I'm very interested in hearing how others handle this as well. From my experience, it depends on what you are trying to achieve. If you are modeling complex steel framing, then perhaps using objects would be better, since there are a number of additional parameters in the beam object that the beam tool doesn't have. However, if the steel framing you are trying to model isn't very complex AND/OR you are planning on collaborating with a structural engineer using SAF model exchange, then perhaps the beam tool (and column tool) is the way to go.
Steel tower framing using objects:
Steel tower framing using column tool & beam tool for SAF model exchange.
I am in the camp of "Model it as it is built".
If you do this, you should spot any problems with clashes and protrusions.
It still takes a keen eye to look around the model and spot any problems.
Having said that, it is easier to say than it is to do, and it can be a lot of work.
And I must admit I don't model a lot of steel connections.
You can create some connections with segmented columns and beams.
You can even simulate the bolts.
But it may not be super accurate and not easy to do or manipulate if need be.
The above are examples that I have played with, but it is not something I actually use.
Beam and column objects may be better, but it depends on how they are scripted and what they include.
The best objects are those that you create yourself, but that requires GDL knowledge.
Or you take it back to basics and model simple beams and columns (can be profiled).
Add your own connection plates - beams walls, slabs, morphs or objects.
Add your own bolts if you don't have a connection object that includes them.
Then work smart, saving assemblies as modules or objects so you can use them over and over.
Barry.
Still looking?
