This example compares the effective lengths and critical load factor, which can be calculated in RFEM 6 using the Structure Stability add-on, with a manual calculation. The structural system is a rigid frame with two additional hinged columns. This column is loaded by vertical concentrated loads.
In the current validation example, we investigate wind pressure coefficient (Cp) for both main structural members (Cp,ave) and secondary structural members such as cladding or façade systems (Cp,local) based on NBC 2020 [1] and Japanese Wind Tunnel Data Base for low-rise building with 45 degree slope. The recommended setting for three-dimensional flat roof with sharp eaves will be described in the next part.
In the current validation example, we investigate wind pressure value for both general structural design (Cp,10) and local structural design such as cladding or façade systems (Cp,1) based on EN 1991-1-4 flat roof example [1] and Japanese Wind Tunnel Data Base . The recommended setting for three-dimensional flat roof with sharp eaves will be described in the next part.
In the current validation example, we investigate wind pressure coefficient (Cp) of flat roof and walls with ASCE7-22 [1]. In the section 28.3 (Wind loads - main wind force resisting system) and Figure 28.3-1 (load case 1), there is a table which shows Cp value for different roof angle.
The Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ) has presented a number of well-known benchmark scenarios of wind simulation.
The following article deals with "Case E - Building Complex in Actual Urban Area with Dense Concentration of Low-Rise Buildings in Niigata City".
In the following, the described scenario is simulated in RWIND& 2 and the results are compared with the simulated and experimental results by AIJ.
Das Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ) hat eine Reihe an bekannten Benchmark-Szenarien für Windsimulation vorgestellt.
Der Nachfolgende Beitrag dreht sich dabei um den "Case A - high-rise building with a 2:1:1 shape".
Im Folgenden wird das beschriebene Szenario in RWIND2 nachgebildet und die Ergebnisse mit den simulierten und der experimentellen Resultate des AIJ verglichen.
The Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ) has presented a number of well-known benchmark scenarios of wind simulation.
The following article deals with "Case D - High-Rise Building Among City Blocks".
In the following, the described scenario is simulated in RWIND 2 and the results are compared with the simulated and experimental results by the AIJ.
Consider an ASTM A992 W 18x50 beam forspan and uniform dead and live loads as shown in Figure 1. The member is limited to a maximum nominal depth of 18 inches. The live load deflection is limited to L/360. The beam is simply supported and continuously braced. Verify the available flexural strength of the selected beam, based on LRFD and ASD.
Using AISC Manual tables, determine the available compressive and flexural strengths and whether the ASTM A992 W14x99 beam has sufficient available strength to support the axial forces and moments shown in Figure 1, obtained from a second-order analysis that includes P-𝛿 effects.
This verification example compares wind load calculations on a flat roof building using the ASCE 7-16 standard and using CFD simulation in RWIND Simulation. The building is defined according to the sketch and the inflow velocity profile taken from the ASCE 7-16 standard.
Consider an ASTM A992 W 18×50 beam forspan and uniform dead and live loads as shown in Figure 1. The member is limited to a maximum nominal depth of 18 inches. The live load deflection is limited to L/360. The beam is simply supported and continuously braced. Verify the available flexural strength of the selected beam, based on LRFD and ASD.