Results beetwen seismostruct and othe software

03-Analytical/modelling capabilities
Post Reply
warcorsario
Posts: 16
Joined: 26 Jul 2019, 01:16

Results beetwen seismostruct and othe software

Post by warcorsario »

Currently, I am evaluating an 8-level building using a pushover type nonlinear analysis, comparing the results between the seismostruct 2018 and etabs 2016 software, finding disturbing results, for example in seismostruct I get a period of 0.53 seconds for the first vibration mode, while in etabs for that first mode the period is 0.72. Why this discrepancy in the results?

User avatar
seismosoft
Posts: 653
Joined: 06 Jul 2007, 04:55

Re: Results beetwen seismostruct and othe software

Post by seismosoft »

We are not sure what could be the reason for such large differences. Possible reasons could be discrepancies in the material properties, section dimensions are geometry. The value of the modulus of elasticity of concrete is usually the most common 'suspect'.
Seismosoft Support

sanya greek
Posts: 38
Joined: 07 Nov 2018, 12:08

Re: Results beetwen seismostruct and othe software

Post by sanya greek »

warcorsario wrote:
07 Feb 2020, 06:42
Currently, I am evaluating an 8-level building using a pushover type nonlinear analysis, comparing the results between the seismostruct 2018 and etabs 2016 software, finding disturbing results, for example in seismostruct I get a period of 0.53 seconds for the first vibration mode, while in etabs for that first mode the period is 0.72. Why this discrepancy in the results?
It can depend from masses you used. For example, Seismostruct don't use forces like masses. And if you putted forces in the place of walls (masonry) it will not account in eigenvalue analysis. So you mast go to Settings--> Gravity and Mass-->Define mass from-->From both Frame/Mass elementsand loads

Post Reply

Return to “03-Analytical/modelling capabilities”