Composite Flooring Diaphragm

M

muratk

New Member
Hello When I click on the diaphragms in the analysis model in the attached structure, diaphragms are not displayed. Since we cannot open spaces later in composite flooring in the program, there must be more than one diaphragm on the floor. How should wind loads be entered for these diaphragms in order to use the Apply wind loads to rigid diaphragm option in the analysis settings? In this part, there are 5 diaphragms on each floor. How should we apply the loads? According to the new steel structures regulation, we can no longer use TS 498 for wind and snow loads. In order to enter the cladding, I guess it is necessary to enter the purlin first, because I could not directly cover the facades.
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
Hello Mr. Murat; Analysis model - If you activate the diaphragms, you can see it on the perspective screen. If you want to look at the details of the diaphragms one by one, they are not currently output in the program. Because you can obtain the calculations for the section used in the composite beam design from the composite beam design details. Since the reinforcement design of the upper concrete section is constructive, we do not output any stress distribution. Could you briefly explain what exactly you need? Work is carried out in line with the demands regarding the opening of spaces for the floors. You can use it in future versions. Wind loads for steel are transmitted through coatings in the program. In case of coating entry, it is automatically calculated according to TS 498 and applied as an area distributed load on the coating. The TS EN 1991-1-4 you have chosen in your model is only for open structures (scaffolding, etc.) in the current version. If you want to perform this calculation for the closed structure, you must perform the wind calculation and enter the wind load on the steel columns and beams. You can do this on the coating from the dialog specified in the attached image, or you can enter it with the add load command to steel beams and columns. Due to the necessity of using wind and snow load with TS EN 1991-1-4 together with the Steel Structures Regulation, R&D work was carried out. You can use it in future versions. You do not need to enter a lover for the skin entry. You can enter data with inter-element overlay or polygon overlay commands. Good work.
 
In my project, the program automatically distributes earthquake loads to 5 diaphragms. I have to calculate the wind loads manually and when I want to load them on the diaphragms, I have to distribute them separately to the 5 diaphragms on the floor. When I tick the diaphragms in the analysis model, I cannot see which diaphragm, where, numbers and names are on the floor. Therefore, I do not know what value to enter which diaphragm in the Apply wind loads to rigid diaphragm option. Alternatively, as you said, if we enter the cladding on the facades and the wind loads that we have calculated manually, we will probably have made a correct modeling. Because TS498 wind loads are very low according to eurocode.
 
Hello there; If you select user-defined wind loads from the coating properties by entering the coating, the determined wind forces will affect the columns and beams. It is a correct approach, you can examine the behavior of the structure under the effect of wind load. If you enter a coating, you do not have to use the loads determined from TS 4982. You can use the wind loads you have determined according to TS EN 1991-1-4 from the relevant section in the image. Good work.
 
2007 earthquake code 2.7.5 new earthquake code 4.4.2 article, combining earthquake effects in perpendicular directions, I could not find in automatic combinations at the moment. Do we need to add them manually? Also, under strong column control, the moment capacity of all beams joining the column from one side appears to be zero. This value appears to be zero at all joint points.
 
Ms. Nurgul, I have examined the project you have uploaded, you have entered the value of 0.6 kn/m2 in the +x direction by selecting the user-defined wind load value in the coating settings. When a manual entry is made in this way, would the program only calculate according to the value you entered, or if you left the user-defined option inactive and did not enter any value, it would have calculated the wind loads on the pavements according to ts498, I guess it is true?
 
Hello Mr. Murat; ideCAD; DBYBHY determines the earthquake load according to the most unfavorable result, as stated in the regulations, instead of obtaining tens of combinations one by one for combining the earthquake effects in perpendicular directions, which are included in 2007 and specified in TBDY 2018. There are no errors determined in the program in strong column - beam control. Can you send your project? You may have made an incorrect modeling or adjustment? Good work.
 
In the program, it is written that the article 2.7.5 is applied in the column reports in reinforced concrete design. I was just wondering why it wasn't implemented in steel. Because this item does not separate reinforced concrete and steel design. Also, how can the most negative result be calculated without adding 0.3 times the force coming from the other direction to the same combination? The file is attached for strong column control.
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
The item 2.7.5 you mentioned is applied for both reinforced concrete elements and steel elements and is calculated by increasing as (Ex+-0.Ey) and (Ey+-0.3Ex). However, as in reinforced concrete, it is not shown to the user by giving detailed information.
 
Hello there; ideCAD Steel & Reinforced Concrete 8.62; As I mentioned before, in the determination of earthquake loads, it correctly performs the process of combining earthquake effects in perpendicular directions for both reinforced concrete and steel. There is a difference in display results at the interface between reinforced concrete and steel. If we make a detailed explanation for steel; - First of all, the values you see in the section effects in the analysis results are the raw results. Design results obtained by combining them and, if necessary, increasing with other factors specified in the earthquake code; are shown in the details section of the design screen of the elements. To explain this with an example, the results for g loading, Ex, Ey and G-0.7Ey, which gives the most unfavorable pmm ratio in design, can be checked in the images below. **** In short, the analysis is carried out in accordance with the Earthquake Regulation for Steel. If we come to the other subject, Strong Column - beam; - This control is carried out on moment-transmitting frames bearing earthquake load. In your model, the joint is defined in your weak beams. If the program contains hinges, it does not perform strong column - beam verification. If there is a joint at the end of your beams connected to a column, that directional moment is taken as 0. The values of 0 seen in the report are as follows: i) Since it does not represent the mechanism of the elements that are weakly connected to the column in moment-transmitting frames, 0 is continued. In short, they are not included in strong column-beam control. Good work.
 
2.7.5. Since you did not show the application of the substance as in reinforced concrete, I had to ask. Also, 2007 Prof. Erkan Özer always uses G+Q+Ex-+0.3Ey etc. in his applications. Therefore, moment, axial force etc. required strengths always seem higher than in the program. The plastic moment capacity of the beam on one side appears to be zero in the moment-transmitting connections seen in the column report. Can you send the corrected version of this? Thanks.
 
In the article 2.7.5 of the 2007 Earthquake Code, it says internal forces in the direction of the a and b principal axis of the elements. In this direction, there are shear forces and bending moments. Torsional moment and axial force are not in this direction. If you combine in this way, you will also increase the normal strength. If you model and solve the teacher's example under the same geometry and load conditions, you will find the same analysis results. That study was done before the steel regulation came into effect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top