4 tayangan

Diunggah oleh sharvan10

FEM

- NAS101 W9
- Computer Lab (Example Problems for SAP2000 v9)
- ME2353 Finite Element Analysis Lecture Notes
- 4 8 Scissors Lift Paper
- Animated 3-D Punch (Rounded Edges) Contact
- fem
- The Finite Element Method
- Finite Element Methods
- 05170223.pdf
- Hughes T.J.R., Finite Element Analysis of Incompressible Viscous Flows by the Penalty Function Formulation
- IFEM.ch06 - FEM Modeling Introduction
- Introduction to FEA and FEM
- Three Dimensional Finite Element Modelling of Truck Tyre Curing Process in Mould
- HC.fm.Final.report
- Theory of the Finite Element Method
- Lecture1.pdf
- ST7201-Finite Element Analysis.pdf
- INCAS BULLETIN Vol 9 Issue 4 Internet First Pg
- Structure Analysis I Syllabus 2010 2011
- 4P1_1731

Anda di halaman 1dari 5

(OP)

7 Feb 02 02:04

Greetings

How accurate is Staad finite element analysis.In case of water

tank resting on soil, can we give springs only KFY value, not

releasing MX, MZ.e.g.

supports

1 to 200 KFY 24000

We get very less moments in bottom slab.

Please respond.

Regards.

arniec (Structural)7 Feb 02 10:15

goto Thread507-7222 - Staad vs competitors for some honest views about STAAD

a

JAE (Structural)7 Feb 02 12:56

Everybody...do you notice that on Eng-Tips we get a lot of STAAD questions? But very few

of other software vendors...is this because there are many more STAAD users or is it the

program?

Ron (Structural)7 Feb 02 13:09

JAE...I think it is both. STAAD has been popular despite its numerous shortcomings. I think

a lot of people have made the investment and don't want to throw that away, so they stick

with a program that they at least feel comfortable that they know many of its problems. Kind

of "the devil you know" syndrome.

Having said that, we can see from the numerous posts that many are just finding out how

error prone this software can be. You would think that Research Engineers would take to

heart some of the feedback they have gotten over the years. In my experience, they view the

problems to be mostly with the user, not the software.

Qshake (Structural)7 Feb 02 13:59

JAE, after reading your inquiry I was going to respond until I found RON had taken the

words right out of my mouth!

So this will be short...I second what RON has noted and urge the original poster to check out

the other staad post for some real feedback.

1161 (Materials)

(OP)

8 Feb 02 02:15

Thanks for replies.Please be more spscific that is can I give spring

support on soil as FIXED BUT KFY 12000(variable)

Regards.

nades (Structural)8 Feb 02 07:52

It has to be

FIXED BUT MX MY KFZ 12000.

because if you do not allow rotation about X and Y axis then

you should have all nodes prevented from rotaions and you may have

only one level of displaced nodes.

1161 (Materials)

(OP)

8 Feb 02 11:51

Thanks for response.

Tank is modelled as 3D resting on ground by Staad.

Can spring support be FIXED BUT KFY 12000.

Regards.

bylar (Structural)8 Feb 02 14:31

I know this does not answer your question but i see from the other responses that they have

had similar experiences with Staad that i have had. They blame all error or

inconsistencies on the user. This is the case even after i have shown them programming bugs

that arise.

I've invested the money and don't care to spend more for another engineering design system.

nades (Structural)8 Feb 02 15:53

Dear 1161,

Staad will not prevent you from defining springs as

FIXED BUT KFY 12000

..BUT, it is not realistic and does not represent reality.

in my view, this is wrong. it has to be

FIXED BUT MX MY KFZ 12000

in order to represent plate supported on springs.

kareemyas (Structural)9 Feb 02 10:48

Dear nades, I think what 1161 says about the soil spring to be KFY is correct, as staad

considers y direction as the normal gravity direction,the direction in which all soils support

the structures resting on them.

danmccarthy (Civil/Environmental)12 Feb 02 09:14

STAAD is the most popular structural analysis program because it is much cheaper than the

more comprehensive (and more accurate) programs such as STRUDL or ANSYS.

If you are performing an analysis which requires the accuracy of finite elements, it would be

best to use a package better than STAAD. STAAD has a very limited library of elements and

provides very poor description of its available elements and their strength and limitations. I

have known several engineers who have used STAAD for finite element analysis and had

disasterous results. Also, the user support services for STAAD is very poor compared to other

products if you run into problems

.

