German 
French 
Spanish 
Portuguese 
Italian 
Arabic 
Russian 
Japanese 
Turkish Dear Madam; I solved the same housing project, which was solved in another program that I am working and learning at the same time, in idecad. However, when I examined the results, I saw that there was a tremendous difference in the reinforcement ratios. Although there is no way I have not tried, I could not reduce the difference of 30 tons of reinforcement. Are there subtle differences in this program that I am not aware of or are there things that I have made mistakes? I kindly request you to review the attached file. (For the benefit of forum members) Good work. /server2/vitgsy/A_._BLOK.rar.html[/url]
Interpreting ideCAD reinforcement results
- Thread starter hızırex
- Start date
Ismail Hakki Besler
Administrator
Re: IDECAD DONATI KIYASI
The program has done its best to prevent you from using the ideCAD Program."hizirex":37ewa651" said:
Ismail Hakki Besler
Administrator
Re: ideCAD equipment comparison
"hizirex":19tw683c" said:
design_building
New Member
Re: ideCAD reinforcement comparison Hello, I haven't had the opportunity to examine your model yet, but as someone who runs a project office, I spent a long time on these quantity issues. Let me specify by giving the clear name of the programs. When I complained about the quantity of a few projects I made, I got a sta4cad lock from my friend and modeled the same project there (I used sta4cad for a long time, so there can be no wrong modeling). It's a tool, no matter how you steer it, you'll get results. I'll get back to you after I review your model. I wish you good work.
Re: ideCAD reinforcement comparison Hello I will say as someone who uses both programs: There is no such difference, there are only minor differences between the two programs. In order to compare this, it is necessary to use both programs well and enter the project data in the same way and make a comparison. My guess is the difference. Unver ÖZCAN
Re: ideCAD reinforcement comparison Could you send the data of the other program? Since there is such a study, let's compare the column-beam-floor-foundation one by one and try to find out where the difference comes from, let's make use of it. It's just a 12-storey building of 15000 m2 and its reinforcement quantity is 577 tons, 30 tons here is 5%. I would also like to apologize to the construction industry, which made us think that the 5 percent difference is too big, while solving the real behavior of a structure whose load is uncertain, whose behavior is not homogeneous and which can only be predicted, by trying to express it mathematically with certain assumptions.
Re: ideCAD donut kiyasi Hi speedrex, Mr. Ismail gave a bit of a harsh answer with a reproachful attitude, but most likely he will be fed up with this scale comparison. It seems normal to me that there is a difference of 30 tons in a project of this size. I have been preparing projects for 6 years. I can truly say that there is no type of building that has not passed my hands. I say this not as knowing, but to state that I have done enough projects to compare. Unfortunately, I encountered a lot of contractor's quantity problems, especially in apartment-type projects. I have used the mentioned software for 5 years. I have modeled even the 2-storey building with both the software and ETABS so far. I was using ETABS for calculations and designs, and I was using the mentioned software for formwork and beam drawings. There would always be differences in the results. I've had many feedbacks over the years. We are talking about a software that solves the beamless slab flooring system with the moment transfer frame method with tape beams. And moreover, many engineers who do not know what this means can prepare 20-floor projects in this way. It's like a joke... As we were designing with ETABS, our quantity was higher than the market, so we would spend our time explaining our problems and even have to prepare benchmark reports. The majority of the Istanbul market uses the mentioned software. Unfortunately, this is the case even in 30-storey buildings in Fikirtepe urban transformation. The contractor is rightly told that he is an engineer and you are an engineer, why is there such a difference? However, we are a nation that goes to at least 2 doctors when we get sick and says that not every doctor is good. Why should the engineers who design the spaces we live in be any different! I have been following ideCAD since 2007. I started using it professionally 7 months ago. I made a conscious choice after trying for years. I have also made notifications for ideCAD since I started using it. But since everything is spoken openly and transparently here, users are more aware of what is missing or about to be fixed. I can safely say that ideCAD is a much better software right now. What happens in the future, time will tell. I always recommend starting with simple steps when making comparisons. For example, start with the 2-story building. Next, compare the low-rise buildings with irregular plans, as in the project you sent. Next, increase the number of floors. So, step by step, you can more easily understand where the difference starts. But even the currently mentioned software and ideCAD building analysis models are not the same. I haven't looked at your model in detail. The ones that caught my eye are as follows: 1- Curtains are especially important in a building whose plan is so irregular. Your elevator curtain contributes very little to the building. Although it is in the 4th degree earthquake zone, I suggest you increase the curtain ratio. If not, I'd stretch the columns a little longer. 