Robot Structural Analysis

## Robot Structural Analysis

Active Contributor
Posts: 48
Registered: ‎09-12-2012
Message 1 of 12 (436 Views)

# problem in analysis with zero displacements .

436 Views, 11 Replies
09-13-2012 12:41 PM

hi

i am new robot user and i have some problems trying to aanalyse a simple bar.here is the case:

i have a simple bar with two suports.one end is pinned (x and z ) and the other end is supported by a roller(there is a  x axis freedom and restrained in the z axis ).also a uniform load is presented.

the problem is that after calculations i do not see any x axis movement at the roller support end.even if i input an extreme load the xx displacement at the roller is 0,0
.i see the bar deformed but no movement at the roller.

another strange situation i have if i convert bothsupports to pinned in both axes x and z. i would expect an Fx reaction in the supports as the bar bents downwards but i get 0.0 again.

what am i doing wrong?

Product Support
Posts: 424
Registered: ‎06-23-2008
Message 2 of 12 (421 Views)

# Re: problem in analysis with zero displacements .

09-14-2012 12:02 AM in reply to: achillesgr

You observe such behavior because probably you have run static linear analysis for the load case with uniform perpendicular load.

It is necessary to consider 2nd and 3rd order geometrical non-linear effects to obtain "coupling" between perpendicular load of member and its longitudinal displacement or force:

Moreover to see such coupling the member should be relatively slender.

---------------------------------------------

Best regards,

Pawel Pulak
Active Contributor
Posts: 48
Registered: ‎09-12-2012
Message 3 of 12 (411 Views)

# Re: problem in analysis with zero displacements .

09-14-2012 05:18 AM in reply to: achillesgr

hi,

i changed the settings per your suggestions but still the same . i am sending the project in atachment .

please take a look what is going wrong

thanks!!

Product Support
Posts: 3,745
Registered: ‎04-26-2010
Message 4 of 12 (407 Views)

# Re: problem in analysis with zero displacements .

09-14-2012 05:42 AM in reply to: achillesgr

You have to make more calculation elements along this bar

Model attached.

Rafal Gaweda
Active Contributor
Posts: 48
Registered: ‎09-12-2012
Message 5 of 12 (398 Views)

# Re: problem in analysis with zero displacements .

09-14-2012 09:29 AM in reply to: Rafal.Gaweda

Ok. that worked fine!

if i assume that this is the uper beam of a frame with two columns so instead of the supports  there are two columns, what buckling parameters should i input?

1.there are 9 purlins on TOP of the beam at the nodes .

2.the beam to column is moment connections

3.there is one L that suports the lower flange to the midle purlin.

should i check the lateral buckling?

the X option at the buckling parameters means that the member will not be checked?

thanks!!

Product Support
Posts: 3,745
Registered: ‎04-26-2010
Message 6 of 12 (364 Views)

# Re: problem in analysis with zero displacements .

09-17-2012 02:02 AM in reply to: achillesgr

should i check the lateral buckling?

What code and your experience says?

the X option at the buckling parameters means that the member will not be checked?

NO , it means bickling will not be checked.

Rafal Gaweda
Active Contributor
Posts: 48
Registered: ‎09-12-2012
Message 7 of 12 (350 Views)

# Re: problem in analysis with zero displacements .

09-17-2012 07:55 AM in reply to: Rafal.Gaweda

Rafal,

i am talking about Eurocode checking.

steel desighn is new for me and do not know where to start from.

what members should i check for buckling or lateral buckling?

i have 3x  two span portal with  5 purlins per span.

should i check the whole structure for buckling ?( purlins, beams and columns?

or only the suported ones?

for example the purlins are unsuported with 5meter length , should i check them in buckling?maybe in both buckling and lateral buckling?

can you please give me an idea what members do i need to check and how?

if a beam have a very small axial load, is this enouth to force me to check for buckling?

from what i have read till now , if a member do ot have axial load then it is not necesary a buckling check.

i am attaching a file to please take a look if you have time.it is a simple structure. please take a look at the bar types and buckling settings and the suports .

thanks again

Active Contributor
Posts: 48
Registered: ‎09-12-2012
Message 8 of 12 (347 Views)

# Re: problem in analysis with zero displacements .

09-17-2012 08:03 AM in reply to: achillesgr

Rafal,

this is the structure i am talking about.

the columns are 6m height and have z bukling suports at midle and the y buckling is set to AUTO. no lateral?

the uper beams have have z bukling suports at the purlin connections and the y buckling is set to AUTO. for lateral i have set a lower flange suport at midspan, right?

thanks

Product Support
Posts: 3,745
Registered: ‎04-26-2010
Message 9 of 12 (345 Views)

# Re: problem in analysis with zero displacements .

09-17-2012 08:36 AM in reply to: achillesgr

My proposal in attached file.

Either bar 3 as a separate bar (Beam Upper  bar type) or as super-member 87 (bar 3+4) and bar type Beam Upper 34.

Anybody else can look?

Tony?

Rafal Gaweda
Active Contributor
Posts: 48
Registered: ‎09-12-2012
Message 10 of 12 (298 Views)

# Re: problem in analysis with zero displacements .

09-18-2012 07:11 AM in reply to: Rafal.Gaweda

Rafal ,

in the case of the beam uper member why do you take the buck Y coef =1.4?

in the case of the supermember beam uper34 member why do you take the buck Y coef =0.7? the 0.7 is for fixed-pined bar , why do you assign this? there are two columns with moment connection type, shouldn t you asighn the fixed -fixed type 0.5?

the automatic buckling works only for columns?

how do i make the two bars supermember? i cannot finf any command to connect bars.

also, there are some offsets in the real model, for example the purlins are located at the upper flange of the beams. should i consider this and move somehow the purlins in robot to their real position?

i have the sme question in the case of rc beam and slab. should i model the slab upon the beam or at the centerline?

how should i treat these offsets in robot?

thanks!!!

Recently Solved