saridurmus
New Member
When the beams are flat, isn't the system weak in terms of relative translation?
I am making a system with cassette flooring for the first time. In the program that will be a 2-storey continuous foundation, should I define the cassette flooring separately as secondary beams or can you look at the system directly from the cassette toolbar. I am waiting for your suggestions."Ismail Hakki Besler":2si4rqlo" said:The two systems give the same results in terms of analysis results. However, in the system on the right, the plate part is equipped with a constructive structure in terms of bending. The difference here is in terms of deflection. Enter it as a separate system when designing cassette flooring within the scope of 2018 regulation. And definitely solve with semi-rigid diaphragm modeling. The calculation made in this way is suitable and gives the same result in both systems, except for floors. However, 2018 regulation has brought many controls for floors as well. In order to make these controls healthy with ideCAD, the system on the left (separate beams and In the image below, the F11 and F22 components of the in-plane stresses formed in the floor particles of your system on the left can be seen. . Regulation He requests the implementation of the rules he wrote in section 7.11. These checks should be made and demonstrated to be provided.
If the tooth spacing is d<=70 cm in both directions, you can define it with the cassette laying command.You can review the following links about the subject."cvlengineerr":3ph0u5oz" said:I am making a system with cassette flooring for the first time. In the program, which will be a 2-storey continuous foundation, should I define cassette flooring separately as secondary beams or directly from the cassette toolbar, can you look at the system. I am waiting for your suggestions. [url =https://www.file.tc/server29/rc65b6/ISIMSIZ_PROJE.ide10.html]https://www.file.tc/server29/rc65b6/IS ... ide10.html[/url]