Static Pushover analysis on a Bridge Model.

04-Unexpected behaviour/errors
huffte
Posts: 889
Joined: 22 Jul 2011, 10:19
Location: Cookeville, Tennessee, USA
Contact:

Re: Static Pushover analysis on a Bridge Model.

Post by huffte »

What element type are you using - DB (displacement-based) or FB (force-based)? If DB, you may need to subdivide elements. Just a thought. Also double-check units.
Tim Huff
Dipesh_Donda
Posts: 6
Joined: 14 May 2020, 21:52

Re: Static Pushover analysis on a Bridge Model.

Post by Dipesh_Donda »

Thank you for your reply.

I am using DB elements. My units are fine. I am not sure what do you mean by subdividing elements. Do you mean the division of elements in the element subdivision tab in the Options menu for pre-processor?

Thank you,
Dipesh
User avatar
seismosoft
Posts: 860
Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55

Re: Static Pushover analysis on a Bridge Model.

Post by seismosoft »

The infrmDB models are only accurate for small elements lengths. As a result, one has to subdivide each member at least to 4-5 elements, in order to achieve good results. If this seems inconventient, it would be better to use one of the force-based frame element models.
Seismosoft Support
Dipesh_Donda
Posts: 6
Joined: 14 May 2020, 21:52

Re: Static Pushover analysis on a Bridge Model.

Post by Dipesh_Donda »

Thank you once again for your reply.

I did change my elements to infrmFB elements. However, I found that it gave me convergence problems. It was resolved when I removed the self-weight of concrete and reinforcements and then applying them to the section with additional mass/length. I also found that the deflections in my model are affected when I make changes in the Gravity and Mass tab in the Options in Pre-Processor.

I am sending my model to the email support@seismosoft.com with a brief description.
User avatar
seismosoft
Posts: 860
Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55

Re: Static Pushover analysis on a Bridge Model.

Post by seismosoft »

We checked briefly your model, the elements' lengths are rather small; the infrmDB is reasonably accurate, and the infrmFB element with 4-5 integration sections are too heavy and it can be expected that they lead to convergence problems.
Seismosoft Support
Abd Ur Rahim
Posts: 1
Joined: 06 Nov 2020, 21:22

modeling of masonry

Post by Abd Ur Rahim »

my questions are:
1. can we perform micro modeling of masonry in seismostruct.
2. the masonry modeled in the published example is on equivalent frame based or some other approach?
3. if anyone have a research paper on masonry modeling in siesmostruct please provide me. not on infill but on pure masonry
for further guidance i shall be thankful
User avatar
seismosoft
Posts: 860
Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55

Re: Static Pushover analysis on a Bridge Model.

Post by seismosoft »

Abd Ur Rahim,
1. No, SeismoStruct's masonry model is a macroelement
2. Refer to the User's manual for a detailed description of the model. it consists of three subelements, a internal fibre element to simulate bending (similar to the frame elements) with two inelastic link elements at the two ends to simulate the shear behaviour
3. no paper has been published yet with the details of the model, but there will e a paper soon

Seismosoft Support
Post Reply

Return to “04-Unexpected behaviour/errors”