2- Beams also need regulation. Do not stud a 60x32 beam into a weaker beam such as a 25x32 beam. 3- Loads of 148 kg and 15 g on the floor (you don't need to load so much, just round it up) seem like little to me. I guess the floors don't have walls on them. But even just 5 cm of screed is 100 kg/m2. 4- Fixed load on the 15 cm low floors on the basement ceiling is 0. There will definitely be a coating here. You should also make your beam depths a minimum of 54 cm as per the regulation. If you are going to make a beamless plate, delete the 35 cm deep beams and analyze with a semi-rigid diaphragm solution. 5- In some hollow floor slabs, the plate thickness should be 12 cm instead of 7 cm. There is no load difference. Could it have been done by mistake? 6- C30 concrete class was used for columns and walls, and C25 concrete class was used for floors and beams. It is a really difficult job to follow in construction. Even the maximum axial load limit in the code is not met if the columns on the lower floor are accidentally poured C25. 7- In a structure whose plan is irregular in this way, I definitely recommend you to solve with a semi-rigid diaphragm. (You cannot do this with the aforementioned software) 8- If you are going to make a highly ductile solution, it is necessary to pay attention to the column-dirt junction area controls. Regulation limits are not provided in some combinations in your build.
saridurmus
New Member
Re: ideCAD reinforcement comparison Yes, friends have explained the subject well. In order to compare something, it is necessary to discuss both. The question form is wrong, but friends still answered, thank you, I downloaded the link first, but I saw that the other program has no data, so I deleted it without examining it. There was nothing to compare, what could I do. I agree with the reviews written by friends for the programs. Instead of comparing the program, I would say that both programs can analyze what kind of structure at what stage at the moment, and then move on to the comparison. By the way, after I started to use programs like the friends above, I compared a few projects, as they said, when the cook was the same, the result was the same. So I didn't feel the need to repeat it.
Re: ideCAD equipment comparison
Dear Mollaoğlu; I would like to thank you for your valuable information and suggestions. First of all, the purpose of our study is to get used to the program and improve ourselves. When we examine the comments made, we would like to express that they do not perceive us as people trying to defame the idecad program. Our aim here is not to compare the programs, but to test ourselves in terms of the results. This attached project has been prepared and submitted to the author for approval by the company that I am the site supervisor of. Based on this, we can make a solution with a different program, idecad, and see how differences occur, what solutions can be made, so the essence of the job is to see how we will follow technically. Isn't that the purpose of the forums anyway! We would like to say that we want to benefit from the knowledge and experience of other commenters, not their criticisms. Good work..."MaFiAMaX":1c7ncvkc" said:
Re: ideCAD reinforcement comparison Since so much has been written and drawn, let me not move on to the subject without MINT 
. The demo was not installed on my computer. Especially when İsmail Bey entered the subject with such a sharp introduction, I was curious and downloaded the file in the link. I installed the demo and looked at your file. When I saw that it was a very large project as other friends said, I thought it was unreasonable to compare. (although there is nothing to compare). After all, it was possible that there could be differences and mistakes at some point at any time. But I still wanted to see what's in the project, albeit alone. Our MaFiAMaX friend has made very good observations. I identified many of the things he wrote and marked some of them visually on the plan. Then, realizing that what I was doing was a bottomless pit, I deleted the file and my work. But one of the important problems I saw was that there was a problem in the connection of the curtains and the beams (especially the horizontal beam curtain connections). If you select these beams from the report menu and get the beam reinforced concrete report, if you look at the "beam information and static results" section in the beam report, you will find a lot of information about the beam for each beam. One of the information here is the information about the right and left supports of the beam. When you look at it, you will see that one of the supports (sometimes both) is a beam instead of a panel. When you look at the tie beam (?!) and continuous foundation drawings, you will notice that you have certain problems.
