Jump to content
  • Welcome to SEFP!

    Welcome!

    Welcome to our community forums, full of great discussions about Structural Engineering. Please register to become a part of our thriving group or login if you are already registered.

Auto-Generated Load Combinations ETBAS & Building Codes for Pakistan


Omer Ahmed
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am so happy to finally find this phenomenal platform to ask questions from professionals! So I used to work in a private company in Lahore where we would use auto-generated load patterns in ETABS v9. After my MSc from UK I just had an interview at another firm last week where I was embarrassed to know that we should manually generate load combinations instead of using system generated combos for frame design! Now this got more confusing when I saw some YouTube videos where they defined load patterns manually using UBC97 (which is an easy case since it have just 5 load cases I think) but since ETABS v18 doesn't come with UBC-97and ACI load cases have like 19 load cases, (1) should I put all 19 cases manually? (2) What is really wrong with auto-generated frame combinations? why some people on YouTube and interviewer said we have to put them manually? (3) Suppose I need to design a foundation and for that I display Base Reactions after analyzing the structure, against which load combination I should be seeing the values of base reactions? Will it be the one with the maximum value of Pz, calculated from Load combination provided/ generated before? (4) Can we mix multiple design codes in 1 model? I mean what if I use UBC-97  (say in an older version), can I use ACI as a design preference and for Load combination as well? because it confuses me that older versions of ETABS doesn't come with UBC-97 as a design preference code but surprisingly it still have UBC-97 in defining load patterns where we put Dead, Live, Earthquake and Wind load data etc. Since the system allows us to pick different codes at different staged, does this mean there will be no serious effect on results?

Many thanks for reading this. Please let me know if there is a need of screenshots to answer. 

Edited by UmarMakhzumi
Changed topic title to make it more relevant to discussion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fundamentally speaking, there is nothing wrong with autogenerated load combinations, provided you know the what is the difference. It is not at all difficult to figure out what will be the difference (load combos have just one variable, some factor x specified loads), just read the relevant code.

Your foundation will have a certain value of flexural and shear capacity measured in terms of k-ft and kipps or whatever the system of units you are using at different locations. Why is it difficult to decide what to do with the results of Etabs? You need to compare the results of all ultimate limit state load combinations with the capacity at these locations.

You can use different codes within the same family of codes. But, you should keep in mind that the definition of DBE level earthquake is different in UBC 97 as compared to the ones that arrived after it. Having said that, the design methodology (strength reduction factored and loads factors) is the same.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Badar (BAZ) is totally correct. I will just add that some people prefer manual Load Combinations to address vertical seismic effects which you can also do with Auto, if you specify the correct parameters. See the thread below.

https://www.sepakistan.com/topic/1307-etabs-load-combinations/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Badar (BAZ) @Ayesha thanks for your replies.

So I am guessing auto-generated load combos are fine as long as we double-check factors from the codes. I have one more question here, so If I use ACI-318 as a design preference code and UBC-97 for Wind and Earthquake loads,  What do I do with the earthquake load factors in Load combinations? I read it somewhere that we need to multiply all the load factors of combos with the Earthquake load in it with 1.1 (as per UBC-97). Can someone please confirm if that's right?

As for the Foundation design i.e. Isolated footing, what I mean to ask is that in order to design it (after finding the area of footing), I am going to need a Load and Moment value from super structure which it will be designed to resist. I have attached a screenshot below ( please ignore the values/results) what I want to know is that there are different Load Cases and Combos in Base reaction table, Should I pick the maximum value from of FZ from the table? assuming that we have a Fix base, which Moment value I should pick from the table which it will be designed to resist?

Many Thanks.

Capture.JPG

Edited by Omer Ahmed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Muhammad,

There is no difference between adding the combinations manually or use default combinations.

For vertical seismic effects you need to modify the value of seismic design category and SDs. 

The program will automatically change the factors of load cases once changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2021 at 6:44 AM, Omer Ahmed said:

so If I use ACI-318 as a design preference code and UBC-97 for Wind and Earthquake loads,  What do I do with the earthquake load factors in Load combinations? I read it somewhere that we need to multiply all the load factors of combos with the Earthquake load in it with 1.1 (as per UBC-97). Can someone please confirm if that's right?

You should use IBC with ACI as UBC is not compatible. If you still want to use UBC, this is grey area and engineering judgement should be used. Discuss with the people in your office and pick something conservative.

