Modal and Seismic Analysis

Modal and Seismic Analysis

Anonymous
Not applicable
1,847 Views
12 Replies
Message 1 of 13

Modal and Seismic Analysis

Anonymous
Not applicable

Hello,

 

I have two separated steel structures in a same model, they have one story each but different heights, the foundation is shared, I want to:

 

1. Run the modal analysis

2. Run the spectral analysis

3. Run the concrete spread footing design

 

It’s necessary run Modal Analysis to run spectral Analysis?

How can I define the stories, if the two separated structures have different heights?

I had defined story one for the small one and story two for the highest one, but I get an error message when I try to run analysis.

 

 

Thank you for your help.

0 Likes
Accepted solutions (2)
1,848 Views
12 Replies
Replies (12)
Message 2 of 13

Anonymous
Not applicable

Maybe I shouldn’t use stories?  

0 Likes
Message 3 of 13

Artur.Kosakowski
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support

Yes, it is necessary to run the modal analysis first.

 

You can either define a single story from the bottom to the top of the structure or delete them. Do you really need to explore the results for stories for the structure type as yours?

 

If you find your post answered press the Accept as Solution button please. This will help other users to find solutions much faster. Thank you.



Artur Kosakowski
0 Likes
Message 4 of 13

Anonymous
Not applicable

Is it possible in Robot analyse and design two separated steel structures in a same model, with different heights and the foundation shared?

If yes can I see two different periods and masse participant different?

 

Thanks

 

0 Likes
Message 5 of 13

Artur.Kosakowski
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support
Accepted solution

Yes, it can. The modal analysis can be run for separate models. On the other hand you may find it difficult to check if the calculated modes contribute towards having 90% of participating masses for each of the structures. Personally I would:

1. Create two separate models for each of the steel structures. The foundation modeled as nodal supports.

2. Create a third model for the foundation with loads being the reactions from the above ones

 

If you find your post answered press the Accept as Solution button please. This will help other users to find solutions much faster. Thank you.



Artur Kosakowski
0 Likes
Message 6 of 13

Anonymous
Not applicable
Thanks,
For the third model, is it possible translate automatically the reactions of the others two or I need input by hand?

David (Eu)
0 Likes
Message 7 of 13

Artur.Kosakowski
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support

http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/Autodesk-Robot-Structural/Only-reaction-for-new-model-API/m-p/3659242

 

If you find your post answered press the Accept as Solution button please. This will help other users to find solutions much faster. Thank you.



Artur Kosakowski
0 Likes
Message 8 of 13

Anonymous
Not applicable

Hello Sir! I've been having struggling with seismic analysis of russian code for weeks.. Still couldn't succeed. In order to transfer from using Lira 9.6 (Russian structural analysis software) to RSAP, I need to analyse same model in both Lira and RSAP. So that I can compare the result. Without seismic load, results are almost same. (of course same codes are set in job preferences and DCF). But results of shells are quite different. Results of ROBOT is higher than Results of Lira. Ecpecially on the edge of support. Second problem is: I can't find same Russian seismic code in both software. I've tried some codes. But I got completely different results. Also in Lira software when I use Load to Mass Conversion, there is only X and Y direction, not -X,+X,-Y,+Y... I hope I could explain what my problem is. I really need your help. If someone who knows and uses both Robot and Lira, please make me contact to him. I'd appreciate your help.

0 Likes
Message 9 of 13

Artur.Kosakowski
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support

I can't find same Russian seismic code in both software

 

The codes available in Robot are:

 

Russian seismic  codes.PNG

 

 

Also in Lira software when I use Load to Mass Conversion, there is only X and Y direction, not -X,+X,-Y,+Y.

 

My assumption is that you confuse definition of eccentricities with load to mass conversion. For the later you should just set the conversion direction Z- (meaning that you want to convert vertical loads acting downwards (as mass does)

and you mark all or just horizontal directions (in case you want to exclude "vertical" shapes of vibrations).

 

load to mass conversion.PNG

 

 

If you find your post answered press the Accept as Solution button please. This will help other users to find solutions much faster. Thank you.

 



Artur Kosakowski
0 Likes
Message 10 of 13

Anonymous
Not applicable

I really thank you for your help. Finally I found the same codes as you showed for both software. But still results of seismic analysis are completely different. Probably I'm defining my seismic load cases wrong. I tried to upload my model but because of size it can't be uploaded. So I recorded small video and uploaded in youtube. Here is link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klVpgICMdJI . Can you check it and reply me if you find out what I was doing wrong, please. Sorry for bothing you. But it will be very helpful if it be solved. 

 

Thank you!

0 Likes
Message 11 of 13

Artur.Kosakowski
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support

Please do not duplicate posts in different topics and continue this one in http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/robot-structural-analysis/having-trouble-to-get-same-seismic-result-in... only. Thank you.



Artur Kosakowski
0 Likes
Message 12 of 13

Anonymous
Not applicable

I'm sorry sir. I didn't know it'd make trouble that duplicating same post in different topics. I just saw in different topic there someone possibly know the both software according to his post. So that I asked help from him too by replying. By the way could you check the video and find any solution for me? if you did, please let me know.

thank you! 

0 Likes
Message 13 of 13

Artur.Kosakowski
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support
Accepted solution

Please read the post from 



Artur Kosakowski