• Industries
  • Products
  • Buy
  • Services & Support
  • Communities
  • Discussion Groups

    Autodesk Robot Structural Analysis

    Reply
    Active Contributor
    Posts: 46
    Registered: ‎06-02-2012
    Accepted Solution

    RC BEAMS - Moments differences between results and RC Design

    265 Views, 3 Replies
    11-25-2012 08:35 PM

    Hi all

    1.- My question is how to interpret the following difference between the

    The moments from the static analysis results and those for which the beam should be design

    please take a look to the attached file

     

     

    The complete file is in

    https://www.dropbox.com/sh/t791xb9yd91idch/Dy4f96cn6u

     

    2.- How to run in order to optimize this structure

    in the RC module the reinforcement parameters for optimizing are "open"or without boundaries

    however it takes the given section dimensions and fails

     

    For your time and advice thanks in advance

     

    Marcelo

    Please use plain text.
    Product Support
    Artur.Kosakowski
    Posts: 2,752
    Registered: ‎12-17-2010

    Re: Moments differences between results and RC Design

    11-26-2012 02:39 AM in reply to: rioja

    1.- My question is how to interpret the following difference between the

    The moments from the static analysis results and those for which the beam should be design

    please take a look to the attached file

     

    I'm not sure if I understand this point correctly. Looking at the parts indicated in green i think that the results are the same: M_after_redistribution at 4.700m = 699.31 and at x=4.711 is is 682.62.

     

     

    2.- How to run in order to optimize this structure

    in the RC module the reinforcement parameters for optimizing are "open"or without boundaries

    however it takes the given section dimensions and fails

     

    As far as I can see you have the problem with torsion as it is difficult to manage correct reinforcement distribution for very short spans and cantilevers generated due to the way you modelled and imported the beam 123. I would suggest modelling and designing the beam in the way shown on the attached picture instead.


    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
    Support Specialist
    Product Support
    Autodesk, Inc.

    Please use plain text.
    Active Contributor
    Posts: 46
    Registered: ‎06-02-2012

    Re: Moments differences between results and RC Design

    11-26-2012 03:53 AM in reply to: rioja

    Thanks Artur

    for the quick response

     

    The point is

    in green it seems to be ok the small dif. is only the mouse pointer to be at 4.7m

     

    The other values for the other spans

     

    in the second picture you can find this legend

     

    Highlighted in blue

    For P3  My max = 974.92 953.87 kNm

    (where 953.87 is from the beam note and 974.92 is from the Results layout)

    For P4

    My max = -533.21 -395.94 kNm

    (where -395.94 is from the beam note and -533.21 is from the Results layout)

    Please use plain text.
    Product Support
    Artur.Kosakowski
    Posts: 2,752
    Registered: ‎12-17-2010

    Re: Moments differences between results and RC Design

    11-26-2012 05:02 AM in reply to: rioja

     

    Highlighted in blue

    For P3  My max = 974.92 953.87 kNm

    (where 953.87 is from the beam note and 974.92 is from the Results layout)

     

    The accuracy of the import depends on number of points you decide on. In addition I would consider modeling the beam with no vertical offset which influences bending.

     

    For P4

    My max = -533.21 -395.94 kNm

    (where -395.94 is from the beam note and -533.21 is from the Results layout)

     

    Values are from the support faces.

    Please see: http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/Autodesk-Robot-Structural/RC-BEAMS-Design-of-structure-beam-at-the-col...


     



    Artur Kosakowski
    Support Specialist
    Product Support
    Autodesk, Inc.

    Please use plain text.