Performance Analysis

Although the basement basement curtains that do not continue on the upper floors share the shear force coming to the basement floor, it does not make sense to strengthen the basement curtains in the performance analysis. The high values in the basement walls in the calculations are the high earthquake load applied to the basement walls in accordance with the regulation with the new structure analysis logic. However, at the point where we reached a consensus with the teachers, the materials such as 2.5.2,3, 2.8.5, 3.5.2, which are prepared with the logic of new building design and in ductile structures, should not be applied to the basement curtains. Ide put an option for this in the analysis settings. However, due to the calculation method and their rigidity, high values may occur in the basement curtains. However, my advice is not to reinforce the basement curtains after solving the problems in the other elements of the structure. This pointless practice is difficult and increases the cost, and as a result you will spend a significant amount of money, but you will not make a positive contribution to the horizontal load capacity of the structure.
 
Mr. suatyy It's like there are differences in our definitions. Are the curtains that you describe as "basement basement curtains" the curtains on which the floors around the basement floor sit? (What I understand as basement curtains, basically curtains that do not carry upper floor upholstery.) The curtains here are curtains with upper floor upholstery. (Basement bulkheads) "However, my advice is not to reinforce the basement curtains after solving the problems in the other elements of the building." you say. 1-In this project, there is no problem in other elements except for basement curtains. If we do what you say, how do we get rid of the "CUT DAMAGED ELEMENTS (THESE ELEMENTS MUST BE STRENGTHENED)" error message that the program gives for basement curtains? 2- I wonder what IDECAD says about Mr. Suatyy and my comments. Good luck with. Unver ÖZCAN
 
What is meant by the basement curtain is the basement curtain that does not continue on the upper floors. So it doesn't have to be outside. Even if it is inside the building, the shears that do not continue to the upper floors only in the basement do not participate in the earthquake capacity of the building. You already know that rigid floors are not included in the earthquake calculation. For basement curtains, R=1.5 is taken and a horizontal load is calculated and given separately. However, this is an installation made by the design logic of this regulation. Because of this high load, you are already encountering this situation in the report. However, we do not take this into account in the logic of Performance analysis. In your report, you state that these are elements that do not participate in earthquake resistance and do not continue to the upper floors. In that report, it will also give brittleness or collapse problems in many beams. What are you doing in this situation? Trying to reinforce all the joists?
 
"suatyy":3dal6jst" said:
Although the basement basement curtains that do not continue on the upper floors share the shear force coming to the basement floor, it does not make sense to strengthen the basement curtains in the performance analysis. High values in the basement curtains in the calculations are made with the new building analysis logic and the regulation It is a high earthquake load applied to basement walls as a requirement. However, at the point where we have reached a consensus with the teachers, substances such as 2.5.2,3, 2.8.5, 3.5.2, which are prepared with the logic of new building design and in ductile structures, should not be applied to basement walls. They put an option in the analysis settings. However, due to the calculation method and due to their rigidity, high values may occur in the basement curtains. However, my advice is not to reinforce the basement curtains after solving the problems in other elements of the structure. This is meaningless practice is difficult and increases the cost and ultimately costs a lot of money, but positive effect on the horizontal load capacity of the structure. You would not have contributed.
Click to expand...
"unver":3dal6jst" said:
"However, my advice is do not reinforce the basement curtains after solving the problems in other elements of the building." . 1-In this project, there is no problem in other elements except for basement curtains. If we do what you say, how do we get rid of the "CUT DAMAGED ELEMENTS (THESE ELEMENTS MUST BE STRENGTHENED)" error message that the program gives for basement curtains? 2- I wonder what IDECAD says about Mr. suatyy and my comments.
Click to expand...
"suatyy":3dal6jst" said:
You state in your report that these are elements that do not participate in earthquake resistance and do not continue to upper floors. What are you doing in this case? Are you trying to strengthen all the beams?
Click to expand...
Elements with shear damage should be strengthened according to the current regulation. The program also prepares a report in accordance with the regulation. As it is known, "shear damaged elements" can be excluded from the failure partition zone in the program. Whether or not the style elements will be strengthened is at the discretion of the engineer.
 
Of course, the program must be in full compliance with the regulations, Mr. Hakan. Controllers on this subject will guide and help the engineer as much as he does and warns. However, while doing something, the engineer should not make the structure worse and avoid actions that would not be beneficial (and sometimes even harmful) to increase the earthquake capacity of the structure (even if it is written in the regulation). Because sometimes some statements in the regulation can contradict the main idea. One should not stray from the main idea. Just as laws cannot be contrary to the constitution and again, the constitution should be taken as a basis while interpreting the laws. We can't expect him to do this from the program, and no one should. This is the initiative of the engineer. However, the engineer should also have the knowledge and experience to use this initiative. It is not possible for me to explain my reservations about beam reinforcement in detail here, but let me tell you briefly, you can make the structure worse by trying to comply with the regulation.
 
