topic Re: Footfall Analysis in Robot Structural Analysis Forum

Footfall Analysis

GabrieleNovembri1027 — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 21:11:07 GMT

hello,
has anyone ever tried to do analysis a footfall with Robot?.
I always get the same error (see attached image). Anyone know where I can find a tutorial?
thanks

Re: Footfall Analysis

Artur.Kosakowski — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 08:42:37 GMT

@GabrieleNovembri1027 wrote:

hello,
has anyone ever tried to do analysis a footfall with Robot?.
I always get the same error (see attached image). Anyone know where I can find a tutorial?
thanks

I'm attaching a document with an example of such analysis. I hope you find it useful. Mind that you should set the solver type as Automatic as the Multithreaded one is not available for this kind of analysis.

Re: Footfall Analysis

GabrieleNovembri1027 — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 19:40:50 GMT

Hi,
thanks for the material and very useful information. I'm doing some tests and I noticed some problems. (see attached picture) The problem appears to be related to 64-Bit Version. Do you know if the result is correct despite the error?

Thanks

Re: Footfall Analysis

Artur.Kosakowski — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 07:04:54 GMT

@GabrieleNovembri1027 wrote:

Hi,
thanks for the material and very useful information. I'm doing some tests and I noticed some problems. (see attached picture) The problem appears to be related to 64-Bit Version. Do you know if the result is correct despite the error?

Thanks

I assume this is the consequence of the parameters you set rather than the error. I think that the only active mass direction is Z which means you cannot have the results for disabled X and Y.

Re: Footfall Analysis

GabrieleNovembri1027 — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 20:21:11 GMT

hi,
I agree with you but I think it would be more useful to have a value of zero rather than -1, j #
thanks

Re: Footfall Analysis

Artur.Kosakowski — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 08:50:51 GMT

@GabrieleNovembri1027 wrote:

hi,
I agree with you but I think it would be more useful to have a value of zero rather than -1, j #
thanks

I agree that 0s will look better (not sure if in this case they are of any use anyway ). I will discuss such change with the developers.

Re: Footfall Analysis

Artur.Kosakowski — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 14:08:05 GMT

@GabrieleNovembri1027 wrote:

hi,
I agree with you but I think it would be more useful to have a value of zero rather than -1, j #
thanks

I agree that 0s will look better (not sure if in this case they are of any use anyway ). I will discuss such change with the developers.

In v.2013 this should be displayed as N/A (not available).

Re: Footfall Analysis

GabrieleNovembri1027 — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 17:56:41 GMT

Great Artur

Re: Footfall Analysis

Anonymous — Thu, 20 Nov 2014 15:31:27 GMT

Hello,

Would anyone know from which part of BS 5400 the limit response factor of R<64 for footbridges is taken? Can not find it in any BS5400 I have.

Thank you in advance

Re: Footfall Analysis

Anonymous — Wed, 29 Apr 2015 18:52:25 GMT

A basic question likely solved by a simple answer as I am a complete novice with RSA...

...how do you ensure the self weight of the structure, plus additional dead loads and a percentage of the live load are taken account of in the footfall analysis?

I am modelling a floor plate with 7 x 4 bays in accordance with the SCI P354 guide.

Re: Footfall Analysis

Anonymous — Fri, 01 May 2015 14:30:50 GMT

I've just seen this in the Concrete Centre guide to vibration on page 20:

Re: Footfall Analysis

Anonymous — Mon, 21 Sep 2020 15:01:43 GMT

Can somebody confirm that by carrying out a self-excitation footfall analysis on RSA is equivalent to assessing a floorplate for continuous vibration? Also, can it be confirmed that, by isolating an area of floorplate as a corridor to assess the implication on adjacent rooms (receptor nodes) and adopting full excitation is equivalent to the VDV approach in SCI P354?