RC module reliability

[GabrieleNovembri1027]

Hi All,
ten months have passed since the first and last post on this problem problem that persists in 2015 version.(see http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/robot-structural-analysis/rc-module-reliability/td-p/4694847)

I did some again some tests with 2015 version in order to verify if something have been changed.

In 2015 Version Robot gives you again two advices. The first indicates that the bearing capacity of the section is not enough. 

The shear stress acting on the section seems greater than the shear strength of the section.

Since VRD / Vsd = 0,28 (as in the picture) it follows that VRD * Vsd  = 0,28 * 385.45  = 107,93.
This result have been tested with another simple software that give out, for the shear resistance of the section a value equal to 397.8 kN 

What's wrong in my reasoning?

The shear strength value in RC module reliable? 

The second advice is a consequence of the first one ?.

Any help will be appreciated

Thanks

[Artur.Kosakowski]

Hi Gabriele,

I have checked the model from http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/robot-structural-analysis/rc-module-reliability/td-p/4694847 and the error no 2 is due to the way you created reinforcement (stirrups) in the column. As you used the typical reinforcement dialog the multi leg stirrups are created one above another instead of being exactly at the same level. The versification algorithm then doesn't recognizes the distances between each of the groups and displays the error about their spacing. If you move the stirrups in such a way that they are at the exactly the same planes (it is the way Robot would generated reinforcement) there will be no error displayed.

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.

[GabrieleNovembri1027]

hello Artur

I think there is a little bit of confusion.

In http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/robot-structural-analysis/rc-module-reliability/td-p/4694847 the typical reinforcement dialog was used to show that, even if the specified stirrups were correct, however, Robot was reporting an error.

The test was done as follows:

1) Real reinforcements were calculated with Robot. Robot signaled an error;

2) the correctness of the reinforcement was verified using another software.

3) the reinforcement was introduced back in robot using the typical reinforcement dialog and verified.

4) Robot signalled again the same error.

The test was used to show that the RC module report errors on correct reinforcement.

Now understand that if the stirrups are not perfectly coplanar robot is not able to take this into account.

This seems to me another BUG.

I think that typical reinforcement dialog is designed to allow the user to define a typical reinforcement and impose it on to a group of columns or beams in order to verify the correctness. The main advantage is, in my opinion, that the typical reinforcement can be directly exported to ASD or Revit.

According to what you say, you should:

1) assume an typical reinforcement;

2) Modify it in order to make the stirrups coplanar;

3 ) verify if the reinforcement I correct;

4) Modify again the Typical reinforcement in order to obtain the correct drawing in ASD.

In my recent post I was signalling that even today Robot reports an error that does not seem to be true !!!

You will find enclosed the model used for the test

Gabriele