It followed that element numbers (like 22836 etc) are generated during analysis only. Trying to locate affected element # 22836 through the procedure advised by Rana, indicated that the relevant output table designates the slab & wall elements by the number types F# for slab elements & W# for wall elements.
Another trial indicated that thr problem is with the meshing of slabs, and not the walls.ĭ. Deletion of these extra objects removed the warning messages.Ĭ. This trial helped in running the analysis completely, with 2 Warning Messages indicating presence of unconnected point & frame objects at the specified locations. Third trial was made using 'default' meshing option ( meshing at grids & in Automesh options, by keeping the 'Further subdivide shell/wall in maximum element size of' option UNCHECKED. Trials were made by automeshing the model at two different maximum mesh sizes of 4 ft & 2 ft (one at a time), but without any positive result.ī. Following steps were taken in order to sort out the error:-Ī. This action meshed the raft slab as well.The meshing of raft slab was haphazard in some regions, because of orientation of slab outer edges in different directions.Ĥ. The problem most probably occurred when the whole model (including the raft slab) was selected through 'Select all' command & automeshed again as stated in para-1 above. Model was running fine at all the steps.ģ. The model was being updated in steps, by refining the geometry along various edges of the slabs according to architectural plans at different floors. The slabs included a raft slab as well, for tranferring the reactions to SAFE.Ģ. Automeshing was adopted in the original ETABS 9 model, with a maximum mesh size of 3 ft for the slabs & walls.
#Etabs 9.7.4 windows 10 update#
Here is the progress & update regarding the problem described in my original post, for the benefit of the interested SEFP users.ġ.
0 kommentar(er)
