Mass participation

Mass participation

Anonymous
Not applicable
3,686 Views
23 Replies
Message 1 of 24

Mass participation

Anonymous
Not applicable

I have only 18% mass participating in 40 modes. Could you give me your advice

 

Thanks

 

 

0 Likes
Accepted solutions (2)
3,687 Views
23 Replies
Replies (23)
Message 2 of 24

Anonymous
Not applicable

very broad question? Smiley Happy

0 Likes
Message 3 of 24

Anonymous
Not applicable

Thanks a lot for your interest, if you see my file in the attachment at the first message, I have claddings with wind loads and vertical loads to simulate the weight of exterior walls (self weight), this wall not contribute to stiffness but are mass to calculate the seismic force. Maybe is it necessary replace the loads by nodal mass at the join points of columns?
I can’t find what is wrong but I can’t increase the seismic mass participation.

0 Likes
Message 4 of 24

rsousa_
Advocate
Advocate

With your model, i'm getting this results. My version of robot is lower than yours, so I had to make some corrections in Analysis-->Analysis Types--> Load to mass conversion   and Combination sign. When you are dealing with modal analysis these tabs are very important.

I think with 40 modes i'm getting 99.9% of mass participation.

Capturar.JPG

0 Likes
Message 5 of 24

Anonymous
Not applicable

Thanks, could you explain me what changes are you made?

 

0 Likes
Message 6 of 24

rsousa_
Advocate
Advocate

in load to mass conversion table, the load cases were missing. there were values of "0" and I modified to "1", "2" and "3". then hit calculation button and get that results.

 

I don't know if the third line was load case "3" snow with coeficcient 0.25.

 

if it ins't put the right loadcase and I guess you will get similar results in terms of mass participation.

0 Likes
Message 7 of 24

Anonymous
Not applicable

Not, in my model (first message this post) I have :

  1. load to conversion table Cas 1, 2 and 3
  2. Snow load coefficient =0.25 is good
  3. Total mass of building are 2 008 924 kg

In your post you have only 101 586 kg

0 Likes
Message 8 of 24

Rafal.Gaweda
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support

David,

 

Have you managed,  checke, corrected the instability in model?



Rafal Gaweda
0 Likes
Message 9 of 24

Anonymous
Not applicable

Yes,

If I check DSC algorithm I have instability type 3 only (I guess because I have a diaphragm)

0 Likes
Message 10 of 24

Rafal.Gaweda
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support

Apply "Shell" and use 80 modes.



Rafal Gaweda
0 Likes
Message 11 of 24

t.sautierr
Advisor
Advisor

I took a look to your model :

 

1)

-> see the modal shapes : acutally the modes are only local modes, I think this is due to the fact that your roof is light and your bracinf is quite stiff (St andrew crosses), in the other hand, your columns are quite high.

 

that's why the local modes appears before the global ones. To illustrate this you can try two things : just to see, try to change the thickness of your roof into something heavy (for example EP30 which is concrete 30cm), or remove the crosses and put fixed support at the bottom; In both case, you will find that 5 modes will give you more than 80% of the mass.

 

2)

I the model I also remove the rigid links because I think it is double role with the fact you define a soft diaphragm.

Either there is no diapgram and you define Rlinks manually - Either diaphram but no Rlinks ?  Am I right Rafal?

 

Rafal, this lead to a question about the local modes : 

 

Is it possible toinactivate some element only for the modal/seismic analysis? I don't think so but ....

If not, the typical solution to solve the issue is :

 

- use concentrated matrix without rotation

- use fake material (very low density (0 is not possible but maybe 0.01 kN/m3) )

- Other tricks?

 

TS

0 Likes
Message 12 of 24

t.sautierr
Advisor
Advisor
That's what I used to test the model, but why is it better working with a shell than a diaphragm ?
0 Likes
Message 13 of 24

Rafal.Gaweda
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support
Accepted solution

This is small model - use 80 modes

 

Of course to erduce number of modes you have to get rid of  some local modes giving small % of masses.

 

You can disable bars ("Inactive") but for all calculations.

You can exclude them for SW generation (sw on Part of Structure) and instaed of their sw apply nodal loads or masses directly

You can make fake material



Rafal Gaweda
0 Likes
Message 14 of 24

Rafal.Gaweda
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support

That's what I used to test the model, but why is it better working with a shell than a diaphragm ?

To calculate 80 modes 🙂



Rafal Gaweda
0 Likes
Message 15 of 24

t.sautierr
Advisor
Advisor
🙂
didn't understand? why for 40 modes it should be diaphragm and for 80 shell?
0 Likes
Message 16 of 24

t.sautierr
Advisor
Advisor
"You can exclude them for SW generation (sw on Part of Structure)"

How : create SW load case, suppress SW and reapply SW only for element I want to have taken into account?
0 Likes
Message 17 of 24

Rafal.Gaweda
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support

didn't understand? why for 40 modes it should be diaphragm and for 80 shell?

Guess.



Rafal Gaweda
0 Likes
Message 18 of 24

Rafal.Gaweda
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support


How : create SW load case, suppress SW 

http://screencast.com/t/oPwCEmwun



Rafal Gaweda
Message 19 of 24

t.sautierr
Advisor
Advisor
Diaphargm reduces the number of degreee of freedom but ..... in this structure we have alread plenty .... grrr I don't find 🙂
0 Likes
Message 20 of 24

Rafal.Gaweda
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support

Diaphargm reduces the number of degreee of freedom but ..... in this structure we have alread plenty .... grrr I don't find 🙂
Because he  used "meshed" diaphragm = meshed panel with rigid link.

 



Rafal Gaweda
0 Likes