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


Cross Section in Geometry Nonlinear Analysis

Cross Section in Geometry Nonlinear Analysis

Cross Section in Geometry Nonlinear Analysis

Dear All
Can you explain this section (Red Circle) in attachment file ?
Thank you

RE: Cross Section in Geometry Nonlinear Analysis

When you model your structure and get forces on your members, those forces are a result of your assumed member stiffnesses.

You then design your members to resist those forces.

Sometimes those designs result in LARGER or SMALLER members than what you originally modeled.

This means that your actual structure is different than the one you modeled.

ACI is simply saying that if the difference between your modeled structure and your actual designed/specified members are more than 10% different, you
should re-model the structure with these different member sizes. This will result in different member forces and you can then re-design to the more
correct forces.

Theoretically you'd keep repeating this process until the model members and the final member sizes were within 10% of each other.

Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

RE: Cross Section in Geometry Nonlinear Analysis

It basically means that if your documentation (the size you want built) differed by more than 10% in the properties noted from that which was analysed, then you should be updating the analysis to the correct sizes.

I believe its meant to allow for some minor tweaking of member properties, say rationalising say concrete member sizes to the nearest 1/2" rather than 1/4" which analysis might have been based on. Make too many changes, or larger changes then you are obliged to revisit the analysis with these updates included.

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 - Rethink Your PLM
A lot has changed since the 90s. You don't surf the Web using dial-up anymore, so why are you still using a legacy PLM solution that's blocking your ability to innovate? To develop and launch products today, you need a flexible, cloud-based PLM, not a solution that's stuck in the past. Download Now
White Paper - Using Virtualization for IVI and AUTOSAR Consolidation on an ECU
Current approaches used to tackle the complexities of a vehicle’s electrical and electronics (E/E) architecture are both cost prohibitive and lacking in performance. Utilizing virtualization in automotive software architecture provides a better approach. This can be achieved by encapsulating different heterogeneous automotive platforms inside virtual machines running on the same hardware. 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