How to use STAAD more efficiently

During my last project I kept track of time lost as a result of deficiencies, bugs, outdated technology, and lack of proper tools in STAAD Pro. I estimated that approximately 32% of the total hours were wasted. This time could be saved if I were using high quality software like Scia Engineer, Dlubal RFEM, SAP/ETABS, or Midas. As I don’t have choice to use other software, I would appreciate comments, guides, links to add-on(s), etc.  that can help me to resolve some of the issues listed below and use software more effectively:

Geometry/Modeling/GUI

  1. Lack of physical members accounts for a significant time waste. Any hints on how to overcome this would be much appreciated.
  2. There is no facility to directly assign design properties to the members. Users have to go to the design tab, select the members, add the design commands, and then assign the properties. Another significant time waste.
  3. There are no tools to create grid or construction lines. For complex floors it is very hard to see where the columns are and properly frame the floor. I usually end up printing the floor plans, sketch the members by hand and then draw them back in STAAD. Any other suggestions?
  4. Lack of geometry objects like lines, circles, etc. that can be converted to the actual members
  5. Lack of proper CAD like tools for geometry definition, apart from the very basic ones
  6. “Stretch members” tool has bug that causes program to crash and in some cases create corrupted input file. It is essential to maintain numerous back-up files to recover the model.
  7. In case when joints are merged, member releases are lost, floor groups have to be re-assigned, the design parameters have to re-assigned, temperature loads have to be re-assigned, etc. Another huge time waste.  
  8. Input file limitations that cause braking the lines is very annoying and creates mess with large models. 
  9. The grouping of automatically selected members has to be done manually. No tools to automatically group the members as far as I know. Things are even more difficult because of the lack of physical members, so basically all of the members with intermediate nodes have to be manually grouped.
  10. No facility to select members of the same cross section apart from using property name which is time consuming
  11. No beam cutback to visually distinguish between simple and moment connections
  12. If the members are deleted - some of the floor groups may become obsolete, causing program to delete the portion of the input file without warning – so the loads, load combinations, analysis and design parameters may be deleted without warning!!!
  13. Working with plate elements is limited to the simplest square/rectangular geometries and loads. "Automatic meshing" algorithm is crude.
  14. Section builder is outdated and difficult to use. I use autocad to calculate section properties.

 Loads

  1. Floor loads distribution rarely works properly, users have to experiment with node tolerances, there is no ability to create openings, etc.
  2. In some cases floor loads distribution in GUI appears correct but it’s actually wrong
  3. No wind load generator for the Canadian Code. Using floor groups for the wind loads is time consuming and cumbersome as requires re-assignment every time when members/joints are modified
  4. No snow load generator for the Canadian Code.
  5. Load combination generator is crude and lacking some of the basic features. In practice load combinations are usually done manually, which is time consuming for modern codes. This is a significant issue.
  6. Difficult and time consuming to apply and manipulate hydrostatic loads (why we need a “wizard” for this?)
  7. “Select region” command does not work as intended - members are missing from selection, etc.

Results

  1. Output file is limited to text only and it is not readable.
  2. Output file is not consistent and varies between codes as well as different versions of the same code.
  3. Discrepancies between GUI and output file. Users have to check both. Significant time waste.

Note: Format and structure of the output file is arguably the worst I have seen among not only commercial, but also free structural software. I hope developers will do something about this.

Design (all the items relate to Canadian Steel Code):

  1. Members cannot be selected based on strength and serviceability criteria. This is a very basic requirement and, in my opinion, software that does not have the capability so select the members base on these requirements should be discarded as not functional for a professional use.
  2. Definition of deflection criteria for members is crude and limited to very small models. For large models its very time consuming to assign deflection limits.
  3. Bug in selecting WT members – this is a known issue
  4. There is no functionally to automatically maintain the top of the beams at the same elevation.
  5. Latest Canadian Steel Code is not implemented, appx. 3 years after the code was published.
  6. Latest Canadian National Building Code is not implemented, appx. 3 years after the code was published
  7. Latest Ontario Building Code is not implemented, appx. 4 years after the code was published
  8. No facility to design members based on certain threshold - say if moment is  less than 1 kNm design member only for Axial Loads.
  9. Batch mode is not efficient way of reviewing results in 2013, but users are constantly referred to batch mode as the only reliable way to verify results.
  10. Basic design parameters (like Radius of gyration, or the actual length of the members) and results cannot be checked in GUI, again it is necessary to check the output file.

Thanks

  • As I mentioned, the platform that STAAD.Pro is built on makes it difficult to enhance in terms of the CAD type tools you are asking about.

    If you are looking for an alternative that is immediately available, I suggest you have a look at Bentley's AECOSim Building Designer. It is quite sophisticated from the standpoint of model generation and it can produce a STAAD file.



  • Kris - " Set New Member Attributes" is certainly an useful tool (that I am using very often), but what I meant was that there should be a toolbar with typical drafting tools (like line, arc, circle, polyline, polygon, rectangle, ...) to draw simple line elements. Once geometry is completed, lines are converted to actual members (beams, columns, bracings, ....). Modifying is again done on line elements level. Competitor products have included this feature long ago.

  • Kris,

    I'm not sure you answered Ram_STAAD's question. Are the existing bugs in STAAD.Pro going to be fixed? I realize as long as you keep developing STAAD.Pro new bugs will pop up and one day you will finally pull the plug and STAAD.Pro will cease development but sasa3k has brought up some good points that have only partially been answered.

    Also, I'm not sure the comparison you made particular holds water. To me STAAD.Pro is an improvement, granted a major one, to STAAD III, whereas STAAD(X) is a whole new animal. Remember STAAD Pre (I think that's what it was called), the front end GUI for STAAD III? Wow, how could we users not have been happy with a change to that stinker? The company I was with finally quit using STAAD in the mid-nineties. When I came back to using STAAD in about 2005, it was now STAAD.Pro. Still basically the same ole STAAD but with a much nicer more reliable GUI. But I digress. There are other threads where we can pick up the STAAD(X) discussion. I would like to ask that we get back on track with sasa's original question.

    Thanks.

  • Back in the late 90's early 2000's when STAAD.Pro replaced its predecessor which was called STAAD-III, the company made a significant amount of effort to make the transition from STAAD-III to STAAD.Pro as painless as possible. Over time, users realized that STAAD.Pro was a better product than STAAD-III.

    We are certain that Bentley will try to accomodate the interests of as many users as possible during the transition from STAAD.Pro to STAAD(X).



  • Kris,

    I understand that. And I appreciate the effort put in to developing a better product. My concern and question is whether or not will we be able to make use of the new package under existing product licenses.

    Surely, if we have to go for a new license for STAAD (X), it is as good as purchasing a new package altogether!

    That said, I am really alarmed that any new product would invalidate the support and further development of the existing product. In our case, STAAD Pro. Since we have pointed out existing issues with the package, can we expect them to be addressed in subsequent release versions of the product? Or are you going to leave us stranded in no man's land?!