To be honest, I find the earthquake engineering topic to be rather intimidating. I guess “I am now, in a way, facing my fears” through the CEE channel in this regard. Today’s video is a great start💯. CEE (as always) have been excellent in making the user understand and appreciate the “bigger picture” and the theoretical context behind approximate method (and CEE have done this without much of the pain). Thank you for this. I plan to re-watch this tutorial again and to also look through the referenced or highlighted codes materials and sections in order to learn more.
Anything new is always intimidating at first, but I plan to take it down piece by piece. I plan to add lectures to the mix once I reach 1k subs. As said, Its only the beginning. Stay tuned.👍 And yes, spreading the channel is the best way to support at the moment.👍 as it increases the subscribers and reach of the channel
I kinda feel like he knows what I don't know and what I want to know. Every video of this series is GOLD and has so much knowledge. I wish universities thought us like this with a tool to use. Anyway thank you much for every video. 🤩
Hello there, I am trying my best to keep up and benefit people. PS: Sorry for the late reply. I had a ton of things to finish and now I am gradually getting back
Happy you find it beneficial. Yeah, I kind of want to tell you what is in my mind during the process, it might not be the best course of action, but a learning process that people would find beneficial. Sure, just write your linked-in profile here. Will add. Note: I am not really that active on any platform. Regards, CEE
Glad you liked it. Yep, this video - of course - touches on Seismic loads in the most simplified of cases. Now I would in the future have an advanced topic in Seismic. And I would basically reference this video so that I can focus on advanced topics in the future. Thank you very much for your comment and dedication. It actually encourages me a lot to give it my all. Regards, CEE
Another great video! Love the channel. Working my way through all your videos, as they are loaded with juicy content. Looking forward to the lectures - will share to help you reach 1000.
I’m coming back to this presentation with respect with the 2024 version of Robot. I noticed that when a simplified modal sismic analysis is being conducted it is required to include mass conversion for live, dead and snow loads according to design code. The problem is that in all cases the basic structure weight is automatically included in the analysis even if the unit eight of structure is erase from the load table. Is Robot at fault ? Tried to erase all loads and still getting results from weight of structure participation. Thanks for your very professional teaching, the greatest !
I checked the documentation of Robot. It seems you are right (I still need to give it more research), but it seems if you perform a dynamic analysis, it will immediately consider a self weight (built in). And the only option you have is to add parts of load cases to it as it seems. I am still investigating this thing, but there is a quick hack you can use until I get some answers from Autodesk. You can add a self weight in the upwards z-direction "kind of to cancel out the built in self-weight. But this solution is kind of a hack and not really what I want to suggest. As I said, checking out why this is. It seems that when you defined a modal analysis, (the pre-requisite of seismic) you can choose the way it calculates the mass and you can even disregard density. I have not played with those options but maybe you can check and tell me your findings. Sorry to not be able to give a definitive answer. Still, I am happy you find those videos beneficial. Stay tuned, CEE
Glad you liked it. Your feedback encourages me to perform even better. And yes, spreading the channel is the best way to support at the moment.👍 as it increases the subscribers and reach of the channel
Hello there, glad you liked it. Of course, I will add it to my todo list. You can see my current todo list when you open the video description. If you like the video, please help the channel by suggestion such videos to your friends, as it increases the reach of this channel. Best Regards, CEE
Great video as always I really would like you to go in detail in a future video regarding quadratic combination and the generated combination regarding seismic as automatic and quadratic combination are really confusing me
I do appreciate your concern regarding this anomaly, Effectively,by including a plus sign to compensate the selfweight of the resident load could be a short term solution altough I would still not know how the software will generate the self weight calculations, is it an equation issue? As for the density, the activation of the "neglect density' function will not provide any changes, the selfweigt is still being included in the results, I did send a request on the Autodesk Forum but did not receive any conclusive replies. Hopefully Autodesk will apply a correction towards this issue. Best regards.
