taxiuf.blogg.se - Midas civil boundary condition support

This method is a bit approximate (but faster) and results can have a small error margin if time durations are very large (Midas does have internal time intervals for this - you can try tweaking them and see if it changes the results)Īs for moments at the pin supports, I'm not surprised.

What is the time difference between the stages ? Not sure about RM bridge and Sofistik but Midas Civil uses a discrete dirichlet method of creep calculation for sequencing.

Are you modelling these with creep ? If yes, what creep models are you using ?.

RE: Composite Arch Construction Stage Analysis Settingsun (Structural) 23 Jan 22 19:55 If Midas is correct, how to fix it in RM Bridge and Sofistik if RM Bridge and Sofistik are correct, how to fix it in Midas. Stage 1 (The moment diagram due to self-weight is symmetrical, so only half of it is hown here)Ģ.

While Midas Civil shows similar moments of the arch in the 1st and 2nd stages as those in RM Bridge and Sofistik, but very different moment in the 3rd stage. RM Bridge and Sofistik show very similar moments of the arch in all three stages, The relevant internal force state must be stored in the specified summation load case.For Sofistik, we use CSM(Construction Stage Module) Line (Linear analysis) and CSM → TH3 (3rd order geometry nonlinear), both gives very similar results

The internal force state (normal forces) of previous construction stages is considered in the p-delta effect calculation.