Ground safety issue

[SonDurak]

THE ATTACHED PROJECT HAS A NEGATIVE GROUND SAFETY ERROR IN THE CORNER POINT, I CANNOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM EVEN IF I ENLARGE THE AMPATMAN. I WAITING FOR YOUR SUGGESTIONS. THANKS...

 

[unver]

Mr. SonDurak A small change in the basis of the project solved your problem. The project is attached. Good luck with. Unver ÖZCAN

 

[SonDurak]

YOU HAVE ENTERED THE BASE AT LEVEL -150 (SAME LEVEL AS THE ELEVATOR PIT), WHEN WE BRING IT TO NORMAL LEVEL AND ANALYZE IT, THERE IS THE SAME PROBLEM AGAIN, UNLESS.

 

[unver]

Mr. SonDurak New proposal for the foundation of the project. The project is attached. Good luck with. Unver ÖZCAN

 

[zeki78]

When we enable the option to increase the soil safety stress when using earthquake loads, it seems to save the ground safety stress in the non-earthquake condition.

 

[Levent Özpak]

Mr SonDurak New proposal for the foundation of the project. The project is attached. Take it easy. Ünver ÖZCAN

Hello Mr. Ünver, There is a mismatch between a part of the P1 fret and the basic level in the model you have created. Dear SonStop; In your project, the foundation system is modeled as in the appendix. To solve the ground tension problem, the mat was enlarged a little more than the left and bottom edge of the foundation and the mat thickness was increased. Also in the Analysis Settings "use multi-conjugate winkler spring method" Other Notes; *The relative storey drift values in the Y direction seem to be at the limit. If your architecture allows, I recommend you to increase the stiffness in the y direction. *There is a Joint Security problem in S8-S9 columns. *I think it is more appropriate to enter -3 for the upper rigid basement floor number. Good work

 

[SonDurak]

THANKS FOR YOUR SUGGESTIONS... Mr. LEVENT; I basically DEFINED 2 1.5 M CURTAINS TO CLOSE AROUND THE ELEVATOR WELL THAT DID NOT CONTINUE ON THE BASEMENT. IT WAS REMOVED IN THE PROJECT YOU SENT. WAS IT WRONG IN MODELING?

 

[SonDurak]

I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION, THE CURRENT ON THE 2nd BODRUM FLOOR IN THE U-SHAPE BROWS THE SYMMETRY OF THE SYSTEM. IS IT A HEALTHY SOLUTION IF WE DEFINE CURTAINS ON THE OTHER SIDE AND OPEN WINDOW SPACE TO THE REQUIRED SECTIONS IN THE ARCHITECTURE?

 

[Levent Özpak]

THANKS FOR YOUR SUGGESTIONS... Mr. LEVENT, I HAVE DEFINED 2 1.5 M CURTAINS ONLY TO CLOSE AROUND THE ELEVATOR WELL THAT DON'T CONTINUE ON THE BASEMENT, DID I SEND YOU THE PROJECT? ] Hello, I didn't feel the need to draw these curtains as I thought they were constructive. CURTAIN ON THE SIDE DISTURBES THE SYMMETRY OF THE SYSTEM. CAN IT BE A HEALTHY SOLUTION IF WE DEFINE CURTAINS ON THE OTHER SIDE, AND OPEN WINDOW SPACES FOR THE REQUIRED SECTIONS IN THE ARCHITECTURE?

If window and door openings do not prevent the floor from being considered rigid. The final decision is yours...

 

[SonDurak]

THANKS.. DOES IT NEED TO BE FULLY SURROUNDED WITH CURTAINS TO ACCEPT SOLID RIGID? FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS NO CURTAIN ONLY ON THE FRONT FACE SURROUNDED WITH CURTAINS ON 3 SIDES. IN THIS CASE, IS IT RIGHT TO ACCEPT RIGID?

 

[Levent Özpak]

THANKS.. DOES IT NEED TO BE FULLY SURROUNDED WITH CURTAINS TO ACCEPT SOLID RIGID? FOR EXAMPLE, 3 SIDES SURROUNDED BY CURTAIN ONLY THE FRONT FRONT DOES NOT ESTABLISH A CURTAIN quot; ] TDY 2007 item 2.7.2.4 and item 2.8.3.2 should be interpreted by You and you should decide.