"lokmanaga":ku0rjgj6" said:I finished the modeling of my project in the link I gave below, but the quantity was more than I expected, I couldn't see an error, but there must be something missing somewhere. I don't understand why you're thinking. Most importantly, what are you comparing it to? Columns work at minimum (1%)... Panels work at minimum. There is almost minimum reinforcement in beams. Reinforcement can be considered normal for a 16-storey building on raft foundation. Maybe this can be said. The sections you chose If it is too big, you may be adding extra reinforcement due to the minimum reinforcement. In addition, the rigid basement floor number will be -1. Entered 0. When it is corrected, there is a decrease of 200 kg. There are warnings that need to be corrected in the geometry control. Apart from these, I did not see any problem in terms of the question you asked. Good studies
Your project seems to be mostly equipped with minimum reinforcement.However, in raft flooring, the working distances of the "reinforced concrete calculation axles" are not arranged correctly, so the amount of "duplicate" reinforcement in the quantity Approximately 50 tons of reinforcement can be saved by arranging the reinforcement working distances and taking the quantity with "change reinforced concrete calculation axle geometry" in raft flooring. It is more economical if you enter the elements that are arranged as L-shaped polygon columns, but whose arm lengths meet the conditions of being a panel, and model them as shells. If you did not prefer the beams numbered K80-K81 on the ground floor in this way, it does not need to be named differently."ftoprak58":1xh4j5n0" said:I have the same problem, too much equipment appears in the project linkYou do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
German 
French 
Spanish 
Portuguese 
Italian 
Arabic 
Russian 
Japanese 
Turkish