Jump to content
  • Welcome to SEFP!

    Welcome!

    Welcome to our community forums, full of great discussions about Structural Engineering. Please register to become a part of our thriving group or login if you are already registered.

Use Of Mass Source Command In Etabs


haro0n
 Share

Recommended Posts

In etabs we define mass source frm there we select from load and then we define differnt loads like dead , live etc my question is that what is use of this "mass souce" we donot apply it in the structue then where we need it?? and which loads are defined here means dead, live and which are not defined??

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its the seismic weight according to code. The load you put here will be used for Seismic calculations. This is W in IBC, UBC or other american codes...

Select "From Loads" option and put all dead loads with factor = 1 and all live loads with factor = 0.25

this is to consider 100%dead loads + 25%live loads for seismic calculations....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Like Rana said, I will just add one more thing. I remember that Live Load only needs to be considered in Mass Source if its a warehouse, or LL=100psf or more. See UBC, for clarification, there is something about the warehouse or 100 psf requirement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 3 years later...

Yes 25% is for warehouse, Usually only 100%D is enough for normal buildings, but you need to consider all the Live Loads and Dead Loads that are permanent. For example if you have permanent mechanical equipment as Live Load then consider then in mass source too. If a portion of live load is assumed to be sustained for example where LL is heavy like in malls, a portion (~25%) of LL should also be considered. In summary, any load that is deemed to be permanent...consider that in seismic weight calculations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 months later...

If i analyze my model with default mass source I.e. element mass and additional mass it will be incorrect?

Because it won't include the live load and other loads like floor finish and wall load in the calculation of earthquake load.

So I must define the mass source as specified load pattern and define load patters as 1 DL+1 floor finish+1 wall load+0.25 live load.

And I must select the options: include lateral mass and

                                                lump lateral mass at story level

Please tell me whether I am right or wrong?

But I have some doubts and questions too.

what does etabs consider as "additional mass"?

does additional mass include the loads we define as live load, wall load, and floor finish?

I know that etabs refer to "element mass" as the mass of the structural elements we used to model the structure like beam, column, slab for which we define the material and section properties.

What does the option include lateral mass do"

what is lateral mass?

Is lateral mass something we define of is it something etabs calculate from our model?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Beenay Shahi said:

If i analyze my model with default mass source I.e. element mass and additional mass it will be incorrect?

Because it won't include the live load and other loads like floor finish and wall load in the calculation of earthquake load.

No, in case the inclusion of live load in Mass Source is not required as per your applicable design code, and other parameters including 'Additional masses' have been correctly applied. Otherwise, yes.

Replies to your other questions and doubts are available at the following link:

http://docs.csiamerica.com/help-files/etabs/Menus/Define/Mass_Source.htm

Regards.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...
  • Moderator

Muneeb, if mass source is not defined properly, seismic forces will not be calculated correctly and so the base shear value will also be incorrect. Selecting different options in mass source menu is quite fine if loads has been taken in consideration as mentioned above 100% dead and 25% live in case of warehouses or permanent live loads. 

Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 year later...

Sorry in advance but what i haven't understood from the above discussion is that how we differentiate between the the options that etabs provide us in Mass source  tab?

If we check the " From self and specified mass" would this be incorrect?

If we check the " From self and specified mass and loads" would it double the effect of Mass?

Is specified mass is the the one what we have applied as area, point and line loads ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On 9/27/2017 at 2:29 PM, NMN said:

Hi,

How about for Canadian code. and what if I have snow load, do I need to consider as well for mass source.

@NMN ASCE 7 says to use 20% of any snow load greater than 30psf as seismic weight. For Canadian Code, you will need to see your local jurisdiction code. If the code doesn't says anything about it, you can use ASCE 7 clause and include the snow load.

On 10/5/2018 at 3:45 AM, Ahsan Kazmi said:

If we check the " From self and specified mass" would this be incorrect?

If we check the " From self and specified mass and loads" would it double the effect of Mass?

Is specified mass is the the one what we have applied as area, point and line loads ?

