Structural Modelling Software 1

[CBEngi]

I currently work for a Canadian Structural Engineering Consultant. We are looking at expanding our modelling software and I'm looking for some opinions with respect to how each program preforms overall and if it uses the Canadian Codes.

We currently use SFrame and are looking at purchasing the SConcrete/SFoundation and SSteel.

I have done some research online and found some other programs that seem to offer the same package (i.e. a full program to offer general analysis, Steel design and Concrete)

The other programs I have noted that may include the Canadian codes are:
STAAD Pro
Robot Structural analysis (AutoCAD Plugin)

I also found these programs along the way
RISA 3D
ISEWEB

I am wondering what other people use, what they thought about the learning curb and how it performs overall. Throughout school we used SFrame and I'm fairly comfortable using the basic program. But we have completed a trial with SFoundation and I didn't find it that competent.

Our office completes a lot of one off projects, but we also do foundation design, concrete buildings and steel buildings for an idea of what we typically do, along with a lot of marine work.

Any comments would be greatly appreciated.

 

[PSEPK]

For Eurocode Steel Design, following reference might be helpful:

1. Designers' Guide to Eurocode 3 Design of Steel Buildings 2e, 2011 (ICE Publishing)

2. Practical design of steel Structures by K.M. Ghosh 2010

3. Eurocode 8: Seismic Design of Buildings Worked examples by P. Bisch et al. 2012

 

[850R]

Thanks again,
I put it in Mcad, and came up with
F.all.strong.axis= 30.16 ksi
F.all.weak.axis= 36.48 ksi

Does it look right? Please see attached.
C6x13

 

[canwesteng]

No, you can't have your moment resistance be greater than My*Sy, and for weak axis bending flexural lateral torsion buckling shouldn't matter.

 

[850R]

Did you mean Fy*Sy?
Are you talking about Minor axis bending where I have Mrz=2.0 greater than My_z=1.9?

 

[canwesteng]

Yeah Fy*Sy. M.r can never be greater than 0.9*F.y*S.y for class 3 sections or channels.

 

[850R]

Thank you so much, big help.

 

[850R]

Hey Guys,

I have another question, which channel sections do Canadians use in their structural design?
Do they use Eurocode sections? Where can I get those channel sections info from? Does anybody have a PDF of channel sections they use?

Thank you.

 

[jayrod12]

CISC has an excel sheet of all standard shapes available here.

 

[jayrod12]

To be clear, I've uploaded that to my dropbox for you. It is available on their website somewhere but it's faster for me to just upload it from my computer.

 

[850R]

jayrod12,

Thank you very much, got the excel sheet.
Do you have something different uploaded in your drop box? How do we get to it?
Sorry I am new to the forum

 

[jayrod12]

Nope I keep my public dropbox fairly empty. I put files in it to upload them here. Then delete them after a time. If you've got the sheet that's all that matters. It should have every section you could possibly need.

And to answer your question. Canadian steel shapes closely mimic American steel shapes. There are a few sizes that are available south of the border that we can't get without special order here in Canada.

 

[850R]

Awesome, thank you so much.

 

[850R]

Another question, this is still for a channel section and Canadian Code.
If I have an unsupported channel section that has an axial tension and bending, would I use clause 13.9.1 or 13.9.2?

 

[jayrod12]

That depends on your situation. Is your channel braced from buckling laterally? If yes, 13.9.1, if not (which is what I suspect) 13.9.2.

 

[850R]

That's what i thought as well, however I was hoping for 13.9.1 because in Table 2, I am not sure where channel section falls under "Description Elements"?

 

[TLHS]

Actually, if it's laterally unsupported you check both clauses. 13.9.1 is a section strength check, where you take the tension stress, add it to the tension stress due to bending and check against your material strength. It checks the tension flange. 13.9.2 is a check against lateral torsional buckling and checks the compression flange. The tension stress helps you here and is *subtracted* from the bending stress. There are definitely cases where a given member with a large tension force could fail 13.9.1 and pass 13.9.2, so both should be checked for a laterally unsupported member.

Also, be very careful with your load cases and 13.9.2. It relies on the tension force to reduce the stress in the compression flange and prevent lateral torsional buckling. Make sure your load cases are actually conservative for that scenario if you're going to use it.

 

[TLHS]

Refer to figure 2-8 in the Commentary for an illustrated table showing how to calculate classes. Channel flanges are treated the same as W-Section flanges, with the exception that channels can't be class one or two by definition due to the shape. Channel webs are treated the same way but are unlikely to govern.

I think you need to sit down with a senior person and walk through of your problem. A lot of this is pretty core material on how to use the Canadian code, and it's important you understand it properly. How channels are treated is a little weird, so it's not an unreasonable thing to have a talk about.

 

[850R]

TLHS,

Thank you very much but there is no Senior engineer with the Canadian code experience around me, therefore I ask you guys help here and really appreciate it.

 

[TLHS]

If you don't have someone familiar with Canadian code, who's going to stamp the drawings?

 

[850R]

I am studying the channel section for Canadian code and putting together some mathcad sheets, trying to cover every possible condition. Therefore there is no project to be stamped at the moment.