Russell Fude's Communities Activities

Wind Load Generator and Applying Member Groups for Open and Closed Structure

Russell Fude — Tue, 21 Aug 2018 14:27:27 GMT

I have been having problems applying wind loads from the wind generator using the member group command. This is only occurring on the enclosed portions of the structure if I have more then four walls considered to be enclosed. I tired to do this in the load cases 6 and 7 labeled as WL(+X) and WL(-X) load cases respectively trying to separate them by a few lines of code or leaving them together. It is working in load cases 8 and 9 because I have not introduced the enclosed scalper walls. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Russ

communities.bentley.com/.../Wind-Load-Generator-Groups.zip

Can't access STAAD editor error.

Russell Fude — Tue, 09 Oct 2018 15:52:53 GMT

A colleague was trying to access the STAAD editor but got the following error message:

He even tried opening another STAAD file and got the same message. We are using version 20.07.11.70 and we are waiting on an upgrade from our CADD Specialists since we do not have the capability to update the program ourselves.

communities.bentley.com/.../W18-Web-NO-Opening.std

How to apply Wind Load Generator Cf factor

Russell Fude — Tue, 02 Oct 2018 12:47:08 GMT

When using ASCE 7-10 Wind Load Generator on an open structure a colleague has found that the actual force applied to the beams is about 1.8 times less then it should be. We tried to use they Exposure factor but that only applies to nodes and that did not increase the overall pressure on an open structure. Is there a way to input the Cf factor into STAAD? Version 20.07.11.70.

Beam offsets

Russell Fude — Fri, 17 Aug 2018 21:15:18 GMT

Is there an easier way to offset floor members so that the top of steel is the same elevation that is required for structural drawings? With all of the different depths of members within the same depth category plus shallow members, can I extrapolate the elevations of nodes plus beams with corresponding nodes so that they are at the same level? There are other programs that do this but so far I have not found a solution to this problem for STAAD. This would be most helpful for our drafters who have to present 3D models to the customer with TOS elevation being on par with reality. The only thing I can offer them is TOS is center line of beam and with a complex, multi sized members per floor, model I cannot provide to them that. I have tried to create a spreadsheet to help me with this but it is to complex to even begin with. I tagged the version in the Tags portion below this box but here is the version anyways, 20.07.11.70.

SFA v8.3.0.20 won't mesh

Russell Fude — Fri, 03 Aug 2018 13:03:34 GMT

Attached is a zipped folder of issues I have been having with SFA. I cannot find a workaround to this issue and realize I don't have the most recent version of STAAD Foundation Advanced which I cannot download due to my companies restrictions. In the zipped folder you will find the SFA file along with a Word document where I have copied warnings and screenshots when I try to export to Excel and then try to open. Please advise.communities.bentley.com/.../SFA.zip

SFA rigid foundations and supported nodes from STAAD.Pro

Russell Fude — Mon, 23 Jul 2018 14:22:10 GMT

I have a question regarding pile supported mat foundations. In the Help file there is a this tip:

Tip: For rigid foundations (i.e., isolated, combined, pilecap, etc.) the supported nodes in the STAAD.Pro model should be oriented to the top of the footing. However, for mat foundations, the supported nodes in the STAAD.Pro model should be modeled at the bottom of the footing.

When modeling from STAA.Pro import Y elevation is at 0, when creating my pile supported mat for a 4'-0" thick mat my Y elevation should be -4'-0". Am I assuming correctly that for my piles, especially fixed head piles, that the embedment depth of 6" or 12" that their Y elevation would be -3'-6" or -3'-0" respectively to get correct pile reactions and moment in the pile head?

Thanks,

Russ

Perform analysis versus P-Delta and Direct Analysis

Russell Fude — Tue, 17 Jul 2018 18:08:14 GMT

I'm having issues with the different methods of analysis', I can get results for Perform Analysis but when I try to switch to P-Delta and Direct Analysis I get warnings about instabilities and error codes in the output such as 1.#INF, 1.#IND and 1.#QNAN. There are both moment connections, pinned connections and pinned connections with springs to overcome tempurature forces. All load combinations that this effects has to do with the following load cases:

7. TL (temperature load)

10 WL1(+Z)

11. WL1(-Z)

14. WL2(+Z)

15. WL2(-Z)

16. WIL2(+Z)

These load cases appear to be what is giving me trouble. Any help would be great.

communities.bentley.com/.../Refinery-Upgrade-20180716-RJF-FIXED-BASE-PLATES.std communities.bentley.com/.../Refinery-Upgrade-20180716-RJF-Fixed-Base-Plates-P_2D00_Delta.std communities.bentley.com/.../Refinery-Upgrade-20180716-RJF-Fixed-Base-Plates-DAM.std

Losing faith in your software

Russell Fude — Fri, 27 Apr 2018 15:40:33 GMT

This needs to be mentioned. My manager has told me to ask if these issues of downloading new versions is worth the money my company pays for this product. I have been using STAAD now for 12 years but the new programs that Bentley is trying to attach and integrate has been less than desirable with all the program errors I have encountered. I have logged many software disputes but all I get is "download the new version", which doesn't help me because I cannot do this by myself, it goes through a software review from our central office in San Antonia, TX. I need Bentley to prove to my company, in some form, that it needs the new version to analyze any structure whether STAAD, RAM Connections or STAAD Foundation Advanced. RAM Structural Systems is basically useless when trying to ISM STAAD files. Beams are not correctly placed, issues with gravity members or lateral members not being defined correctly when imported from ISM.

