ProtaStructure Design Guide

Effective Stiffness Modifiers

Version: 1.0 16.06.2022

Please get in touch with us for your training and technical support queries

[email protected]

[email protected]
 Sayfa - 2

Limitation of Prota shall not be held responsible for any losses caused by
Responsibilities documentation, software, or usage errors.

In addition to Prota License Agreement Terms, it is the responsibility of

the user

• to check results generated by documentation and software,

• make sure that the users of the software and their supervisors
have adequate technical capabilities,
• make sure that the software is used correctly per the reference
manual and documentation,

Intellectual ProtaStructure is a registered trademark of Prota Software Inc., and all

Property intellectual property rights belong to Prota Software Inc. Documentation,
training, and reference manuals. Any program component cannot be
copied, distributed, and used in violation of the license agreement.

Trademarks ProtaStructure®, ProtaDetails®, ProtaSteel® ve ProtaBIM® are registered

trademarks of Prota Software Inc. Prota logo is a trademark of Prota
Software Inc.
 Sayfa - 3

Table Of Contents
Table Of Contents .................................................................................................................................... 3
Model ...................................................................................................................................................... 4
Slab Analysis and Design Methods........................................................................................................... 4
Inclusion of Slabs to Building Model for All Load Combinations .............................................................. 5
Effective Stiffness Modifiers for Earthquake Load Cases and Combinations ........................................... 6
Explicit Use of Effective Stiffness Modifiers ............................................................................................. 7
Slab Stiffness Coefficients for Load Cases using Uncracked Sections ...................................................... 8
Analysis Using “Finite Elements Floor Analysis” Option ......................................................................... 10
Comparison of Results ........................................................................................................................... 11
Analysis Results of SAP2000 and Finite Element Floor Analysis Method ............................................... 14
Analysis Results of SAP2000 and Building Analysis Method .................................................................. 15
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 17
Thank You… ........................................................................................................................................... 19
 Sayfa - 4

Model
A slender floor plan with shearwalls at the far edges is chosen for this case study. A flexible diaphragm
option will be used. Seismic forces will be calculated using the equivalent static load method. The
behavior of the structure with different slab stiffness modifiers will be investigated.

3D model of the structure

Slab Analysis and Design Methods

In ProtaStructure, slabs can be analyzed and designed with three different methods. These methods
are:

• Analytical approach with code-based Moment Coefficients Method

• FE Analysis by including slabs in the global building model for all load combinations
• Analysis using the “Finite Elements Floor Analysis” option independent from the building under
vertical load cases only.

In this study, effective stiffness modifiers will be discussed by using the last two methods
 Sayfa - 5

Inclusion of Slabs to Building Model for All Load Combinations

As shown below, slabs can be included in the building model in the “Analysis > Building Analysis” section.

Including Slabs in Building Model

 Sayfa - 6

Effective Stiffness Modifiers for Earthquake Load Cases and Combinations

ProtaStructure generates effective stiffness modifiers automatically if a seismic code is selected. Also,
users can customize these modifiers manually. This option can be applied as stated below.

Effective Stiffness Modifiers Location

 Sayfa - 7

Effective Stiffness Modifiers in Turkish Seismic Code Generated Automatically

ProtaStructure uses these modifiers only in load cases where the cracked section option is used.

For example, according to the Turkish EQ code, a vertical load combination (1.4G + 1.6Q) must consider
uncracked gross sections, whereas a seismic combination (i.e., G + Q + E) must consider cracked
sections. That means we have to analyze the structure for two sets of G and Q; one cracked and one
uncracked. ProtaStructure creates Gc and Qc load cases for cracked section analysis and uses effective
stiffness modifiers for cracked sections for these load cases. Thus, the final load combination becomes
Gc + Qc + E.

Explicit Use of Effective Stiffness Modifiers

By default, ProtaStructure will consider cracked sections only for earthquake load cases (if required by
the selected seismic code). Uncracked gross section properties are used for non-seismic load cases.

It does not have to be this way. Suppose the “Use Cracked Sections” option or “Use Cracked Sections in
All Vertical Load Combinations As Well” option is selected while generating the load combinations. The
specified load cases will also use cracked section modifiers in that case.

The cracked section option can also be activated for “User Defined Vertical Load” and “User-Defined
Horizontal Load”.
 Sayfa - 8

Activating the “Use Cracked Section” Option

Slab Stiffness Coefficients for Load Cases using Uncracked Sections

ProtaStructure pays special attention to slab modeling when it comes to cracked sections. Unrealistic
slab section modifiers can affect the analysis results considerably.

Users can specify additional slab stiffness modifiers for load cases that do not use cracked sections using
the “Analysis > Building Analysis > Model Options > Slab Model >Slab Stiffness Coefficients” fields. “In-
Plane” and “Bending (Out-of-Plane)” stiffness modifiers can be chosen between 0.3 - 0.8 and 0.25 – 0.7
by engineering judgment, depending on the structure.

Choosing Stiffness Modifiers for Slabs

Important

These coefficients are only valid for load cases using uncracked sections. Load cases that are adjusted
to use cracked sections utilize the modifiers explained in the previous section.

