RISA modules vs RAM

[WiSEiwish]

Any users of RISA Floor and Foundation in conjunction with RISA 3D have any opinions as to how it compares to RAM? I have RISA 3D and RAM both but am intrigued by ditching RAM in favor of adding RISA Floor.
RAM is good at designing steel beams and columns for gravity loads, but seems to fall short in every other department.
RISA Floor seems to have those capabilities and the ability to use different materials as well, but I've never tried it. Thoughts?

 

[JoshPlumSE]

When I first started working for RISA, they were in the beginning stages of developing RISAFloor. One of the main reasons was because there were so many RAM users who used the program for their composite beams, then would build a separate model in RISA-3D for their lateral analysis. Therefore, you're exactly the type of engineer they were trying to win over when they developed the program.

Some thoughts:
1) Try the RISAFloor demo and run through the tutorials. That will give you as good of a sense as anything else.
2) RISAFloor is now only available on a "lease" basis. Same as RAM. If that's a deal breaker, then you have to go somewhere else (ETABS?).
3) When you add up the cost of RISA-3D, RISFLoor and RISAFloor ES (which is needed for elevated slabs), my belief is that buying a copy of ETABs is actually a good bit less expensive. At least after a couple of years.
4) There may be other programs out there that compete against Floor, RAM and ETABs. But, I'm not very familiar with them. Maybe someone else can comment.

Caveat: I am a former RISA employee and current CSI employee. Therefore, I'm not exactly an unbiased observer.

 

[WiSEiwish]

Thanks! I checked out the etabs website. It looks similar to TSD which I have a small amount of experience with. I like the wall panel inputs. Less of a black box that way.

The only thing missing is that they only do steel and concrete.
Many of the buildings I do are mixed with steel, masonry, and wood being the most prevalent

I am one of the many apparently that does gravity in RAM and lateral in RISA. It's really annoying that it is the best way.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

What is TSD? I'm not familiar with that acronym.

RISAFloor was originally designed for steel, composite beams, and steel joists. It may not be quite as complete as what you get from RAM or ETABS in those areas, but it does a pretty good job. However, if you're looking for wood also, then RISAFloor is probably your best bet. Someone else can correct me if I'm wrong. But, my belief is that the RAMs and ETABs of the world don't seem to do much wood design.

There are some caveats and frustrations related to lateral design of wood in RISA-3D. So, it's best used by an experienced engineer who knows what type of wood shear walls he/ she wants to use.

Then again, if concrete is really important, then you're probably talking ETABs, or ADAPT, or such.

 

[WiSEiwish]

TSD is Tekla Structural Designer.
I don't do much with wood, but a lot of masonry. Wood is usually an accent with a glulam here and there. It seems that most of my buildings are steel with masonry shear walls. A lot of times I do the masonry by hand or as a separate calc.

Just annoying doing my steel in RAM jumping to RISA 3d for steel frames then going somewhere else for cmu. All the time I'm grabbing loads from one program and bring them into another.

I appreciate your responses!

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Oh, that's a little different. Masonry is sort of an afterthought with RISA (in my opinion). Not sure what the other guys have. Therefore, I would say that RISA doesn't has as much of an advantage if your primary interest is masonry. Though wood could really tilts the scales if you have a lot of those projects.

 

[WiSEiwish]

Masonry always seems like an afterthought.