Linear Calculation Method Application Limits Check

A

actombo

New Member
Hello, It is desired to add another floor on the existing single-storey building. The lower floor of the building was built in 2002. It has a project. Core results Although the C30 is a single storey, it is designed as a raft with a foundation beam. All of the columns have been tightened to 30/60 and the beams have been tightened in the same way. While the flooring reinforcements were made using 10 gauge iron, it was more than enough on the safe side. Currently, a floor on the building is requested by the owner. The project account report was made according to 2 floors. We entered all the values. We added the upper floor, but there is a problem with the echo value. How can I overcome this problem? What can I do when one of the linear calculation method checks is not available? I would appreciate your help. I added the project. Good work
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
Hello there; I reviewed your project. There does not appear to be a problem with the performance of the structure. As you have written, the structure is on the safe side, and the "Limited Damage" performance confirms this. However, in TBDY Section 15.5.3.1 (c), "In reinforced concrete buildings, on any floor other than the upper floor of the building, the average of the scaled ECHO values of the vertical ductile elements (columns, shears and reinforced partition walls) for each earthquake direction and the shear force of the beams in the earthquake direction greater than the average ECO value." item has. This item states that linear performance analysis cannot be applied if it occurs in the structure. Floor reinforcements do not contribute to the performance analysis. Since plasticization is not expected in these elements, flooring reinforcements do not provide any performance contribution to the structure. The ECO value is actually the ratio of the impact to the capacity. If the capacity is low, the ECO value will also be large. In your project, the EKO of the vertical ductile elements was found to be larger than the EKO of the water beams, which may be due to the fact that the structure was equipped for a single storey. If the column reinforcements were a little more, the ECO of the vertical ductile elements could be lower. Another issue is that some situations occur according to Design According to Strength. Since the reinforcements are fixed, column-beam cutting safety is not provided in some elements when you perform DGT, that is, normal analysis. If this value provides, it is very possible for the ECO value to return to normal. Best regards...
 
"oguzcan":1cdsrn0x" said:
Hi; I have examined your project. There does not seem to be a problem with the performance of the structure. As you wrote, the performance is on the safe side and the performance is "Limited Damage" confirms this. However, TBDY Section 15.5.3.1 ( c) In "Reinforced concrete buildings, on any floor other than the upper floor of the building, the average of the ECHO values scaled by the shear force of the vertical ductile elements (columns, shears and reinforced partition walls) for each earthquake direction is greater than the average ECO value of the beams in the earthquake direction." This item states that if it occurs in the building, linear performance analysis cannot be applied. There is no contribution to the performance analysis of flooring reinforcements. Since plasticization is not expected in these elements, flooring reinforcements do not provide any performance contribution to the structure. The ECO value is actually the ratio of the effect to the capacity. If the capacity is low, the ECO value it will be big . In your project, the EKO of the vertical ductile elements was found to be larger than the EKO of the water beams, which may be due to the fact that the structure was equipped for a single storey. If the column reinforcements were a little more, the ECO of the vertical ductile elements could be lower. Another issue is that some situations occur according to Design According to Strength. Since the reinforcements are fixed, column-beam cutting safety is not provided in some elements when you perform DGT, that is, normal analysis. If this value provides, it is very possible for the ECO value to return to normal. Best regards...
Click to expand...
'Since the reinforcements are fixed, some elements do not provide column-beam cutting safety when you perform DGT, that is, normal analysis. If this value provides, it is very possible that the ECO value will return to normal.' Is it right to play with equipment for this?
 
Hello there; While the shear safety of the column-beam connection is made, the beam reinforcements are taken into account in the shear force. Therefore it can be done. However, the main issue here is the impact-capacity ratio. To change the ECO value, reinforcements can be changed or sections can be enlarged. In TBDY Section 15.5.3.1, vertical ductile elements require higher capacities. Since the method is a linear method, its sanctions can be somewhat punishing. If this rule is not followed, methods such as pushover analysis or nonlinear analysis in the time history can be used. Best regards...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top