For basic structural analysis STAAD is probably all you need. It is easy to use and relatively

accurate. However, you would be fooling yourself to think it does advanced analysis properly.

It will give you an answer but the answer may be wrong.

wmccain (Structural)12 Feb 02 09:38

Gents:

I am a registered user of STAAD. It does have several shortcomings,

however, if you stick to "standard" problems with finite elements, you

can get good results. I have, for instance checked the plates against

an analytical solution for vertical walls with varous loadings and found

STAAD to be accurate.

(Joint No) FIXED BUT FX FZ MX MY MZ KFY XX.XXX.

You must release all the other DOF's or you'll induce bogus membrane

stresses, and it will affect your moment results(this is what you're after,

I presume). Under no circumstances do you want to fix moments.

Since you have now left all the other DOF's free in all the

joints, you will induce instabilities in the solution unless you FIX

FX and FZ at one of the joints in your mat and FX OR FZ(not both)

in some other joint in your mat, away from the first. This will give

you accurate moments(not very sensitive to subgrade modulus, by the way)

and a stable solution. If you are interested in lateral soil resistance, then

use lateral SPRINGS, do not FIX.

Qshake (Structural)12 Feb 02 10:39

wmccain, how do you evaluate your results with STAAD? What is the baseline that enables

you to say you've got good results?

In my experience finite elements (true finite elements)must be evaluated for several factors to

encompass the behavior or response to the change in those variables. Not the least of which

is the element type itself. So, in my interpretation, you cannot just run one file and consider

the matter complete. And since the heart of the finite element method is a numerical

approximation there is an inherent amount error in the analysis - how does STAAD report this

error or even better how does STAAD minimize this error?

JAE (Structural)12 Feb 02 14:19

wmmcain, I would also like to know how many engineers out there ever typically deal with

"standard" designs. It seems that with so many owners altering or adding onto their existing

buildings, there is not a lot of standard problems out there.

JAE (Structural)12 Feb 02 14:20

And one more thing....how do you know how standard your particular problem is before

STAAD starts to give you eroneous results?

Guest (visitor)12 Feb 02 15:52

To see how accurate STAAD's plate elements and dynamic analysis are, go to

http://www.reiworld.com/Support/Pro/Verification.pdf

They compare their answers with ANSYS.

wmccain (Structural)12 Feb 02 19:25

Thanks, born2build. I've never seen so much whingeing

over one word. Maybe I should have said "flat plate

related problems." I do not used STAAD for tubulars,

tubular junctions, or multiple curvature shells. I do

think, however, and I think the STAAD verification problems

bear me out, that mats on Winkler foundations, rectangular

tank walls, and other "flat" problems with rectangular

elements can be solved accurately assuming the user's

boundary conditions are correct. On this last point see

nades, above and my response. I am not defending STAAD.

If anyone has any further problems about the use of the word "standard", then let them

scream and yell to their

hearts' content.

1161 (Materials)

(OP)

12 Feb 02 22:25

Thanks for responses.How is it if the tank supports are given PINNED as done in Staad

manual example no.10.Please comment.

Qshake (Structural)12 Feb 02 22:53

Gee, if I had a verification problem and I posted/published the results I guess I would make

sure the problem was such that any comparison looked favorably on me too.

However, Gentlemen, we are asking you to step out into the unknown, to really apply the

product to engineering problems and not textbook examples. In this area, I ask you, are you

completely satisfied with the STAAD product?

I have used STAAD for a number of years and have always felt that the problems I analyzed

were appropriate for the software. In that respect, I got exactly what I needed from

STAAD. But I will not perform complex dynamic analysis or FEA with the program. Which

that program is marketed to do but doesn't live up to those expectations.

wmccain (Structural)12 Feb 02 23:27

I feel compelled to respond to the

irresponsible remarkes by QSHAKE. The

"baseline" used to measure the accuracy

of the STAAD solution is stated in my

original post. The type of element used

is explained in the STAAD manuals. ERRORS

in a numerical analysis are dependent upon

boundary conditions and assumptions in

the analysis itself, as well as on

the numerical method. I see in this forum

numerous examples of faulty boundary conditions

associated with the use of the STAAD elements

in foundation mats or tank bottoms. The post

I responded to as well as previous and following posts

are prime examples of this.