It seems from you follow-up comment that you found a way to make it work by emptying the Temp folder. Looks like a bug to me, will follow up with Autodesk. Maybe they release an update to address the issue. Regards, CEE
Robot 2024 Model Selfweight in simple Modal analysis issue. This morning, after erasing all the temporary files in %TEMP% , Robot 2024 seems to work fine without the selfweight issue. I did this after tryong to set the selfwight sign to -1 in the load table. Dont know I to explain this since not only did I get to deal with this issue while you also did. I did experience that issue on two different computers. Best regards
I think this might be a bug in Autodesk Robot. Thnx for pointing it out. It is indeed strange, but well, at least it seems (if I understood your correctly) that it normalized. Good to know, I will email the ppl there to let them know about this bug. Regards, CEE
The drawback when erasing %TEMP% file content is that if your model was built with the self weight issue it cannot be corrected or at least I still don’t know how. Stuck with the resident self weight @@CivilEngineeringEssentials
@@richardbelec3816 I think the solution itself might not be really the way to go, but a temporary solution until Autodesk decides to fix the issue. IMHO, if you remove the self weight, it should be removed.
Glad you liked it. Your feedback encourages me to perform even better. I have it in mind and will add it to the list (check the description for the todo list) And yes, spreading the channel is the best way to support at the moment.👍 as it increases the subscribers and reach of the channel
So now a have one automatic generated force created in one direction and in the other perpendicular direction Ok. But to use this forces in my manual combination a must create an accidental quadratic combination of both? And the last one I've created put on my ULS combination. That's correct?
for some reason, it seems I missed your comment. Thanks for your question. You're correct that Robot generates automatic loads for each horizontal direction in an earthquake analysis. However, for your ULS combination, you need to consider how these forces might interact under extreme conditions. An accidental quadratic combination (SRSS or Quadratic Sum of the Squares) is appropriate for earthquake forces because it assumes they can occur simultaneously, although not necessarily at their peak values. This provides a conservative estimate of the maximum combined effect on your structure.
@@CivilEngineeringEssentials can explain what we talked here with an example yours a simple situation will help me to be sure that what I do is correct.
To be honest, I find the earthquake engineering topic to be rather intimidating. I guess “I am now, in a way, facing my fears” through the CEE channel in this regard. Today’s video is a great start💯. CEE (as always) have been excellent in making the user understand and appreciate the “bigger picture” and the theoretical context behind approximate method (and CEE have done this without much of the pain). Thank you for this.
I plan to re-watch this tutorial again and to also look through the referenced or highlighted codes materials and sections in order to learn more.
Anything new is always intimidating at first, but I plan to take it down piece by piece. I plan to add lectures to the mix once I reach 1k subs.
As said, Its only the beginning. Stay tuned.👍
And yes, spreading the channel is the best way to support at the moment.👍 as it increases the subscribers and reach of the channel
I kinda feel like he knows what I don't know and what I want to know. Every video of this series is GOLD and has so much knowledge. I wish universities thought us like this with a tool to use. Anyway thank you much for every video. 🤩
Hello there,
I am trying my best to keep up and benefit people.
PS: Sorry for the late reply. I had a ton of things to finish and now I am gradually getting back
This channel is
Happy you find it beneficial. Yeah, I kind of want to tell you what is in my mind during the process, it might not be the best course of action, but a learning process that people would find beneficial.
Sure, just write your linked-in profile here. Will add.
Note: I am not really that active on any platform.
Regards,
CEE
This is why i love ❤️ this channel.
Great content.
Looking forward to the continuation of this topic in the future.
Thank you.
CEE.
Glad you liked it.
Yep, this video - of course - touches on Seismic loads in the most simplified of cases. Now I would in the future have an advanced topic in Seismic. And I would basically reference this video so that I can focus on advanced topics in the future.
Thank you very much for your comment and dedication. It actually encourages me a lot to give it my all.
Regards,
CEE
Another great video! Love the channel. Working my way through all your videos, as they are loaded with juicy content. Looking forward to the lectures - will share to help you reach 1000.
Thanks a lot for your comment. It means a lot.
Stay tuned, there is more content to be produced.
Regards,
CEE
thank you for the clear explanation and already subscribed to your channel
Awesome! thank you very much. Wishing you all the best,
CEE
I’m coming back to this presentation with respect with the 2024 version of Robot. I noticed that when a simplified modal sismic analysis is being conducted it is required to include mass conversion for live, dead and snow loads according to design code. The problem is that in all cases the basic structure weight is automatically included in the analysis even if the unit eight of structure is erase from the load table. Is Robot at fault ? Tried to erase all loads and still getting results from weight of structure participation. Thanks for your very professional teaching, the greatest !
I checked the documentation of Robot. It seems you are right (I still need to give it more research), but it seems if you perform a dynamic analysis, it will immediately consider a self weight (built in). And the only option you have is to add parts of load cases to it as it seems.
