Who will prepare the Soil Geotechnical Report?

S

saridurmus

New Member
Hi Friends, Who will prepare the 16.2.2.2 Soil Geotechnical Report in the Design of Foundation Soil and Foundations under the Earthquake required in Chapter 16 of the TBDY 2018 Regulation. Can I have your views?
 
Thank you Mr. İsmail, I know this, I have given this as a printout to our representation to the municipalities. In addition to this, the hesitations in our municipality's mind were explained by Ozan Dadaşbilge Y. İnş. Eng. I also presented the pdf output of the fame seminar. In addition, I convinced him in today's meeting that he should leave the Geotechnical Expert with documents such as TBDY 2018 chapter 16 - Annex 16D.
 
For God's sake, does anyone have a Geotechnical report in a new format? The last point of geotechnical report coming to our municipality is now Static report. They want Equivalent Earthquake Load calculation. There are only results in the static report. Does it make sense to get any data from the static report? Help me, I'm devastated now..
 
"huseyinakkus56":3vkp56e4" said:
For God's sake, does anyone have a new-format Geotechnical report? Otherwise, I would take it and put it in the Geotechnical report so that we wouldn't discuss it. Isn't the geotechnical report prepared for suggestion-warning purposes before the project? Is it reasonable to get any data from the static report? Help me, I'm miserable..
Click to expand...
Hello; Geotechnical report foundation design in static project While preparing the geotechnical report, a preliminary analysis should be made in the static project and the foundation pressures formed at the base of the structure (for settlement calculations on the foundation ground, etc.) should be determined and the total horizontal force acting on the structure (for foundation slip controls) should be determined. Therefore, the geotechnical report should be included in the static project from the static project. data transfer is necessary and mandatory Submit static pre-study to generate data for geotechnical report You can give a summary in the form of a table added by İsmail Bey. For now, the program does not automatically prepare this table; You can give G+Q, 1.4G+1.6Q for raft foundations, BASE BASE PRESSURE GRAPH for the worst combination with earthquakes, and Total horizontal Force Vt acting on the base of the structure. For continuous and single foundations, in addition to Vt, you can prepare and submit a separate foundation report for G+Q, 1.4G+1.6Q, Earthquake combinations. Best regards.
 
Thank you for your help, I am preparing a report as you mentioned, but we get the Vt value from statics, the municipality says calculate it. He says, transfer the value to the geotechnical report by performing the operations. As far as I can see, we can get Vt as a direct result from the report. Do we have a chance to get these accounts-transactions from the report?
 
"huseyinakkus56":g5dryb35" said:
Thank you for your help. I'm preparing a report as you mentioned, but we get the Vt value from statics, the municipality says to calculate it. It says to transfer whatever value we get to the geotechnical report. As far as I can see, we can get the Vt directly from the report as a result. Can we get these calculations-transactions from the report?
Click to expand...
Vt values are printed in the dynamic analysis report.You can take the dynamic analysis report of your project and add it to the report you prepared.
 
You do not have a chance to manually calculate the Vt you find with modal analysis. Besides, no one can say, "Prove this value from where you found it," in this responsibility project author. It gets to the point where it's ridiculous and inextricable. Then let's prove all static calculations manually. Sent via iPhone using Tapatalk
 
"2m project":126wzwrt" said:
You don't have the chance to manually calculate the Vt you found with modal analysis. Besides, no one can say, "Prove this value from where you got this value from," the project author has this responsibility. Let's prove the calculations manually. Sent via iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Vt calculated from Modal analysis is often 10% smaller than Equivalent Static Vt. The previous stage of Vt calculation is Modal Vt values calculated for each mode These Modal Vt values calculated for each mode are combined with CQC and found Vt. Any magnitude calculated in dynamic analysis is like this. Column beam end forces, plate stresses, Foundation related values. So almost everything the program calculates is calculated as Modal and CQC combined is done.
 
"Ismail Hakki Feeds":3uu6vn0w" said:
"2m project":3uu6vn0w" said:
You have no chance to manually calculate the Vt you found by modal analysis. Besides, no one can say, "Prove this value from where you found it," in this responsibility project author. It gets to the point where it's ridiculous and inextricable. Then let's prove all static calculations manually. Sent via iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Vt calculated from modal analysis is often 10% less than the Equivalent Static Vt. The previous stage of the calculation of Vt is the Modal Vt values calculated for each mode. The Modal Vt values calculated for each of these modes are combined with the CQC to find Vt. This is the case with any magnitude calculated in dynamic analysis. Column beam end forces, plate stresses, Foundation related values. In other words, almost everything that the program calculates is calculated as Modal and CQC combination is done.
Click to expand...
Well, Mr. İsmail, are the parameters in the image not available in dynamic analysis? For example, when we replace these parameters in TBDY 4.19, are we going to calculate and combine CQC for each mode?
 
Dynamic Vt is already the aggregated value. You don't need to combine anything. In my previous message, I explain how we calculate what we do in the program. The result of ideCAD response prints the Dunamik Vt value calculated by CQC merging.
"Ismail Hakki Feeds":14mwj4ti" said:
"2m project":14mwj4ti" said:
You have no chance to manually calculate the Vt you found by modal analysis. Besides, no one can say, "Prove this value from where you found it," in this responsibility project author. It gets to the point where it's ridiculous and inextricable. Then let's prove all static calculations manually. Sent via iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Vt calculated from modal analysis is often 10% less than the Equivalent Static Vt. The previous stage of the calculation of Vt is the Modal Vt values calculated for each mode. The Modal Vt values calculated for each of these modes are combined with the CQC to find Vt. This is the case with any magnitude calculated in dynamic analysis. Column beam end forces, plate stresses, Foundation related values. In other words, almost everything that the program calculates is calculated as Modal and CQC combination is done.
Click to expand...
Also, the TBDY 4.19 Formula Esvalue you mentioned is related to the earthquake load calculation. This value (Equivalent Vt) is already calculated and printed in the program.
 
Ismail, I understand what you mean. My aim is to calculate that Vt value myself in line with the municipality's request. Because the municipality does not accept us to get the Vt value directly from the static report. It asks how it is calculated step by step. I've been looking for a way out too, but it doesn't seem like it will be calculated by hand.
 
Hello there; The program performs Modal Analysis and increases the modal analysis results when necessary by comparing it with the Equivalent Earthquake Load method as per TBDY 2018 4.8.4. Based on this, it is sufficient to calculate the Base shear force manually according to the equivalent earthquake load method to give in your geotechnical report. You can determine whether you have made a mistake by comparing the calculated value with the Equivalent earthquake load Base shear force given in the Dynamic analysis report. ** Formulas in Excel are not automatic, please manually correct the spectrum and Ra value according to TBDY 2018 - SECTION 2. Good work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top