For 1161(visitor)

For example: A moment's thought will enlighten one

to the fact that to make joints in a soil supported

tank bottom pinned in X and Z would be an error. Also,

as suggested in another post, to fix moments in Z, X,

and Y, would be in error.

These conditions would produce nonsensical results.

To evaluate a structural force associated with a

degree of freedom, one must release that degree

of freedom.

The Example 10, which is in the STAADPro 2001 Online

Documentation, is, as far as I am concerned, in error.

I will not work a problem such as this in the manner

suggested by STAAD. I refer you to the post I placed

solution stability.

Happy howling,

Guest (visitor)13 Feb 02 11:31

I have evaluted STAAD verificacion manula. It seems good. I have question in Problema 11,

what method used to got mode shapes?

Guest (visitor)13 Feb 02 12:06

In STAAD 2001, they report the method used in eigenvalue extraction. Check the output

files. The STAAD engine will say Subspace Iteration method used. The STARDYNE engine

has the HQR and LANCZOS methods.

JAE (Structural)13 Feb 02 14:08

I guess I don't see how remarks in this forum, especially the ones above by Qshake are

"irresponsible". He simply made a point about STAAD relative to his assurance level of the

program's accuracy and use.

My single point was that STAAD is marketed aggressively as the best structural program out

there and yet over and over again I hear engineers complain about it, seem confused about its

application, and doubt its results.

I haven't used the program for some years but when I did, weird results would appear and not

correspond to the results from an exact replica model built in STRUDL. This was about 12

years ago and Eng-Tips forums still have posts appearing with STAAD issues.

When someone offers me a program to use and then says "Its a great piece of software as

long as you keep to standard designs"...would you feel confident in using it? Not me.

Guest (visitor)13 Feb 02 16:15

Thank you carl! I am new user to STAAD in Brasil and I think product is so good. Me

company have used Sap 90 in past days. Its is to confusing. Mr. JAE, please don not be mad

at me for using the STAAD. I still like to hear your good advise to me. A work friend used the

STAAD in US and liked it so much. So we buyed it here. Also our cheif used STAAD 3 in

Europe and also liked it much. I look at Exmples Mr. Born2build write and they look good.

What are problemas I should look for? Thank you.

- NAS101 W9Diunggah olehaiyubi2
- Computer Lab (Example Problems for SAP2000 v9)Diunggah olehdeepak_karna_1
- ME2353 Finite Element Analysis Lecture NotesDiunggah olehpgkaero
- 4 8 Scissors Lift PaperDiunggah olehJames Holden
- Animated 3-D Punch (Rounded Edges) ContactDiunggah olehDan Wolf
- femDiunggah olehMarampalli Shilpa Ramya
- The Finite Element MethodDiunggah olehsroensch
- Finite Element MethodsDiunggah olehpriyaank
- 05170223.pdfDiunggah olehBharathkumar Hegde
- Hughes T.J.R., Finite Element Analysis of Incompressible Viscous Flows by the Penalty Function FormulationDiunggah olehPablo Zitelli
- IFEM.ch06 - FEM Modeling IntroductionDiunggah olehGabri943
- Introduction to FEA and FEMDiunggah olehManjunatha Babu N.s
- Three Dimensional Finite Element Modelling of Truck Tyre Curing Process in MouldDiunggah olehbhushan5004
- HC.fm.Final.reportDiunggah olehAnuj Deshpande
- Theory of the Finite Element MethodDiunggah olehRahan Ozuari
- Lecture1.pdfDiunggah olehAnonymous 37PvyXC
- ST7201-Finite Element Analysis.pdfDiunggah olehMadhan Kumar
- INCAS BULLETIN Vol 9 Issue 4 Internet First PgDiunggah olehCandace Frank
- Structure Analysis I Syllabus 2010 2011Diunggah olehRavi Khandelwal
- 4P1_1731Diunggah olehAhmed Abd Ellatif
- 02whole (1)Diunggah olehrsantana
- Analysis and Simulation of Progressive DieDiunggah olehInternational Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology
- As 2419201922Diunggah olehIJMER
- Ejemplo CFX o Fluent Heat Conduction in a CylinderDiunggah olehavilaman45
- Chapter 7 FEM 3DDiunggah olehAnonymous Zz1bV7H59y
- PLAXIS 2D 2017 Tutorial Lesson01Diunggah olehAnonymous VJHwe0XB
- CE309 FundamentalsDiunggah olehY SAHITH
- Sliding Frame‐Solid Interaction Using BEMFEM CouplingDiunggah olehfabioengcivil
- edsgn468 section05 07 syllabus sp19Diunggah olehapi-457205909
- PBI RG crite 12.docxDiunggah olehRG Ingalla

