17-floor housing/beam problems

[alyjeex]

As a final homework, I am doing a 17-floor (2B+1Z+14NK) structural analysis. After the analysis, it gives a warning that shear safety is not provided in some beams. I increased the dimensions of these beams (currently 25*75) but still could not provide them. I think their dimensions are already large. (I thought of things like stirrup tightening, but I don't know how to do it in the program) material C30/S420, earthquake zone-1, framed and curtained system Anyone who understands, please comment

 

[cakilomer]

Cutting safety has many problems. If you add the project, there may be friends who can help you in more detail. Short beams are the most important problem. I think you need to see the data to help.

 

[alyjeex]

The file size is big, I can't add it :cry:

Cutting safety has many problems. If you add the project, there may be friends who can help in more detail. Short beams are the most important problem. I think you need to see the data to help[/ quote]

 

[cakilomer]

1) The shear force should not be greater than 0.22 X bw xdx fcd value. If it exceeds, you can increase the cutting force with stirrups. By increasing the stirrup diameter and decreasing its spacing. 2) If your beam is a short beam, you can reduce the size of the columns to which the beam is connected and relax the beam, or reduce the size of the beam and put a tight and large diameter stirrup. good work

 

[alyjeex]

Sir, as you said, the beams that cause problems are short beams (Ln=1,45m). *100 tried) didn't work. Do you have any other ideas?

1)The shear force should not be greater than 0.22 X bw xdx fcd. If it exceeds, you can increase the shear force with the stirrup. By increasing the diameter of the stirrup and decreasing its spacing. 2) If your beam is a short beam, you can reduce the size of the columns to which the beam is attached and relax the beam or reducing the size of the beam and placing a tight and large-diameter stirrup may be another solution, and finally, removing the beam may also be a solution. good work

 

[Reform Group]

In terms of being a simple solution, two basic solutions can be enlarging the columns or changing the column directions in a weak way, I hope the architecture allows. If the beam will grow, try only vertical direction and try to enlarge it horizontally. Good work.

 

[alyjeex]

I changed the dimensions at 30*55, but I tried it at 25*80. No, it doesn't matter what I did. I showed their places in the attachment. I couldn't solve the problem no matter what I did

In terms of being a simple solution, two basic solutions can be enlarging the columns or changing the column directions in the weak direction, I hope the architecture allows it. If the beam will grow, just try vertical direction and try to enlarge it horizontally. Good work.

 

[cakilomer]

The program makes automatic stiffness reduction to the beams attached to the panels in its own plane. But as far as I can see, the ones in your project are columns, so the program does not do this stiffness reduction. Therefore, you should check your beam loadings and see at which loads the beam's shear force GQ EX EY gives shear error, you can apply stiffness reduction accordingly. You can read and evaluate the regulations. Other than that, other interventions can be made to those beams, but these are at the initiative of the engineer. However, it is necessary to read the regulations and evaluate them. good work

 

[alyjeex]

What I understand is that the beams I mentioned in the annex carry too much moment, and accordingly the shear force is high. As the dimensions increase, the moment capacities increase, the incoming shear force also increases. That is, I cannot solve it by increasing the size. I should reduce the force, otherwise I should remove the U curtains in the elevator space and change the design. For example, crossing the space with a single beam. Do you have any thoughts on this?

The program does automatic stiffness reduction to the beams attached to the panels in its own plane. But as far as I can see, the ones in your project are columns, so the program does not do this stiffness reduction. It gives a cutting error, you have to look at it, you can apply stiffness reduction accordingly. You can read and evaluate the regulations. Other than that, other interventions can be made to those beams, but these are at the discretion of the engineer. However, it is necessary to read and evaluate these regulations. Good work

 

[NYILMAZ]

Try changing the curtains at the beginning of these beams (4 curtains in the vertical direction) and making columns. I say try to make the long columns at the top of the stairs (the ones outside on the same axis) to the size of the curtain. I pointed it out on the picture you posted. If the architecture allows, the blue drawn column curtain group will most likely solve your problem. If the architecture does not allow, you can try the red column curtain group.

 

[alyjeex]

Ok, sir, the problem is solved. I removed the horizontal curtains in the U, it became a single beam in the short beams. After the analysis, there was no problem. I got the cuttings and romaxes. Thank you everyone for their ideas. Architectural If the architecture allows, the blue drawn column curtain group will most likely solve your problem.