Hi Guys,
I had been working on a file in the morning and the file was saved and closed. Now i'm trying to get back at it but can't open RAM frame, I can only open the file and see Ram Model. I tried everything I can think of but no luck. I am unable to post the file here since its too big. Any suggestions or is there a way for me to upload the file anywhere.
Thank you,
Day
Do you get some error opening Ram Frame? How about Ram Steel Column module?
Some tips that might help. https://communities.bentley.com/products/ram-staad/w/structural_analysis_and_design__wiki/ramss-files-faq , https://communities.bentley.com/products/ram-staad/w/structural_analysis_and_design__wiki/42880/saving-version-16-01-models-in-version-16-00-causes-file-corruption
Otherwise send the file
Seth,
I did get an error in RAM Steel Column Module as well. I checked the link above and the software was not updated while we were working on this file or saved in a different version, so I am not sure if that is the cause. I have uploaded the file in the secure file upload link, the name of the file is 19076 tru hotel 7.rss.
Thanks,
Seth, after I updated the software the file started working. But the results are troubling. I have attached a pdf of my framing plan with wall group numbers. I have steel beams and columns on the right side of the building. After I run my Analysis and Steel Code check in RAM Frame, when I view the results for the steel beams, they pass with very low interaction ratios. When i looked at the Wall group forces what I found is the walls adjacent to the steel beams (Wall Group 40 and 45, highlighted in yellow) are getting a large portion of the Shear compared to a typical wall on the building. While the walls above the steel beam(Wall Group 41 to 44) and eventually the steel beams itself have very small shear value. The forces are very uneven in the walls near the steel beam. When i look at the wall group forces on the left side of the building the shear value for all the walls is pretty consistent for all the floors to what i would expect based on previous experience. I have worked on similar projects on RAM in the past and never had this issue and I am unable to figure out why this is happening. You can even see this in the RAM file I uploaded earlier.
PDF
A picture is worth 1000 words.... this is how it deflects (worm's eye view, wind on broad side).
Note, since there is no diaphragm considered, the walls form something like a Vierendeel truss and where the walls set on a soft frame it's like span, where the walls go down to ground it's more rigid, like a support. .
Seth, but in my case I do have a flexible diaphragm. Also, even if I consider the walls form a Vierendeel truss, then do i design my steel members using the loads obtained here. In my case i'm going to be using my steel members as a moment frame and if i'm not getting the correct loads I might be under designing my frames. So that is my concern, since i need to design the steel members as a moment frames, I need to make sure I'm using the right wind or seismic values.
Flexible diaphragms in RAM Frame are nothing at all. If the diaphragm stiffness was considered (e.g. as a semi-rigid diaphragm), then the frames below the walls would have even less lateral load in them as the diaphragm would help to distribute those lateral forces into adjacent walls (I presume). If you do not want any of this truss action you could stop considering the wall out-of-plane stiffness in the analysis, though you would need to revise the way the wind loads are applied in that case.
Or, if you already know what force you want the frames to be designed for, check them in a separate model or with a spreadsheet.
Seth, by not considering the wall out of plane stiffness in the analysis, it does make a difference in the wind loads for the walls above the steel beams. My final question here is does the Steel check in RAM frame not consider any gravity loads? Please see the attached file. Here I have two beams Beam 601(W21x44) and Beam 571(W21x50), when I look at the results in the Steel Beam Module, the Shear value obtained are 46.64 K for B601 and 79.1 K for B571. But when I look at the results in RAM frame I get shear values to be -2.51 K for B601 and 0.01 K for B571. I can even reduce the Beam sizes to a W8x10 and W10x30 for B601 and B571 respectively and the results show the beams still work according to RAM Frame, where as they fail horribly in Steel beam module. Can you please shed some light on this.
Thank you.