Advice about the project

[eissenhover]

Re: PROJECT DESIGN AND PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED

Mr. Coşkun, there are frames in your structure. I said that 75% of the earthquake was carried by the curtains in case the frames could not be formed properly. There is no need for this for this structure at the moment, but I saw a lot of studs in the structure, especially in front of P05 and P06, there were studs at a short distance. I recommend that you eliminate these studs by lengthening these curtains, where shear cracks may occur. If you can reduce the other studs by extending the columns or adding additional columns where possible, your structure will be healthier. The curtains in the building are not bad, evenly distributed. This situation is good, I think there is no such exaggeration. Your periods are also compatible for a 10-floor building. I think some of the beams were larger than the column he stepped on to save them from cutting. This is not a pleasant situation. Either increase the column to these dimensions, or (I suggest) accept that such high shear short beams will crack and perform a cracked section stiffness reduction. (0.4 EI) so they take less impact and you can recover with a smaller size. I think you will make raft the foundation. I would not recommend making a section less than 110 cm. Note: They do not accept 20 in the butt beams at the ends of the closed overhangs, you need to make 25. take it easy.

Mr. Suatyy Can you explain more about the case of not forming frames? Let's be careful in the next projects. Are you talking about the case that the columns are not connected with the beams? I can't stretch the curtains, there are ventilation windows in those parts. I was thinking of reducing the beam sizes by doing stiffness reduction as you said, I will follow your advice. Isn't the raft basically 110 cm too high? When I look at the calculations, a 70-75 cm raft saves with additional reinforcements. I tried to solve it with the rafter raft, but it did not save even though the sections grew too much. Regards, take it easy

...Hello Mr. Suat. I have a question, you know, if 70 or 75% of the earthquake (the rate is not important for my question at the moment) carries curtains or if it overflows, it would be good. What I want to ask is, how do you determine this in the suki program (idecad). I don't know how much of the earthquake force is, do you give the command to the program so that the curtain will carry that much. Where do you look at the alpha value your friend is talking about. Arkads alpha dropped to 50 percent or so when he lifted the curtain, he said. Where is he examining it? If you could help with this situation, I would greatly appreciate it

 

[eissenhover]

Re: PROJECT DESIGN and PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED I think you are talking about the ace value presented in the report titled pitch cut control, and you recommend this value to be around 70%. do i understand right?

 

[mühendise]

I'm getting a warning of the maximum purchase price as a result of my analysis, it says that the maximum purchase price has been exceeded in the basement and ground floor beams and columns. How can I fix it? can you help me (hollow floor slab)

 

[unver]

Re: maximum pursantaj Hello Increase the sections and/or concrete values. Unver ÖZCAN

 

[mühendise]

Re: I'm getting a warning about the maximum pursantaj original thanks, when I increased the sections, some got better, some did not.

 

[mcoban]

Friends, I am waiting for advice from experienced friends about the project I have prepared, I would appreciate it if you could review and tell me your suggestions, thank you (what are your recommendations for the raft foundation, the ground parameters are correct)

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[ozdemirhasan35]

you have defined wall load on all beams, all floor loads are taken as 0.2, I don't know the architecture but first you should review the loads.

 

[mcoban]

I'm going to define wall loads and floor loads. I wanted to get advice as a whole system and I couldn't get over the raft foundation floor safety problem, can you help me about it?

 

[ozdemirhasan35]

I wanted to get advice as a whole system to define wall loads and slab loads and I couldn't get over the raft foundation ground safety problem, can you help about it

then check the ground stresses after entering the loads as they should be try to solve it by increasing the max stress on the edges, try to keep the height of the raft foundation to a minimum to save stapling.Is this a parking lot?Can you upload the architecture as well?

 

[NYILMAZ]

If you are going to do the basic data entry separately, then you should enter it as two separate structures. As it can be understood from here, the application will be done separately. (it seems difficult to concretize all of them at once) In that case, it would be more appropriate to make the project as two separate projects in terms of comfortable use at the construction site. I wish you had made the main carrier beams as wide as you made them high. That way, you wouldn't have to deal with a lot of equipment piling up. Under normal conditions, your raft height is high, but as the distance between the columns increases, it is normal to encounter stapling problems. Different results can occur when you optimize loads. For example, the wall loads on the roof beams. I suggest you to solve semi-rigid diaphragm and superstructure interactively. Depending on the soil class, you can increase the soil stresses under earthquake loads. N. YILMAZ

 

[unver]

Hello. Soil safety 8t/m2 calculation result is 26.6 t/m2, which is too much. My suggestions; --You have given floor group A, so low floor can be C or D. If so, you should solve the superstructure interactively. TDY 2.2.1.5 -- If the floor is not D group, you can increase the floor safety by 50%, -- You can reduce the live loads on the roof and remove the wall loads, -- If this is a school building or similar building, the live loads on the normal floors are low, --Two blocks side by side Since you have solved it, take it so that it is rigid in the X direction and not rigid in the Y direction, -- Activate the TS498 HY reduction from the load safety, Even when these corrections are made, the ground safety is 20.58 t/m2. Additionally -- Semi-rigid diaphragm solution, -- Soil improvement or piling for the ground may be appropriate. - Don't forget the ladder. Unver ÖZCAN

 

[mcoban]

First of all, thank you for your interest. While reading the sections about dilatation in the forum, it was suggested to solve the structure as two different structures in case of dilatation in the foundations. Mr. nyılmaz, you mentioned this situation and I recommend you to solve it as different structures.

