computer design software 1

[structuralnerd]

I'm trying to update my company's computer design software, and I would like to get some opinions on which people prefer. We do building design...mostly steel and concrete (we also do some water treatment plants), and some wood and masonry thrown in there as well. We currently have RISA and an older version of RAM. We also have STAAD, but I have not used that extensively. Any opinions on what we should be using?

 

[kslee1000]

Either RISA or STAAD works fine. I think RISA is cheaper? But it does not mean it is inferior. I haven't used RAM personally, what I have learned from co-workers, it is excellent program for extensive steel works, learning curve can be long though.

 

[minorchord2000]

You might want to try ENERCALC as well.

 

[271828]

At my old office, we used RISA for 95% of our stuff. We used ETABS whenever we had huge shearwall bldgs with lots of seismic stuff going on.

Nowadays, I use SAP2000 for everything because I'm doing vibrations research.

The big downside to any CSi product is the interface. The programs are extremely powerful, but they provide enough irritating "features" that it's a real turn-off to me.

One thing to think about if you go from RISA to something like RAM is quality control. Like any other tool, it can be mis-used.

We've seen some pretty crazy stuff from folks who mis-used automated systems. It's obvious that they had the cad guy import a grid, add framing, modify loads and criteria, and hit "go" and then export dxf back to cad. Then cad guy cleaned it up and sent it out the door with inadequate checking. With tight schedules and low fees, this can apparently be very tempting.

On one job, the guy had "shored" turned on and the beams were undersized by 2-3x. The owner called us for help after the first bay almost collapsed when they tried to place concrete on it. There were W12x14 in places were W16x31 should've been. It was completely obvious that nobody checked the output. The insane sizes got by everybody. This was from a reputable firm.

We tried to start using RISAFloor at one point and one of our 15 year guys tried it first. He had a bunch of same length beams with trib widths 6"-12" different and it spat back a different reaction and number of studs for every beam. Got right by him and ended up on the drawings.

One of my buddies is a steel detailer and he said he wishes he had a quarter for every braced frame he's seen over the last few years that had W14x22 beams with HSS12x12x1/2 braces with huge axial loads. Both W14 nodes are attached to the diaphragm so it gets no axial load. If an engineer is mentally closer to the modeling procedure, then he'll catch this. If he's designing via nintendo, then maybe he will, maybe he won't.

I'm not saying that automated systems are horrible. One has to be VERY cognizant of the underlying psychology to avoid falling into these traps. You need to come up with some kind of quality control procedure.

My only idea is to forbid any drawing from going out the door without an experienced engineer taking a HARD COPY and highlighting each and every beam to ensure that a human actually freakin' mentally registered the size.

Anyway, off my soap box...

 

[structuralnerd]

We used RAM and RISA quite extensively at my old firm, and it took me a good year to really learn RAM and all of it's quirks and what to check. I still don't feel 100% comfortable with RAM Frame. You have to be really careful with the diaphragm. I did quite a bit of steel there, and at my current firm we do quite a bit of concrete. Is RISA and RAM good with concrete? I'm not that familiar with ETABS. Is that a good program? Easy to use?

 

[kslee1000]

I use any program that can handle finite element analysis for concrete, then provide reinforcing by hand or spreadsheet. The only computer program I trust and used quite often for the design of reinforced concrete is PCACol. Just couldn't rely on computer generated configurations for the beams and slabs.

 

[271828]

ETABS and SAP are fairly similar. The main downside to any CSi program is the interface. Perhaps others love it, but I don't. The underlying technical aspects blow RISA away, but RISA's easier to use.

Here's an example. In RISA, you have a menu where you define what units you want to use. ft for length, klf for a line load, ksi for strength & E, etc. In SAP and ETABS, you have to use consistent units, kip & inch for example. Say you want to change the concrete props. You have to change to lb & ft and go into the menu to set the weight in pcf. Then you exit the menu and set it to kip & inch. Go back into the menu and set f'c and E. I think that's totally doofus. The other option, of course, is to input one of them in unfamiliar units, not the end of the world, but it's still doofus, LOL.

I think RISA is easier than anything else I've used. When their new version came out, I really hoped that they'd upgraded it to do buckling, time history, etc., but it doesn't look like they did.

