I have been using SeismoStruct for one year and I still don't get along with the definition of non-structural nodes.
I believe that the only purpose is to define the element local axes.
My suggestion is, since most of the times elements are defined in a plan which is paralel to one of the three ortogonal plans, to simply ask the user to specify an angle with that plan.
It is just a request to simplify the most likely cases in which users define ortogonal elments..
Of course it still needs a lot of thinking, but it would be a great development.
I would be glad to hear from you and to help thinking of new ways of defining the element connectivity.
Best regards,
forsake non-structural nodes
-
seismosoft
- Posts: 1263
- Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55
Re: forsake non-structural nodes
Dear G.Carvalho,
Whilst we believe the definition of non-structural nodes to be relatively straightforward and in-line with what is done in other structural analysis codes, we are nonetheless planning to release, in 2012, a new version of SeismoStruct that will feature even easier definition of building models.
Seismosoft Support
Whilst we believe the definition of non-structural nodes to be relatively straightforward and in-line with what is done in other structural analysis codes, we are nonetheless planning to release, in 2012, a new version of SeismoStruct that will feature even easier definition of building models.
Seismosoft Support