Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Pushover analysis

  1. #11
    Active Member
    Join Date
    2010-03
    Posts
    56
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Default Re: Pushover analysis

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomasz.Fudala View Post
    Non-linear hinges are considered an independent non-linear links for each degree of freedom in a given node. The interaction between different degrees of freedom is disregarded. For example, bending of a bar in one plane does not depend on bending in another plane and longitudinal forces.
    But, if you consider column, then for sure the property of a hinge for column depends on the amount of axial force. As you now axial force may vary during analysis. As far as I know in other structural analysis software (i.e. SAP2000) you can define hinge with interaction.
    In SAP2000 there are three types of hinge properties: default hinge properties, user-defined hinge properties and generated hinge properties. For example of default properties you have Default-M3, Default-P, Default-PMM, and Default-V2, as can be seen on figures in my previous post. Usually moment hinge properties (Default-M3) are assigned to beams and interacting hinge properties (Default-PMM) are assigned to columns.
    In addition to moment-rotation relationships, a three dimensional interaction surface with axial force-bending moment interaction diagrams has to be defined for columns. Although SAP2000 could not update the moment-rotation relationships due to the variations in axial load levels during pushover analysis, the yield and ultimate moment values are updated by using the three dimensional interaction surface. Axial force-bending moment interaction diagrams about two major axes of each column section are utilized to determine the other three axial force-bending moment interaction diagrams required to define the three dimensional interaction surface.
    With comparison of results obtained by ARSA and SAP2000 for RC frame quite big differences are obtained. I am trying to match the input data, but it seems that SAP2000 has more detailed input which obviously influences the results.

  2. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    2010-01
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    47
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Default Re: Pushover analysis

    During pushover analysis is there any way to change the loading matrix from modal to uniform or triangular?

  3. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    2011-09
    Posts
    2
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Default Re: Pushover analysis

    Hi, I am having the same issue. I am prompted with no convergence and type 3 instability warnings.

    Have you guys found out the reason?

    Appreciate it if someone could help...THANKS...

  4. #14
    Woo! Hoo! my 1st post
    Join Date
    2012-12
    Posts
    1
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Default Re: Pushover analysis

    Could anyone help; how to calculate the user defined hinge properties of RC column for SAP2000 for pushover analysis

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2015-08-07, 05:36 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2015-08-07, 05:34 PM
  3. SE118-1: Preparing Autodesk Revit Structure Models for Analysis in Robot Structural Analysis
    By Autodesk University in forum Structural Design and Engineering
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2014-12-01, 03:48 AM
  4. Dynamic analysis - footfall analysis??
    By ContriveR in forum Robot Structural Analysis
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2012-07-13, 08:07 AM
  5. Pushover analysis with Robot Structural 2010
    By pascal.bogdan in forum Robot Structural Analysis
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2010-03-26, 01:29 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •