|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
sukanta.adhikari General Sponsor
Joined: 26 Jan 2003 Posts: 726
|
Posted: Fri Jun 25, 2021 2:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Anirudh,
I have used SAFE few years before. Right now I am not having the license ,so I am not able to use it.
SAFE approach is different from STAAD. In STAAD ,we use plate element to model the raft and beam to model the connection between columns at raft level.
But in SAFE ,I remember in the training the raft was modelled with shell/element and instead of beam... the connection between column was also done using same shell/element used to model the other portion of raft. The thickness of shell/element connecting the columns were locally made thicker, since beam depth will be more than other portion of raft. But a beam was not used.
I forget the reason. You can contact CSI for help.
Regards
S Adhikari
Anirudh4569 wrote: | Dear sir,
I have monolithically modelled raft foundation with beams in safe. The supports i have applied as soil supports with subgrade modulus.
vikram.jeet wrote: | Dear Er
If analysis is carried considering foundation input as base pressure instead of springs, may please see the output , probably it may match nearer to yr manual calcs.
Also in case of springs, pl check the value of modulus of subgrade reaction entered . If value is that of rock , then also , I feel , the rock springs in vicinity of rcc columns share and beams do not reflect.
Just a generic view |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Anirudh4569 SEFI Member
Joined: 14 Jun 2021 Posts: 8
|
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2021 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ok sir Thankyou for your response.
sukanta.adhikari wrote: | Dear Anirudh,
I have used SAFE few years before. Right now I am not having the license ,so I am not able to use it.
SAFE approach is different from STAAD. In STAAD ,we use plate element to model the raft and beam to model the connection between columns at raft level.
But in SAFE ,I remember in the training the raft was modelled with shell/element and instead of beam... the connection between column was also done using same shell/element used to model the other portion of raft. The thickness of shell/element connecting the columns were locally made thicker, since beam depth will be more than other portion of raft. But a beam was not used.
I forget the reason. You can contact CSI for help.
Regards
S Adhikari
Anirudh4569 wrote: | Dear sir,
I have monolithically modelled raft foundation with beams in safe. The supports i have applied as soil supports with subgrade modulus.
vikram.jeet wrote: | Dear Er
If analysis is carried considering foundation input as base pressure instead of springs, may please see the output , probably it may match nearer to yr manual calcs.
Also in case of springs, pl check the value of modulus of subgrade reaction entered . If value is that of rock , then also , I feel , the rock springs in vicinity of rcc columns share and beams do not reflect.
Just a generic view |
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
|
|
|