STAAD.Offshore Weight Factor

Hello,

I'm trying to get an understanding of a weight discrepancy between my results in STAAD.Pro and my results in STAAD.Offshore. When I run a simple gravity case for a structure in STAAD.Pro, I get a resultant weight as a sum of the y-reactions at my supports. 

Comparatively, when I take the same structure with the same supports in STAAD.Offshore, and run an transportation case setting only the heave acceleration at -1g, the resultant sum of the Y direction forces equates to approximately 1.06 times the resultant weight of the STAAD.Pro model. This has been tested with multiple structures and on multiple computers, so from what I can tell, there may be an issue with the software.

Has anyone else come across this issue? As this will affect the results in all other transportation cases that will be run, I was hoping to sort this out and align the weights prior to finalizing my analysis. I would appreciate any information that anyone could provide on the above.

Best regards,

Eoghan

  • What units are you using? Are you consistent in both applications? Can you attach a sample that illustrates the two values?



  • Carlos - thank you for the response. I'm using US units in both applications. I've included a few screen shots of results of a simple case I was running to try to solve the discrepancy:

    Gravity case in STAAD.Pro (Total Fy = -11.757 kips):

    STAAD.Offshore Input Parameters:

    STAAD.Offshore Results:

    My intent in running this case in STAAD.Offshore was to replicate the effects of gravity on the structure. As you can see, the resulting STAAD.Offshore load (12,450 lbs) was approximately 6% higher than the resulting STAAD.Pro weight (11,757 lbs).

    I tried running an identical case on a heavier and more complex structure, and the resultant STAAD.Offshore load again worked out to be approximately 6% higher than the STAAD.Pro load.

    I would appreciate any help in solving this. Hopefully the above examples help to clarify the issue I'm having, but please let me know if I can provide any additional information.

    Best regards,

    Eoghan

  • The issue is down to a reduced accuracy that occurs by using 'inches' in the length unit. Whilst this may sound counter intuitive, what happens is that there is a reduced precision on the density value that gets processed and recorded in the MIC file. I would suggest that your best option is to change to use FEET as your length unit and you should be ok.