This all depends how you have defined the loads. Some people differentiate between dead loads by creating a dead load case and a super dead load case. Other don't. So go with the option based on your loads definitions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • Hi there,
      I am interested in performing "Performance Based Design" for a 20 story building. 
      I'll be performing "Non-Linear Static Pushover Analysis" for my model. Until now, I have decided to go with "Displacement Co-efficient method". I will be using ETABS 2017 for performing Pushover Analysis. While assigning plastic hinges, I have an option of using ASCE 41-17 (Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing buildings". I would like to know what would be a better estimate for relative distances for plastic hinges in case of beams, columns. Any input concerning assignment of hinges to beams, columns and shear walls is highly appreciated. Normally it's taken 0.05 and 0.95 or 0.1 and 0.9. What's your opinion on this?
      Secondly, it would be great if someone can recommend me a book or some good source to understand how to characterize building using performance levels. Any sort of help is appreciated.
      I have recently graduated and joined a structural design firm, so kindly guide me, considering me a beginner.

       
      • 2 replies
    • *SEFP Consistent Design*<br style="background-color:#ffffff; color:#272a34; font-size:14px; text-align:start">*Pile Design*<br style="background-color:#ffffff; color:#272a34; font-size:14px; text-align:start">*Doc No: 10-00-CD-0007*<br style="background-color:#ffffff; color:#272a34; font-size:14px; text-align:start">*Date: April 16, 2018*

      1.1. FUNCTION OF JOINT

      Beam-column joint must transfer the forces, such as moment, shear and torsion, transferred by the beam to the column so that the structure can maintain its integrity to carry loads for which it is designed.

      Another function of the beam-column joint is to help the structure to dissipate seismic forces so that it can behave in a ductile manner.

      1.2.WHY DO WE CARE

      During an extreme seismic event, the code-based structure is expected to maintain its load-carrying capacity for gravity loads even after the structure deforms into inelastic range so that it does not pose any life safety hazard. Hence, the joint can go through significant degradation of strength and stiffness, and if it fails in shear, or anchorage, the life-safety objective of code cannot be achieved.

      1.3.CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE


      1.4.THINGS TO CONSIDER FOR BEAM COLUMN JOINT

      Longitudinal bars of beams, or slab, must be able to develop their yield stress, so that the beam/slab can transfer moment to joint. It means that longitudinal bars must have adequate development length for hooked bars. This implies that the size of the column must be such that bars can develop their tensile forces. If bars can transfer moment, they can also transfer shear as far as monolithic construction is concerned.


      The shear strength of the joint must enable the transfer of moment and shear through it.



      The joint should be Constructible: Congestion of reinforcement is the main concern.

      1.5.DESIGN SHEAR FOR BEAM COLUMN JOINT

      The design shear for beam-column joint depends upon the relative strength of beam and column at the joint.

       
      • 4 replies
    • *Comments/Observations regarding modelling in ETABS*

      *Doc No: 10-00-CD-0006*

      *Date: May 06, 2017*

      Some of the observations made during extraction of results from ETABS (v 9.7.4), for design of reinforced concrete members, are being share in this article.,

      1) Minimum Eccentricity

      ETABS always considers the minimum eccentricity for selecting the design moment of columns irrespective of the probable behavior of the column, whether short or long column. See section 10.10.6.5 and its commentary of ACI 318-08 which deals with minimum eccentricity of long columns. You should always check the design moments that ETABS uses for columns if you want to bring down the cost of construction.

      2) Unbraced/ Braced Preference

      ETABS always performs analysis of frame as if it is un-braced. You should investigate if the storey under consideration is braced, or un-braced (10.10.5.2), and decide appropriate design moments of columns.

      3) Time Period

      ETABS has a tendency to select a time period of the building that is considerably less than the value obtained by the approximate method, Method A, of the section 1630.2.2  of UBC 97. To quote the FEMA 451 document: ''Because this formula is based on lower bound regression analysis of measured building response in California, it will generally result in periods that are lower (hence, more conservative for use in predicting base shear) than those computed from a more rigorous mathematical model". So, there is no need to use the value of time period that is lot less than Ta. One should always check the time period used by the software; ETABS can overestimate the seismic force by more than 2 times.

