thank you very much ^_^ I am extremely happy to know that those videos are of help Stay tuned for more content, and maybe share those videos with your friends? Regards, CEE
Great and educative 💯 sir. Is it possible to change the support type at the base of column to which node 5 is associated, from pinned to fixed to eliminate the instability type 2 at the node 5 I really enjoy how you kept validating your model and analysis every step of the way. I should adopt that in my workflow going forward. This tutorials is really intensive at 35mins which explains why you didn’t post anything on Monday and Tuesday. The effort you put in this is really incredible and unimaginable. Looking forward to your tutorials. God bless you Regards.
I should explain the issue of supports being fixed vs pinned in a separate video. There is an assumption behind fixing or pinning a support, namely: when you fix a support, you are assuming that the support is NOT rotating and has enough rigidity to not even rotate the slightest pinned is vice versa, it can rotate. In reality, it is somewhat between pinned and fixed, so I chose pinned as the worst case for stability. Furthermore, from a design perspective (I am getting technical now), you would get a single curvature column that would be more susceptible to buckling + would have higher end moments. I think I should talk about this issue. and yep, the tutorial was really intensive and took a while to script and prepare ^_^ Glad you liked it.
yes Dr that's obvious i will share@@CivilEngineeringEssentials, also if you do have time i would like to understand loading phase in robot when especially using claddings. Like how to come from a scratch with only the mass of a material to get the forces and other data for you to be sure that you have accounted for everything and that the load that you do apply at the end is representative and realistic? currently i am working on a solar plant structure and i have tried to calculate the load and i got at the end 0.926 kpa for a total of 210 solar pannels of 30kg each size of one is (1.144x2.27 9m) . could you please guide on this one?
yeah i understand anyway thank you for your conideration my side too i will try out something and maybe share with you on your email@@CivilEngineeringEssentials
does releasing the bracing exclude it from taking loads? what about select the object, go to object inspector, model, trapezoidal and change from analyze to ignore? and also don't the bracings need to be defined as axial members only by going to geometry, additional attributes, advanced member properties and assign the axial property to the members? I am enjoying your videos, very good way of teaching the software in an engineering perspective not just the user interface or how to use the software as most software colleges do.
Alright so to disect the question: Releasing an element means that you are assuming that an element does not carry any moment at its end points. Under some circumstances, and ignoring the self weight, you would get pure truss members with that. You would, however, not get a pure truss member even if you release a member if you have (for example) a load in its middle-point. Releasing the rotation simply means that the end points do not carry rotations, which makes them equivalent to a pin. You could also - theoretically - release the Ux direction, which turns it into a roller. if you select from the object inspector and select ignore, then it will not carry forces from the surfaces. However, if you connect another member to it, load transfer may happen. You would at that situation have to make sure that the intersection - or connection - does not cause force transfer. This was done in a video where I was talking about warehouses and hangers. The other option of making the member an axial member works fine too. And it is even more effective than releasing the members. When you assign an axial member to your target, then it will not carry moment at all. (But you might think: what about the self weight of the members, shouldn't a member feel wl2/8 moments?) Well, No. Because when you declare an element as axial element, robot will take the self weight, sum it up, and divide it on the two edge points (nodes). Hope the answers make sense. In case you have any other question, feel free to ask. Regards, CEE
![[TF2] The Russian Bear Trap](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YFNSwz2_rOA/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you so much, this is the best Robot Structure video series I've ever watched
thank you very much ^_^ I am extremely happy to know that those videos are of help
Stay tuned for more content, and maybe share those videos with your friends?
Regards,
CEE
It was very interesting watching I cant wait for more videos, Thank you very much 💯
Glad you enjoyed it, stay tuned for more content like that.
Thank you for your efforts and the good energy that reflects on us. Regards.
Glad you liked it ^_^ I always try to make things positively.
Great and educative 💯 sir.