. The demo was not installed on my computer. Especially when İsmail Bey entered the subject with such a sharp introduction, I was curious and downloaded the file in the link. I installed the demo and looked at your file. When I saw that it was a very large project as other friends said, I thought it was unreasonable to compare. (although there is nothing to compare). After all, it was possible that there could be differences and mistakes at some point at any time. But I still wanted to see what's in the project, albeit alone. Our MaFiAMaX friend has made very good observations. I identified many of the things he wrote and marked some of them visually on the plan. Then, realizing that what I was doing was a bottomless pit, I deleted the file and my work. But one of the important problems I saw was that there was a problem in the connection of the curtains and the beams (especially the horizontal beam curtain connections). If you select these beams from the report menu and get the beam reinforced concrete report, if you look at the "beam information and static results" section in the beam report, you will find a lot of information about the beam for each beam. One of the information here is the information about the right and left supports of the beam. When you look at it, you will see that one of the supports (sometimes both) is a beam instead of a panel. When you look at the tie beam (?!) and continuous foundation drawings, you will notice that you have certain problems.HakanŞahin
Administrator
Hello, In order to compare the programs, you must make sure that all options that will affect the analysis and reinforced concrete results are selected the same in both programs. For example, in ideCAD, curtains are modeled as shells. You can't do this in other programs. Report/Building Reinforced Concrete Design Analysis Report , Report/Analysis settings report , Report/Building Summary Information and Structure/Summary You can see the options marked in ideCAD by getting the ]reports. You need to confirm that the same options are selected in the program you are comparing. Structure weights directly affect the analysis. Are the loads entered the same? Are the element sizes selected the same? Are the concrete cover thicknesses the same? Choosing different directly affects the amount of reinforcement. Correct typical tooth definition in ribs affects rib reinforced concrete. There are warnings about the typical thread in the geometry check. Is the same rib system selected as the other program? In the project, there are two classes of concrete, C25 and C30. Which elements were used? Was it used in the same way in the other program? Is the rigid floor number the same in both programs? It directly affects the floor forces. To summarize: Programs allow many options to be selected. If you expect the result of the two programs being compared to be exactly the same, you should first confirm that the user-dependent options are the same, and then that the initial data, such as the material, load and geometric information based on the calculation, are the same.
HakanŞahin
Administrator
Hello again, I would like to add some points that I saw in data entry. These affect the mathematical model. The point mentioned above by Mr. Nedim is that on the 1st floor, the beam K148 is defined from below and bypasses the curtain P011. The K151 beam is connected to the curtain in the middle, while the K148 beam is connected from the horse to the K166 beam. You need to confirm that it is entered in this way in the other program as well. There may be other similar faults on other floors. While the P011 curtain ends on the 1st floor ceiling, it continues as a column on the next floor. The shell element at the bottom continues as the bar element at the top. ideCAD models this data entry, but you must confirm that the same mathematical model is set up in the other program. The other thing that catches our eye is the tie beam that you basically defined on the edge of the raft. The tie beam is only the elements that try to compress and pull, and its reinforcement is made accordingly. In the other program, is this element defined as a tie beam, you must confirm its sameness.
HakanŞahin
Administrator
Finally, I would like to make the following note: Let another engineer model the formwork plans of the project you mentioned, based on the floor heights, with Etabs, sticking to the same dimensions. This job is very complex and requires expertise in both programs and above all is engineering work. In fact, in the same program you mentioned, when another engineer enters exactly the same values (when he thinks he has entered them), you will see a 10-15% difference on the basis of quantity. Good work
Hakan Bey ; I would like to thank you for the very valuable information you have provided. We think that this equipment difference may be due to incorrect entries to the program. We would like to express that we will enter the values in the exact same way and make a re-evaluation. After we finish our work, we will return and wait for your comments. good work ..."HakanŞahin":a3o3hxdy" said: