Seminar Report On Reliability of Software Analysis in Structural Engineering (RCC)
Certificate Sinhagad Institute of Technology and Science, Narhe, Pune – 411041
Civil Department
Seminar Topic
Reliability of software analysis in structural engineering (RCC) This is to certify that the report entitled “Reliability of software analysis in structural engineering (RCC)” is a bonafide record of the Seminar presented by Name – Mr. Nikhil Sunil Kumbhar T.E Civil - Roll No- T5043 Batch – T3 From. Sinhgad Institute of Technology and Science Narhe Ambegaon Pune. Academic Year – 2013 – 2014
Sign of Seminar Guide (Mr.I.M.Jain) 1 Civil Dept. Sinhagad Institute of Technology and Science, Sign of H.O.D Narhe, Pune- 411041
(Mr.S.D.Khandekar)
Seminar Report On Reliability of Software Analysis in Structural Engineering (RCC)
Reliability of software analysis in structural engineering (RCC) Presented by Mr. Nikhil Sunil Kumbhar (
[email protected]) T.E Civil - Roll No- T5043 Batch – T3 Seminar Guide – Mr. I.M.Jain Academic Year – 2013 – 2014 Abstract STAAD.Pro, SAP 2000, RSA Pro and ETABS are the present day leading design softwares in the market. Many design companies use these softwares for their project design purposes. So, this project mainly deals with the comparative analysis of the results obtained from the design of a regular multi storey building structure and simpe 2D RCC Frame when designed using STAADPro, SAP2000, RSA Pro and ETABS softwares separately. These results will also be compared with manual scalculations of a sample beam and column of the same structure designed as per IS 456. Keywords: Structure Design, STAADPro v8i, RSA Pro 2014, SAP 2000v 16 and ETABS 2013 1.Introduction
STAADPro, ETABS, RSA Pro, SAP 2000 are the present day leading design softwares in the market.
Many design companies use these softwares for their project design purposes.
So, this project mainly deals with the comparative analysis of the results obtained from the design of a multi storey building structure when designed using STAAD.Pro , ETABS, RSA Pro, and SAP 2000 softwares separately and also determining which one is the most reliable software.
2.Limitations on Manual calculations
As the size of structure goes on increasing, manual errors in calculations goes on increasing.
Though the size of structure is small, still time require for designing the structure is more.
Human can do mistake while calculating for complex elements.
Every time human has to refer the code.
Lack of good presentation of results.
Can not optimize the structure for economy
3.Necessity of Software analysis in structural engineering.
To eliminate the manual calculations and errors.
To optimize the structure from economy and durability point of view. 2 Civil Dept. Sinhagad Institute of Technology and Science, Narhe, Pune- 411041
Seminar Report On Reliability of Software Analysis in Structural Engineering (RCC)
To represent the results obtained in powerful manner
To compare different design criteria for same structure.
For structural detailing which is the most important part of structural design.
To save the time by reducing time taken for calculations.(almost in secs)
To design the structure as per code of any country.
4.Softwares for structural analysis and design. 1. CSI SAP 2000
7. MidasGen
2. CSI Etabs 2013
8. Master Series
3. Autodesk Robot Structural Anlysis Pro 2014
9. STRAP
4. Bentley Staad.Pro v8i 5. SAFE
10. Bently RAM 11. Axis VM 12. RISA
6. Tekla Structure 19 5.Problem Definitions 5.1Case I - G+2 Storey Structure
Fig1 - Plan of Case I
Fig2-Loading Diagram
3 Civil Dept. Sinhagad Institute of Technology and Science, Narhe, Pune- 411041
Seminar Report On Reliability of Software Analysis in Structural Engineering (RCC)
5.1.1.General Geometry •
Room Size ( C/C) = 3m x 3m
•
No of Rooms/ Floor = 9 Nos
•
No of Storey = 3
•
Type of Support at base of column = Fixed(Restrained in X,Y,Z)
•
Floor to Floor Height = 3m
•
Type of Structure = RCC
•
Beam Size(Typical) = 300mm x 400mm
•
Column Size(Typical) = 300mm x 300mm
•
Slab Thickness = 200mm
5.1.2.Property assignments
Characteristic of Concrete(fck) – 20Mpa (M20)
Steel Grade – Fe 415 (For main also secondary reinforcement)
5.1.3.Loads
Dead Load – 1.5 kN/m2
Live Load – 2 kN/m2
Load Combination – 1.5*(DL + LL) as per IS 456
Load Variation – Linear
Note – Load values are taken as per IS 875 by considering Residential Project.
