D Irregular Slabs