Dave
Thanks for looking into my query.

The system is being analysed to B31.3. Yes, the restraint loads are different in W+P1 cases. Please see below an extract from the restraint summary.

When a P1 (SUS) alone is run, at the node cited below, the restraint loads are zero in both programs.

I had PD/4t set as “False” in both programs.

I am attaching zip files of both calc’s. That will provide you with the details required.

Felix

ps: AdditionalIy, we checked by opening the CII 2013 model using CII 2016 (reverse of my initial exercise), in that instance the results matched.

CII 2016 (V8)
LOAD CASE DEFINITION KEY

CASE 1 (OPE) W+D1+T1+P1
CASE 2 (OPE) W+D1+T2+P1
CASE 3 (OPE) W+D1+T3+P1
CASE 4 (SUS) W+P1
CASE 5 (SUS) WNC
CASE 6 (SUS) W

Node Load Case FX N. FY N. FZ N. MX N.m. MY N.m. MZ N.m.
70 Rigid +Y
1(OPE) -215 -2535 118 0 0 0
2(OPE) -220 -2556 113 0 0 0
3(OPE) 27 -2068 205 0 0 0
4(SUS) 0 -2641 0 0 0 0
5(SUS) 4 -1853 185 0 0 0
6(SUS) -22 -2056 204 0 0 0

CII 2013 (V6)
LOAD CASE DEFINITION KEY

CASE 1 (OPE) W+D1+T1+P1
CASE 2 (OPE) W+D1+T2+P1
CASE 3 (OPE) W+D1+T3+P1
CASE 4 (SUS) W+P1
CASE 5 (SUS) WNC
CASE 6 (SUS) W


Node Load Case FX N. FY N. FZ N. MX N.m. MY N.m. MZ N.m.
70 Rigid +Y
1(OPE) -232 -2590 106 0 0 0
2(OPE) -237 -2613 101 0 0 0
3(OPE) 29 -2068 205 0 0 0
4(SUS) -21 -2051 204 0 0 0
5(SUS) 4 -1853 185 0 0 0
6(SUS) -22 -2056 204 0 0 0