SAL9000

Hi all. I am trying to design a concrete vertical water tank and specifically wanted to include the effects of water sloshing in my analysis. I am yet to start and I wanted to ask if there is anyone who has had an experience using SAP2000 for this kind of application. I wanted to know how to incorporate the dynamic effect of sloshing in the SAP2000 model. If this is not possible, I would like to ask what software I can use to do this. I have seen that general FEA software such as Abaqus and ANSYS can do the analysis for the sloshing effects, however I am not sure if these software or if there are available plugins for these software that can carry out the design of the tank. Thank you in advance for your response.

Greetings everyone. I would like to know your opinion on a project that I am working on. It was designed on 2014/15 and construction was completed on 2017. The structure is a concrete mid-rise structure, designed using the 2010 edition of our code (equivalent to ASCE 7-10, ACI 318-08, seismic provisions from UBC 1997). Now, the client wanted to assess if the structure is up to the standards of the latest code applicable (2015 edition - equivalent to ASCE 7-10, ACI 318-11, seismic provisions from UBC 1997). Should this structure be investigated using ASCE 41-17 since it is already an existing structure, or does analyzing it using the latest set of codes be sufficient considering that it is a relatively "young" building? I am not quite sure what to use since the differences between the 2010 and 2015 editions of our local code are quite few. I would also like to add that we have no codes or standards enforced in the assessment of existing structures. Some engineers in our country already practice using ASCE 41, while some are analyzing existing structures against the latest set of codes. I am hoping to hear your feedback on this. Thank you all.

Greetings! I am quite confused as to whether elements below grade (i.e. ground beams, columns extending to footings, tie beams, etc.) should be modelled in ETABS/STAAD. I have seen quite a few people consider these elements in their models (making the base of the model coincide with the top of the footing), while others prefer to do the opposite (base coincides with the ground floor level). So, my questions are: 1. Should these underground elements be modelled, analyzed, and designed separately? 2. What should the modelling approach be when it comes to buildings with basements? And to high-rise structures? 3. What are the pros and cons of modelling or not modelling these elements? Your insights into this topic are very much appreciated.

Greetings! I am quite confused as to whether elements below grade (i.e. ground beams, columns extending to footings, tie beams, etc.) should be modelled in ETABS/STAAD. I have seen quite a few people consider these elements in their models (making the base of the model coincide with the top of the footing), while others prefer to do the opposite (base coincides with the ground floor level). So, my questions are: 1. Should these underground elements be modelled, analyzed, and designed separately? 2. What should the modelling approach be when it comes to buildings with basements? And to high-rise structures? 3. What are the pros and cons of modelling or not modelling these elements? Your insights into this topic are very much appreciated.

Thank you all for your answers. I'll be sure to keep them in mind. Cheers!

Greetings everyone! I am fairly new to the industry and have little knowledge about the usual practice in designing structures. I am confused about how staircases should considered in structural engineering softwares. Should they be modelled as inclined shells, as a flat horizontal membrane, or by just simply leaving it as an opening (apply loads on adjacent beams)? Is it a case to case basis, and if so, when should we model staircases for each type and why? I am looking forward to your recommendations, thank you.