German 
French 
Spanish 
Portuguese 
Italian 
Arabic 
Russian 
Japanese 
Turkish 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.
Opinions questions about using ideCAD Static 7
- Thread starter Ismail Hakki Besler
- Start date
HakanŞahin
Administrator
In this type of beams, the name of beam is used. It does not make a difference in terms of analysis. It makes a difference in terms of analysis. It makes a difference in terms of reinforced concrete and reinforcement design. If you want the beam opening to be drawn as one piece without forming a support, give a single name. Otherwise, a support area is created for each piece. (If the beam exceeds 12 meters, the program is open makes an overlay joint)"proisa":2ks0wehr" said:I had to draw a beam like the one below in a building. In terms of analysis and reinforced concrete design, is it better to enter it as a single beam or to divide it into parts and give different names?
Mr. nitasltd My suggestion to your project 1- correct the geometry errors 2- Let the P02 column come from the top as a column on the 1st basement floor (the wrong calculation is corrected.) 3- give the basement curtains as a basement curtain 4- the curtain at the entrance on the ground floor is between the K59-K60 beams give it 5- check the wall loads 6- take the stair loads 7- rib beams are wide (25+32/2+32/2=57 cm at most) 8- center the columns on the beams as much as possible Take it easy Ünver ÖZCAN
Levent Özpak
New Member
Hello, In the project you added, the warning cannot be solved in Ver 7.019. If the problem persists, if you contact us by voice, you can detect the problem with remote access. we try to."nitasltd":2oao832v" said:gives the error that the system cannot be resolved, but I could not find the error.. can you help
HakanŞahin
Administrator
There is no problem in analyzing the ladder-structure together."proisa":3tqsc329" said:ver 7.019, is there any problem in solving the ladder together with the structure because the ladder moments are calculated as 0?
Hello, in the attached simple project made in Default settings; If the column concrete cover is 4.5 cm, the transverse reinforcement is Q8/12/7/10, if the column concrete cover is 4 cm, the transverse reinforcement is Q8/12/8/10. Why does this difference occur in the span of column confinement transverse reinforcements?
windtalker
New Member
Hello, I need your help on a few issues, 1) I am getting weak fold error in the attached sarten1 and sarten3 projects. 2) Sarten2 project closes[/b] with an error during analysis. 3) Due to the dilatations, the basement curtains do not form a closed area and only curtains remain on two facades, especially in the 2nd part. In this case, should we consider as a rigid basement? If not, should we enter the rigid basement floor number like -2? 4) Do you have a suggestion about the dimensions of the deflection beams in the project? For ease of formwork, I chose the deflection beams in the same size as the main beams. What is your suggestion? Should I stay the same or reduce the size? 5) Any suggestions for the system will be greatly appreciated. Thanks for all your answers. Good work..
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
HakanŞahin
Administrator
It is normal for the stirrup spacing to change according to the given concrete cover value because it affects the bk value used in the volumetric reinforcement ratio. The bk value is dependent on the concrete cover (TDY formulas 3.1 and 3.2) cross-sectional dimension of the column or wall end zone core (distance between outermost cross-section reinforcement axes) for each of the horizontal directions"emrah":141c5b5u" said:Hello In the attached simple project with Default settings, if the column concrete cover is 4.5 cm, the transverse reinforcement is Q8/12/7/10, if the column concrete cover is 4 cm, the transverse reinforcement is Q8/12/8/10. Why does this difference occur in the span of transverse reinforcements of the column confinement zone?
Levent Özpak
New Member
Hello,
The answer to your previous question about the Weak Floor warning will be helpful ."windtalker":27k67l0f" said:Hi, 1) I am getting weak floor error in attached projects sarten1 and sarten3.
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
In sarten_2 .ide7 project, no joint point is formed on the beam at the coordinate where the left slab edge of D06 slab on the ground and 1st floor is connected to the K53 beam.In addition, the right joint point of the K54 beam on the 1st floor is on the K63 beam to which it is connected. The analysis is completed when the two conditions mentioned above are corrected.(sarten_2_example.cde) In the project, the support definitions of the edges of the stairs in the 1st basement floor are not correct. The 4th arm of the ladder is not connected to the stair landing.(You can see it from the Perspective Window 3D frame/deformation.) Good work2) Sarten2 project closes with an error during the analysis.
mhanifiata
New Member
attached file check In the attached project, I solved 11*12 m tile as a tape. 50 cm height seems to be enough. but I'm not completely convinced... I ask experienced friends to check it out.
