Continuos RC beams on beam supports in a 3D model, how valid? 4

[IJR]

I have an old habit of designing continuous RC beams resting on other beams (not on columns) by hand or spreadsheet and assuming the supports to be non-rotating and vertically non deflecting. If necessary I would then utilize redistribution to modify moments as most codes suggest.

But in 3D elastic wire frame, with strength design in mind, modelling a continuous beam resting on beam, wont that rely on elastic deformations? Is that proper analysis?

regs
IJR

 

[capper]

You hit on my point dik, picture the negative moment over the support: It goes from a maximum to 0 as the support stiffness decreases from rigid to 0.

btw I like fourpled!! where do you register new words!!

 

[dik]

Capper... misunderstanding... I'm talkin' -ve moment over the rigid support... not the one at the beam support... after all, that's the one that increases <++G++>

fourple... sorta like a double double martini while watching Monty Python! I think I made up the word about 35 or 40 years ago... but somebody else may have had the same thoughts/experience...

 

[dik]

Capper...

also thought of another explanation for the misunderstanding... If the negative moment becomes more negative, then you are correct... it decreases... I was thinking of absolute magnitudes... just getting bigger...