German 
French 
Spanish 
Portuguese 
Italian 
Arabic 
Russian 
Japanese 
Turkish yunussacikk
New Member
hello, when I do the analysis, the reinforcement gives insufficient warning in the columns, why the program does not throw the reinforcement even though my column purchase is in the 1s.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Insufficient reinforcement in columns v10
- Thread starter yunussacikk
- Start date
Ismail Hakki Besler
Administrator
Re: insufficient reinforcement in columns Could you add a project, please.
yunussacikk
New Member
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
YasinTezel
Member
Hello, in the 2018 earthquake code, the length of the column lower and upper confinement zone was changed to 1.5 bmax. (It was bmax in 2007.) In addition, compaction is made where the column longitudinal reinforcements are overlapped. Due to your column cross-section and storey height, the entire column is considered as a confinement zone. Separate reinforcement spacing in the confinement zone and the overlap zone is currently not available. Analyze again by making Ø10/10/10/10 in all columns. I take the error you reported regarding the reinforcement selection in our notes.
YasinTezel
Member
Your project also had tile mesh generation problems. The corrected version is attached.
"YasinTezel":2fi5789h" said:Hello, in the earthquake code of 2018, the length of the column lower and upper confinement zones was changed to 1.5 bmax. Due to its height, the entire column is considered as a confinement zone. Separate reinforcement spacing in the confinement zone and the overlap zone cannot be given at the moment. Analyze again by making Ø10/10/10/10 on all columns. I take the error you reported about the reinforcement selection in our notes. HE SAYS I CAN'T SOLVE THE PROBLEM, CAN YOU HELP ME?You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
HakanŞahin
Administrator
The concrete cover was chosen as 2.5 cm in the column parameters. After defining the concrete cover by 3 cm and removing the column reinforcement fixation, the insufficient reinforcement message will not appear when you analyze again. Alternatively, you can give your own column stirrup as fi8/13/8/10/13.
thanks for your interest. Doesn't the regulation allow a min 2.5 cm concrete cover?"HakanŞahin":1uhvp36l" said:Concrete cover was selected as 2.5 cm in the column parameters. After defining the concrete cover as 3 cm and removing the column reinforcement fixation, the message of insufficient reinforcement will not appear when you re-analyze. Alternatively, you can set the column stirrup on fi8/13/8/10 You can give it as /13.
HakanŞahin
Administrator
1.) Definitions and minimum values for concrete cover and net concrete cover are given in TS500. Considering these values, you need to enter the most appropriate concrete cover value. Concrete cover: The distance from the longitudinal reinforcement center of gravity to the outermost of the concrete (We give this value in the parameters) Net concrete cover: The distance from the outermost reinforcement edge to the outside of the concrete (TS500 Article 9.5.1, minimum values are given) 14' longitudinal reinforcement and 8' If we look at the stirrups, at least 1.4/2 + 0.8 + 2 = 3.5 cm concrete cover value can be written in the parameters for the columns that are not open to external influences. 2) As the net concrete cover increases, the need for reinforcement increases as the area inside the wrap decreases. In addition, the stirrup calculation of columns with high ductility level in earthquake method also depends on the winding area.
I said here. When I said that the reinforcement in the column is insufficient, you said as a suggestion to increase the concrete cover. Wouldn't this solution be wrong because if the concrete cover increases, the need for reinforcement will increase? I ??"HakanŞahin":28p91ulf" said:1.) Definitions and minimum values for concrete cover and net concrete cover are given in TS500. Considering these values, you need to enter the most appropriate concrete cover value. Concrete cover : From the center of gravity of the longitudinal reinforcement, the definitions and minimum values of the concrete are given in the TS500. distance to the outside (we give this value in the parameters) Net concrete cover: The distance from the outermost edge of the reinforcement to the outside of the concrete (TS500 Article 9.5.1, minimum values are given) If we look for 14' longitudinal reinforcement and 8' stirrup, it is not open to external influences. For columns, at least 1.4/2+ 0.8 + 2 = 3.5 cm concrete cover value can be written in the parameters 2) As the net concrete cover increases, the need for reinforcement increases as the area inside the wrap decreases.In addition, the stirrup calculation of the columns with high ductility level in earthquake method also depends on the wrap area.
HakanŞahin
Administrator
Let me summarize the subject again: 1. The missing Ace message occurs when you give a 2.5 cm concrete cover because the program cannot automatically select the stirrup spacing. If you give the stirrup as fi8/13/8/10/13, the missing Ace message will disappear. (Answer to your first question) 2. If you enter the concrete cover at least 3 cm, the program can select automatic spacing and the missing As message is not displayed. According to the criteria already given in TS500, it is more appropriate to enter 3.5 cm. (Suggestion to correct the value of the concrete cover you entered) 3. If the concrete cover increases, the need for reinforcement increases, but this solution is not wrong. Accordingly, the equipment is selected. (answer to your last question)
hello friends, I bought a yarn factory project of 9.547 m2. The distance between the columns is 10.15. There are 83 columns in total. There is a project that was made before, but because it was lost, they came to me and they wanted me to draw it from the beginning. I am getting reinforcement error in the column in the analysis. If I did, the problem was not solved [email protected] I have an e-mail address, if anyone can help, I can send you the project by e-mail. Just send a message to my e-mail. thanks in advance
Hello there; You cannot solve a structure with these axis dimensions with these element dimensions. 1st option: Divide your columns into 100/100 beams, 60/100 or 100/80 (floor height will be decisive) and 40/80 secondary beams and remodel your floors using d=20cm slab slabs. . Option 2: You can outsource the project to an experienced engineer. Best regards.
Hello there; The situation seems more complicated than it seems. However, we can easily say that it is quite normal and expected for columns and beams to give errors such as insufficient reinforcement in your model. We do not know exactly what is expected from you, but if the structure is insufficient, it must be strengthened. Best regards. Sent via iPhone using Tapatalk
Mr. Yasin, hello We are trying to make changes and analyze a project that we have made to the 2007 earthquake code in the ide7 version, according to the 2007 earthquake code in v10. However, in the light of the suggestions you have mentioned above, we cannot ensure the cutting safety even though we have reduced the stirrup spacing in the S22 and S33 columns. ://we.tl/t-p6BeoN7pEh]https://we.tl/t-p6BeoN7pEh[/ur l]"YasinTezel":186e1jys" said:Hi, in the earthquake code of 2018, the length of the column lower and upper confinement zone was changed to 1.5 bmax (it was bmax in 2007.) In addition, the column lengthwise reinforcements are overlapped. Due to its height, the entire column is considered as a confinement zone. Separate reinforcement intervals in the confinement zone and the overlap zone cannot be given at the moment. Analyze again by making Ø10/10/10/10 on all columns. I take the error you reported about the reinforcement selection in our notes.
Levent Özpak
New Member
Hello, columns in columns S22 and S33 shear force value exceeds the limit values.To overcome the problem, you need to enlarge the section, use higher strength concrete or make improvements in the carrier system to reduce the incoming shear force from the column.Note: -The regulations made for column transverse reinforcement spacings in Ver 10 according to TBDY 2018 Due to TBDY 2007, the wrapping zone conditions are not automatically checked (Automatic control is only performed according to TBDY 2018). Save your project as an old version and export it. Solve it in version 8.62. -It would be appropriate to analyze the dilations in separate project files. Good work"infernal":26tfzjcj" said:Hello Mr. Yasin. We are trying to make changes and analyze a project we made in ide7 version according to 2007 earthquake code in v10, according to 2007 earthquake code. I would be very grateful if you could help. Best regards..You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.