What type of software do you use for connection design? 1

[S.K.G]

I was wondering what other types of software there are in the industry that other structural engineers use for connection design (shear, moment, brace, etc.,). The company where I work uses RISA connections.

 

[KootK]

Idea Statica seems to be becoming increasingly popular and has some very impressive capabilities: Link

 

[human909]

I use SpaceGass for my modelling of steel structures and generally connections. The connection design is suitable for most standard connections shear, moment etc and covers most member types. It just follows the relevant industry body guidance of standard connection types rules and procedures.

It is a great piece of software, simple to use, mostly used in Australia but supports other codes. It has a the user interface is still something out of windows 3.1 but it works.

IdeaStatica is fantastic for complicated and bespoke connections. It takes more time than software that works to rules and procedures but the sky is almost the limit with what you can do.

 

[driftLimiter]

I use Risa Connection, Ram Connection, and have used IdeaStatica.

Both Risa and Ram are quite capable, but only IdeaStatica for stuff that doesn't fit nicely in a constrained geometry.

 

[S.K.G]

Thanks for the responses guys, I will take a look at IdeaStatica since all of you guys recommended it. Risa is great but it is limited to the standard connections available in the CISC and AISC guidelines.

 

[Aesur]

Am I the only one still using hand calcs or excel spreadsheets?

 

[Tomfh]

Handcalcs/excel for most things.

 

[EngDM]

Am I the only one still using hand calcs or excel spreadsheets?

There can be so many checks with connections that for someone without extensive knowledge things could easily be missed. I personally use RISA Connection and enjoy the report it gives to spit out exactly which check is doing what. Once you understand the simple connections RISA offers, you can apply those equations to a bit more complicated geometry.

 

[DrZoidberWoop]

Exclusively hand calcs and Excel for connection design. It feels good knowing I'm not working with black box software or rigid commercial constraints.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Am I the only one still using hand calcs or excel spreadsheets?

No, there are plenty of you around. I'll add to that and say that there are plenty of connection tables that can be used for the vast majority of shear connections. Maybe with a minor hand calculation to go along with them.

Moment connections, braces and really weird shear connections are the only ones where I use software.... even if 10 years ago I would have used MathCAD or Excel.

 

[RPMG]

Hand calcs primarily, but I check difficult connections with RAM Connections. For shear connections, I usually only specify one type, and I have simple rules memorized to get a lower bound strength quickly. For moment conn's, I usually say that I want "this" amount of the flange strength.

 

[Aesur]

There can be so many checks with connections that for someone without extensive knowledge things could easily be missed.

Luckily for me, 90% of connections are very simple and basic here, I don't get to use special moment frames or braced frames often and if I did, the local fabricators would be lost as it's so uncommon. I do have spreadsheets and I and another user here created for special braced frames years ago when we worked together that I would use if the need came.

I do actually have experience with both RAM and RISA Connection, they are great, if used properly. Far too many times I have seen an engineer trying to outsmart/trick the software and come up with a completely wrong design. For example, I once saw someone pick a moment connection of beam to column where column continues, this was actually for a cantilever column and cantilever beam both sides of the column, like you see in parking canopies, the "T" shape. I had no issue with them using the selected connection as switching the beam and columns is ok, what I did have issue with was, the connection required 8 bolts, 4 inside the column flanges and 4 outside, however they input the geometry such that it overlapped the interior and exterior bolts and visually looked like there were only 2 bolts each side for a total of 4, but the output was still using the capacity of 8 bolts. There were no red flags or warnings in the software and the design was grossly under sized; I only caught this because I knew what types of connections were available in the software at that time and what they had wasn't one of them. Moral of the story, don't trust the software to tell you when you screw up and don't blindly use software without knowing how it works.

 

[271828]

Am I the only one still using hand calcs or excel spreadsheets?

I've come up with a way to develop very modular tools in Excel, and use that for most designs. I would use Mathcad, but their genius developers don't allow the same sheet to be viewed in multiple windows -- 2004 wants their program back.

I've used RISA Connection a lot over the last few years. It has enough bonehead issues to motivate dropping it. I end up red-lining through a lot of RC calcs in Bluebeam and pointing at supplementary attached calcs. Creates a book-keeping nightmare.

 

[lexpatrie]

Yea, I built all my own.

I did get a few submittals with connection designs that were delegated, I think it was SDS/2 that just created this absolute wall of text. Maybe they've gotten better since 2017 or so. I thought having those calcs would be so helpful and it was about the same as having EnerCalc, I spend way too much time trying to decipher them and figure out what some of the mysterious values in the calculations are and where they come from.

I haven't done any delegated connection design lately, as I've been doing a lot of roof framing evaluations and many of them are where the snow load dropped from when they were originally designed, so there's "space" in the capacity of the connections as designed, already.

If I could, can we expand or narrow this conversation a moment -

If anybody remembers the "poison bolt" phenomenon from back when, where the bolt capacity was limited by the bolt at the bottom that was close to the edge of the angle/piece, was that actually code, straight up, or was it an overapplication of the code by some engineers, which was conservative? My read is it was an overapplication, and conservative. Larry Muir article below....

