Smart questions
Smart answers
Smart people
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Member Login




Remember Me
Forgot Password?
Join Us!

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips now!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

Join Eng-Tips
*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Donate Today!

Do you enjoy these
technical forums?
Donate Today! Click Here

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.
Jobs from Indeed

Link To This Forum!

Partner Button
Add Stickiness To Your Site By Linking To This Professionally Managed Technical Forum.
Just copy and paste the
code below into your site.

98040400 (Civil/Environmental) (OP)
8 Mar 09 11:44
In an analysis of a 30 storied RCC building with moment frame and shear wall, I found that modal participation mass ratio is 54%, though I have used the number of modes 48.
What could be the reason?

What are the checks in dynamic analysis before go for design?

Can anyone send me a file of complete dynamic analysis.

thanks
shams
slickdeals (Structural)
8 Mar 09 19:06
I suspect there a bunch of elements that are not connected to the structure that are causing it to flop about. Look at your dead load deflection animations. Usually this will show you the rogue elements.

By code, a modal analysis should typically capture at least 90% of the building's modal mass.
WillisV (Structural)
9 Mar 09 7:09
...and though you didn't ask it in your actual question, from the title of your post ritz vectors are generally better for 3-dimensional analysis as they capture coupled modes.  

 
ning2009 (Structural)
20 Mar 09 3:43
In an analysis of a 30 storied RCC building with moment frame and shear wall, I found that modal participation mass ratio is 54%, though I have used the number of modes 48.
What could be the reason?

---Because you have a lot of local modes in your ETABS model. This situation might be normal if you have highly non-regular structures. Increasing the number of modal shapes might be the only solution.

and though you didn't ask it in your actual question, from the title of your post ritz vectors are generally better for 3-dimensional analysis as they capture coupled modes.

---be careful about Ritz vectors, which are likely to cause significant calculation errors when high Ritz modes are used. In one case, when I increase the number of Ritz vectors from 200 to 300. Base shear tripled, although in both of two cases, modal participation mass ratio are beyound 90%
 
ATOOMUS (Structural)
1 Apr 09 4:14
EIGEN VALUE OR RITZ VECTOR

- RITZ Vector is more quick than EIGEN VALUE but at a large numbers of modes as larger than 250 modes may be become unuseful. So, you must lead to incrase manual meshing for elemens which may usally lead to acheive 90% of the building's modal mass participation.

- If there are free movement elements in the model, the model gives you low values of modal participation. So, the modal must be checked again. (see ETABS animation may help you).
- Don't define walls as membrane which leads to negative time periods and low mass participation percentages.

Best Regards,
ATOOMUS
ilkernet (Structural)
29 Apr 09 4:54
All answers are good.
besides, you have to use much more than 48 modes. you can use 3 modes for each storey, so that in total 90 modes
ishvaaag (Structural)
14 May 09 4:55
One reason may be that you are using spring supports under a slab foundation. I had this recently in one structural model. You model the thing with non yielding supports and participation skyrockets.
RahulLeslieAlexander (Structural)
26 May 09 8:20
Every seismic code should be having a cut-off frequency (separating out-of-phase modes from rigid modes), where the modes with frequencies higher than that should not be considered for your Resonse Spectrum. I wonder haven't that limit been crossed when increasing no. of modes to 300 or so?

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close