      Visit the forum link to read the complete article.
      Link: http://www.sepakistan.com/topic/2300-commentsobservations-regarding-modelling-in-etabs/
      • 0 replies
    • The minimum amount and spacing of reinforcement to be used in structural floors, roof slabs, and walls for control of temperature and shrinkage cracking is given in ACI 318 or in ACI 350R. The minimum-reinforcement percentage, which is between 0.18 and 0.20%, does not normally control cracks to within generally acceptable design limits. To control cracks to a more acceptable level, the percentage requirement needs to exceed about 0.60% (REFRENCE ACI COMMITE REPORT 224R-01)



       

       



       

       

      So according to above statement , should we follow 0.60%, to be on more safe side??



       
      • 12 replies
    • Dear Sir/Madam,

      This email is an invitation for the participation in the First South Asia Conference on Earthquake Engineering (SACEE-2019) which will be held on 21-22 February 2019 in Karachi, Pakistan. This conference is the inaugural event in this series of conferences which has been constituted under the auspices of South Asia Earthquake Network (SHAKE). The organisers of the conference include NED University, University of Porto, University of Fuzhou, University Roma Tre and Institution of Engineers Pakistan. The conference website can be visited at http://sacee.neduet.edu.pk/.

      Please note that world leading earthquake engineering experts have confirmed their participation in the conference. These include Prof Abdelkrim Aoudia (Italy), Prof Alper Ilki (Turkey), Dr Amod Mani Dixit (Nepal), Prof Bruno Briseghella (Italy), Prof George Mylonakis (UK), Prof Khalid Mosalam (USA), Prof Humberto Varum (Portugal) and many others. The presence of these distinguished experts allows you to exchange your work/issues with them and discuss possibility of any future collaboration. Please note that participation in the conference is strictly based on registration. Early registration in different categories at reduced rates are available till 10 December 2018. Please visit the conference website to see the details and the link for registration.

      If there are any queries, please do not hesitate to contact the Conference Secretary at the following address

      Prof. Muhammad Masood Rafi
      Conference Secretary- SACEE-2019
      Chairman
      Department of Earthquake Engineering
      NED University of Engineering & Technology Karachi, Pakistan.
      Phone: 0092-21-992-261261 Ext:2605
      Email: rafi-m@neduet.edu.pk
    • What is the Minimum reinforcement For Precast Pile  according to different codes (ACI,BS)??  Pile length is 40 times of pile least dimension . 
      • 1 reply
    • Dear members, I am working on a 10 storied rcc factory building with one basement,  where floor loads are in general 125 psf(Live) . but there are 2 warehouse in the building at ground floor & 10th floor where the Live load of stacked materials are 450psf. I have modeled it and analysed in ETABS. After analysis, seeing the floor displacement for seismic load,  i am in big shock to see the pattern. the displacement pattern suddenly increased hugely & then got normal . if the warehouse load created problem, then why it effected only Ground floor level, not the 10th floor! Please tell me how can i solve it. 
      • 1 reply
    • Asalamualaikum all,

      I have columns which are conflicting with the underground water tank as shown in figure.
       

      So I have decided to make underground water tank base slab as a footing for column. So I import etabs model to safe and just take uniform water load on base slab and point load from columns.

      This is the residential house. The BC is 2tsf. But SAFE is showing tension on the base slab and the thickness from punching is 30''. I believe that thickness is too high. What can be the error? Is this approach is correct for design base slab of ugwt to carry load of two edge columns?
      • 11 replies
    • SAFE perform iterative uplift analysis,any one having experience how to check the results of this analysis???what is the purpose and scope of this analysis???
      • 15 replies
    • Shear wall design
      AOA 

      i am facing problems in shear wall design .what are the pier and spandral ?what will be the difference when we assign pier or spandral? without assigning these the shear wall design is incomplete .

      i am taking about etabsv16

      someone have document about shear wall design plz provide it 

      thank you

       
      • 13 replies
  • Tell a friend

    Love Structural Engineering Forum Of Pakistan? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines.