Modification of Limit Stresses
The limit stresses in RF-/STEEL can be user-defined for each thickness range.
To do this, click the [Edit Material] button. In the "Edit material" window, you can then define the limit stresses using the yield strength or by selecting the "Manual definition of limit stresses independent of yield strength" (Figure 1).
Sonja von Bloh, M.Sc.
Product Engineering & Customer Support
Ms. von Bloh provides technical support for our customer and is responsible for the development of the SHAPE‑THIN program.
Do you have questions or need advice?
Contact our free e-mail, chat, or forum support or find various suggested solutions and useful tips on our FAQ page.
In RF-/FOUNDATION Pro, the foundation design requires the definition the corresponding loading (load cases, load combinations, or result combinations) for the different design situations (STR, GEO, UPL or EQU).
SHAPE-THIN determines the effective cross-sections according to EN 1993-1-3 and EN 1993-1-5 for cold-formed sections. You can optionally check the geometric conditions for the applicability of the standard specified in EN 1993‑1‑3, Section 5.2.
The effects of local plate buckling are considered according to the method of reduced widths and the possible buckling of stiffeners (instability) is considered for stiffened sections according to EN 1993-1-3, Section 5.5.
As an option, you can perform an iterative calculation to optimize the effective cross-section.
You can display the effective cross-sections graphically.
Read more about designing cold-formed sections with SHAPE-THIN and RF-/STEEL Cold-Formed Sections in this technical article: Design of a Thin-Walled, Cold-Formed C-Section According to EN 1993-1-3.
- For a buckling analysis, FE‑BUCKLING determines the governing shear stress of τ = 7.45 kN/cm², while RF‑/STEEL gives the result of the maximum shear stress of τ = 8.20 kN/cm². Where does this difference come from?
- How can I display the stresses in the stress points in RF‑STEEL Members?
- What is the difference between the RF‑/STEEL and RF‑/STEEL EC3 add-on modules?
- I compare the flexural buckling design according to the equivalent member method and the internal forces according to the linear static analysis with the stress calculation according to the second-order analysis including imperfections. The differences are very large. What is the reason?
- Why do I obtain much higher design ratios in RF‑/STEEL than for cross-section design in RF‑/STEEL EC3?
- The design ratio of the cross-section check is different for the RF‑/STEEL and RF‑/STEEL EC3 add-on module. What is the reason?
- Why RF‑/STEEL does not display the same maximum internal forces when calculating a result combination, as it is in the results of the result combination itself?
- I used double members when entering members. Do I have to consider anything else or is it better to enter a member with double cross-section properties?
- For RSTAB/RFEM, I use cross-sections whose values are defined by direct input. How do I get the RF-/STEEL module to consider my cross-sections?
- In the design module, a SHAPE-THIN cross-section is classified as an Illegal Cross-Section Type and the design is thus not possible. What is the reason?