On 2/20/2021 at 6:44 AM, Omer Ahmed said:

As for the Foundation design i.e. Isolated footing, what I mean to ask is that in order to design it (after finding the area of footing), I am going to need a Load and Moment value from super structure which it will be designed to resist. I have attached a screenshot below ( please ignore the values/results) what I want to know is that there are different Load Cases and Combos in Base reaction table, Should I pick the maximum value from of FZ from the table? assuming that we have a Fix base, which Moment value I should pick from the table which it will be designed to resist?

There are two approaches. Either you design based on Envelope (Consider the max of all forces, Fx, Fy, Fz, Mx, My, Mz) and design for that. Or you can each load combination one by one. You can develop an excel macro to do that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ayesha Pardon my ignorance, so I used to opt for UBC since it have earthquake zones of Pakistani cities. Does IBC or ACI have that as well?  The problem with UBC is that it doesn't come in every version of ETABS. I am familiar with Eurocode and ACI but do I need to feed earthquake zone data in Etabs as well if I go with them?

Edited by Omer Ahmed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • UmarMakhzumi changed the title to Auto-Generated Load Combinations ETBAS & Building Codes for Pakistan

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • Hi there,
      I am interested in performing "Performance Based Design" for a 20 story building. 
      I'll be performing "Non-Linear Static Pushover Analysis" for my model. Until now, I have decided to go with "Displacement Co-efficient method". I will be using ETABS 2017 for performing Pushover Analysis. While assigning plastic hinges, I have an option of using ASCE 41-17 (Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing buildings". I would like to know what would be a better estimate for relative distances for plastic hinges in case of beams, columns. Any input concerning assignment of hinges to beams, columns and shear walls is highly appreciated. Normally it's taken 0.05 and 0.95 or 0.1 and 0.9. What's your opinion on this?
      Secondly, it would be great if someone can recommend me a book or some good source to understand how to characterize building using performance levels. Any sort of help is appreciated.
      I have recently graduated and joined a structural design firm, so kindly guide me, considering me a beginner.

       
      • 2 replies
    • *SEFP Consistent Design*<br style="background-color:#ffffff; color:#272a34; font-size:14px; text-align:start">*Pile Design*<br style="background-color:#ffffff; color:#272a34; font-size:14px; text-align:start">*Doc No: 10-00-CD-0007*<br style="background-color:#ffffff; color:#272a34; font-size:14px; text-align:start">*Date: April 16, 2018*

      1.1. FUNCTION OF JOINT

      Beam-column joint must transfer the forces, such as moment, shear and torsion, transferred by the beam to the column so that the structure can maintain its integrity to carry loads for which it is designed.

      Another function of the beam-column joint is to help the structure to dissipate seismic forces so that it can behave in a ductile manner.

      1.2.WHY DO WE CARE

      During an extreme seismic event, the code-based structure is expected to maintain its load-carrying capacity for gravity loads even after the structure deforms into inelastic range so that it does not pose any life safety hazard. Hence, the joint can go through significant degradation of strength and stiffness, and if it fails in shear, or anchorage, the life-safety objective of code cannot be achieved.

      1.3.CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE


      1.4.THINGS TO CONSIDER FOR BEAM COLUMN JOINT

      Longitudinal bars of beams, or slab, must be able to develop their yield stress, so that the beam/slab can transfer moment to joint. It means that longitudinal bars must have adequate development length for hooked bars. This implies that the size of the column must be such that bars can develop their tensile forces. If bars can transfer moment, they can also transfer shear as far as monolithic construction is concerned.


      The shear strength of the joint must enable the transfer of moment and shear through it.



      The joint should be Constructible: Congestion of reinforcement is the main concern.

      1.5.DESIGN SHEAR FOR BEAM COLUMN JOINT

      The design shear for beam-column joint depends upon the relative strength of beam and column at the joint.

       
      • 4 replies
    • *Comments/Observations regarding modelling in ETABS*

      *Doc No: 10-00-CD-0006*

      *Date: May 06, 2017*

      Some of the observations made during extraction of results from ETABS (v 9.7.4), for design of reinforced concrete members, are being share in this article.,

      1) Minimum Eccentricity

      ETABS always considers the minimum eccentricity for selecting the design moment of columns irrespective of the probable behavior of the column, whether short or long column. See section 10.10.6.5 and its commentary of ACI 318-08 which deals with minimum eccentricity of long columns. You should always check the design moments that ETABS uses for columns if you want to bring down the cost of construction.

      2) Unbraced/ Braced Preference

      ETABS always performs analysis of frame as if it is un-braced. You should investigate if the storey under consideration is braced, or un-braced (10.10.5.2), and decide appropriate design moments of columns.