Seismic forces are not considered. Table No – 1 Results for Case I
5.1.4..Results Parameters
Staad.Pro
Etabs
RSA Pro
SAP 2000
Live Load Reaction
27.054kN
26.7kN
26.56kN
27.21kN
Dead Load Reactions
143.785kN
147.4kN
146.99kN
147.78kN
259.188kN Reactions for Load Combination(1.5*(DL+LL)
261.15kN
260.32
262.50kN
Shear Force(1.5*(DL+LL)) 12.58kN
16.27kN
16.95kN
17.86kN
4 Civil Dept. Sinhagad Institute of Technology and Science, Narhe, Pune- 411041
Seminar Report On Reliability of Software Analysis in Structural Engineering (RCC)
Total Moment (1.5*(DL+LL) at 1.5m
5.38kN.m
7.88kN.m
8.72kN.m
7.89kN.m
Area Provided
339mm2
246mm2
339mm2
246mm2
Design Load Calculated for Column
151kN
135.03kN
142.53kN
136.18kN
Area of long-steel in columns
452.39mm2 (Min Requirement as per IS is 720)
720mm2
904.78mm2
720mm2
Staad.Pro do not consider minimum requirement of steel as per Code
5.2.Case II ] 2D RCC Frame
DL – 50kN/m Civil Dept. Sinhagad Institute of Technology and Science, Self Wt -25*0.4*0.6 Narhe, Pune- 411041 LL – 50kN/m
5
Seminar Report On Reliability of Software Analysis in Structural Engineering (RCC)
Fig3- Loading Diagram of 2D RCC Frame 5.2.1General Geometry •
RCC Portal Frame
•
H = 4m
•
Span of beam – 4m each
•
Beam Size - 400mm x 600mm
•
Column Size – 400mm x 400mm
6 Civil Dept. Sinhagad Institute of Technology and Science, Narhe, Pune- 411041
Seminar Report On Reliability of Software Analysis in Structural Engineering (RCC)
5.2.2Property
Characteristic of Concrete(fck) – 20Mpa (M20)
Steel Grade – Fe 415 (For main also secondary reinforcement)
5.2.3.Loads
Dead Load – 50kN/m (Excluding Self wt)
Live Load – 50kN/m2
Load Combination – 1.5*(DL + LL) as per IS 456
Load Variation – Linear
Seismic forces are not considered.
5.2.4Results Max Moments in kN.m Softwares
Left
MidSpan
End Support
Staad.Pro
56.07
163.15
269.52
RSA Pro
55.67
162.55
273.91
Etabs
56.28
161.59
270.24
SAP2000
56.28
161.59
270.24
491
828
1603.68
Requied Ast analysis(area in mm2) Staad.Pro
Table No – 2 Maximum Moments
7 Civil Dept. Sinhagad Institute of Technology and Science, Narhe, Pune- 411041
Seminar Report On Reliability of Software Analysis in Structural Engineering (RCC)
RSA Pro
460.43
847.04
1561
Etabs
492
868
1549
SAP2000
492/621(from 867 Sesmic)
1549
Mannual Calculations
462
1531
827.9
Table No – 3 Area of steel required Design Load
287.44
kN
Design Moment
55.67
kN.m
Column
Ast Provided
Min ast
Staad.Pro
904.78
1280
RSA Pro
1520.53
1280
Etabs
1280
1280
SAP2000
1280
1280
Note - Staad.Pro is giving huge difference in Min ast and Provided Ast (Almost difference of 1 bar of 22mm)
Table No – 4 Results for Column
6.Conclusions •
From analysis of Case I and Case II, It has been found that Staad.Pro v8i do not satisfy the minimum requirement of steel for compression member given as per IS Code.
•
Also from Case I and II, it is found that Staad.Pro is giving conservative results, whereas Etabs, RSA Pro and SAP are giving closer results compare to Staad.
•
From Case I, It is cleared that there is large variation in results when floor load is applied. 8 Civil Dept. Sinhagad Institute of Technology and Science, Narhe, Pune- 411041
Seminar Report On Reliability of Software Analysis in Structural Engineering (RCC)
•
For the RCC building structure, Etabs, RSA Pro are the best software packages.
•
SAP 2000 is also good software but it is designed for general purpose due to which it lacks in detailing of structure, however results obtained are great and satisfy the requirements of Code.
•
Though the each software is good, it is better to check the design in multiple softwares to ensure the reliability of design.
•
Hence from design results, we can conclude that RSAPro, Etabs and SAP are the most reliable softwares, whereas results of Staad in Compression reinforcement do not satisfy in some sections.
•
From Structural analysis results, we can conclude that all the softwares are reliable excluding floor load analysis.
7. References •
International Journal Of Civil And Structural Engineering Volume II, Issn 0976 – 4399 article by Prashanth.P, Anshuman.S, Pandey.R.K, Arpan Herbert
•
IS 456:2000
•
IS 875
Links •
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_finite_element_software_packages
•
http://www.engr.usask.ca/classes/CE/463/Labs/CE%20463%20Lab1%202014/CE463_L ab1_2013.pdf
•
http://www.overstirred.com/2011/09/top-5-structural-design-softwares.html
•
http://www.designtoeurocodes.com/forums/showthread.php/307-What-is-your-mainstructural-analysis-and-design-software
Softwares Usied – Staad.Pro v8i (structural analysis and design professional) Etabs 2013 (Extended 3D Analysis of Building Systems) RSA Pro 2014 (Robot Structural Analysis Professional) SAP 2000 v16 (Structural Analysis Programe)(in 1996 first version of SAP with GUI)
9 Civil Dept. Sinhagad Institute of Technology and Science, Narhe, Pune- 411041
