Linear performance analysis-floor forces

A

AERDEM

New Member
hello, a performance analysis of the current situation of the building was requested for the license procedures of the illegally constructed building within the framework of a certain project. The building consists of floor permit, basement, mezzanine and 13 normal floors, and when the municipality stopped the construction after the 4th normal floor, the citizen asked me for a performance analysis. Core samples were taken from each floor up to the fourth floor, reinforcements were determined and surveyed from top to bottom. I did the modeling in idecad as follows: 1- All floors up to the 4th floor were drawn according to the survey. The concrete material was defined for columns, beams, curtains and slabs according to the core results. The reinforcements fixed with the device were also entered and 'fixed' in the reinforced concrete tabs of the elements. 2- After the 4th floor, each floor was entered as a new project. After the 4th floor, I entered the same column-beams in the upper floors so that c30 concrete was used, only as a cross section, but I did not interfere with the reinforcement. (no reinforcement, fixing, etc.) 3- I made a static analysis. Thus, the reinforced concrete of the floors after 4 was formed. 4- After the static analysis, I locked the reinforcements of all the building elements and started the performance analysis. 1- I wonder if this path I followed is correct? 2-
3- I did a static analysis. Thus, the reinforced concrete of the floors after 4 was also formed.
Click to expand...
After the static analysis, there was an E error in almost all the columns in the basement and ground floors, but when I performed the performance analysis, I did not get a brittle warning or an error. How healthy is it, is there something I've overlooked? 3-fold strength seems very, very low to me. is this normal? by the way, 2018 regulation says my performance analysis method should be non-linear method. Due to my computer's ram problem, I chose this method to at least get an idea for now. project link
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
Hello there; I reviewed your project. First of all, all of the steps you have listed as items are a correct form of modeling and analysis. There are two reasons for the low floor forces. One is that the spectrum curve of the structure is below. As far as I can see from the analysis settings wizard, the place where the structure is located is Mardin and the spectrum curve in this region is quite low. Another reason is that the periods of the dominant modes of the structure are close to 3. As the structure period increases in the spectrum curve, the earthquake load decreases with a great rate, and the floor shear or base shear forces also decrease significantly. Linear performance analysis exceeds the application limit according to TBDY 15.5.3, only because the BMS class is less than 5. Best regards...
 
"AERDEM":37jmmvrb" said:
ideCAD, why does ideCAD give near-zero base shear in a 17-storey building?
Click to expand...
Hello, The base shear forces are not close to zero and are correct 293.03 tf in the X direction .In Y direction 341.35 tf. The values you show as screenshot are horizontal forces acting on each floor.Base shear force is the sum of horizontal forces acting on all floors.
 
"AERDEM":30q1supe" said:
hello, a performance analysis of the current state of the building was requested for the license process of the illegally constructed building within the framework of a certain project. The floor permit of the building consists of the basement, suspended ground and 13 normal floors, and after the 4th normal floor, the construction was stopped by the municipality. The citizen asked me for performance analysis. Core samples were taken from each floor up to the fourth floor, the reinforcements were determined and surveyed from top to bottom. I did the modeling in idecad as follows: 1- All floors up to the 4th floor were drawn according to the survey. concrete material, core results were defined to columns, beams, curtains and floors according to this. Reinforcements determined with the device were entered in the reinforced concrete tabs of the elements and 'fixed' in the same way. 2- After the 4th floor, each floor was entered as a new project. After the 4th floor, c30 concrete was used. I entered the same column-beams on the upper floors, only as a cross section, but I did not interfere with the reinforcement (no reinforcement, fixing, etc.) 3- I made a static analysis. The reinforced concrete of the floors after 4 was also formed. 4- After the static analysis, I locked the reinforcements of all the building elements and started the performance analysis. 1- I wonder if this path I followed is correct? 2-
3- I did a static analysis. Thus, the reinforced concrete of the floors after 4 was also formed.
Click to expand...
After the static analysis, there was an E error in almost all the columns in the basement and ground floors, but when I performed the performance analysis, I did not get a brittle warning or an error. How healthy is it, is there something I've overlooked? 3-fold strength seems very, very low to me. is this normal? by the way, 2018 regulation says my performance analysis method should be non-linear method. Due to my computer's ram problem, I chose this method to at least get an idea for now. project link
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
Click to expand...
Is this order correct? This is the method that came to my mind as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top