> It seems you have got a lot of negative energy from someone recently!
It sure does, doesn't it?
> Anyway, I have been using applied mechanics for many years
> successfully, maybe more than you!
It's possible--I wouldn't bet on it.
> And of course I always will need to learn more, even though
> someones like you may doesn't need for more learning! But using
> new methods are always necessary. I wish You could answer my question!
Your question really had no answer, since you didn't specify what
kinds of suggestions you were after. SAP2000 does what it does--
nothing to suggest. SAP 2000 is like ANSYS or NASTRAN or other
general purpose FEA software--they do analysis, not design. Design is
an engineer's job. Sometimes you'll find program features that seem
to mimic design, but they're usually doing iterative analysis based
on user-specified criteria. Codes like the AISC Code or the Boiler
Code rely almost exclusively on manual calculation and proportions
for details which have given satisfactory service.
That said there's not a whole lot of structural code provisions
specifically addressing general shell theory. I don't use SAP2000,
but from what I read the Code provisions it incorporates are aimed at
framed structures. The design methodology in the ASME Codes is based
on shell theory, and there are areas in those Codes that are written
around the use of FEA output, but the loading and service doesn't
apply for all fields of engineering. It's not too tough to apply
equivalent standards to shell element results for metals, once you
know enough mechanics to understand the basis of Code provisions.
ANSYS, for example, has no AISC Code post processor, but it's fairly
simple to do the arithmetic with a spreadsheet using tabular output
if you're dealing with plate structures or shells. If there are
programs which do anything other than simple Div 1 design (like
Caesar or Codeware) I'm not aware of them. ANSYS will provide
primary, secondary and peak stresses, for Nuclear Code assessment,
but it's really doing an analysis task, not design, and it should
only be used by engineers who really know their stuff, because it's
easy to confuse things.
You didn't mention whether your plant design problem involved metal
or concrete. I daresay the ACI has provisions for shell like cooling
towers or domes. There may even be software which does design tasks
like re-bar placement but I don't do concrete, and I don't keep up
with it. The ASME Nuclear Code also covers concrete containment
vessels, but again, I don't know of software that actually designs
these things. Again--it's the engineer who does the design, using FEA
results.
Christopher Wright P.E. |"They couldn't hit an elephant at
chrisw@skypoint.com | this distance" (last words of Gen.
.......................................| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania
1864)
http://www.skypoint.com/~chrisw/
******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*
http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********