hi, i modeled one 3 storey RC building and i run an incremental dynamic analysis. my model is really complicate. However, the results of IDA are really weird. Here are the resulst from the performance criteria check. Anything thoughts?
C7A 0, 22,26 Not reached yet
C8A -6,1988E+274 22,26 ***REACHED***
C8A 3,4485337E-127 22,26 REACHED AT PREVIOUS STEP
C9A -1710,6777689 22,26 ***REACHED***
C9A 1,5922814E-216 22,26 REACHED AT PREVIOUS STEP
C10A -5,0844227E-198 22,26 REACHED AT PREVIOUS STEP
C10A -2,6836E+261 22,26 ***REACHED***
C11A 1,5035417E-208 22,26 REACHED AT PREVIOUS STEP
C11A -5,8297E+030 22,26 ***REACHED***
C12A -5,0286531E-225 22,26 REACHED AT PREVIOUS STEP
C12A 1,1728659E-188 22,26 REACHED AT PREVIOUS STEP
C13A -4,7816436E-008 22,26 REACHED AT PREVIOUS STEP
C13A -7,1723420E-130 22,26 REACHED AT PREVIOUS STEP
IDA_results
-
seismosoft
- Posts: 1263
- Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55
Re: IDA_results
Dear Manousos,
The results are indeed weird, because it seems that there is a bug in the code. Can you please send the project file to us at support@seismosoft.com, so that we spot the bug and fix it?
Many thanks,
Seismosoft Support
The results are indeed weird, because it seems that there is a bug in the code. Can you please send the project file to us at support@seismosoft.com, so that we spot the bug and fix it?
Many thanks,
Seismosoft Support
Re: IDA_results
Dear Seismosoft, i send the project file.
Many thanks
Many thanks
-
seismosoft
- Posts: 1263
- Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55
Re: IDA_results
Manousos,
We have not run the project yet, however we noticed from the SeismoStruct warning message that the output is 3.64GB large.
It is strange that you did not notice it, since it states explicitly that SeismoStruct supports output files up to 2GB.
Can it be that you are getting the wrong values after the first 2GB of the results file are read? In such case, please increase the output frequency, from the Output module to 2 or larger.
Seismosoft Support
We have not run the project yet, however we noticed from the SeismoStruct warning message that the output is 3.64GB large.
It is strange that you did not notice it, since it states explicitly that SeismoStruct supports output files up to 2GB.
Can it be that you are getting the wrong values after the first 2GB of the results file are read? In such case, please increase the output frequency, from the Output module to 2 or larger.
Seismosoft Support
Re: IDA_results
Dear seismosoft,
The results that i paste at the first topic referred at the scale factor 0,1. the wrong values exist from the beginning of the analysis. However, i have run other analysis with less steps and in any case the size of the result file was less than 2GB. the results continues to be weird.
The results that i paste at the first topic referred at the scale factor 0,1. the wrong values exist from the beginning of the analysis. However, i have run other analysis with less steps and in any case the size of the result file was less than 2GB. the results continues to be weird.
-
seismosoft
- Posts: 1263
- Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55
Re: IDA_results
Dear Manousos,
You are indeed right. There is a bug in the output of the performance criteria just for IDA, the other analyses types (dynamic, pushover etc) run fine. The bug will be corrected in the upcoming v7.1 release that will be published in 1-2 months time. Until then, you can use dynamic analysis for your project.
Thank you for this bug report and apologies for any inconvenience that it might caused you.
Seismosoft Support
You are indeed right. There is a bug in the output of the performance criteria just for IDA, the other analyses types (dynamic, pushover etc) run fine. The bug will be corrected in the upcoming v7.1 release that will be published in 1-2 months time. Until then, you can use dynamic analysis for your project.
Thank you for this bug report and apologies for any inconvenience that it might caused you.
Seismosoft Support
Re: IDA_results
Dear Seismosoft,
Would you please update us about the next release of seismostruct since the current version has bugs in the IDA.
Regards,
Muntasir
Would you please update us about the next release of seismostruct since the current version has bugs in the IDA.
Regards,
Muntasir
-
seismosoft
- Posts: 1263
- Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55
Re: IDA_results
The new release with be published during the next month.
Seismosoft Support
Seismosoft Support
Re: IDA_results
Dear Seismosoft,
I did IDA analysis of a steel braced frame using seismostruct 7.04 version. I defined the yield strain of steel as performance criteria and ask to notify with colours. The problem is it can not show me the performance criteria in the deformed shape though my inFramFB elements actually reached to yield. I can see it from the analysis log. When I run the same model in Seismostruct version 6 it shows the yielded columns and beams with the defined colour.
Thanks
Amy
I did IDA analysis of a steel braced frame using seismostruct 7.04 version. I defined the yield strain of steel as performance criteria and ask to notify with colours. The problem is it can not show me the performance criteria in the deformed shape though my inFramFB elements actually reached to yield. I can see it from the analysis log. When I run the same model in Seismostruct version 6 it shows the yielded columns and beams with the defined colour.
Thanks
Amy
Re: IDA_results
Dear Amy,
I tried to reproduce the reported error, but the frame elements in my model were correctly coloured. Please check the assigned value in the performance criterion and if the selected color is covered by the color of another performance criterion.
I tried to reproduce the reported error, but the frame elements in my model were correctly coloured. Please check the assigned value in the performance criterion and if the selected color is covered by the color of another performance criterion.
Zoi Gronti
Seismosoft Srl.
Seismosoft Srl.