Opinions questions about using ideCAD Static 7

Hello friends. I am building an additional classroom in an existing school, I designed the system, I solved it, there is no problem, but I am undecided about the curtain ratio and what kind of application I can make instead of the raft amplification in the part that corresponds to the existing building. the project is below, waiting for your feedback
 
"windtalker":2jyg5kms" said:
Mr. Ünver, first of all, thank you very much for your reply. I have some issues with your suggestions, I would be very happy if we could discuss them. 1- I defined the elevator shaft on a separate floor based on a question that Hakan has answered before. I'm giving the link that may be useful for you too
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
.
Click to expand...
Hello, Lift shafts (7.x) We don't have to define it as a different floor in the version.It is enough to open a space 1 cm away from the panel and define the floor edge in the area where the elevator will be.The attached elevator shaft example was made in 7.018.
 
Mr. windtalker, Mr. Hakan answered your first question, 2. I do the stair solution by ticking the solution option together with the building. stair edges to beam, column, floor ...etc. you should fix the supported places, 3. In my opinion, remove the K28-K29 beams and leave a stairwell, make the stairs wooden or if you are going to make reinforced concrete, you should support these beams by extending them, 4. As you said, it may be a matter of preference, 6 In the sense that the curtains should fit on the raft foundation, (it should not pass into the elevator shaft) 7. It was a suggestion to give the level difference in the elevator shaft, you will give the elevation, 9. Correct Take it easy Ünver ÖZCAN
 
Unver, I will take all your answers into consideration, thank you. Mr. Hakan, the attached file was made in the demo version of 7.18, so I cannot open it in the original program. The demo version of the 7.18 version is not available on the site and I cannot open the file because there is a version difference with the old version. I'd appreciate it if you could save it in 7.17. Thanks again, good work.
 
"windtalker":m7fj9ptl" said:
Unver Bey, I will take all your answers into consideration, thank you. Mr. Hakan, the attached file was made in the demo version of 7.18, so I cannot open it in the original program. The demo version of the 7.18 version is not available on the site and there is a version difference between the old version and the old version. I can't open the file for 7.17. I would appreciate if you can save it in 7.17. Thanks again, good work.
Click to expand...
The sample project was not made in the demo version. The project can be opened in the normal version 7.018 (you should be able to open it)...
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
Dear o_berdibek, I have brought an analysis to the attached structure. An analysis can be made in the adjacent region without amputation. As the overhanging parts of the building are heavier anyway, the ampatage was increased in that direction, ensuring both ground safety and balancing different settlements. When I analyzed it with the semi-rigid diaphragm solution, I changed the direction of the column (S301) in the upper left corner, since the relative storey drift was high at the 1st floor of the building. In this way, rigidity is provided in the direction with low inertia. The file is attached:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
thanks windtalker, but the part with the exits is the place that comes to the existing building. Overhang was made due to the foundation amplification of the existing building. that is, the exit side where the amampa comes to zero. In addition, in the system you arranged, the difference between the center of mass stiffness is 1.3 and 1.6 meters on the ground and the first floor. I know the accepted value is 1 meter.
 
Mr. o_berdibek I know the accepted value is 1 meter. Where did you get this information? We will be glad if you explain. Unver ÖZCAN
 
The difference between the center of mass stiffness causes torsion in the structure and A1 irregularity control is done by idecad. If nb>2, dynamic calculation method is performed and eccentric loads are increased with D coefficient. I haven't heard of the 1m limit, but close is good. A more regular structure emerges, and the total stiffness of the carrier elements in both the x and y directions becomes closer to each other. If the adjacent order is where the protrusions are, extending the ampatage to the right and left may be the solution, in my opinion, it is better to extend it in the -y direction. If he doesn't save, piled raft. The opinions of our experienced brothers are more important, in fact, they are only theory and foresight.
 
Hello, I did not know if my elevator shaft design in my previous project was correct. I know that there is no need to define the floor, but since the elevator shaft is on the side, it creates a problem. If there is no problem with the design in this way, I would like to deliver it. download link:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
Thank you.
 
Fixes -2. I made a second file without defining the basement floor, but the elevator shaft didn't really appeal to me. Since the elevator was on the side, gaps occurred in the curtains. If you approve the elevator shaft in the old file, I will apply the corrections to it. I also have a question. When editing the stair support conditions, when we mark the solution tab with the structure, select all the elements under it and apply it to all edges, I think that all elements within the support distance will be supported, so if there is no element at that distance, the support will not be formed. This support situation can also be observed on the 3D screen. If the support conditions are defined in this way, do you think it will cause problems in the analysis?
 
Mr. windtalker 1- Fix the elevator foundation as suggested by Hakan, 2- You should describe the support situation on each side of the stairs. the program does not find it automatically. If it is like yours, you define an unrealistic staircase shape. 3- stair side beams K28-K29 are not straightened Take it easy Ünver ÖZCAN
 
Thanks, I will implement what you said. It's time for our next question :) In projects with a roof piece, the wooden roof is moved to the walls and these walls are attached to the floor, beam, etc. Can sit anywhere. How can we determine how much of the wooden roof load these walls will take? Because we need to transfer the roof load carried by that wall together with the wall to the slab, beam etc. It is possible to determine the roof load that each wall will take, but it is both tiring and not certain. Instead, dividing the total roof load by the total load-bearing wall length and increasing it -not right, but- does it leave us on the safe side enough? Or is there a method you use for this type of application?
 
Mr. windtalker If you explain your question with a simple drawing, my answer will be clearer, more accurate and satisfying. Unver ÖZCAN
 
Unver Bey, Attached is a file with a roof play and roof plan. Beam traces are indicated in yellow, walls in red. There are floors between the beams and as you can see, the walls can press on the beams and floors in places. Which wall takes how much of the roof load :?: if we can determine this, the wall+roof load it carries; 1) If the wall is above the beams, we can spread it on the floor by increasing it. thanks.
 
Mr. windtalker My suggestions for load passage on this roof 1- If there are such walls on the roof TDY2007 5.7. Put a reinforced concrete beam on all the walls as stated 2- there is a roof between the walls 1-2-3-4 as I have given as CATI LOAD in the appendix, if the loads are transferred to the concrete roof slab by uprights: - by adding the roof load to the reinforced concrete slab, 3- as the CATI LOAD in the appendix There is a 1-2-3-4 inter-wall roof as I have given, if the roof is supported on 3-4 walls - the roof load as a linear load on 3-4 walls, 4- There is a 1-2-3-4 inter-wall roof as I have given in the appendix CATI LOAD If the roof is supported on 1-2-3-4 walls - you can solve your building by giving the triangular and trapezoidal roof load to these walls as a linear load to the walls. (If the roof is supported on the walls around it, you can think of the passage of loads as in the reinforced concrete slab, taking into account the support conditions, as in the one-way and two-way reinforced concrete floors.) Take it easy, Ünver ÖZCAN
 
Hello there; In the retaining wall calculation I'm working on, although all the criteria are green, the reinforcement part appears red, but the As error is not written either. How do I fix it? I am attaching the project as well. Thanks in advance. Edit: Ok I got it done. Thanks to Mr. Levent. But I couldn't delete the message.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top