Leaderboard

In my openion we should not change any end length off set to pass some member or reduce the steel %age. suppose if we agree with rana that we can provide end length off set as slab half thickness then what for all other columns that the software repoting at 0 loaction and further thing is that if you can go to elevation 3 and exturude it shows that slab will be inside the beam by default and beam is exdtuded bleow column so how we can not provide end length off set as slab half thickness.

1. ETABS will never design a column or beam inside end-offsets (NEVER!) You can do joint design manually by taking moment inside the joint but I am talking here about the column design specifically. 2. ETABS will design a column at 0 location in some cases. For example at foundation level. There is no framing so end-offset will be zero and design will be reported at 0.0 3. It is important to check the local axis 1-1 direction (red) in column to see which one is I end and which one is J end. As EngrUzair said,we should be sure if ETABS or any other software taking the input and output correctly or not. And Junaid, If you right click on C15 in your model, you will find out that end offset i = 0 (at floor level) and end offset j = 36inch (at soffit of beam). This is what sameersaleem was suggesting actually. so basically what ETABS is doing in your case is correct. It is reporting values at 0.00 that is your slab level. If you want to go a step ahead you can change the i end offset value = half of slab thickness because it is center to center modelling.

@Rana, My point of view, is as under: 1. When we select & adopt a structural software, we believe that it works correctly at least for basic design-related calculations; both the structural analysis i.e., computation of member forces and moments etc, and proportioning of members i.e., sizing of members and determination of reinforcement. 2. Now, if we believe that the software is performing correctly for the analysis part (which is not only most important and a harder calculation), will it be logical to say that design results of software (Which are a lot simpler and easier to calculate) are incorrect, WITHOUT verifying it manually? In simple words, if analysis results of ETABS (or any other structural software) are acceptable to me, I will not object to its design output merely because I 'feel' that it is giving excessive reinforcement or erroneous results, UNLESS I check them manually and is prove them wrong. 3. In the present case, if we are sure that all other calculations done by ETABS (including all the analysis and other design output) are OK, I see no reason for believing that the software is giving incorrect reinforcement (both in display as well as design summary) for the columns - the most critical members of the structure. 4. As such, IMHO column reinforcement (or other design results), displayed in graphic output or shown in design tables, SHOULD NOT be ignored ordinarily, without any soild reason. Regards.

Sameer yes you are right for slab extrusion below beam. In this case you will not apply end offset as = half slab thickness. But I was talking about a general concept. Anyway, sometimes it is necessary to change end offsets manually. But for most of the part in ETABS end offsets are okay. For example when a beam is rested on another beam end-offset is not properly calculated. I am not sure if it is the same in ETABS 2013 or not. I was talking in general for end-offsets. As I thought Junaid was talking about j end. But in this case Junaid, you dont need to change anything. You have to provide reinforcement at 0 location at i end. Thanks and it was a nice discussion btw. Hope this clarifies your concern Junaid?

From an analysis point the 0 location shall be significant as the joint can be treated as rigid. I am not in to softwares so can't comment what SAP or ETABS would do, but if I am asked to do an analysis, I would make the above assumption and do the job. Also, when in doubt please be conservative. I guess there is no right or wrong here. Engineering is all about judgement and this situation is one good way to exercise it. Thanks.

Dear Rana there is no end length off set issue here at location 0. or you are not familiar with ETABS. ETABS always calculate the reinforcement at 0 loaction. and as far as end lenght off set is concern for this then it will be below slab not above slab.