 

[emrah33]

Re: There are errors in my project, I couldn't solve it

 

[unver]

Hello emrah33 My suggestions; --The upper rigid basement floor number should be -1 and -2, --There is no frame on the outside starting from the 1st floor in the long direction, --The connections of the curtains around the elevator to the floor are very weak, Y direction is good but X direction is very weak. Increase its rigidity. Unver ÖZCAN

 

[NYILMAZ]

Firstly ; I suggest you solve a semi-rigid diaphragm. Apply live load reduction factor Use seismic loads for ground stresses. R coefficient is entered as 7 in both directions, but there are no curtains in the system. You can enter the elevator part with the panel object. Include stairs in the system. Review loads. (all beams have 13cm brick load) Single rib cantilever slabs cannot be made, arrange them. On the 1st floor, columns s4, s5, s6 and S19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 are connected in one direction. K39 beam became the only console from S21 column? The S7 column is entrusted to Allah... As the two-way consoles and consoles do not have continuity, there are also beams attached to them. Make the widths of the ground floor cantilever beams the same as the continuing beams. The directions of the continuing beams in some beams are opposite. (for example, K50 K51 (reverse) -52 on the ground floor and 45-46 (reverse) - 47- 48 reverse ) Fix it with the command ]edit/object edit/beam-foundation/set beam-basic direction[/u]. Make some split beams one piece. (give a name) Some columns have minor angle errors that you probably made by mistake. (s19, s11 etc.) Also, by making changes in the size or location of some columns, you can get rid of such multiple and studs at the bottom of the support. (eg S15, s11, s12 s1 N. YILMAZ in the middle.

 

[NYILMAZ]

Oh, and I forgot a very important detail: There is a column named S2 in the middle, it was forgotten in the basement and ground floor. That is, the column starts after the ceiling of the ground floor, does not descend to the foundation.

 

[e.zrl]

Friends, I would like to get your opinions on a project I am working on.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[NYILMAZ]

Friends, I want to get your opinions on a project I'm working on, I had to make a lot of studs and beams, I would appreciate it if you could give your opinions and suggestions on this subject.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

I looked at your project. In general, there is no problem. Since you sent it as a floor, I analyzed all floors, including the basement, as the same. There are not as many studs as you fear. I can even say that you have created a load-bearing system that will be considered good in general. Some column sizes are unnecessarily large, I think. Considering the beam loads, all beams are 19 cm wall. (I didn't change this) Some columns, I changed their dimensions (I made them square) and some I changed their orientation (to pass column beam shear safety B). Such as the translation of the doors. When placing the columns, the long side - short side relations being staggered, one long and one short usually cause you to provide easy and good solutions. Correct the floor loads of the balconies incorrectly. There seems to be a mistake in the basement floor elevations. (what's the top elevation, I made an edit). You set the attic wall loads. You said the basement floor is rigid. I didn't change it as it probably is. In this case, when I analyzed, there was no problem. If the columns in the corners of the balcony are not essential, you can remove them. Console can work in this part. (if appropriate from an architectural point of view) N. YILMAZ Note: I did not add the project on purpose, I am attaching a picture. .

 

[e.zrl]

Friends, I would like to get your opinions on a project I am working on, I had to make a lot of stud beams, I would be very grateful if you could give your opinions and suggestions on this matter.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

I reviewed your project. In general, there is no problem. Of course, since you sent it as a single floor, I considered all floors, including the basement, as the same and analyzed. Not as many studs as you fear. In fact, I can say that you have created a carrier system that will be considered good in general. Some column sizes are unnecessarily large I think. Looking at the beam loads, it seems that all beams carry 19 cm of wall (I didn't change this). I changed the dimensions (square) of some columns and changed the orientations of some of them. (to pass column beam shear safety B) Slight modification of architecture may be required. Such as the translation of the doors. When placing the columns, the long side - short side relations being staggered, one long and one short usually cause you to provide easy and good solutions. Correct the floor loads of the balconies incorrectly. There seems to be a mistake in the basement floor elevations. (what's the top elevation, I made an edit). You set the attic wall loads. You said the basement floor is rigid. I didn't change it as it probably is. In this case, when I analyzed, there was no problem. If the columns in the corners of the balcony are not essential, you can remove them. Console can work in this part. (if appropriate from an architectural point of view) N. YILMAZ Note: I did not add the project on purpose, I am attaching a picture. .

Hello N. YILMAZ, First of all, thank you very much for your interest and reply. I made a few edits in line with your suggestions, I would be very happy if you could review and share your suggestions again. I wish you a good work

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[NYILMAZ]

Hello N. YILMAZ, First of all, thank you very much for your interest and reply. I made a few edits in line with your suggestions, I would appreciate it if you could review and share your suggestions again. I wish you a good work

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

I looked at your project. There doesn't seem to be a problem in general. As the shortcomings: Won't you enter the system by adding one more floor to the elevator bucket at the top. Balcony loads (and loads of stairwell) need to be corrected. I guess you don't have low floors. Some floors have walls on them. You can enter as a linear load. Congratulations, good work. N YILMAZ Note: The word "congratulations" here is because it is a simple and unadventurous work, both architecturally and statically.