Project approval status ? Report

U

UFUK KÜÇÜK

New Member
Hello, We are Sakarya University civil engineering final year students. We are doing our finishing work in groups of 2 with idecad. As a subject, we are investigating the effect of curtain layout on framed-curtained structures. In this context, we modeled 5 5-storey and 5 10-storey buildings with idecad. We were in a position to complete all the stages and finish the comparison section, but as a result of the performance analysis, we realized that some of the structures did not provide the targeted performance and were in the state of MIGRATION. (Until this stage, we were focusing on the errors that emerged as a result of the structural analysis and frankly we did not know about the performance analysis) How is it possible that when there is no error in the report we received as a result of the analysis, MIGRATION can occur as a result of the performance analysis? We do not want to make changes in the ground class and other general settings of our buildings in case of earthquake zone. After all, there is no concept of changing the ground in a real project. Finally, when we compare the column and wall dimensions in our projects with some approved real projects, we see that they are large enough and more than enough. As a group, we look forward to your return, thank you... An example of our project is attached. HORIZON SMALL
 
First of all, you should know why you are going to do what. I could not understand why you switched to performance analysis while examining the effect of curtains in the frame system. I understand you are working on the effect of pitch, size, placement and quantity on different building types. Performance analysis is an exception to this issue. This issue is examined under a separate topic and under a separate heading in the earthquake regulation. Performance analysis is used in "evaluation of existing structures". In other words, it is for the purpose of examining the condition of an existing structure that was built on a certain date. From this point of view, there is a need to compile different external information in performance analysis. This information is summarized as; It includes a lot of information such as taking cores from the building, taking reinforcement films, knowing the stirrup spacing and especially their shape, closure type (hook), corrosion status. In addition, there are different options and coefficients according to the condition of the building, its type, purpose and targeted performance level. As a result, it does not serve much purpose to subject a structure that you have designed and calculated from scratch to performance analysis. As I said at the beginning, the regulation and therefore the calculation methods are different. In a new project, all calculations are made according to Section 2 and Section 3 of the regulation, while the Performance Analysis report is prepared in accordance with the 7th Article of the regulation, the Evaluation and Strengthening of Existing Buildings. The conditions found in chapter 2 and chapter 3 are different from the method in chapter 7. In this case, a project you just made may not save structure for performance analysis. Therefore, it is normal for the structure that you perform to give different results. Even the idioms are different. According to Sections 2 and 3, results such as this, that, and that inadequacy and negativities are given in the results of the analysis, while in the performance analysis, collapse, before collapse, immediate use life safety, heavy damage, advanced damage, etc. There are phrases like I don't know if it contributed to your work, but I hope it will at least be useful in terms of whether you are on the right or wrong path. Good work. Best regards... Sent from my N. YILMAZ SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
Hello, Mr. N. Yılmaz. Thank you very much for your explanations. We made such an analysis because of our teacher and when we saw the migration situation, we were uneasy. You have explained very clearly and clearly what we should do and why. As a result, you have helped us a lot within the scope of our thesis work. We would like to thank you and IDECAD family for your information.
 
Hello teacher, we examined the relevant chapter 7 in detail, focused on 2 studies and talked to our teacher a few times. You have a sentence above: "As a result, it is not very useful to subject a structure that you have designed and calculated from scratch to performance analysis as it is..." I personally did not understand this point, but our teacher saw trouble in the same way. Should I understand this from your sentence and the error we encountered?; Let's say that the projects we are working on right now are real projects and I solved these projects without any errors, I took them to the municipality, got approval and before they were put into practice, any institution (let's say I'm building a school and MEB) also asked me for a PERFORMANCE analysis of the BUILDING. (or whether the project has been implemented but it has just been completed and performance analysis has been requested before the occupancy is taken) As a result, the core values vs. the standard for the project.... I am doing a performance analysis before the occupancy of the same building is taken, and I see a collapse. So what will I do then? In short, while the TDY-2007, TS500 and ts498 regulations have been fully implemented in the building I am currently modeling, how can the performance analysis not achieve the targeted while the project is ready for approval? Yes, I understand. In performance analysis, the program carries out a different algorithm, evaluates it according to chapter 7, but how can it be that a project that is ready according to chapters 2 and 3 gives an error in the same program when performance analysis is performed before it is put into practice? ( I'm asking and wondering because I want to get real information, to solve the problem when I encounter this error when I'm on the market, to educate myself and open my project office in the following years and because I love Idecad, maybe it's a simple logic but I can't understand it unfortunately? ) I'm waiting for your return, thank you in advance Horizon SMALL
 
Hello, You should check the preliminary information given to the program for performance analysis. For example, you may have left the reinforcement corrosion and insufficient clamping length yield stress multiplier reduced in the element settings. How many times did you enter the building information coefficient, did you accept the element reinforcements as the reinforcement entered in reinforced concrete or did you enter a defined percentage etc. The answers to the questions affect the performance analysis evaluation. All of this information must be compatible with the information envisaged for the new building. If you add the project you are working on to the message, we will examine it and we can tell you why the structure collapsed.
 
Hello sir, I couldn't find the settings you mentioned, please excuse me. And it rars my project from the plugin installation located under the message block in every message. I uploaded it as a file, but when I send the message, my project is not loaded. I couldn't send it anyway, I thought it was my problem and tried it with my friends, but it still didn't work. If it is not uploaded again with this message, is it okay if you write your e-mail if possible and send it to your e-mail? Or can you send an ss where those settings are located? (As a result, it will be better for me to send my project, I want to receive your comments.) Thank you....
 
Thank you very much, sir, I gave you trouble. Now I'm reviewing the link you mentioned and I uploaded my project......
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
(Note: the project has only the basic problem and its solution We will do it later, I think there is no other problem ) Thank you...
 
Hello, Your project is in the collapse zone due to 3 factors. 1. You should choose the building knowledge level comprehensively. Because your building is a new structure, you know all the section, material and reinforcement properties. 2. The shearing capacities of P3, P7, P8, P9 and P6 curtains (selected stirrups) are insufficient and these elements break brittle. According to TDY2007, even if an element is brittle, the structure will be considered in the collapse zone. If you make the stirrup diameter of these curtains 10, the cutting capacity of the elements will be sufficient. 3. Many of your columns on the ground floor exceed the axial bearing capacity (Nk/Acfcm>0.7). According to the regulation, these elements are considered directly damaged. However, the regulation also states that the axial force values on the columns may not be greater than the normal forces values based on the column shear force calculation. Accordingly, apply item 7A.3 Upper limit of axial forces found in column and curtain settings. After these processes, the building is safe for life. Finally, the elements on the F axis are defined 2 cm to the left of the F axis. All the points I wrote in the project I added have been corrected. (
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
) Either you continue to work with this project or you can correct my mistakes in your project.
 
Thank you very much sir, really did not expect this much attention, you surprised us. You have been of great help to our work and we have understood the subject, we are concentrating on it even more. Thanks again to all IdaCAD family and to you....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top