Offsets have to be replaced with another option in which rigid links will be automatically defined in proper locations, because the way that they are used right now in Robot is not convenient at all and it is causes many simulation problems... Especially in RC structures, where it is immediate to consider non "centerlined" connections between members, Robot has to be improved about this issue.
It will be a very powerful tool if you create a link with Opensees (open source hi level structural analysis software) that allow the user to export the model (geometry, sections, material, loads) to Opensees and, after the nl calculation, import the results from them. The first phase can be done such a special *.str file, and the second it can be done with a special _RT file. Watch on line the power of opensees.
It will be powerful if will be added, in the steel connection tool, the option to auto detect the identical joint present in the whole structure, or define from selection a region where the identical joint have to be applied.
Once Robot find the group of "SAME STEEL CONNECTION PROPERTIES" the user can create the joint using the actual definition present in Robot. This definition will be applied to all the member of family, and all of it depend by only one "master definition", each changes on its parameters (for example bolt class or plate thickness) will be applied to all the joints of the family, avoiding the "time consuming" manual definition and calculation of each connection and, overall, the possible mistake in manual data input.
After you have defined the steel connection family, the user can run the code checking of the family, Robot automatically calculate all the steel connection present in the family and plot the report of the top ratio one.
This tool, added to an improvement of steel connection type (for exaple more beam to beam connection type) can be made easily, the calculation engine is the same of robot, the report generation is the same of robot, only the grouping engine tool have to be programmed, but can be partially copied from the spread footing dimensioning.
Please give kudos to this idea.
Greetings at all
Hi, So I noticed that as the model gets bigger in size due to big number of elements the model tends to be slower and slower to manage. at this point, and editing in the model will consume lots of time.
I think this happens because RSA saves all the information in one file and as the user edit the model, RSA saves the information in its location in the file and by the time RSA finds the location in the file and edit the code and regenerate that takes a significant time in some cases..
any file has total number of node more than 20,000 things start to get slower and slower.
I hope the programmers can find an algorithm or a way to speed up working with large files. (may be by splitting iinput file into different files or something similar).
The section builder tool is very good, although there are some problems.
- the naming convention is USELESS. only being able to give a 4 letter description is very limiting.
- not being able to save a new profile as a concrete beam is limiting. the section definition only allows reduction of moment of inertia for steel sections, and any user defined section can only be used as a "steel" section.
I think everyone have tryed to get ennoyed about how the plates seems to turn upside down, sideway or inside out when you go into Provided reinforcement maps for plates just fells allraund random. I whould love to have every plate turn up the same way, Like local system is allways followed, i dont care about the detalies, aslong as the same rule is allways followed, because then i whould be able to not have to think about what side of the wall im lokking at, in what direction. I can just adjust my local system for all the walls, whits i do anyway.
Im sure this is and easy function to fix, so thanks on advance
Add to the parametric section tab more sections such us C,U, Sigma. Definig general dimensions, thickness AND BEND RADIUS.
Obviously calculating them as thin walled sections when thinner than 3mm.
Please, this is ESSENTIAL
A general update in push over analysis should take place.
There are several issues that must be resolved in order this type of analysis to be completed in Robot. Some of these are already posted, for instance the following links:
..and many others like the ability to set a starting case (usually containing dead and live loads) before the push over analysis e.t.c (I think that some of them are already posted as SR in Subscription Center).
When we select a node by indicating its number, it is marked with a green color spot in the structure but if the structure is a little more than simlpe it's difficult for the user to see where it is... It should be marked by a different (more clear) way, for instance the node could be enclosed in a small circle in order to be visible.
It would be very beneficial to make the input and display of beam restraints more user friendly as the current method is not straight forward. This is the only reason I avoid using Robot for Portal Frame design.
I have attached a pdf screenshot from another program which is the easiest I have come across to input beam restraints. It also shows an overall structure view of the restraints so it is easy to see if there is a restraint out of place. I find it can be easy to get member restraints backwards or upside down without this view. Just a tick box in display to show restraints would be fine.
Setting restraint points is much quicker because its done from one dialog box for all restraints. This may be something which could be developed in the short term with excel using macros and linked to Robot by creating a new Member Type?
Please see http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/Robot-Structural-Ana
Objects (panels, contours, lines, polylines, arcs circles and so on) table with coordinates of their characteristic points