Kel

Thanks for your reply. I've gone through the steps, again unsuccessfully. However,I've stumbled on a thread in another forum where CSI technical support team advises to merge the panels before export to SAFE (screenshots of thread attached). I have tried and it has worked for me.I am curious to know whether you/everyone else does the merging too.It is tedious.

I have exported a floor from etabs to SAFE following the correct steps(Analysis+floor only option). However,when I try to analyse the model in SAFE, analysis runs and says complete but there are no results.The lock/unlock model setting remains unlocked even after analysis thus no resultant analytical data to work with.what could be the problem?when I happen to export reactions it just works perfectly. I have attached the F2K and FDB files for considerations FFFourth.F2K FFFourth floor.FDB

You are right.The slab modelled is ribbed. When I have the panels distribute loads to primary beams directly(taking global-y as shortest span) and have the secondary beam only carry line load the deflection on the slab becomes lesser than having them distribute to secondary beams(taking global-y as shortest span). The spans under consideration are 7.5mx6.0m Got me wondering whether the presence of a secondary beam influences the direction of the shortest span or not. Also,I think because of stiffness on slabs the impact of secondary beams on slab deflection is more prominent in larger spans

Yes, With the secondary beam the deflection is 26mm.Without,it's 22mm. With a secondary beam,the direction parallel to the primary beam becomes the shortest span. Without,the shortest span changes and the panels take loads directly to the primary beams.

Badar, Is the increased deflection a practical representation because ideally the secondary beams should be shortening a long span and reducing the deflections?

Dear Engineers, I have modelled separately two different floors on ETABS and in between is a secondary beam connected to primary beams at the ends. When I pin the secondary beams and do analysis and design,the floors seem to ignore the secondary beams by acting as a single span resulting into longer span with increased deflection and higher reinforcements required.I have attached a file showing this. When I make the joints of the secondary beams fixed,the floors now act as expected;as two separate spans thus giving correct deflection and reinforcement results. I want to keep the pinned secondary beams but again I want the floors to behave normally(maintain separate spans).How do I fix this issue? Kind Regards, Kel

Dear esteemed engineers, I have modelled and analysed a ribbed slab in ETABS but I have trouble finding out the reinforcement per rib.Etabs has provided a general area of reinforcement of 939mm2/m as per the attached file.How do I find the area of reinforcement for each rib from this general value? The floor span c/c is 7500x5400mm The ribs are spaced at 530mm c/c along the Shortest span The support is 250mm wide along the longest span and 200mm along the Shortest. Thanks in advance. Kelvin

Hallo engineers, I need your help. I have modelled a project in ETABS, applied loads on she'll floors(gravity loads),meshed and analysed and the shell results are behaving well. However,the floors don't seem to transfer loads to the beams and further to columns after concrete frame design and I don't know why.When you right click on the beams or columns after design and go to member design details,design loads and design moments still read zero yet the shell floors supported have loads. The frame support and joints are all fixed. I've attached the file ClubStrutDesignFILE 2.EDB