SAP2000 v14.2.0 design results
Current time: 10-26-2021, 11:02 PM
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Author: imran
Last Post: imran
Replies 13
Views 8847

SAP2000 v14.2.0 design results
#1
SAP2000 v14.2.0 design results

[Image: info.png]
I analyzed and designed the model but the steel requirement is less in only one column. So if some one can tell me what is wrong with my model I would be greatly obliged.

The model is attached

[Image: screen.png]
[Image: 28101093992876287373.png]

[Image: Download.png]

***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:

http://forum.civilea.com/thread-27464.html
***************************************


The ONLY dumb question is one that is not asked
#2
It seems, that have a some mistake in v.14.2.2.
I checked similar model according to EC 2-1992.
In the same column steel requirement is less......
Bad.....
red_pool61, proud to be a member of Engineering Forum since Jan 2009.
[-] The following 1 user says Thank You to red_pool61 for this post:
  • imran
#3
i worked on model limited time

first : problem is about sap2000 mesh options. if you delete slab elements or auto mesh option,
you can get same results from column design.

i have to go out now if i find what the error is, i am gonna share with you

regards,
jaffa kree
[-] The following 1 user says Thank You to ascetic19 for this post:
  • imran
#4
dear friends,

in sap 2000 14.2 or 14.2.2 ( i have no tried previous ones )
there is serious problem about meshing shell elements.
pls. be aware of this stiuation
i could not find any solution for this changing references

if you know solution for this pls. share with us

best regards,


jaffa kree
#5
Dear Ascetic19,

Please describe the problem about meshing in detailed way.

Regards.
Any content in the links of this post is for evaluational purposes and not to be used in any other way. If you don't agree that, you must not use it. If it's not free and you're using it in any other way than evaluational purposes, you have to buy a licence.
#6
I tried the same model in SAP2000 v12 and it was fine so i think it is only isolated to v14 and above.

struceng --> please check the model it is giving incorrect steel in columns and also giving very high steel in 2nd storey (sap2000 v12 and v14) while etabs gives steel area of arount 5 in^2 and sap gives around 9 in^2.

I detected it in such a simple model but for a complex model it would be impossible to detect
The ONLY dumb question is one that is not asked
#7
(08-26-2010, 12:44 PM)struceng Wrote: Dear Ascetic19,

Please describe the problem about meshing in detailed way.

Regards.

after defining slab elements,

if you do not assign auto mesh over those slabs there is no difference
column design results,

if you do assign auto mesh over those slabs there is difference between column design results as shown imran' s posts

jaffa kree
#8
The problem is not about meshing. It is about M2 design moment in concrete design. When M2 is negative and M3 is positive, rebar area is calculated lower than it must be except minimum reinforcement is applied (also tested for other structures). For other sign configurations of M2 and M3, there seems no problem. For Eurocode 2:2005 there seems no problem but all other codes are affected. There seems no problem in steel design.

This error is very annoying for conrete designers.

Regards.
Any content in the links of this post is for evaluational purposes and not to be used in any other way. If you don't agree that, you must not use it. If it's not free and you're using it in any other way than evaluational purposes, you have to buy a licence.
[-] The following 6 users say Thank You to struceng for this post:
  • imran, Dell_Brett, aslam, rudyhera03, ascetic19, Grunf
#9
Hi all,

For SAP2000 v14.2.2 and Eurocode2, the design is OK for me.

best regards

Zipat
[-] The following 1 user says Thank You to zipatton for this post:
  • Grunf
#10
dear struceng,

this error really funny. i do not understand csi.
how can they do this kind of mistake?

best regards,

on the other hand,

i wanna say something

i removed automesh on same model,

m22 sign is negative but results are same. i think problem is not only about
m22 signs

am i right?
jaffa kree




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)