Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hello,
In Fast rebar positioning box, select Bottom and 1 bar, the press Add. Same for Top. If 1 bar is selected, then it will be positioned in the center.
Remember also to select the rebar size on the left of rebar table before to use fast rebar positioning.Hello,
Rect. Base means you can assign a rectangular shaped rebar, by specifying it’s base. Height is automatically determined by Area valueStrand is the option to assign a strand or tendon prestress to the specified rebar.
Hello,
ImportExport module is needed to handle IFC export. The program suports IFC2x3 and IFC4, including structural domain.Hello,
now it’s clear: we don’t support HingeRadauTwo:
# #eleTag #iNode #jNode $transfTag* #secTagi #Lpli #secTagj #Lplj #secTagInterior
element forceBeamColumn 1 1 17 1 “HingeRadauTwo 1 0.304 1 0.304 1”but
element beamWithHinges $eleTag $iNode $jNode $secTagI $Lpi $secTagJ $Lpj $E $A $Iz $Iy $G $J $transfTag
(this was the old syntax)We’ll implement this in the next version (coming on 1st July).
I can anticipate the read model; I believe T beams should be double-checked.Dear Kostas,
forcebeamcolumn elements are supported, so the problem should be elsewhere. I ask if you can share the model (if you don’t want to upload it here, please send it by the form at the bottom of Support page).Hello,
please find below:
1. we support prestressing on cross-section checking and during analysis by using a pretension load (see Assign / Loads / Pretension load mask).
2. what do you need nominal curvature method by EC2 for? we provide directly the numerical moment-curvature curve. If you need 2nd order effects in analysis, activate P-Delta or “2nd order” options for non-linear analysis
3. We don’t support directly a point load without a supporting node; however in the model you attached you get errors because you need the command Edit / Check model / Check line mesh, otherwise your model has free nodes.
The suggested way is to remove the free nodes, and to apply a distributed non uniform load instead of the point load.
You’re dealing with a tapered section (conical), hence it’s best to have a single element without further splitting.regards
Hello,
by design, we choose the user cannot specify section properties modifiers for elements, but directly for sections. Hence, if needed, duplicate the columns section, and double click on it. On the last tab of Section Properties, specified the magnified area value.CSI software also uses Timoshenko hypothesis, unless you can disable it. In any case, there are many things that can cause differences (e.g. auto-meshing in CSI, etc.).
Hello,
the differences you registered are not related to integration method or extrapolation method, but more generally to the beam formulation the solver uses. In that sense, the result are solver-dependent, and they should be referred to the built-in solver rather than to NextFEM.
In particular, you’re showing the results form OOFEM (the default solver); please refer to their website to get more info on beam formulation and how results are recovered. You can try running the model with OpenSees directly in NextFEM Designer, by changing Solver options.
Finally, by our experience, linear analyses with beams can differ from one solver to another: OOFEM shows little difference with CSI product solvers, while it has good agreement with others. Don’t expect the same stiffness matrix for the same element in all solvers.
In addition, some statistical remarks: you cannot refer the COV (Coefficient of Variation) on null values: your last red row shows a difference that, in absolute terms, is comparable to the other lines.Thanks for it, we’ll solve in the next minor patch (File / Update / Check for minor updates…).
Currently we don’t support initial imperfection as per 1st mode.Can you share your file telling between which nodes you created the link? Can you descrive the operations you do in detail?
Dear Akshay,
to clarify about internal constraints:
– rigid links bounds all degrees of freedom (DoFs), while
– rigid floor involves only x,y and rz.
Looking at your screenshot, the issue you encounter is not clear enough; I believe you should try to directly draw the rigid links by selecting the “Draw link” option in the same mask.