Jämförelse mellan 2D- och 3D-programvaror för analys och dimensionering av byggnadsstommar
(2011)Programmes in Helesingborg
- Abstract
- In the design of load-bearing building structures computer programs for analysis and design are frequently used. The programs are both 2D and 3D, where the latter is relatively new in the construction sector. For a 3D application, more phenomena can be taken into account, but on the other hand, the work required to build a model is more comprehensive.
The purpose of this work is to investigate when it is appropriate to choose a 3D-program and when a 2D-program is sufficient.
Interesting questions in this context is the time needed and the results:
? How much easier is it to build a model in a 2D-program?
? Does the more correct description of the building in a 3D model lead to a safer / cheaper construction?
? Are there other qualities... (More) - In the design of load-bearing building structures computer programs for analysis and design are frequently used. The programs are both 2D and 3D, where the latter is relatively new in the construction sector. For a 3D application, more phenomena can be taken into account, but on the other hand, the work required to build a model is more comprehensive.
The purpose of this work is to investigate when it is appropriate to choose a 3D-program and when a 2D-program is sufficient.
Interesting questions in this context is the time needed and the results:
? How much easier is it to build a model in a 2D-program?
? Does the more correct description of the building in a 3D model lead to a safer / cheaper construction?
? Are there other qualities such as the possibility to link the calculations to BIM?
To investigate the above questions two computer programs were selected and used for the design of a reference object. The programs used were Frame analysis, which is a 2D-program, and 3D Structure, which is a 3D-program. Both programs are from StruSoft, who also provided the programs. The reference object was provided by COWI in Kristianstad.
What most determines the type of software that is appropriate to use is the type of building to be designed. The more complex the building is, all the more reason there is to use a 3D-program. What Frame Analysis wins in time, is lost in the risk of not choosing the right section when the building is complex. 3D Structure has the advantage of modelling the whole building and hence all elements are analysed, even those that were not originally assumed to be critical. Furthermore, 3D Structure has great potential to be linked to BIM. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/2165190
- author
- Nilsson, Markus and Mårtensson, Robin
- organization
- year
- 2011
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- 2d-programvara, 3d-programvara, 3d structure, frame analysis, dimensionering, byggnadsstomme, stålkonstruktion
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 2165190
- date added to LUP
- 2011-09-22 00:00:00
- date last changed
- 2018-10-18 10:18:12
@misc{2165190,
abstract = {{In the design of load-bearing building structures computer programs for analysis and design are frequently used. The programs are both 2D and 3D, where the latter is relatively new in the construction sector. For a 3D application, more phenomena can be taken into account, but on the other hand, the work required to build a model is more comprehensive.
The purpose of this work is to investigate when it is appropriate to choose a 3D-program and when a 2D-program is sufficient.
Interesting questions in this context is the time needed and the results:
? How much easier is it to build a model in a 2D-program?
? Does the more correct description of the building in a 3D model lead to a safer / cheaper construction?
? Are there other qualities such as the possibility to link the calculations to BIM?
To investigate the above questions two computer programs were selected and used for the design of a reference object. The programs used were Frame analysis, which is a 2D-program, and 3D Structure, which is a 3D-program. Both programs are from StruSoft, who also provided the programs. The reference object was provided by COWI in Kristianstad.
What most determines the type of software that is appropriate to use is the type of building to be designed. The more complex the building is, all the more reason there is to use a 3D-program. What Frame Analysis wins in time, is lost in the risk of not choosing the right section when the building is complex. 3D Structure has the advantage of modelling the whole building and hence all elements are analysed, even those that were not originally assumed to be critical. Furthermore, 3D Structure has great potential to be linked to BIM.}},
author = {{Nilsson, Markus and Mårtensson, Robin}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Jämförelse mellan 2D- och 3D-programvaror för analys och dimensionering av byggnadsstommar}},
year = {{2011}},
}