Is it possible to change the support type at the base of column to which node 5 is associated, from pinned to fixed to eliminate the instability type 2 at the node 5
I really enjoy how you kept validating your model and analysis every step of the way. I should adopt that in my workflow going forward.
This tutorials is really intensive at 35mins which explains why you didn’t post anything on Monday and Tuesday. The effort you put in this is really incredible and unimaginable.
Looking forward to your tutorials.
God bless you
Regards.
I should explain the issue of supports being fixed vs pinned in a separate video.
There is an assumption behind fixing or pinning a support, namely: when you fix a support, you are assuming that the support is NOT rotating and has enough rigidity to not even rotate the slightest
pinned is vice versa, it can rotate.
In reality, it is somewhat between pinned and fixed, so I chose pinned as the worst case for stability.
Furthermore, from a design perspective (I am getting technical now), you would get a single curvature column that would be more susceptible to buckling + would have higher end moments.
I think I should talk about this issue.
and yep, the tutorial was really intensive and took a while to script and prepare ^_^
Glad you liked it.
@@CivilEngineeringEssentials thanks for your consideration sir.
thanks so much this was the best video id ever watched for robot
You are most welcome. I am honored by your comment.
If you can, please consider sharing this channel with your colleagues, it helps a lot.
yes Dr that's obvious i will share@@CivilEngineeringEssentials, also if you do have time i would like to understand loading phase in robot when especially using claddings. Like how to come from a scratch with only the mass of a material to get the forces and other data for you to be sure that you have accounted for everything and that the load that you do apply at the end is representative and realistic? currently i am working on a solar plant structure and i have tried to calculate the load and i got at the end 0.926 kpa for a total of 210 solar pannels of 30kg each size of one is (1.144x2.27 9m) . could you please guide on this one?
Sure thing, I just need to find the time for it, but it is an interesring topic request 👍
yeah i understand anyway thank you for your conideration my side too i will try out something and maybe share with you on your email@@CivilEngineeringEssentials
also the minimal height under the solar panel plant is 3m and the angle of inclination for solar panels is 15 degres @@CivilEngineeringEssentials
does releasing the bracing exclude it from taking loads? what about select the object, go to object inspector, model, trapezoidal and change from analyze to ignore? and also don't the bracings need to be defined as axial members only by going to geometry, additional attributes, advanced member properties and assign the axial property to the members?
I am enjoying your videos, very good way of teaching the software in an engineering perspective not just the user interface or how to use the software as most software colleges do.
Alright so to disect the question:
Releasing an element means that you are assuming that an element does not carry any moment at its end points.
Under some circumstances, and ignoring the self weight, you would get pure truss members with that.
You would, however, not get a pure truss member even if you release a member if you have (for example) a load in its middle-point.
Releasing the rotation simply means that the end points do not carry rotations, which makes them equivalent to a pin.
You could also - theoretically - release the Ux direction, which turns it into a roller.
if you select from the object inspector and select ignore, then it will not carry forces from the surfaces.
However, if you connect another member to it, load transfer may happen. You would at that situation have to make sure that the intersection - or connection - does not cause force transfer. This was done in a video where I was talking about warehouses and hangers.
The other option of making the member an axial member works fine too. And it is even more effective than releasing the members. When you assign an axial member to your target, then it will not carry moment at all.
(But you might think: what about the self weight of the members, shouldn't a member feel wl2/8 moments?)
Well, No. Because when you declare an element as axial element, robot will take the self weight, sum it up, and divide it on the two edge points (nodes).
Hope the answers make sense. In case you have any other question, feel free to ask.
Regards,
CEE
Perfect explanation ,thank you
Thanks a lot. Happy it helped. Stay tuned for more content.
hi CEE,, what version is this RSA?
I was using 2020 back in the day
, شكرا [. : thanks in my language
العفو،
I do speak your language, too ^_^
Stay tuned for more content.
Regards,
CEE