A tale of tearouts, Muir, Modern Steel Construction, May 2017.

Bolt Bearing Resistance, Gustafson, Steel Interchange, Modern Steel Construction, May 2006.

This probably goes farther back in the literature but 2006 is good enough for now....

 

[human909]

Exclusively hand calcs and Excel for connection design. It feels good knowing I'm not working with black box software or rigid commercial constraints.

Regarding excel sheets vs software being a black box. I think Excel gets used too much, Excel is IS often quite and black OPAQUE box. IMO excel can be more of a black box than many of the good clear calculation software that is out there. When the software spits out a comprehensive set of calculations referencing every code and not skipping 3 steps it is pretty clear. MathCAD can be good for this or some software like ClearCalcs/SkyCiv. To be fair the two software packages I listed above IdeaStatica and SpaceGass are not this transpareent.

For example:

I've had the fortune of inherited a massive library of excel calculators, complete with one-on-one instructions on how to use them. But to me they are black boxes. Sure I can interrogate them but that takes extensive effort. Why not spend my time using software that does the same thing and presents the information in a much clearer fashion? (After using the excel calculators for a while I bought a subscription for another software package.)

Even my own Excel spreadsheets sometimes end up as black boxes to me. Especially when I have a junior colleague update them and introduce errors, which I later painstakingly have to track donw.


However to be clear I use Excel all the time. In fact I am about to open a fresh sheet now to calculate loads from some equipment that I don't normally deal with. I find it quicker than MathCad (but not as clear). The calculations are simple I'll use Excel or pencil and paper depending on my mood.

 

[canwesteng]

80% of the time, grabbing something from the book.
15% for bespoke connections, it's by hand (mcad), using yield lines usually.
5% using RAM connection. I wish I could a real calc output from it though instead of a checklist

 

[DrZoidberWoop]

IMO excel can be more of a black box than many of the good clear calculation software that is out there.

I've experienced that cluster**** as well. I also wouldn't release my Excel sheets to a subcontractor, or whoever, because then they essentially become black boxes for secondhand users.

Successful implementation, over the years, has relied heavily on document control and modification reporting. I wouldn't introduce a new sheet into the master calc-sheet repository before having it independently checked by at least 2 other engineers. Many firms move so fast on small projects, w/ varying scopes/materials, that they don't have that luxury.

 

[EngDM]

I've experienced that cluster**** as well.

Some of the more complex spreadsheets I've made would be impossible for a 3rd party to go back and figure out how it works. My office uses Excel for the most part, so I make my spreadsheets in excel regardless of how complex even though it would be much clearer if done in python.

For instance, if anyone has ever worked with the solved UDL equation, where any input can be variable (

https://github.com/buddyd16/pyMAOS/blob/main/derivations/Linear Distributed Load.pdf),

inspecting the cells that go through this calculation would be painful.

Or anything that uses a solved integral.

I think the biggest qualm I have with Excel sheets is that, unless you've named your variable cells and referenced them as their assigned name in the equation box, interpretting an equation is a pain and not worth the hassel.

 

[southard2]

desconplus.com

I used connection software called desconwin and descconbrace. I should mention that I haven't upgraded or renewed since the new company that bought it a few years back. I'm still using probably like the 2010 version of the software.

What I like about it is that the input is very easy to do. It then autogenerates the connection which you can then export as an autocad file and simply drop into your drawings.

Keep in mind I don't do a lot of fancy BIM stuff. I only 3d model four or five times a year using RISA-3D which I think it a very nice software program.

At any rate it worth a try out. I bet they have a partial free trial you could try with it. It does quite a bit of connection types. I rarely have to do any calculations by hand now. And I trust it way more than I do writing my own excel sheet for this stuff. It is very difficult since connection design really gets into the weeds when it comes to variety, etc...

John Southard, M.S., P.E.

https://www.pdhlibrary.com/

 

[human909]

For additional context on my work flow. I only have about FOUR excel/MathCAD calculators that I for my work. That is probably FAR FAR less than most.

-An Excel CUSTOM BUILT bulk material pressure EN 1991-4 & AS3774 calculator (I have yet to see software that does these calculations according to code.)
-An Excel CUSTOM BUILT silo calculator for footing loads and temporary errection needs.
-An Excel monorail crane calculator to local standards. Simple and effective.
-A MathCAD buckling calculator for cylinders subjected to internal vacuum


At some stage it would probably make sense to have a few more. Simple things like bolt bearing capacity I end up hand calculating in each instance. But it isn't hard and I don't do the manual calculation very often. Also, I've essentially been a engineer solo without direct mentors or structural peers all my career. I have been and still are salaried but I've been the only structural engineer. It means that there is no learning from others within my firm or receiving Excel calculators from others.

(The library of Excel calculators I have recently inherited has been from a retiring engineer that I know from other connections.)