I am still investigating this thing, but there is a quick hack you can use until I get some answers from Autodesk.
You can add a self weight in the upwards z-direction "kind of to cancel out the built in self-weight. But this solution is kind of a hack and not really what I want to suggest.
As I said, checking out why this is. It seems that when you defined a modal analysis, (the pre-requisite of seismic) you can choose the way it calculates the mass and you can even disregard density. I have not played with those options but maybe you can check and tell me your findings.
Sorry to not be able to give a definitive answer. Still, I am happy you find those videos beneficial.
Stay tuned,
CEE
Fantastic content. I will share the channel with my team and other graduates. Essential engineering videos is right!
Glad you liked it. Your feedback encourages me to perform even better.
And yes, spreading the channel is the best way to support at the moment.👍 as it increases the subscribers and reach of the channel
Excellent lecture! Can I ask if you could possibly add a tutorial for a simple TBM tunnel lining analysis in robot?
Hello there, glad you liked it.
Of course, I will add it to my todo list. You can see my current todo list when you open the video description.
If you like the video, please help the channel by suggestion such videos to your friends, as it increases the reach of this channel.
Best Regards,
CEE
مبارك جهودك استاذ. ملاحظة بسيطة. لفظ الحمولة الحية . لايف. بدل ليف. وجهودك عظيمة ومفيدة.
مشكور أخي الكريم، سيتم تعديلها ويسعد اوقاتك
Great video as always
I really would like you to go in detail in a future video regarding quadratic combination and the generated combination regarding seismic as automatic and quadratic combination are really confusing me
Great suggestion. I will keep that in mind. thnx a lot and stay tuned for more content.
I do appreciate your concern regarding this anomaly, Effectively,by including a plus sign to compensate the selfweight of the resident load could be a short term solution altough I would still not know how the software will generate the self weight calculations, is it an equation issue? As for the density, the activation of the "neglect density' function will not provide any changes, the selfweigt is still being included in the results, I did send a request on the Autodesk Forum but did not receive any conclusive replies. Hopefully Autodesk will apply a correction towards this issue. Best regards.
It seems from you follow-up comment that you found a way to make it work by emptying the Temp folder. Looks like a bug to me, will follow up with Autodesk. Maybe they release an update to address the issue.
Regards,
CEE
Robot 2024 Model Selfweight in simple Modal analysis issue. This morning, after erasing all the temporary files in %TEMP% , Robot 2024 seems to work fine without the selfweight issue. I did this after tryong to set the selfwight sign to -1 in the load table. Dont know I to explain this since not only did I get to deal with this issue while you also did. I did experience that issue on two different computers. Best regards
I think this might be a bug in Autodesk Robot. Thnx for pointing it out. It is indeed strange, but well, at least it seems (if I understood your correctly) that it normalized. Good to know, I will email the ppl there to let them know about this bug.
Regards,
CEE
The drawback when erasing %TEMP% file content is that if your model was built with the self weight issue it cannot be corrected or at least I still don’t know how. Stuck with the resident self weight @@CivilEngineeringEssentials
@@richardbelec3816 I think the solution itself might not be really the way to go, but a temporary solution until Autodesk decides to fix the issue. IMHO, if you remove the self weight, it should be removed.
Thanks for informations. If you have chance please add equake engineering videos. Regards
Great Idea. Will take it into account
Thank you for your clear explanation and your effort. It will be wonderfull If you make modal and responce spectrum analysis example.
Glad you liked it. Your feedback encourages me to perform even better.
I have it in mind and will add it to the list (check the description for the todo list)
And yes, spreading the channel is the best way to support at the moment.👍 as it increases the subscribers and reach of the channel
So now a have one automatic generated force created in one direction and in the other perpendicular direction Ok. But to use this forces in my manual combination a must create an accidental quadratic combination of both? And the last one I've created put on my ULS combination. That's correct?
for some reason, it seems I missed your comment.
Thanks for your question. You're correct that Robot generates automatic loads for each horizontal direction in an earthquake analysis. However, for your ULS combination, you need to consider how these forces might interact under extreme conditions.
An accidental quadratic combination (SRSS or Quadratic Sum of the Squares) is appropriate for earthquake forces because it assumes they can occur simultaneously, although not necessarily at their peak values. This provides a conservative estimate of the maximum combined effect on your structure.
@@CivilEngineeringEssentials can explain what we talked here with an example yours a simple situation will help me to be sure that what I do is correct.
Great
most welcome.