      3) Time Period

      ETABS has a tendency to select a time period of the building that is considerably less than the value obtained by the approximate method, Method A, of the section 1630.2.2  of UBC 97. To quote the FEMA 451 document: ''Because this formula is based on lower bound regression analysis of measured building response in California, it will generally result in periods that are lower (hence, more conservative for use in predicting base shear) than those computed from a more rigorous mathematical model". So, there is no need to use the value of time period that is lot less than Ta. One should always check the time period used by the software; ETABS can overestimate the seismic force by more than 2 times.

      Visit the forum link to read the complete article.
      Link: http://www.sepakistan.com/topic/2300-commentsobservations-regarding-modelling-in-etabs/
      • 0 replies
    • The minimum amount and spacing of reinforcement to be used in structural floors, roof slabs, and walls for control of temperature and shrinkage cracking is given in ACI 318 or in ACI 350R. The minimum-reinforcement percentage, which is between 0.18 and 0.20%, does not normally control cracks to within generally acceptable design limits. To control cracks to a more acceptable level, the percentage requirement needs to exceed about 0.60% (REFRENCE ACI COMMITE REPORT 224R-01)



       

       



       

       

      So according to above statement , should we follow 0.60%, to be on more safe side??



       
      • 12 replies
    • Dear Sir/Madam,

      This email is an invitation for the participation in the First South Asia Conference on Earthquake Engineering (SACEE-2019) which will be held on 21-22 February 2019 in Karachi, Pakistan. This conference is the inaugural event in this series of conferences which has been constituted under the auspices of South Asia Earthquake Network (SHAKE). The organisers of the conference include NED University, University of Porto, University of Fuzhou, University Roma Tre and Institution of Engineers Pakistan. The conference website can be visited at http://sacee.neduet.edu.pk/.

      Please note that world leading earthquake engineering experts have confirmed their participation in the conference. These include Prof Abdelkrim Aoudia (Italy), Prof Alper Ilki (Turkey), Dr Amod Mani Dixit (Nepal), Prof Bruno Briseghella (Italy), Prof George Mylonakis (UK), Prof Khalid Mosalam (USA), Prof Humberto Varum (Portugal) and many others. The presence of these distinguished experts allows you to exchange your work/issues with them and discuss possibility of any future collaboration. Please note that participation in the conference is strictly based on registration. Early registration in different categories at reduced rates are available till 10 December 2018. Please visit the conference website to see the details and the link for registration.

      If there are any queries, please do not hesitate to contact the Conference Secretary at the following address

      Prof. Muhammad Masood Rafi
      Conference Secretary- SACEE-2019
      Chairman
      Department of Earthquake Engineering
      NED University of Engineering & Technology Karachi, Pakistan.
      Phone: 0092-21-992-261261 Ext:2605
      Email: rafi-m@neduet.edu.pk
    • What is the Minimum reinforcement For Precast Pile  according to different codes (ACI,BS)??  Pile length is 40 times of pile least dimension . 
      • 1 reply
    • Dear members, I am working on a 10 storied rcc factory building with one basement,  where floor loads are in general 125 psf(Live) . but there are 2 warehouse in the building at ground floor & 10th floor where the Live load of stacked materials are 450psf. I have modeled it and analysed in ETABS. After analysis, seeing the floor displacement for seismic load,  i am in big shock to see the pattern. the displacement pattern suddenly increased hugely & then got normal . if the warehouse load created problem, then why it effected only Ground floor level, not the 10th floor! Please tell me how can i solve it. 
      • 1 reply
    • Asalamualaikum all,

      I have columns which are conflicting with the underground water tank as shown in figure.
       

      So I have decided to make underground water tank base slab as a footing for column. So I import etabs model to safe and just take uniform water load on base slab and point load from columns.

      This is the residential house. The BC is 2tsf. But SAFE is showing tension on the base slab and the thickness from punching is 30''. I believe that thickness is too high. What can be the error? Is this approach is correct for design base slab of ugwt to carry load of two edge columns?
      • 11 replies
    • SAFE perform iterative uplift analysis,any one having experience how to check the results of this analysis???what is the purpose and scope of this analysis???
      • 15 replies
    • Shear wall design
      AOA 

      i am facing problems in shear wall design .what are the pier and spandral ?what will be the difference when we assign pier or spandral? without assigning these the shear wall design is incomplete .

      i am taking about etabsv16

      someone have document about shear wall design plz provide it 

      thank you

       
      • 13 replies
  • Tell a friend

    Love Structural Engineering Forum Of Pakistan? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines.