Structural Modelling Techniques

[Structureslover]

Hi guys, I'm interested in structural software modelling or even just modelling in general.

Are there any manuals out there that could be of use?

I've read SCI's publication on steel structures. But I'm hoping for more!

Thanks!

 

[Trenno]

What software do you have access to?

 

[Structureslover]

Spacegass, I have looked at their software manual in detail.

Also the guide need not be software specific. Since modelling is just the predicted behavior of structural systems.

 

[StructuresSteve]

I'm not sure I have really come across any decent manuals for computer modelling which I think is odd given that it is so widely used these days. The SCI publication you refer to has some useful tips.

I have experience of STAAD, S-Frame, Superstress, Robot and RAM Structural but everything I have really learned about them has either been by word of mouth from other engineers or trial and error.

Sometimes there is no substitute for just sitting down with a piece of paper, pencil, calculator and good old-fashioned brain power!

 

[Gumpmaster]

There's a book from Bentley "Analysis and Design of Structures - A practical guide to modeling" by Trevor Jones. Trevor is a practicing structural engineer, not a software engineer.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Graham Powell had a series of articles published in some US magazine (structure, structural engineer, Modern steel construction) can't remember which. The articles weren't really a guide to structural modeling, but rather a discussion of how poorly structural analysis is taught in schools these days. And, how the teaching needs to be less focused on hand calc methods and more on how to interpret, test and understand computer models. That's probably a terrible summary of the articles. But, you might search for them and see what they say. They may have some good suggestions for you.... Perhaps teaching yourself as much as anything.

Not exactly what you were looking for, but it might help.

 

[canwesteng]

These articles perhaps?

http://www.structuremag.org/?author_name=grahampowell

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Yup, those are the articles I was thinking about. I really think Dr. Powell is onto something with his suggestions. I'm not sure that I'm as critical of current structural analysis education as he is. But, I do think we need to do a better job of teaching students how to model and how to interpret or validate results.

Personally, I do a lot of hand calculations as a means of explaining the results of a computer analysis. And, it is sometimes surprising how much difficulty some engineers have modeling even very simple structures.

In my undergraduate analysis course (20+ years ago) my professor (Frieder Seible) started every class by having a student sketch out an approximiate deflected shape (or shear diagram or moment diagram) for a simple structure. No calculations.... Just looking at the structure and the applied load and getting a feel for how it was going to behave. Those lessons stick with me even today! Much more than the lessons on how to manually assemble a stiffness matrix or such.

 

[Archie264]

Josh, hear, hear!

Structureslover, you may find this of interest: link

Relatedly I consider the moment distribution (Hardy Cross) method an indispensable tool both for practical use on simple structures and for getting a feel for how structures respond.

 

[KootK]

I have these documents that I find to be very helpful.

Concrete: Finite-Element Design of Concrete Structures

Steel: Advanced Analysis in Steel Frame Design

Can anyone supply me with the title of the SCI document that was mentioned above? There are a few.

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

 

[bookowski]

Dr Powell has a textbook on the topic as well. It's sold through csi. A bit pricey though and I haven't seen it so can't comment on how useful it is.

 

[Ussuri]

KootK

He may be referencing SCI Report P148. Modelling of Steel Structures for Computer Analysis.

There is a quote in Section 3 dated 1956:

The pre-eminence given to mathematics in our schools of engineering, a purely analytical basis of the theory of elasticity, and its intrinsic difficulties, persuade the young student that there is limitless potency inn the theoretical calculations and give him blind faith in their results. Under these conditions neither students nor teachers try to understand and feel intuitively the physical reality of a structure, how it moves under load, and how the various elements of a statically indeterminate system react among themselves. Today everything is done by theoretical calculation. That student is rated best who best knows how to set up and solve mathematical equations.

It is highly regrettable that some of the highest qualities of the human mind, such as intuition and direct apprehension,...have been overwhelmed by abstract and impersonal mathematical formulas

I find this quote interesting. Today we complain that young engineers rely too much on software without the understanding of the principles (mathematical) behind it. Yet back in 1956 we have a complaint that young engineers rely too much on maths (and first principles) and not enough on understanding.

So if you cant use maths, or software how do you gain the understanding. Practical application?