hello, as a result of the change in the ground values, the ground safety stress of the structure we want to receive a performance report does not recover 1) In the performance report, it does not give an error about the foundation, should I intervene on the basis? 2) In projects where Linear Performance Analysis will be made, it would be appropriate to model the panels as bars. (Cracked section rigidity is not obtained in the shear walls modeled on the shell). (Levent brain comment) Does the panels that we will model as a bar include the existing panels or only the reinforcement curtain or both of them? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . thanks
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
"kasky":1f5mresu" said:
1)Shouldn't I make a fundamental mistake in the performance report, should I intervene on the basis?
Click to expand...
Performance analysis results cover the superstructure. TDY 2007 Chapter 7 does not specify any criteria related to foundations. Evaluation of foundations is at the discretion of the engineer
"kasky":1f5mresu" said:
2) It would be appropriate to model the panels as bars in the projects where Linear Performance Analysis will be made. Does it cover or both?
Click to expand...
Cracked section stiffness is not obtained when the shears are modeled as shells in both existing and retrofit shears. Accordingly, it would be appropriate to model the existing curtains as rods. It can be modeled as a bar if the cracked section stiffness of the reinforcement walls is to be taken into account, or as an acceptance if the actual stiffness is to be taken into account. Good work
 
Mr. helmety - Don't leave the boost curtains on the 3rd floor. Continue up to the 7th floor. Good luck with. Unver ÖZCAN
 
- Do not leave retrofit curtains on the 3rd floor. Continue up to the 7th floor. Good luck with. Ünver ÖZCAN[/quote] Should the regulation continue or is it advisory? thank you for the replies
 
Mr. Kasky is a recommendation as someone who has seen the project and application mistakes made by examining the Erzincan, Dinar and Sakarya earthquakes on site. If you examine from page 60 of the "SILI EARTHQUAKE NEJAT BAYULKE" compilation I have attached, you will see how important the stiffness change is in the building. Good luck with. Unver ÖZCAN
 
hello, I could not provide the performance required by the earthquake regulations, even though I put sheathing and curtains in the attached project as much as possible, perhaps exaggeratedly. I am waiting for your help in this regard. In the analysis made as I sent, it is immediately useless, but after deleting the P05 curtain connected to the s03 column of the attic, the performance comes out before the collapse, this curtain is not present on the other floors available in the attic? Best regards
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
"kasky":2vf3rlen" said:
hello Even though I put sheathing and sheathing as much as possible in the attached project, I could not achieve the performance required by the earthquake regulations, I am waiting for your help in this regard. After deleting, the performance comes out before the collapse, this curtain is only present in the attic and is not present on other floors. Best Regards
Click to expand...
Hello, First of all, curtains must be entered on all floors. A curtain entered only in the attic will give erroneous results because vertical continuity is not provided. Apart from that, the superstructure in the project is interactive. The solution has been made. However, there are singular foundations in the system. The superstructure interactive solution can be applied to the continuous foundation and beamless raft foundation system in the program. When the curtain on the attic is deleted, the superstructure interactive solution option is unchecked, and the analysis and performance analysis are performed respectively, only K52 beams on the 3rd floor Due to the collapse of the spit, the performance of the structure appears before the collapse in the -Ey installation. Re-evaluate your project in the light of this information. Good work
 
Good day, I am working on the performance analysis and retrofit of a building as in the attached file. The point I want to ask is that although I enter some of the floor loads (of course for control purposes) 20 t/m², none of the elements give an error. The soil safety stresses in the foundations are way above the allowable values, which means that they see the loads somehow. But shouldn't these loads come out in the performance analysis? Am I thinking wrong? Thanks.
 
Hello, In your project, some of the curtains are marked as retrofit curtains and some are not. Therefore, it does not provide vertical continuity on some curtains. Curtains that are not continuous in 3d frame mode can be seen in the perspective window. There is no beam on the P27 curtain, but the negative upper level is given. The curtains entered between S216-S214-S207 on the ground floor must be entered in the same way on the 1st floor.
 
Good day, Thank you for your comments. It looks like I missed some points since it's my first time doing the boost account. I have one more question; I could not see where to enter the "reinforcement realization coefficient" mentioned in the earthquake regulation (7.2.6.2, 7.2.5.2 and 7.2.4.2 articles) in the program. Is there a place where I can enter this coefficient or do I need to consider it in another place? Thanks for your help and comments. Rain Can KOÇAK
 
"yagmurcankocak":17hu5ett" said:
I couldn't see where to enter the "reinforcement realization coefficient" mentioned in the earthquake code (in articles 7.2.6.2, 7.2.5.2 and 7.2.4.2). Thank you for your help and comments Yağmur Can KOÇAK
Click to expand...
Hello You can define reinforcement realization coefficient values in Analysis settings/Reinforcement tab.
 
Good afternoon, Is this table you are showing added in version 7.019? I have version 7.018 but I couldn't see this table. My table opens like this: note: I wasn't aware that 7.019 was out, I'm just downloading it.
 
Good day, I downloaded the new version and its working. Performance analysis reports are really nice. In the previous version, it was not so traceable. As a matter of fact, I shared the screenshot below, it showed all the loads in the beam loads section. And these amounts look different for each beam. Normally I define only wall load on beams, no live load. Apart from that, there must be loads coming from the floors, which must be 2 floor loads on a beam (even if it's moving & fixed, it's a maximum of 4 loads). But it seems a little too much here. What is the reason of this? Did I unwittingly define a duplicate load somewhere? Thanks, Yağmur Can KOÇAK Note: I shared the project as an attachment.
 
Hello, The situation you mentioned is about the beams on the panel modeled as a shell and it is related to the display... Loads on beams consist of repetitive printing of the same element if the report is carefully examined. (There is no such thing as excessive load transfer.) Do not model panel objects as shells. ... In this case, loads on the beams on the panel are not pressed repeatedly. Note: Also, the cracked section stiffness of the shear walls currently modeled as shells is not taken into account in the program. It would be appropriate not to model as a shell in order to take into account the cracked section stiffness in panels. Good work
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top