To explain it better, two analysis results are shown below for both G and Gc load cases. In the first one,
slab stiffness coefficients are determined as 0.8 for In-Plane behavior and 0.7 for Bending behavior. In
the second one, coefficients were taken from the code as 0.25 for both In-Plane and Bending behaviors.
 Sayfa - 9

Deformation in Z For Load Case G

Deformation in Z For Load Case Gc

 Sayfa - 10

Analysis Using “Finite Elements Floor Analysis” Option

This method analyses the floors by isolating them from the building analytical model. This analysis
option is only for load combinations that include vertical load cases. In other words, all horizontal load
cases are ignored. This method is analogous to “Short Frame Analysis.”

This method can be reached from Analysis > FE Floor Analysis tab. In this window, effective stiffness
modifiers can be adjusted. The stiffness modifiers here only affect the bending behavior of the slabs.

Stiffness Modifiers for Finite Element Floor Analysis

This analysis option recommends picking a stiffness modifier value between 0.25 – 0.7.

Unlike the building analysis model, in-plane degrees of freedom (DoF) are locked in the Finite Element
Floor Analysis. In other words, in-plane shear, tension, and compression stresses will not be computed.
This analysis method is developed to observe slabs' bending deformation under vertical load cases.

Using the first analysis option (including slabs in the building model) is advised to obtain more complete
analysis results.

The following is sample output from FE Floor Analysis. The stiffness coefficient for the slab is taken as
0.5.
 Sayfa - 11

Deformation in Z For Load Case G

Comparison of Results
To compare results, an analytical model created automatically by ProtaStructure can be exported
directly to SAP2000. Since cracked and uncracked sections are used together in the same model, and
SAP2000 does not support this feature, ProtaStructure always exports cracked section stiffness
coefficients. Because of this issue, all stiffness coefficients should be set to 1 to obtain comparable
values.
 Sayfa - 12

Arranging Stiffness Coefficients For Cracked Sections in Building Analysis

Arranging Slab Stiffness Coefficients For Uncracked Sections in Building Analysis

 Sayfa - 13

Arranging Stiffness Coefficients in Finite Element Floor Analysis

After these configurations, all analyses should be repeated to compare the results. Then, from the
ribbon, BIM > Export to SAP2000 option can be used for both analysis method results within s2k format.

Exporting Models to SAP2000

 Sayfa - 14

Analysis Results of SAP2000 and Finite Element Floor Analysis Method

Analyses results can be examined below.

Deformation in Z Direction for Load Case G

Deformation in Z Direction for Load Case G

 Sayfa - 15

Analysis Results of SAP2000 and Building Analysis Method

Deformation in Z Direction for Load Case G

Deformation in Z Direction for Load Case G

Apart from the deformations in the Z direction, deformations in the Y direction are also checked, and
the results are shown below.
 Sayfa - 16

Deformation in Y Direction for Load Case Ey-

Deformation in Y Direction for Load Case Ey-

 Sayfa - 17

Conclusion
Slabs can be analyzed using several methods with different stiffness coefficients in ProtaStructure.

Different stiffness coefficients can be selected in Building Model Analysis and Finite Element Floor
Analysis with different user interfaces. By default, stiffness modifiers follow the selected seismic and
design code provisions, but users are free to modify them.

Analysis models are exported to SAP2000, and results are compared.

All values are tabulated and presented as follows.

Deformations (mm)
G Gc Ey -
Direction Z Direction Y
Slab Stiffness Mod.

In-Plane = 0.8 Building Analysis

-4.83 -11.542 0.345
Bending = 0.7 Model

FE Floor Analysis - -
Bending = 0.5 -7.681
Model

Analysis Results from ProtaStructure

Deformations (mm)
G Gc Ey -
Direction Z Direction Y
In-Plane = 1.0
PS - Building Analysis Model -3.4186 -3.4186 0.1666
Bending = 1.0
Slab Stiffness Mod.

In-Plane = 1.0 SAP2000 – Building Analysis

-3.4186 -3.4186 0.1643
Bending = 1.0 Model
- -
Bending = 1.0 PS – FE Floor Analysis -3.7853
- -
Bending = 1.0 SAP2000 – FE Floor Analysis -3.7853
Comparison of Results

Based on the results, it is observed that stiffness and deformation have a negative correlation. In fact,
as bending stiffness increases, deformation in the Z direction decreases. It is also valid for in-plane
bending stiffness and deformation in the Y direction.
 Sayfa - 18

Demonstration of in-plane deformation

Demonstration of Bending Deformation

In these studies, it is observed that results from both ProtaStructure and SAP2000 are almost identical.
The level of precision could change depending on the complexity and differences of models. All in all,
the main lines to compare results are stated, and essential points for effective stiffness coefficients are
underlined in this article.
 Sayfa - 19

Thank You…
Thank you for choosing the ProtaStructure Suite product family.

Our top priority is to make your experience excellent with our software technology solutions.

Should you have any technical support requests or questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at
all times through [email protected] and [email protected]

Our dedicated online support center, together with our responsive technical support team, is
available
to help you get the most out of Prota’s technology solutions.

The Prota Team