 

[Lion06]

For steel buildings, I don't think you can beat RAM. We use RAMSteel to design all of the gravity framing, then usually take lateral moments out of RAMFrame for design of lateral connections. We do a lot of type II with wind buildings.
Enercalc is good for discreet elements. It can be cumbersome for multi-spans beams, though.

 

[swivel63]

i've always used ETABS, SAFE, and SAP. SAFE is getting a PT option. but for that, i've always used Concept and program similar to ADAPT 2D.

 

[271828]

StrlEIT, what kind of QA procedures do you have in place to prevent brain-deadening like I typed about in my previous post?

 

[structuralnerd]

At my old firm, it was required to have another engineer check our RAM models. We had a checklist of items to look at and make sure were correct.

 

[271828]

strlnerd: but in the end, somebody actually mentally registers what's actually on the paper, right?

"checking a model" sounds more like scanning through the menus to make sure numbers and settings are input correctly.

IMHO, the only acceptable way to check the plans is the old fashioned way. Print the plans and look at them, LOL. There seems to be something that's lost while looking at the screen. I don't know if it's the additional burden of having to deal with the program or if it's not being able to see everything at once at a familiar scale (like 1/8"=1'-0").

 

[structuralnerd]

We had an official quality check program where a select few senior engineers would do a thorough check of the drawings before they went to bid on every project. There was a form that was filled out and a score was given for each project. It kind of felt like you were being graded. The comments were given back to you and you had a time limit to address those comments and send it back to the senior engineer that checked your project.

 

[271828]

I guess that cause a 34' long, 7' trib, W12x14 holding up a composite slab to be caught, LOL. That's what those fellows had on the one bldg I typed about earlier. My boss didn't tell me what we were going to talk about and he unrolled those drawings and in about 2 seconds, my eyes were bugging out! They just looked crazy.

I've wondered over the last few years, with all the talk of EDI, RAM, SDS, etc. whether old fashioned checks like at your old firm will become less common. If so, then that would seem to me to be a disaster waiting to happen.

 

[structuralnerd]

It would be a complete disaster. Even the most careful and experienced engineer makes mistakes which makes the QA/QC process very valuable.

 

[Lion06]

We don't really have a formal QA process where I am at right now. Our director looks through the drawings during the DD and CD phases, but never with a fine tooth comb, and certainly not checking out the models.
We have, however, had about 12 hours worth of seminars within our firm to come up with reasonable defaults for the program. I do agree with you, however, that we there should always be someone reviewing it with a fresh set of eyes.
I feel like our environment is so fast-paced that no one wants to take the time. Another thing I don't like about all these programs is that unless it is a connection detail, I rarely get to design anything by hand. I have done some concrete and masonry shearwalls and some very large combined footings, but I haven't done a beam or column by hand since I finished school!

 

[271828]

StrlEIT, I think it's not as good, but probably good enough just to print out the plans and highlight the beam sizes for your own designs. I did this for years and it was almost like a second set of eyes, especially if I did it a little later on in the project.

Like you typed, nobody's going to have time to check somebody else's stuff, at least not in any firm I've worked for.

You have a valid concern wrt not doing manual calcs. This is an extreme example, but we had one licensed SE with 12 years of experience who came from a firm that used automated systems. He hadn't designed anything manually for years. He actually asked one of our 3 year guys whether deflections were checked with factored or service loads. He could barely calc wind and seismic loads. Granted, this was an extreme case, but lesser dulling of technical skills is bound to occur with lack of practice.

 

[transmissiontowers]

I am a user of GTSTRUDL and it is geared toward buildings and bridges although I design neither one.

http://www.gtstrudl.gatech.edu/

They are proud that they can pass the NRC quality control tests for structural software used in Nuclear Power Plant design and maintenance. There is a free student edition with all capabilities but limits on number of joints.

_____________________________________
I have been called "A storehouse of worthless information" many times.

 

[Lion06]

I would be interested in hearing from others who have RAM Structural System and how much you get to do hand calcs for steel.
The only hand calcs I get to do for steel is connections (not shear too often, but many unique moment connections), designing side plates for WF beams subject to torsion, and some other miscellaneous stuff. I have done quite a bit of hand calcs for concrete. I have also done quite a bit for wind and snow (including irregular drift conditions).
I think I might be venting a little because we have a lot of projects in CA right now and I haven't done any design work in at least 6 weeks!!!

 

[swivel63]

how is strudl? i've always wanted to learn it, but it doesn't seem very user friendly.