What I usually do (as with any other design that involves FEM.) is do a equilibrium hand calc first to get a feel of the target values. I had noticed it doing manual section cuts.ģ - The sign convention is indeed confusing. I think that that has to do with the way that SAP2000 integrates the forces using the nodal values.
I'm glad the tool is useful and that you've figured out how to use it, doing sections orthogonally to the longitudinal axis.ġ - I've never checked the influence of the quad extra dimensions and that certainly needs attention. Shoot for the Moon, even if U miss, U still land among Stars! RE: Section Cut Shz713 (Structural) So It is better to include the exact width.ģ-for analysis purpose, which force output you take? I reckon for shear must be F3, but for moment I am not too sure because I am getting similar shapes! Below graphs are force profile for slab which I shown in the beginning of this thread. in my case left and right width are measured to outermost left and right side if I need the force profile within the middle), the result is not correct. I realized that if left and right width are not the complete width (e.g. Is 0.1m reasonable?Ģ-for left and right width, it is better to include the whole width in which we're interested to get the force output. To compare with SAP section cut results, section cuts must be drawn transversely not longitudinally, also group cut must be set to ALL-> doing so, Excel and section cut results match!ġ-quadrilateral dimension above and below slab(az), I noticed that it changes output to some extent.