Robot Structural Analysis Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s Robot Structural Analysis Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular Robot Structural Analysis topics.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Continuous Footing Design - Initial Setup Confusing

3 REPLIES 3
SOLVED
Reply
Message 1 of 4
bjur
2157 Views, 3 Replies

Continuous Footing Design - Initial Setup Confusing

I am having difficulty trying to design some simple continuous footings.  The video on continuous footings on this site: http://www.robotoffice.com/rsa/ is awesome, however, the initial part is confusing.  The inidividual applies an "Elastic Ground Bar" to some objects.  What were those objects?  It lookes like those objects turn into a "T" shaped footing.  How would I model a "T" shaped continuous footing?  Does the initial bar have to be that shape before I apply the "Elastic Ground Bar" to it, or is it changed once the continuous footing is designed?  

 

If I wanted to model a rectangular grade beam that sits under a simple retangular frame, how would I do this?  What about modeling a continuous "T" footing under a wall?  Do I need to model a bar under the wall first?

 

Great forum.  Best resource by far!

3 REPLIES 3
Message 2 of 4
Artur.Kosakowski
in reply to: bjur

You should define either a rectangular or 'reversed' T shape RC beam under a wall.

 

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
Message 3 of 4
bjur
in reply to: Artur.Kosakowski

What am I doing wrong?  Attached is a sample model that has continuous footings under a simple box shaped structure.  It has both columns and walls that bear on the continuous footings.  I get a no support warning when I verify the model.  The model won't solve as it won't converge.  Really confused right now.  Any chance you could look at the sample model and tell me where I screwed up?  I wanted to test both point loads on continuous footings as well as both vertical and lateral loads coming from wall panels.

Message 4 of 4
Artur.Kosakowski
in reply to: bjur

1. There are no horizontal restrains (supports) which cause the instability warnings. Solution: define either some horizontal nodal supports or modify elastic soil definition adding some Ky (Uy) elasticity.

2. As you rotated the supporting beams by 180 deg the definition of unidirectional elastic soil should be Uz- rather than Uz+ (definition is in the local coordinate system of a bar). In such case there will be no convergence for wind load cases but this is obvious as there is no vertical load to stabilize the structure. All combinations converge.

 

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

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Autodesk Design & Make Report