Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: column design manually and y sap2000 differnece

  1. #1
    Associate Engineer
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    5

    column design manually and y sap2000 differnece

    hi,
    In my building there is a huge difference between the reinforcing area recquired when designed by sap2000 and manually by IS 456.can anyone tell me why?and how to solve this?

  2. #2
    Lead Engineer Cake of Doom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    434
    Which method are you using to asses the minimum area for reinforcement in you hand calcs? Is the difference greater than required or less than, according to hand calcs? Have you looked at SAP's analysis to see how it arrived at it's conclusion?

    This is like telling a doctor that you simply don't feel very well, without telling them the symptoms.

  3. #3
    Associate Engineer
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    5
    the required reinforcement is always less in my hand calculations than that provided by sap2000.Yes,I have seen saps method, it does not provide the detailed method that it uses but the values of moments and axial force used by me as well as sap are also similar.so,I don't understand why there is a difference.

  4. #4
    Lead Engineer Cake of Doom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    434
    Is SAP taking the cracking reinforcement as a separate issue and adding more metal, rather than looking at the adequacy of the re-bar that's already in to perform for both roles? That seems to be the reason I mostly come across for design suites doing this.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •