Seismosoft | Earthquake Engineering Solutions

Thank you for your detailed response. According to Annex 9A of KAN.EPE., if a member is classified as quasi-ductile, a capacity design check is not required (for RSA with the global factor q). SeismoBuild automatically determines whether a member is quasi-ductile (can I see this result?), and then ...

Hello Seismosoft team,

I ran two RSAs in SeismoBuild: Analysis A: q = 2 & Analysis B: q = 1.
Theoretically, forces in case B should be about double those in case A. Instead, when I increase q, shear forces also increase, which is the opposite of what I expect.
Could this be due to a mistake on my ...

So, the software considers confinement, which can lead to higher strengths. However, can it also account for column cover spalling? Spalling may limit the benefits of confinement and should be carefully checked when concrete strains exceed the crushing strain of unconfined concrete

Dear Seismosoft team,

I have a question regarding the bending moment capacity of members when the check is performed after a linear dynamic analysis (Checks by KAN.EPE). Is the capacity presented by the software based on Annex 7A, equation (A.6.a) of KAN.EPE or something else?

Best regards

According to KAN.EPE., all members have a quasi-linear M–θ diagram, so the initial stiffness up to the yield point is constant and corresponds to the effective stiffness (not the uncracked one), as stated in paragraph 7.2.3. Of course, this stiffness changes after yielding. However, I don't ...

Hello,
in my model the calculation of target displacement (EC8) of SDoF is dt=0.47cm
and in MDoF= Γ * dt =0.77* 0.47=0.365 cm.
Is it maybe Γ=0.77<1 and d(MDoF)<d(SDoF)?
Thank you!

Why the shear capacity of a wall is different by different load pattern in pushover (Modal X+ vs Uniform X)?

Thank you , for the very useful information , but i don't see on any KANEPE or EC8 paragraph that "the calculation of the target displacement is with uncracked stiffness

If i want to run a pushover analysis , the default choice of Seismobuild is the uncracked stiffness.
The parametres E , I , change measure with each iteration of pushover or remains constant;

Hello,

In the programme "Seismobuild" is it possible not to take the mass of the basement floor ( -1) into account when conducting Eigenvalue Analysis?

Thanks in advance for your help!