sa good night, thanks in advance .Urgent...

[dosyalar35]

sa.. ii kasamlar I would like to consult your information on a subject. When I analyze the same project according to the 1st degree earthquake zone, why does the g+q+e value give lower values in the columns compared to the analysis results in the 4th degree earthquake zone?? (It changes not in all columns, but in most of them. What can be the reason, while the axial force increases, v2 can decrease, how does the result increase when g and q are the same when e decreases) Very urgent thanks in advance...

 

[dosyalar35]

is there anyone who can answer please help please don't need much solution just a reason urgent please...thanks...

 

[HakanŞahin]

sa.. ii kasamlar I would like to consult your information on a subject. When I analyze the same project according to the 1st degree earthquake zone, why the g+q+e value is lower in the columns compared to the analysis results in the 4th degree earthquake zone. values. It would be more accurate if you give a comparative screenshot.

 

[dosyalar35]

For example, when I consider the G+Q+EY1 load combination for the s15 column 4th floor 0 position, when we compare the axial force- v2 - m3 values, the values in the analysis results are smaller compared to the 1st region? what could be the reason?

 

[HakanŞahin]

for example, when I consider the G+Q+EY1 load combination for s15 column 4th floor 0 position, when we compare the axial force- v2 - m3 values, the values in the analysis results are smaller compared to the 1st region I wonder?

Hello, if you look at the EY1 values, you can see that the value is larger in the analysis made according to the region 1. The reason why the combination seems small in absolute value is that in the combination of (G+Q) + EY1, G+Q While the G+Q value was the same in both projects, the EY1 value was higher in the analysis made compared to the region 1. The total is a direct sum and is larger in value. 4. in the analysis for region = (G+Q) + EY1 = -1.8123(same) + 0.1779(small) = -1.6344 tf (small) in the analysis for region 1 = (G+Q) + EY1 = -1.8123(same) + 0.7115 (large) = -1.008 tf (large) Result: -1.008 tf > -1.6344 tf I also compared your projects with sap2000. I am attaching screenshots. For 4.db: S15 subnode: G+Q+EY1 V2major = -1.311 tf (ideCAD) V2major = -1.314 tf (SAP2000) M3major = -1.634 tfm (ideCAD) M3major = -1.638 tfm (SAP2000) 1.db for: S15 subnode: G+Q+EY1 V2major = -1.013tf (ideCAD) V2major = -1.018 tf (SAP2000) M3major = -1.100 tfm (ideCAD) M3major = -1.108 tfm (SAP2000) In short, the results looks normal.