Welcome to the STAAD.Pro Ideas portal. The purpose of this site is to post ideas for enhancements and new features. We value your feedback and our team regularly reviews your suggestions for consideration in future releases.
You have 3 options for providing feedback:
Vote for an existing Idea. The popularity of an Idea helps us understand its importance to our users.
Comment on an existing Idea. We want to hear your unique point of view.
Add a new Idea. If no existing Idea describes what you would like, add a new one!
When you Vote, Comment, or Add an idea you will also be subscribed to that Idea and will receive status updates. Please note that we may merge or rename Ideas for clarity. Thank you for your support and feedback, it is always appreciated!
If the suggestion is for another code, then that is another idea, The original solution has been completed.
Please note that STAAD.Pro 2023-2 has been shipped with a tool to determine the unbraced lengths and effective length factors according to the AISC 360 code.
Dear All,
With reference to the above constraint in calculating the KZ parameter for Moment Resisting Frames, a Macro has been developed.
This macro is aimed at..
Minimum manual inputs to Macro, which shall minimized the calculation checking efforts of engineer.
User is only responsible for correct modelling of staad file. Thus the checking efforts are limited to staad input file. Minimal efforts are then required to verify that the correct inputs are entered on to the Macro screen.
User shall initiate a design of Moment resisting sway frame by assuming KZ parameters (May be by approximating the end conditions with the standard diagrams given in code).
Once the preliminary section sizes are determined the exact KZ parameters can be entered which the Macro calculates in automated way.
The Lengths and Section properties are taken from Staad file itself and no manual efforts are required.
Since all (Most of the inputs) the required inputs are obtained from Staad file itself, a similar approach can be adopted in staad engine and this way the user intervention can be completely eliminated to achieve both accuracy and Saving of time and efforts.
Users, please note that the attached macro is prepared considering the requirements/formulae as per Eurocode National Annex - Nederlands.
Similar Macro can be developed for other codes as well.
The detailed video for "how to use" the macro & flowchart can be viewed at below links
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfMJcA2wiAA&t=12s
https://www.youtube.com/@CivilBotsforBeginners/featured
Regards,
Pravin Agashe.
Correct. Assigning design parameters is currently in the domain of the analytical workflow.
But currently this is not how it is set up, right? The physical modeler does everything but set up the design parameters. Which is still done in the Analytical modeler.
I just want to make sure that I am not missing some functionality within the physical modeler that could make my life easier.
The first step in this solution will be for the Physical Model to take ownership of setting design parameters. That means that similar to modelling and geometry functions, that becomes restricted in the analytical environment. Then we can build a system that can automate the parameters for various attributes such as effective length and deflection lengths.
Just for clarification, does the physical model tell the analytical model the Lx, Ly, and Lz values? Likewise, does it also tell it DJ1 and DJ2 values? My understanding of the modeling was that it doesn't do that. At least if I view the design commands in the analytical model (after converting from the physical model), it won't have those values defined.
I feel like the poster was asking for something like that.
Thank you for your post. I think the first part is really about accounting for the fact that you are looking to retain the concept of a physical beam or column even if it has to be sub-divided for analytical purposes. That is already addressed by defining your model in the physical workflow. If I understand correctly, your suggestion in the second and third points is about automatically calculating the effective length factors, we do have this in our backlog. The factors themselves being determined by the stiffness of the members that it is connected to in the two orthogonal axes.