Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • 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!
  • Students Click Here

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

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here


Etabs and Safe Reaction Loads Differ

Etabs and Safe Reaction Loads Differ

Etabs and Safe Reaction Loads Differ

Good day,

I have a 4 story concrete building, shear walls, flat slab floors and roof with concrete beams and column. The model was completed in etabs, (no errors)and pier labels were added to the walls. An Axial Force Diagram was done in Etabs to show the loads acting at the reactions and wall loads. The floors were then exported to safe (Floor loads & loads from above) and Load reactions checked (both point reactions & Integrated wall Reactions). When comparing both load diagrams the point loads as well as the wall loads differed.
The differences were large. What could be the reason for this?

Wall Modifiers - m11 = m12 = m22 = 0.1, f11 =f12 =f22=0.35
Beam Modifiers - I22 =I33=0.35
Column Modifiers - I22 =I33=0.70
Slab - m11 = m12 = m22 = f11 =f12 =f22=0.25

Etabs model is below along with screenshots of the force reactions


RE: Etabs and Safe Reaction Loads Differ

Interesting screen shots, and not directly related to your question, but are your walls meshed in etabs or are they one solid wall element?
Etabs understands what a "pier" label is, but safe does not understand what this label means. Safe will only understand where the wall is meshed and will place nodal reactions at the meshed wall locations.

I would not expect the SAFE screen shot to have a singular load applied for each of the "perimeter" walls, but rather a continuous line of point reactions where Etabs has internally meshed the walls.

Also see this thread:

see my response there and let me know if this is your case as well.


RE: Etabs and Safe Reaction Loads Differ

Thanks S&T

To answer your first question Yes, the walls were meshed in Etabs.

From your previous thread the question "Is this a model where you are replacing existing reactions with new reactions?"
No i am not replacing the loads... I am comparing/questioning the loads shown in etabs vs that shown in safe and the major difference.
Also Safe can give a single load reaction for a wall if the "integrated wall reaction" is checked instead of the "point loads" option.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

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! Already a Member? Login


eBook - Manufacturing the Cars of Tomorrow
In this ebook, we'll explore how additive manufacturing is going to transform the way cars are made. This includes commentary from thought leaders such as Ford's CTO, Ken Washington, Customer case studies of ways 3D printing is being used today, and a variety of part examples where 3D printing is already impacting how automobiles are made. Download Now
White Paper - Smart Manufacturing for Semiconductor
New technologies and approaches present great opportunities for semiconductor manufacturers to achieve high levels of innovation, yield and improvement. This white paper explores some of these cutting-edge technologies and how they can be applied effectively in the semiconductor industry. Read about how Smart Manufacturing is transforming the semiconductor industry. Download Now
White Paper - Analysis and Simulation in Aircraft Structure Certification
Organizations using simulation and analysis tools effectively see the benefits in their ability to achieve certification faster and with drastically less total cost than those who do not maximize these tools. Read this White Paper to learn about how digital tools such as analysis and simulation help in aircraft structure certification. Download Now

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