Lateral load from claddings vs. line load

[bartosz.zaforemski]

While doing some test model with claddings and line loads on bars I came across something wierd.

Two structures - 1st with claddings, 2nd without them (load is defined directly to the horizontal bars)

Both models represents equal deformations, equal bending moments and axial forces in columns, BUT: in 2nd model with line load (on horizontal bars) there are axial forces in beams with some "extra" peaks... I mean Case:2

What's the issue?

http://speedy.sh/eeJnY/Strop-TESTING.rtd

[StefanoPasquini6790]

Hi, for your floor you choosed a rigid one and this can cause the peack of compression in the bonduary beams. Try to change the analysis type for your floor and watch to the results.

Let me know if this help you, greetings.

[bartosz.zaforemski]

Floors are modelled as semi-rigid diaphragm in both cases, it should not make any difference cause the only difference is in load aplication (via cladding or directly to the egde of diaphragm).

[Artur.Kosakowski]

The link you have provided doesn't work correctly. Could you attach both (compressed) files again?

[bartosz.zaforemski]

https://www.wetransfer.com/downloads/437d763def3104201c163c81ec98698e20140630070048/455c210adf05837e...

[Artur.Kosakowski · Accepted solution]

For case 1 I want the vertical load to be distributed in one direction that is perpendicular to the direction of the wind (meaning only beams that are parallel to the load have load assigned).

For case 2 I no longer want this 

In other words due to this definition the wind load is applied as trapezoidal axial loads along the indicated beams. I would suggest defining uniform load on the beams (bar load type) rather than panel edges (surface load type) 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.