[imran]

SAP2000 v14.2.0 design results

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

***************************************
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
***************************************

[red_pool61]

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.....

[ascetic19]

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,

[ascetic19]

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,

[struceng]

Dear Ascetic19,

Please describe the problem about meshing in detailed way.

Regards.

[imran]

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

[ascetic19]

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

[struceng]

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.

[zipatton]

Hi all,

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

best regards

Zipat

[ascetic19]

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?