Hi, I've been trying to model a section variable beam on Seismostruct, but I can't find how to do that. Is it possible to model this type of beam on Seismostruct?
Please, let me know.
Thanks a lot.
SECTION VARIABLE BEAM ON SEISMOSTRUCT
- seismosoft
- Posts: 1193
- Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55
Re: SECTION VARIABLE BEAM ON SEISMOSTRUCT
In SeismoStruct it is possible to have different sections in the same element. The different sections can be specified in the Element Classes module (i.e. select more sections than one). Note also that the only difference allowed is in the reinforcement, i.e. different section types or section with different dimensions cannot be accepted.
Seismosoft Support
Seismosoft Support
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 17 May 2019, 15:04
Re: SECTION VARIABLE BEAM ON SEISMOSTRUCT
Hi everybody,
i have a same problem: i want to model a reinforcement variable beam on Seismostruct but with the option "select more sections than one" in the Element Classes module i can't subdivide the beam as i want but i must keep the coordinates of the integration sections (for 5 section [-1 -0.655 0.0 0.655 1]*L/2).
For example: I have 5 meters long beam ( with a rectangular section) and for the first meter there is a disposition of the reinforcement and for the second one another ecc... With "select more section than one" in the element classes i have a preset lenghts of every section along the beam (for 5 section [-1 -0.655 0.0 0.655 1]*L/2).
Can you help me?
Thank a lot
i have a same problem: i want to model a reinforcement variable beam on Seismostruct but with the option "select more sections than one" in the Element Classes module i can't subdivide the beam as i want but i must keep the coordinates of the integration sections (for 5 section [-1 -0.655 0.0 0.655 1]*L/2).
For example: I have 5 meters long beam ( with a rectangular section) and for the first meter there is a disposition of the reinforcement and for the second one another ecc... With "select more section than one" in the element classes i have a preset lenghts of every section along the beam (for 5 section [-1 -0.655 0.0 0.655 1]*L/2).
Can you help me?
Thank a lot
Re: SECTION VARIABLE BEAM ON SEISMOSTRUCT
Dear Lorenzo Crocco,
You may create more than one beam elements in order to model the 5 meters long beam, i.e. insert nodes at the locations you want to divide the beam element and assign the proper beam sections.
You may create more than one beam elements in order to model the 5 meters long beam, i.e. insert nodes at the locations you want to divide the beam element and assign the proper beam sections.
Zoi Gronti
Seismosoft Srl.
Seismosoft Srl.
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 17 May 2019, 15:04
Re: SECTION VARIABLE BEAM ON SEISMOSTRUCT
Dear Zoi, thank you very much.
Your answer satisfy my problem.
But to verify that the use of two elements instead of just one is correct and representative of reality, I tried to do a pushover analysis of a column stuck to the base (with a single section and reinforcement along its entire length) with a horizontal load applied in the extremity node. (PIC1)
PIC1:
In a simulation I used a single 3 meter high element (using 10 integration sections) and another simulation by dividing the column into two elements 1.5 meters long each one (using 4 integration sections for each element).
The two solutions should be co-incident or very similar, and in fact in terms of displacement they differ very little, but the two deformed do not coincide at 1.5 meters high (in the simulation with two elements there seems to be a fracture, which in reality it shouldn't be there). (view PIC2 , PIC3)
(2 elem.) PIC2:
(1 elem.) PIC3:
I tried to apply internal constraints but this situation continues to exist, how can I do to avoid this distinction between the two solutions?
Thank so much and sorry for my bad english.
Lorenzo Crocco
Your answer satisfy my problem.
But to verify that the use of two elements instead of just one is correct and representative of reality, I tried to do a pushover analysis of a column stuck to the base (with a single section and reinforcement along its entire length) with a horizontal load applied in the extremity node. (PIC1)
PIC1:
In a simulation I used a single 3 meter high element (using 10 integration sections) and another simulation by dividing the column into two elements 1.5 meters long each one (using 4 integration sections for each element).
The two solutions should be co-incident or very similar, and in fact in terms of displacement they differ very little, but the two deformed do not coincide at 1.5 meters high (in the simulation with two elements there seems to be a fracture, which in reality it shouldn't be there). (view PIC2 , PIC3)
(2 elem.) PIC2:
(1 elem.) PIC3:
I tried to apply internal constraints but this situation continues to exist, how can I do to avoid this distinction between the two solutions?
Thank so much and sorry for my bad english.
Lorenzo Crocco