Sta4cad reports of the project you compared with Sta4cad Can you attach the idecad project file to the message?"serpilakbas":1isruf6f" said:I've been using idecad for 3 months. It throws a lot of reinforcements compared to sta4cadle, is there a problem with the parameters? I'm having a lot of problems with beams and continuous foundations. I'd be glad if you could help
"serpilakbas":24itpdy1" said:I did not analyze the same project in two programs, but it was too much to throw 8 by 14 on a width of 40 cm, it was throwing 6 on the same width. I used both programs at different times. When I compared the parameters, I could not see a noticeable difference.[ /quote] Hi, The amount of reinforcement is the result, so did you encounter the moments based on the reinforced concrete calculation and/or the normal forces if the element is column? What is the structure/foundation condition? Did you solve the superstructure interactively? How did you accept the rigid diaphragm model, is it full or semi-rigid? Did you solve it? Did you calculate according to mode combining or response analysis? Did you apply the TS500 redistribution item? Are the irregularities the same? Are you sure that there is no data entry error in the program?
"serpilakbas":1b3j5p5j" said:in general, ide also throws more equipment, this is true for every building element (at least this is my determination because I encounter problems that I do not encounter in the stadium) I would like to answer the questions you asked here one by one, but your style was interesting I'm in the learning phase. I modeled housing in both programs. I think it's normal to go for comparison. In my first question, I asked if there is a problem with the parameters. The problem may be in my knowledge, but I couldn't understand why you wanted to measure what I know instead of telling me what to do. Thank you ] Please don't take it that way. What I wrote was purely aimed at listing what could be different. Of course, you can make comparisons, it's normal to do it, but you should appreciate that you need to provide enough data for the situations you made the comparison so that we can make an accurate and accurate assessment and help you. have both data in your hands lı... At least you can add the project you made with ideCAD to the message. You need to give us enough data to find out if the result/difference is normal.
Since only 16 diameter is selected in the reinforcement selection, the program cannot automatically increase the automatic reinforcement."serpilakbas":825upuc0" said:doesn't the program need to automatically discard the insufficient reinforcement
To overcome this situation, instead of increasing the diameter of the reinforcement, you can arrange the raft slab axles in a more economical way. The program finds the raft reinforcements according to the position of the calculation axis you defined, then looks at the difference of the additional reinforcements for other regions. The defined axis of calculation coincides with the columns. This is the location where there is more moment regionally in your project (the raft calculation is in the form, you can examine it from a 3D frame)... However, if you define the raft calculation axis by shifting it 2 meters above the D axis, the reinforcement on the axis will be calculated less. Additional reinforcement needs of other regions will be as much as the difference. 16 reinforcements are enough for all of them. Note: In the projects you add, if you specify what element is excessive in which element, as on this basis, we can also look at that subject if you specify it as the element name."serpilakbas":825upuc0" said:causing insufficient reinforcement in the foundation
In the project you sent, 11.22 cm2 reinforcement in continuous openings in the foundations came out as required (basic minimum works), and the program selected the nearest reinforcement to 12,315 cm2. Moments appear normal on supports. Reinforcements are around this area... Continuous foundation parameters: Minimum reinforcement ratio = 0.003 concrete cover = 6.5 cm foundation beam dimensions = 40 /100 minAs= (100-6.5) * 40 * 0.003 = 11.22 cm2 The reinforcement selected by the program is 5fi14 flat + 3fi14 pile, total 12.315 cm2 0.003 is entered in excess here, the program's default value is 0.001 and minAs= 0.8fctd/fyd is automatically checked, this value is 0.003' for this project."serpilakbas":25yl2w75" said:in the small project I sent, I was told by another engineer that there was excess reinforcement in the foundations.
"serpilakbas":25yl2w75" said:When I wanted to define ribs as ribs, I was told to do it by converting it to tape first.According to TDY, you have to do it on C and D floors... For other cases, it's your initiative."serpilakbas":25yl2w75" said:is it better to make a superstructure interactive solution
German 
French 
Spanish 
Portuguese 
Italian 
Arabic 
Russian 
Japanese 
Turkish