- RCC DensityDiunggah olehmnazzal17
- HSRDiunggah olehsharvan10
- Waste to Wealth_2 OctDiunggah olehsharvan10
- grade-5-geometry-classifying-quadrilaterals-b.pdfDiunggah olehsharvan10
- culture of jharkhandDiunggah olehsharvan10
- 5th maths telanganaDiunggah olehSurendar Bhookya
- DISEÑOS DE RIP_RAPDiunggah olehPochi Paz
- Chapter 25Diunggah olehAnonymous oVmxT9Kzrb
- Imd Stations in HimachalDiunggah olehsharvan10
- ceap1psDiunggah olehjesvinjesvin
- Earth SideDiunggah olehsharvan10
- EnviromentDiunggah olehPawan Kumar Meena
- 285133-yle-flyers-posters.pdfDiunggah olehsharvan10
- nhi14007.pdfDiunggah olehLuis Marcos
- Gtse Online Class IV EvsDiunggah olehsharvan10
- En Sizeguide WatchDiunggah olehsharvan10
- MountainsDiunggah olehsharvan10
- FEM SLABDiunggah olehEfren Elegado
- RCCDiunggah olehsharvan10
- RCCDiunggah olehsharvan10
- is.4031.6.1988Diunggah olehHiteshAgarwal
- Sloped Layers to Improve RCC Dam Construction - ForBESDiunggah olehsharvan10
- Components of Hydropower Projects & DesignsDiunggah olehsharvan10
- AREATIONDiunggah olehsharvan10
- RCC-THESISDiunggah olehsharvan10
- peter panDiunggah olehandrea
- waste waterDiunggah olehArmando Basoc
- JetscourDiunggah olehsharvan10
- Energy DissipaterDiunggah olehsharvan10

- Basics of ISO 14001Diunggah olehdhinesh81
- c4000 stand alone specifications.pdfDiunggah olehRuben Duran
- MBD I Mitac PD10BI Celeron MT ManualDiunggah olehsunny007_m
- Amazons_resources_and_competences.pdfDiunggah olehNiveydan
- Electrical SymbolsDiunggah olehDmark Kram Ned
- CI ExcelDiunggah olehRaghu Nandepu
- The UK Independant Press Standards Organization (IPSO) determined that the Daily Express publishing a lie about actor Halle Berry was not "significantly misleading"; here's my replyDiunggah olehPeter M. Heimlich
- MID TER EXAM-10Diunggah olehsaira tahir
- Bamboo BuildingDiunggah olehruiterfe
- APPLE-The Times of IndiaDiunggah olehkkunal2587
- CVDiunggah olehDev
- Geotechnical Asset Management for the UK Highways AgencyDiunggah olehkrainaoz2011
- Example_bearing replacementDiunggah olehyoungc71
- DesignConcernsPropulsionShaftingAlignment.pdfDiunggah olehAnonymous fj2uXP
- B737-Fuel Systems SummaryDiunggah olehqwerk123
- Gamma-j Usb Web Store SrsDiunggah olehaditya181987
- Odometer Correction for W168 a-Class, W202 C-Class, W140 S-Class, W210 E-Class, W461 G-Class, W208 CLK, W220 S-Class, W163 MLDiunggah olehJame Eduardo
- 1-SPRINGDiunggah olehAj Banz
- game lesson planDiunggah olehapi-300676725
- 24 06 09-Jordanski Forum-seznam PodjetijDiunggah olehThiwakkaran Muagan
- IEC 60297-3-102Diunggah olehraj_rajesh_eee
- Ibus21 Specification Sheet2Diunggah olehbmat
- Brochure Surpass Hit 7060hcDiunggah olehRalph Ronquillo
- DesignBuckConverter0803.pptDiunggah olehValentin Plyusnin
- Environment and SDMProcess REVIEW 2014Diunggah olehjohnalis22
- Lrm Eft ResumeDiunggah olehlmateer
- Electric GeneratorsDiunggah olehSaul Mejia
- TBE3Diunggah olehpasteman
- 1st Read Me for PIC32 CTMU 2ChSliderDemoDiunggah olehLaercio Marques
- Dr. Joe M. Blackbourn, www.nationalforum.comDiunggah olehAnonymous sewU7e6