In the same project (Column concrete cover 4.5 cm), I arranged the column reinforcements as 4Q14 in major and minor directions. but it gives an error when selecting the transverse reinforcement Q8/12/8/10 Is there an error in the attached calculation?"HakanŞahin":c14rmjir" said:It is normal for the stirrup spacing to change according to the given concrete cover value because it affects the bk value used in the volumetric reinforcement ratio. The bk value is dependent on the concrete cover (TDY formulas 3.1 and 3.2) see: For each of the horizontal directions to each other, Cross-section size of column or wall end zone core (distance between outermost cross-section reinforcement axes)
HakanŞahin
Administrator
Your calculation is correct ... The difference with the program is this: The program stays on the safe side and accepts the number of kiosks as 1 according to the initial situation. According to this, the total number of arms is 3.... 25/40 net concrete cover = 3cm long = 40- 2*3 -0.8 = 33 .2 cm bkshort = 25- 2*3 -0.8 = 18 .2 cm Ash/s = 0.3*33.2*[ ( (25*40/19/34) -1)] * 2549.291/42828.081 = 0.324 Ash/s = 0.3*18.2*[ ( (25*40/19/34) -1)] * 2549.291 /42828.081 = 0.178 Nd < 0.2Acfck Ash/s = 0.324 * 2 / 3 =0.217 long (value printed in column shear reinforcement calculation report) Ash/s = 0.178 * 2 / 3 =0.119 short (value printed on column shear reinforcement calculation report) Number of stirrup arms of 8 = 3 Stirrup range of tightening zone: s = 0.5 * 3 / 0.217 = 7.31 -> 7 cm (printed in the report)"emrah":35ffckos" said:In the same project (Column concrete cover 4.5 cm) and I arranged it to be 4Q14 in the minor direction. The number of crossties increased by 1 compared to the first situation, but when selecting the transverse reinforcement Q8/12/8/10, it gives an error. Is there an error in the attached calculation?"HakanŞahin":35ffckos" said:It is normal for the stirrup spacing to change according to the given concrete cover value, because it affects the bk value used in the volumetric reinforcement ratio. The Bk value is dependent on the concrete cover. (TDY formulas 3.1 and 3.2) see: Cross-section size of the column or wall end zone core (the distance between the outermost cross-section reinforcement axes) for each of the horizontal directions to each other
HakanŞahin
Administrator
Fixes reported in the forum and fixed in version 7.020:
"cem_kucuk569":lzz9w8gi" said:In the report of the ladder I sent attached, the forces and moments are zero. When I do the demo, I can see the forces and moments. ]"proisa":lzz9w8gi" said:I have tried Risky Building analysis in many projects myself. As a result of over 10 projects I tried; 85% of the buildings that do not have a problem in the normal design and receive the Life Safety performance from the linear performance analysis turn out to be risky buildings.
HakanŞahin
Administrator
Hello, If the floor support is the panel object, it is kept on that side. (You can check the support moments) Therefore, during thickness control, the panels are considered as continuous edges. For example, in D1, two sides are continuous on the upper floor, while on the basement floor there are continuous edges on 3 sides."proisa":2t0t94uv" said:In the project file I added, the same two floors provide the floor thickness in the basement but not on the ground floor. DB101-DZ01 / DB109-DZ07 What is the reason?
It's not easy to find the reason for this kind of breakage. I did not experience any crashes on my own computer. It is important for the solution that you can define the breaking phase of the program more clearly."proisa":2t0t94uv" said:When I calculate manually, the calculation made on the ground floor is correct. All of a sudden, while dealing with this project, the system crashes all the time... ideStatik stopped responding.... I couldn't find any errors in the geometry control
I'm a 3rd year civil engineering student, I downloaded the demo version of idecad static 7 and I'm using it, but I can't use some ready projects with the version mismatch issue. I think the demo version is 7.017, but the ready-made projects I have are 7.020, is it possible to update the demo version?