Engineering Updates

For small load carrying columns , the pedestals are designed without any reinforcement and with height less than three times its width. Generally hollow concrete blocks are used and the hollow place is filled with concrete. But this is only limited to small load ranges. But in the case of large load columns , construction and design of pedestals is same as reinforced columns for major loads. Reinforcement is also provided for the pedestals but the amount of reinforcement is 0.15% of its cross sectional area. Minimum reinforcement shall be 0.15% of crossection area (Refer clause 26.5.3.1 of IS 456 on pedestal having length less than 3*least lateral dimension) Minimum Bar dia - - Better use 12mm dia as minimum Maximum spacing - - 200mm (This is generally for mass concrete and the case of pedestal seems closer to it) Lateral ties - - Al around may be 10mm dia @200mm c/c maximum , But internal ties need to be provided ,may be ,at double spacing to connect opposite fa...

Hello, Everyone  I am here writting about the difference between syntax of member loading in case of EQ definition And other load case detals in STAAD PRO. Command for  Member Weight  other than EQ loading The above shown fig describes about the application of member loading in load case details other than earthquake. There are various options for type of loading like uniform force, uniform moment, concentrated force, e.t.c after selecting this we have to apply intensity and distances in case of uniform force. In the case of earthquake loading we have to select firstly loading type then intensity of weight and starting distance.  Command for  Member Weight  in case of EQ loading Sometimes we define member weight in load case details and copy pasted it in staad edditor under  earthquake load definition. Then we have taken care about the syntax as in this definition  starting distance is followed...

Etabs VS Staad Hello Everyone,😊  I am here after little bit long time. Today in this blog I am sharing my working experience on  Etabs and Staad. And compare these two software commonly used by structural engineers. 1- For small structures like up to 3-story buildings STAAD is easier to use and for beginners is easier to learn, but ETABS needs more inputs, which might be difficult to understand in initial stages. 2- On the other hand, more inputs in ETABS gives you more control of what the software outputs. Like Shear wall design, stiffness modifiers, mass source, restraints, diaphragm . . . 3- For high-rise structures, undoubtedly ETABS gives better results and reliability. In the world, you can find more iconic and famous high-rise buildings designed by ETABS. 4- Based on some comparisons I myself did, ETABS gives you 5-10% more economical design than STAAD. This claim has proved by the others. 5- There are more analytical options available in ETABS...