I recently completed my yearly review with my manager and I brought up all of the problems I have encountered with the Bentley programs. He agrees with me that STAAD has not been forthcoming with fixing errors, only asking for the model and reissuing another version that fixes what was wrong without explanation and this dates back to 1990 as he has told me.

Personally, I am having a hard time relying on your company to put forth a working version of any of your structural programs because of the fact Bentley keeps reissuing versions of programs we already have without any explanation of what was wrong with the previous version. I have found many errors that have been “Logged” in the most recent of versions that has been supplied to us. It seems that when I find an issue with the recent program it gets corrected in the next version. Am I to assume that I am a beta tester for all Bentley software that is issued to us? If so then other users of this software may not be aware of these problems and are designing inferior structures that could become catastrophic failures in the field.

SFA not following code for temp and shrinkage per ACI code

Russell Fude — Tue, 01 May 2018 22:07:36 GMT

communities.bentley.com/.../Spliter_2C00_-Sampler-_2600_-Turn-Box-Support-4_2D00_5_2D00_18_5F00_foundation1.sfa

Per ACI 318-11, Section 7.12.2.1(b), r MIN = 0.0018 for temperature and shrinkage. For a mat with thickness of 30 inch. As MIN = 0.0018 x 12 inch x 30 inch = 0.648 in²/ft. In commentary, R7.12.2, ACI states that As MIN may be placed near the top or bottom of the slab or may be distributed between the top and bottom faces of the slab as deemed appropriate.

STAAD ERROR: STAAD Fndn is computing As MIN = 0.648 in²/ft for both the top face and bottom face of the mat foundation. Therefore, on lightly loaded mat foundations where As MIN governs, STAAD Fndn is providing twice the reinforcing permitted by the code. A box to mark if the temperature and shrinkage reinforcing is used on the top face, bottom face, or equally on both faces would be beneficial with STAAD Fndn correctly distributing the reinforcing between the two faces if that box is checked.

I would add that STAAD Fnd has a setting option for this purpose on rigid foundations in the Global Settings in the ‘Rigid Foundation Settings’ tab. However, I selected that option for my recent designs and do not think it is applying the minimum to top and bottom combined. This would be a separate error.

How do we fix this. Version 8.3.0.20

Discussion Starter I

Thu, 03 May 2018 04:11:40 GMT

Start a discussion in a forum that receives 5 replies.

Ask A Question II

Tue, 01 May 2018 15:44:12 GMT

Ask 10 questions in a forum.

Structure Wizard Issues

Russell Fude — Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:33:08 GMT

When trying to reinforce a member using Structure Wizard we end up getting worse results after the fact. We did a comparison of a W24X55 from the Section Database and a W24X55NR, NR stands for not reinforced, from the Structure Wizard and loaded them the same with the same properties and they fail at different ratios even though they are the same shape. We would like to know what is going on here besides the fact that the Physical Properties Ay and Az are not populated. Attached is a side by side comparison of the beams, a Word document with some screen grabs and the Section Wizard files.

Thanks,

Russ

SFA converting inches to feet for grade beam design.

Russell Fude — Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:46:00 GMT

I have been running into this issue off and on where when designing a grade beam I input the "Default Properties" for the slab and grade beam and the units is in inches. When I enter the grade beams into the "Physical beams" table it automatically populates the depth and width in feet but it is not converting all the beams dimensions correctly. I have attached a word document with snapshots and explanations. The zipped file will be uploaded to "Bentley Secure File Upload".

STAAD Foundation Advanced issues

Russell Fude — Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:23:16 GMT

I've been trying to design a pile supported mat with thickened grade beams, 48 inches, and slabs, 18 inches, and have run into issues with trying to import loads from STAAD.Pro and exporting the file to excel to define the load combinations and not getting them all imported back in. If I am not doing this correctly please let me know. Attached is a file with the SFA program, excel exported spreadsheet and word document with screen grabs of current version and error messages I have been receiving.

Issue with Wind Load Generator and Floor Load

Russell Fude — Fri, 22 Dec 2017 14:11:45 GMT

I have witnessed this before and now I am starting to question it. The GUI interface shows how my "Wind Load Generator" applies loads and there always seems to be an issue with the "Display Wind Contributory Area" where it displays one or more areas that seem to go into infinite in the upper left hand of the screen. I've tried looking for this on this site but I have not found out why this occurs. Can you please address this issue for me? My current version is 20.07.11.70 and the file will be attached.

Thanks,

Russ