What is the most effective way to replicate the same structural components to create a building?

Hi guys,

I am currently preparing a model of a 40 storey modular building for collapse analysis. The building is formed by the stacking of modular units, which are similar in structural layout to a shipping container, but with the addition of a concrete floor.

I have created some low level modules but find that the linear patterns available are not effective, and some errors are creeping in. For instance in the picture below i first modelled 2 module and analysed them sucessfully, but when i mirrored them some components were missed and the analysis would not solve.


After this i used the Linear patter command in spaceclaim to create a larger building as shown below. However when i did this it copied the structural steels forming the module but not the surface representing the concrete.


Can the structural components for the first module, including the beams, columns and surface be locked together to create a body, which can then be replicated to create the full structure?

Tagged:

Best Answers

  • rkumbharrkumbhar PuneForum Coordinator
    Accepted Answer

    Hi @MickMack It appears to be selection problem before doing pattern. It may be able to select only surfaces or beams. You can manually select beams, surfaces from the tree and then use 'linear pattern' tool.

  • rkumbharrkumbhar PuneForum Coordinator
    Accepted Answer

    Hi @MickMack First try uncheck the box 'preserve instances' for the share options. Also I would not recommend to increase but you can try increasing the 'Coincidence tolerance' in the options tool on left side.

Answers

  • rkumbharrkumbhar PuneForum Coordinator
    Accepted Answer

    Hi @MickMack It appears to be selection problem before doing pattern. It may be able to select only surfaces or beams. You can manually select beams, surfaces from the tree and then use 'linear pattern' tool.

  • Hi @rkumbhar ,

    Thank you for the response do you think this is the best way to replicate the module? Is there any other options?


    When i tried to share the new geometry it does not share the surfaces, shown in first screenshot, 16edges and 32 vertices selected. Then i selected the surfaces and beams as individual elements from the tree but it does not allow me to accept them as shown in the 2nd screenshot below.



    Is this related to the linear pattern?


    The surfaces have been formed using the blend command, and they are supposed to represent 100mm concrete floor. I don't think this is the issue as it shared to mechanical okay and analysed when there were only two modules.


    Thanks

    Michael

  • rkumbharrkumbhar PuneForum Coordinator

    Hi @MickMack It is not generating 'Share topology' because there is gap between surfaces. The edges are highlighted in first image since it will do 'share topo' for beams and surface edges which are coincident. Do the linear pattern with proper offset such as there wont be any gap.

  • Hi @rkumbhar ,

    Are you referring to the gap between the modules shown below with the red arrows?


    As this is a modular structure each module is independent and these gaps are necessary, therefore there will be 4 independent modules each with a floor connected to form the structure.


    I include below a screenshot of the single storey structure which i created first and which i was able to analyse in mechanical. You can see the gap below but the floor was sucessfully shared, in this instance.


    Micheal

  • rkumbharrkumbhar PuneForum Coordinator
    Accepted Answer

    Hi @MickMack First try uncheck the box 'preserve instances' for the share options. Also I would not recommend to increase but you can try increasing the 'Coincidence tolerance' in the options tool on left side.

  • Thanks @rkumbhar , can you advise how to uncheck the box 'preserve instance' for the share options.

  • Thank you @rkumbhar

    Your assistance has helped me resolve this problem, and i have a nice clean geometry to import into mechanical. This has eliminated a host of problems that i was having in mechanical such as elements loosing properties, issues with nodes in surfaces etc etc.


    I have had to reduce the coincidence tolerance to 0.08m, but i consider that this is necessary as the gap between adjacent surfaces is 0.1m. A screen shot of this solution is provided below to close out this thread.


    Many Thanks.


    PS. The slab is formed with a rectangle in sketch and its edges are used for the beams.

Sign In or Register to comment.