RAM Concept Conflicting Audit Strip Results

I have modeled a 1-way PT slab and beam system starting with RSS and importing into Concept. At the lowest level I have several columns that need to jog. The audits on the strips at those locations produce a couple sections with errors that suggest removing 100% of the PT but adjacent sections may tell me to increase the amount of PT by a more reasonable percent. 

Is that a function of the forces induced by the column jog, or am I missing something? 

I have uploaded my file with the post URL. When opening uncheck all of the import options from RSS as I have made some geometry and load modifications to the model that would be overwritten. 

  • As for beam modeling, you can make adjustments in Ram Concept - Mesh Input - Standard Plan, just remember not to reimport the beams and slabs again after that. It the analytical behavior is affected by modeling it more exactly, then this work is worth doing. If nothing else, the "no torsion beam" behavior ought to be avoided for forking beams (your model already has this correct).

    As for design strips, you can have a segmented span segments (partial length design strips) if needed where part of the span is wide, and then later splits into two parts. Where there are angled beams coming together it can get messy, due to span boundary limits from adjacent strips, so one other strategy is to use individual design sections at key locations.