German 
French 
Spanish 
Portuguese 
Italian 
Arabic 
Russian 
Japanese 
Turkish Column 18 has junction zone security error. How can I overcome these problems? In my previous projects, there were 6-7 of them. Especially in horizontal beam - deep beam transitions, should we give up the deep beam just for this reason? Waiting for your suggestions Thanks in advance
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Column beam junction area safety error
- Thread starter mkrts88
- Start date
muhammetboztoprak
New Member
Re: Too many bbg errors make the installation of the pillow beam and the sagging beam at the same diameter and number.
Hi My Suggestions --For column (B) errors
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
[b ]"9) There is warning B in my columns. How can I solve it?"[/b] Examine --Place beams to support the beginning and end of the stairs, dissolve the ladder together with the structure --It is not appropriate to leave gaps on the ribs as you did. You should not disturb the continuity and support of the ribs. There are examples on the forum for similar situations. Unver ÖZCANInstall the pillow beam and the sagging beam with the same diameter and number of fixes - I tried one of them and it didn't work out - Put beams to support the beginning and end of the stairs, solve the ladder together with the structure --> is this a general recommendation or does it get the bbg error when you do this? It is not appropriate to leave spaces as you did. You should not disturb the continuity and support of the ribs. There are examples on the forum for similar situations. --> a friend said that the municipality wants it this way, I'm not sure
Hello --
there is no such solution in the link I gave, --"mkrts88":353icg47" said:assemble the pillow beam and the sagging beam in the same diameter and number, I tried it on one of them and it didn't work
This is a general recommendation for the stair If you don't put the beam, you should support the stair on the rib this is not the right solution, --"mkrts88": 353icg47" said:--Put a beam to support the start and end of the stair, solve the stair with the structure --> is this a general recommendation or does this remove the bbg error
The one who said this either didn't see the project or didn't understand what it was."mkrts88":353icg47" said:--It is not appropriate to leave spaces on the ribs as you did. You should not disturb the continuity and support of the ribs. There are examples for similar situations in the forum. --> the municipality wants it this way said a friend, I'm not quite sure
Levent Özpak
New Member
Column beam connection shear safety in the program( B) control The control is carried out according to the conditions specified in TBDY 2018 article 7.5 and figure 7.102 and no problem has been detected. If you add the ideCAD project file and state that "this value is calculated incorrectly in this element", we will examine the project file."SENOL":2sa6q64g" said:friends, make the beams fit well on the columns, bring them to the point where the other beams end, so it gives this error because it cannot hold fully. The 10th version of Idecad needs to be improved a little more.
Hello, there are points in your project that may cause problems with modeling and are statically unsuitable: 1- As you can see in the attached picture, you have surrounded the floor gaps with unsupported beams, this is statically not suitable for program data entry. 2- Your cantilever beams and cantilever ribbed floors are modeled as discontinuous, which may cause problems in terms of program data entry and statics 3- Your horizontal beams are 40/30 dimensions, these dimensions are not very suitable for these openings, although they save as in your project. This will cause an increase in beam reinforcements, which will increase errors B. Min 50/32 try to choose. 4- Take care to define your rib beams as constantly as possible for the whole system. 5- I am of the opinion that the carrier system design should be reviewed for the entire system. Best regards."mkrts88":y9vi6ruw" said:18 columns have junction zone security error How can I overcome these problems There were 6-7 in my previous projects Especially in horizontal beam - deep beam transitions, should we give up the deep beam just because of this? Waiting for your suggestions already thanks
semihocaktan
New Member
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
Hello. In the project that I left the link for, I get joint zone security, axial capacity insufficient, basically punching and ground safety negative errors. However, since I am working with a project of this scale for the first time, I am having trouble fixing the errors. I could not fully grasp the axial capacity insufficient error. Could you help? Thank you from now. I am also attaching the architectural plan.Ismail Hakki Besler
Administrator
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
Google search axial out-of-capacity results
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
Hello. My suggestions about modeling; --Fix errors in geometry check, --2. remove the curtains in the basement that are not connected with the building, --2. In the basement floor, you can connect the outer axles with 25/50 beams, --S04 and S17 columns are left alone VERY FAULT MODELING you can make a cassette like the one on the left and connect them exactly, --Check the elevator engine room tick, --Rx=7 Should be A15, Ry=8 A=11, - Check the beams and floor for deflection, - Support the stairs and solve them together, - Increase the thickness of the stair plate, - Lift the columns in front of the elevator curtain and make curtains, -Make the curtains as a group, --4. You can reduce the slab loads on the floor ceiling, remove the wall loads, so you can avoid the maximum floor stress error, --Enter linear wall load where there is a wall above the floor, --Enter if there is an elevator machine floor, --Calculate the finite element widths by 0.25 m. finish. Unver ÖZCAN
muharremyerdelen
New Member
Hello, I am working on a project that has been approved by the municipality. When I design the same on the demo, I get the B error in the S02 column. In both licensed and demo projects, beam and column dimensions and concrete class are the same, there is no B error drawn in the license, I get a B error when I draw from the demo. I would appreciate it if you could examine it. (Analysis settings and other parameters are the same) Municipality approved project;
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
I designed from the demo;
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
muharremyerdelen
New Member
any help?"muharremyerdelen":2lj3i4xn" said:Hi, I'm working on a project that has been approved by the municipality. When I design the same on the demo, I get the B error in the S02 column. The beam and column dimensions and concrete class are the same in both licensed and demo projects, there is no B error in the language. When I draw from the demo, I couldn't find the reason. I couldn't find the reason. I would appreciate it if you examine it. (Analysis settings and other parameters are the same) Municipality approved project;You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
What I saw at first glance is that one of the projects has a 3D analysis model and the other does not. Ground floor beam kz06 reverse in the municipal project (this may be the main reason for the difference). Apart from this, there are also other differences that are overlooked. It is necessary to check both projects down to the smallest detail. When everything is the same, the results will be the same.
Levent Özpak
New Member
Hi, the K06 view direction of the municipal approved project is changed and the K06 beam is resolving the continuous view direction of the K06 beam and K06 resolving in the K06 beam. The joint is evaluated separately in the cut-off safety control K05 and K06 n Continuous analysis is appropriate. Building load information is also different"muharremyerdelen":htzf5s6a" said:Hi, I'm working on a project that has been approved by the municipality. When I design the same on the demo, I get an error B in column S02. In both licensed and demo drawn projects, beam and column dimensions and concrete class are the same, there is no B error in the language. When I draw from the demo, I couldn't find the reason. I couldn't find the reason. I would be glad if you examine it. (Analysis settings and other parameters are the same) Municipality approved project;You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
muharremyerdelen
New Member
As far as I understand, it is not the right solution, but the trick of this job is to change the beam gaze direction. Thanks for your help."Levent Özpak":2my1bn8v" said:Hi, K06 in the municipality approved view direction project. The view direction of the K06 beam connected to the S11 column has been changed. K05 and K06 are not resolved continuously and are evaluated separately in the Joint cut-off safety check. Continuous analysis of K05 and K06 is appropriate. The structure load information is also different"muharremyerdelen":2my1bn8v" said:Hi I'm working on a project that has been approved by the municipality. When I design the same on the demo, I get the B error in the S02 column. In both licensed and demo projects, beam and column dimensions and concrete class are the same, there is no B error drawn in the license, I get a B error when I draw from the demo. I would appreciate it if you could examine it. (Analysis settings and other parameters are the same) Municipality approved project;You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.I designed from the demo;You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.