Flooring System

G

Godfrey

New Member
Subject: Sculpture project Aim: Designing the pedestal (floor system) on which the statue will sit Explanation: The positions of the columns are fixed (as they are aligned with the statue above). I designed the classical beamed flooring system as in the pictures, but as you can see, it is obvious that it will cause problems both in terms of mold and workmanship. In fact, if this system could be made with beamless flooring, for example, it would be more applicable in terms of workmanship. Of course, cassette flooring is also among the options. I thought a lot, but I couldn't design anything other than the classical system. I am waiting for your valuable feedback as soon as possible...
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
It is not clear what you want to do from the system you sent. There is only a carrier system that you set up. Since the architectural dimension of the work (sculpture, etc.) is not known, it is not possible to make a criticism or suggestion. Despite this, I can only say the following about the structure: 1-I couldn't figure out why you use stud beams in such a random column distribution. 2-Why did you place a circular column inside the curtains? (in terms of manufacturing?) 3-The method of connecting the continuous foundation system to the beamless raft is incorrect in the foundation design. Instead, you can attach continuous foundations directly to the columns and then return to the rafter raft system. Or you can make a complete beamless raft. Your ground stresses are low (4-9) and your ground safety stress (25) is good. Do you need such a thick foundation system? 4-I was able to get only 1 of the pictures you sent with Hotlife. The site is holding hotlife after 1st and 2nd downloads. As far as I know, this forum site can upload files up to 2.5-3 MB. For small files, you can use the site's own upload. 5- If there is detailed information about the things to be done, suggestions can be made. Good luck with.
 
On top of this foundation system, a mixed system of approximately 37.5 meters of reinforced concrete shell and inner skeleton of steel-reinforced concrete was designed. As I mentioned in the explanation, the columns were predetermined according to this statue. The elevator curtain was later designed by the architect between the existing columns, so it is inevitable that circular columns will come inside the elevator and stairwell curtains. Of course, this type of curtain column polygon will force the construction site, especially in terms of formwork. For the foundation design, the maximum internal forces are in the central columns. Axial loads on the side columns are at low levels. For this reason, and taking into account the cost, we considered a raft foundation for the center. Because if the entire foundation is made as a foundation raft, the cost is more than pi.r^2 (pi.18^2)-(pi.12^2) = 565 m^2, that is, since the existing raft is 490 m^2, the area It doubles. The thickness of the foundations was chosen as 1 meter due to the gigantic and unaccountable weight of the sculpture. For the foundation design, could you explain a little bit about the drawbacks of connecting the continuous foundation outside to the raft foundation in this way, apart from creating some (5-6 tf/m2) negative safety stress on the connecting beams, Mr. Yılmaz?
 
The picture you just posted looks a little more meaningful. What will you use the bottom of the system for? If I were you, I would place more systematic columns, except for the essential points. The behavior of a systematic system is also more predictable. I would even use a more curtain type system depending on the use of the lower part. Despite appearing to be thick, your floors have too many openings. instead, I suggest you shred it or return to the cassette system as you mentioned. What I said about the basics; 1. 100 cm foundation corresponds to approximately 9-10 storey building. 2. The way you connect your continuous foundation to the raft is not in the data logic of the ideStatik program. In terms of the program, I think your connection method is wrong. 3. I think there is no harm in making the circular columns inside the curtain as square. It will be much easier to manufacture. You should also approximate the loads from the superstructure (sculpture). Perhaps it would be more accurate to think of the system as multiplex in terms of modeling other effects correctly. If you are not going to use the lower floor for any other purpose, I think it would be good to go for the method of shortening the beam system and column lengths from a certain height (for example, half of the floor). The suggestions I made may seem irrelevant because I did not know your system very well. The credit is yours. Good luck with.
 
First of all, thank you very much for your interest and suggestions. There are gradual spaces inside the sculpture (restaurant, exhibition halls, etc.). I also thought of the raft base thickness just like you did. In other words, the effective height of the statue is approximately 30-35 meters. If the floor height is 3 meters in normal buildings, the raft foundation is made with a thickness of 100 cm in a 10-storey, that is, 30-meter structure. Of course it's an approach and it seems logical to me for now. The weight of the outer shell of the statue was stated as approximately 750 t. At the same time, if we take into account the system's own weight and live loads, and with a safety margin, it will have a weight of around 2500-3000 t. The design issue here is that this load can be axially distributed to the columns with a margin of safety, but theoretical approximations are required for moments and shear forces. For example, I divide the sculpture into 4-5 parts along its height, and build a calculation model with the lumped masses in these parts (mdof systems in building dynamics books) and try to find the internal forces. But my time is very limited. You need to think more simply. It tells me to rely on the dimensions of the columns (linear and non-linear shear and moment carrying capacities) and do a complete stirrup tightening, but the economy must also be taken into account. Also, I don't think cassette flooring or beamless flooring can be done. If combining the continuous and rail foundation system in this way is wrong in terms of the mathematical model, what should be done considering the cost?
 
Mr. Yılmaz, you mentioned that the beams are fragile. I chose 35x70 cm and saw that it was sufficient in terms of static. In addition, you can indicate if there is a place where you disagree about the column-beam connections (I connect this beam to this column, not to this column). What is your suggestion?
 
"Also, you should approximate the loads coming from the superstructure (sculpture). I think you'd better go. " I wonder if we can get the effects coming from the superstructure by modeling it as in the attached picture? (with multiple floors) The other picture also shows the arrangement of columns and some beam connections. In such a system, I think that there will be no problem in transferring the load on the 60-70 cm shift of the columns. In addition, the system in this state is around G=1200 tons. Q=360. (I'll pass this on as a note) I didn't mean the slenderness of the beams as a result of a calculation. I wanted to point out that I found the beams a bit fragile in the face of the columns being very strong.
 
Mr. Yılmaz, your approach and the interest you show is very impressive... As you suggested the behavior of the sculpture, which can be considered as a continuous system instead of a shell-designed and lumpy-mass system, your approach to modeling as multiple layers is nice. I studied your suggestion, indeed your system is more systematic and predictable in terms of columns. There is only one problem, as I mentioned before, the columns (many of them) are aligned with the statue above. So the variables in this problem are beams and floors.
 
By the way, there is little difference between 3D and autocad file, because the project has been overhauled.
 
Your project started to make sense as its attachments arrived. Now it is possible to examine and talk more easily. What is your expectation? If you ask a question, it is easier to come to a conclusion together.
 
What I want to do; A - It is not possible to make the ground floor ceiling with beamless flooring or cassette flooring in terms of ease of manufacture (formwork and iron assembly) and architectural aesthetics instead of beamed flooring. B - To be able to include upper floor ceiling tiles in the main system model with any flooring system. This option seems very difficult because the outer shell of the sculpture forms the upper floor boundaries. In this case, it makes it impossible to connect the perimeter columns with the beams. Otherwise, I will have to suggest that the upper floor floors be made as steel platforms. C - It bothered me that I could not create a complete system model. In addition, the sculptor who made the sculpture will determine the upper levels of all columns (red column pieces in the picture), so what the f. ? The link contains the IdeCAD file of the system that is being worked on (the slab calculation axes have not been arranged as it should be, and the staircase is being designed).
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top