Continuous foundation and raft foundation

E

evanes07

New Member
Have a nice day; In the project I took, I first solved it with a raft foundation, then the foundation level would go down to -4.20 m. I drew the basis constantly, it did not give an error in the geometry control, I got an M error in a column in the report, how can I fix it? Also in the report, the moment value of the continuous foundation was abnormal? Of course, before these, is my continuous basic drawing correct? What are the violations of the regulations? On a continuous basis, is the goal to divide the foundation into as equal pools as possible? Moreover, when I took the quantity in this state, the concrete and iron of the foundation were significantly lower than the raft, is the continuous foundation generally economical? I will be glad if I can get information..
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
"evanes07":1zwn5l8e" said:
Good afternoon; in the project I took, I first solved it with a raft foundation, then the foundation level would go down to -4.20 m. When it comes down, why isn't the raft a continuous foundation? I drew the continuous foundation, it did not fail in the geometry control, I got an M error in a column in the report, how can I fix it? And the moment value of the continuous foundation was abnormal in the report? Of course, before these, is my continuous foundation drawing correct? What are the errors against the regulation? "Is the purpose of continuous basis to divide the foundation into equal pools as possible? Besides, when I took the quantity in this state, the concrete and iron of the foundation were significantly lower than the raft, is the continuous foundation generally economical? I would be glad if I could get information..
Click to expand...
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.
 
Hi, Get the duration base report. Check the bearings at the left and right ends of the continuous foundations. You should see the support name written on each element except for the cantilever foundation beams. The TK60 is not connected to the S13, the foundation beam is defined as idle. TK59 is not connected to S13 and S14, foundation beam is defined as idle. TK38 is not connected to P01 on the right, foundation beam is defined as being free. T39 is not connected to P01 on the left, foundation beam is defined as being free. TK61 is not connected to S16, foundation beam is defined as being free. No foundation is defined under P01. You must enter the foundation beams with the same name so that the panel's nodal points will be captured. After correcting these, the ground safety problem remains in the TK62. To get around this, give the TK62-TK63 a 30cm amp from left to right to its foundations. After analyzing, the m error in the column will disappear. Continuous foundation moments will also appear at the level they should be. Note: the project is version 7 project. Message 7 version was written within the framework of data entry rules.
 
Hello. /quote] Mr. evanes07 I consider making a project as a very serious job, You should be able to explain every line, point, account, .... on the project when asked, If you do not have enough knowledge, do not make a project without understanding, In this forum:
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.
and I suggest you review the answers to the questions in the Forum, You can get yourself in trouble by making unwanted mistakes, Take it as a sincere warning from a colleague.
 
First of all, thanks for the answers, I worked with idecad for only 4 months without getting help from anyone because I have extraordinary health problems, and then I have drawn 15 real projects so far, I have drawn these projects by reading, asking and researching a world in the idecad forum, but until now I have not received any feedback. I have solved a raft foundation in all of them.. I have been drawing projects in real terms for 7-8 months, so I did not find the foundation constantly and I did not research it until now, I already said in the message, I always said that I am a novice in foundation.. Also, the errors in all the column connection points that Hakan stated, the columns were constantly too much during the work. The nodes went beyond because I gave kinks, and since it is said in the forum that the continuous foundations must pass through the column joint points, I tried to pass them through. Besides, I did not know how to pass through the curtain, I learned that too...and also after I put the project here, I tried to pass it through a world of continuous foundations. I did research, according to my project -4.20 m Since there is an excavation requirement up to the level of the -2.60 basement level and the basement floor level should be -2.60, considering the possible basement flooring at 15 cm, I think a continuous foundation beam height of 145 cm is needed, but lean concrete etc. to be poured on the foundation. I think this height may decrease a little when other materials are taken into account. Then, a foundation beam height of 145 cm is impossible to save without amplification, and I gave the appropriate amount of ampoule. I reduced the beam width and found the ideal dimensions for economy and performance. Also, it is humility that many errors do not appear in the geometry control on a continuous basis. one shortcoming... Best regards..
 
Could you please see if there is an error that catches your eye in the project I re-posted? I rearranged all of the columns as it was necessary to fit them into the foundation beams, I gave an ampatage for 160 cm height, but when I took the foundation drawing, the cross-section of the axis no. 2 turned out to be triangular. Also, will the basement floor be the same as the upper level of the foundation beams? If this is the case, I guess that for the area where 4.20 m excavation is required, -2.60 for the basement floor, 160 cm foundation beam height is required with the ampatment? In addition, how can we make the most reasonable way to fit the column S103 to the full beam without removing the stud foundation beam?
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
"evanes07":2l4rcfni" said:
but when I took the foundation drawing, the cross-section of the axle 2 turned out to be triangular?
Click to expand...
Change the trim method on the shear support of the K187 foundation beam or make the eccentricity of the beam 38 cm, there will be no problem. This process is done automatically in version 8.
 
Thank you..I had one more request; Since the beam height will be 160 cm for this project, the municipality does not accept the permanent foundation. Don't you need to make your account in the program? There will also be a basement floor slab, how is this calculated in the program?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top