STAAD Questions 4

[pbw]

We are a small C/S engineering firm. Currently we are using STAADIII. We had many problems running it when it first came out (program bugs)but finally feel like we have it under control. <br>
<br>
We are considering upgrading our analysis software and I would like an evaluation of the STAAD2000 and STAAD.etc packages. Also, would like general comments on the STAAD program.<br>
<br>
Thanks

 

[JC]

Our company has established STAAD3 as a standard for analysis. We have the latest version but not <br>
STAADPRO. There are bugs in versions 22.3a, b, 23 and 24. I don't think they'll ever get all the bugs out, even STAAADPRO. We just live with the bugs. Good luck!

 

[mc]

We recently started using STADD Pro and STADD ect. STADD Pro does not seem to have all the kinks worked out though it should eventually be a good program. Unfortunately it and STADD ect are quite weak on LRFD design. The brand new STADD ect programs are ASD only. Which makes no sense to me. Our office standard has been LRFD for steel for several years now. Also,I think STAAD's marketing department is way ahead of there programers. They have been adveertising and promising to us STADD2000 for several months now. It finally came a few days ago but we were told it was a beta version, gee thanks - make us your guinny pig.

 

[legner]

We have used STAAD from release 21 through 22W and have experienced many program bugs. It is impossible to enumerate all the problems we have had. The bugs seem superficial, but how can you assure yourself that there are no bugs in the solution engine or code checking? We are considering switching to RISA 3-D, which appears to be somewhat more economical.

 

[pbw]

Thanks for all the replies....I think we'll stick with the version we have!!!!

 

[JAE]

We currently do not utilize STAAD but I used it quite a few years ago in conjunction with the Alamodome design in San Antonio, Texas. We ran parallel models with STRUDL (then a McDonell Douglas product) and STAAD. Both models presented us with exactly the same deflections, telling us that the matrices were solved in similar fashion. However, when attempting to get individual member loads along the length of the member, the STAAD numbers exploded to infinity. When contacting them to get help, we were somewhat put off with their attitude to our problem...They always seemed to assume that the problem lay with us and not the program. We never attempted to utilize STAAD again as this, to us, revealed a very unhealthy in-house attitude on their part.

 

[MPHenry]

I have used StaadIII and I'm currently using StaadPro. The StaadPro package has several bugs which are annoying more than serious. However, I found StaadPro lacks some of the versatility which was available on the Dos version of StaadIII Ver. 22. I have found that support from RE(UK) has been very good and helpful. I'm particularly annoyed with the Structure Wizard in StaadPro which supposedly generates standard truss forms, frames, surfaces etc. Everytime I use this facility I have to find and delete all the duplicate nodes and members generated, this was not the case with StaadIII.<br>
I would be interested in some comments on Staad.etc, the utility package available for StaadPro. We are thinking of purchasing it but feel that the Structural Library from ENERCALC at $925 is more versatile and better value for money. I would appreciate your comments? By the way, does anyone out there know of a good general reinforced concrete slab design program?

 

[JC]

To: MPHenry:<br>
I have used Enercalc for many years and am currently using Ver. 5.1.3. It is good for simple, straight forward problems but lacks the versility of STAAD3. Support for Enercalc is non-existent. There are bugs in it, especially Fastfram. Fastfram, The analysis program similar to STAAD3, has not been updated since January 1997! For more information, go to their web site.

 

[majdal]

In STAAD-III


Regarding the column design, How can I design columns with wedth of 20 cm, knowing that when i try to do this it says that &quot;column depth less than 10 inch, design ignored&quot;
Though if i did the design manually, i will get a result, so why cant staad do it???????
How can i go around this [sig][/sig]

 

[USStructuralist]

There are a number of Structural Software questions on various forums and Listservices. I have started to compile some of the messages on STAAD and about 19 other popular software including a number of FEM programs which is available on our Structuralist.Net Professional Discussion Forum under the category of Structural Software Users Forums. Please feel free to use this one-stop software users forum.

The direct link to the software forum is:

http://www.structuralist.net/cgi-local/UltraBoard/UltraBoard.cgi?action=Category&CID=5

(no line breaks in the URL address)

Regards,
Dennis S. Wish, PE
The Structuralist Administrator for:

http://www.structuralist.net

AEC-Residential Listservice
admin@structuralist.net
(208) 361-5447 E-Fax

 

[ADT]

Just to support the above rather negative comments on STAAD-III. I've had the same issues; modules that don't work, minimum or no support etc. lots of things too numerous to list.

But then, just last week a client made the use of STAAD-III a condition of carrying out the work on a very large project!! So how does this work??

To close, I found a good and pretty accurate analysis package called Framework last month. You can track it through

http://www.structural-engineering.fsnet.co.uk/free.htm

I've tried a couple of things and it looks accurate. Doesn't do Finite Element Analysis though, or any Design in a serious way. Look out for the execrable English also!

ADT [sig][/sig]

 

[Ron]

Care for another two cents?.....

We had used STAADIII for a number of years and switched to STAADPro last year. For the type of work we do (mostly analytical, some design) we found both adequate though very buggy and surprisingly susceptible to odd condition &quot;blow-ups&quot;. Support sucks. In our office, we have pretty much settled on using FeMAP as the model building interface and then import into STAAD. We find this to be much easier than working with the STAAD front end. We were doing quite a few communications towers so we went to a dedicated tower software for that application only. Still using STAADPro and FeMAP. As most everyone does, we do our own design checks. For strictly FEA, we are using FeMAP/mTAB-Stress.

Speaking to the US contingent, is everyone remembering to do your hand calcs. as check against computer analysis when you change programs and as periodic check? Most states require this documentation. [sig][/sig]

 

[Qshake]

Good Point Ron. Always know the behavior of the model so that a check can be performed and the analysis ascertained. [sig][/sig]