Finite element analysis in Civil Engineering
Description: The practical approach to the choice of calculation schemes of single-storey and multi-storey civil buildings is studied. General characteristics of the finite element method. Types of finite elements. Analysis of structural solutions of buildings and the formation of the calculation scheme of FEM. Modelling of multi-storey buildings in SCAD Office and Forum. Transfer of calculation models from Revit to SCAD.
Amount of credits: 5
Пререквизиты:
- Building Constructions
Course Workload:
| Types of classes | hours |
|---|---|
| Lectures | 15 |
| Practical works | 30 |
| Laboratory works | |
| SAWTG (Student Autonomous Work under Teacher Guidance) | 30 |
| SAW (Student autonomous work) | 75 |
| Form of final control | Exam |
| Final assessment method | In the computer lab. |
Component: Component by selection
Cycle: Base disciplines
Goal
- The purpose of the discipline is to provide students with theoretical and practical knowledge in the field of modern computer-aided design of load-bearing structures of buildings and structures using modern computer programs.
Objective
- master modern methods and technologies of designing load-bearing structures of buildings and constructions using modern computer programs;
- develop skills to make design diagrams of load-bearing structures of buildings and structures to carry out static and strength calculations;
- To form students' abilities to conduct static calculations, as well as calculations for strength, rigidity and stability of load-bearing structures of buildings and structures using modern computer programs.
Learning outcome: knowledge and understanding
- Knowledge of the purpose, scope, structure, capabilities, operating conditions of the software packages most commonly used at the moment;
Learning outcome: applying knowledge and understanding
- Ability to properly compose a computational model of civil buildings using a finite element library;
Learning outcome: formation of judgments
- Selection of rational calculation schemes and types of finite elements to obtain correct calculation results;
Learning outcome: communicative abilities
- Ability to work in a team, with joint project work;
Learning outcome: learning skills or learning abilities
- Mastery of methods of quantitative prediction of the stress-strain state and stability of buildings and structures; methods of designing elements, connections and structures made of concrete and reinforced concrete using modern software systems; skills of using modern normative, reference and technical literature.
Teaching methods
interactive lecture;
information and communication (classes in a computer lab using professional application software packages);
search and research (independent research activities of students in the learning process);
solving academic problems.
Assessment of the student's knowledge
Teacher oversees various tasks related to ongoing assessment and determines students' current performance twice during each academic period. Ratings 1 and 2 are formulated based on the outcomes of this ongoing assessment. The student's learning achievements are assessed using a 100-point scale, and the final grades P1 and P2 are calculated as the average of their ongoing performance evaluations. The teacher evaluates the student's work throughout the academic period in alignment with the assignment submission schedule for the discipline. The assessment system may incorporate a mix of written and oral, group and individual formats.
| Period | Type of task | Total |
|---|---|---|
| 1 rating | Formation of the model in the program Forum. Setting loads. | 0-100 |
| Collection and assignment of loads in the computational scheme. | ||
| Selection and verification of structural reinforcement. | ||
| Test. | ||
| 2 rating | Setting the parameters of the elastic base. | 0-100 |
| Task for SIW | ||
| Oral survey | ||
| Total control | Exam | 0-100 |
The evaluating policy of learning outcomes by work type
| Type of task | 90-100 | 70-89 | 50-69 | 0-49 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Excellent | Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory | |
| Work on practical training sessions | Completed the work in full compliance with the required sequence of actions | Fulfilled the requirements for a grade of "5" but made 2-3 deficiencies. There is 1 mistake or 2-3 mistakes. The student can correct them independently or with a little help. | Performed incompletely less than 50% of the work and made errors in the process of conducting the work. | Completed the work in full compliance with the required sequence of actions |
| Oral survey | Shows fluency in monologic speech and ability to respond quickly to questions | Shows fluency in speech, but at the same time makes minor mistakes, which he corrects independently or with minor correction by the teacher | Shows insufficient fluency in speech, logic and consistency of presentation, makes mistakes that can only be corrected by a teacher | Shows fluency in monologic speech and ability to respond quickly to questions |
| Task for SIW | Completed the work in full in compliance with the necessary sequence of actions | I fulfilled the requirements for the "5" rating, but 2-3 shortcomings were made. 1 mistake or 2-3 flaws were made. The student can fix them on their own or with a little help. | Did not complete the work in full, less than 50% of the work volume, and mistakes were made in the process of carrying out the work. | Completed the work in full in compliance with the necessary sequence of actions |
| Test | 90-100% correct answers | 70-89% correct answers | 50-69% correct answers | 90-100% correct answers |
Evaluation form
The student's final grade in the course is calculated on a 100 point grading scale, it includes:
- 40% of the examination result;
- 60% of current control result.
The final grade is calculated by the formula:
| FG = 0,6 | MT1+MT2 | +0,4E |
| 2 |
Where Midterm 1, Midterm 2are digital equivalents of the grades of Midterm 1 and 2;
E is a digital equivalent of the exam grade.
Final alphabetical grade and its equivalent in points:
The letter grading system for students' academic achievements, corresponding to the numerical equivalent on a four-point scale:
| Alphabetical grade | Numerical value | Points (%) | Traditional grade |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 4.0 | 95-100 | Excellent |
| A- | 3.67 | 90-94 | |
| B+ | 3.33 | 85-89 | Good |
| B | 3.0 | 80-84 | |
| B- | 2.67 | 75-79 | |
| C+ | 2.33 | 70-74 | |
| C | 2.0 | 65-69 | Satisfactory |
| C- | 1.67 | 60-64 | |
| D+ | 1.33 | 55-59 | |
| D | 1.0 | 50-54 | |
| FX | 0.5 | 25-49 | Unsatisfactory |
| F | 0 | 0-24 |
Topics of lectures
- Overview of programs used to calculate the structures of buildings and structures
- Finite Element Library
- Classification of loads and impacts
- Collection of loads on civil buildings according to SNiP/EN
- Modal analysis
- Selection and verification of reinforcement in reinforced concrete elements
- Check the bearing capacity of steel sections
- Modeling of an elastic bed
Key reading
- 1. Karpilovskii V.S., Kriksunov E.Z., Malyarenko A.A., Perel'muter A.V., Perel'muter M.A., Fialko S.Yu. SCAD Office. Versiya 21. Vychislitel'nyi kompleks SCAD ++ - Moskva: Izd-vo Assotsiatsii stroitel'nykh vuzov, 2015. 2. Perel'muter A.V., Gordeev V.N., Lantukh-Lyashchenko A.I., Pashinskii V.A., Pichugin S.F., Makhin'ko A. Nagruzki i vozdeistviya na zdaniya i sooruzheniya - Moskva: DMK press, Izdatel'stvo Assotsiatsii Stroitel'nykh Vuzov, 2014. 3. Perel'muter A.V., Slivker V.I. Raschetnye modeli sooruzhenii i vozmozhnost' ikh analiza - Kiev: Izd-vo "Stal'", 2002.
Further reading
- 1. Kabantsev O.V. Raschet i konstruirovanie mnogoetazhnykh i vysotnykh monolitnykh zhelezobetonnykh zdanii. Spetskurs - Moskva, 2009. 2. Malakhova A.N., Mukhin M.A. Proektirovanie zhelezobetonnykh konstruktsii s ispol'zovaniem programmnogo kompleksa LIRA. - Moskva, 2015.
