A collar beam roof with the selected geometry is compared in terms of its internal forces between the calculation using RFEM 6 and the manual calculation. In total, three load systems are analyzed.
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 this example, the shear at the interface between concrete cast at different times and the corresponding reinforcement are determined according to DIN EN 1992-1-1. The obtained results with RFEM 6 will be compared to the hand calculation below.
An inner column in the first floor of a three-story building is designed. The column is monolithic connected with the top and bottom beams. The fire design simplified method A for columns according to EC2-1-2 is than proofed and the results compared to [1].
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.
In the current validation example, we investigate wind pressure value for both general structural designs (Cp,10) and cladding or façade design (Cp,1) of rectangular plan buildings with EN 1991-1-4 [1]. There are three dimensional cases that we will explain more about if in the next part.
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.
In the current validation example, we investigate wind force coefficient (Cf) of cube shapes with EN 1991-1-4 [1]. There are three dimensional cases that we will explain more about if in the next part.
The available standards, such as EN 1991-1-4 [1], ASCE/SEI 7-16, and NBC 2015 presented wind load parameters such as wind pressure coefficient (Cp) for basic shapes. The important point is how to calculate wind load parameters faster and more accurately rather than working on time-consuming as well as sometimes complicated formulas in standards.
The goal of this verification example is to analyze the fluid flow around the glider. The task is to determine the drag coefficient and the lift coefficient with respect to the angle of attack. These coefficients can also be drawn into the graph of the drag polar. The limit angle for laminar fluid flow around the wing profile can also be determined from the velocity field. The available 3D CAD model (STL file) is used in RWIND 2.
The verification example describes wind loads in several wind directions on a model of a group of buildings. The model consists of eight cubes. The velocity fields obtained by the RWIND simulation are compared with the measured values from the experiment. The experimental data are measured using a thermistor anemometer in the wind tunnel.
The verification example describes pressure loads on the walls of buildings in tandem arrangement located at ground level. The buildings are simplified to rectangular objects and scaled down while maintaining the elevation ratios. The pressure distribution on the walls of the model of a medium-high building was conducted by an experiment. The chosen results (pressure coefficient Cp) are compared with the measured values.
The verification example describes the steady-state flow around a high-rise building in city blocks (scaled model). The example is given by the Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ). The chosen results (velocity magnitude) are compared with the measured values.
The verification example describes the steady-state flow around an isolated building (scaled model).The example is given by the Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ). The chosen results (velocity magnitude) are compared with the measured values.
This verification example compares wind load calculations on a duopitch 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.
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.
A sphere is subjected to a uniform flow of viscous fluid. The velocity of the fluid is considered at infinity. The goal is to determine the drag force. The parameters of the problem are set so that the Reynolds number is small and the radius of the sphere is also small, thus the theoretical solution can be reached - Stokes flow (G. G. Stokes 1851).
The verification example compares wind load calculation on a building with a duopitch roof using the standard EN 1991-1-4 and using CFD simulation in RWIND Simulation. The building is defined according to the sketch, and the inflow velocity profile is taken according to the standard EN 1991-1-4.
The verification example compares wind load calculation on a building with a flat roof using the standard EN 1991-1-4 and using CFD simulation in RWIND Simulation. The building is defined according to the sketch, and the inflow velocity profile is taken according to the standard EN 1991-1-4.
A single-mass system with clearance and two springs is initially deflected. Determine the natural oscillations of the system - deflection, velocity, and acceleration time course.
This verification example is based on Verification Example 0122. A single-mass system without damping is subjected to an axial loading force. An ideal elastic-plastic material with characteristics is assumed. Determine the time course of the end-point deflection, velocity, and acceleration.
A symmetrical shallow structure is made of eight equal truss members, which are embedded into hinge supports. The structure is loaded by a concentrated force and alternatively by imposed nodal deformation over the critical limit point when the snap-through occurs. Imposed nodal deformation is used in RFEM 5 and RSTAB 8 to obtain the full equilibrium path of the snap-through. The self-weight is neglected in this example. Determine the relationship between the actual loading force and the deflection, considering large deformation analysis. Evaluate the load factor at the given deflections.
A structure is made of four truss members, which are embedded into hinge supports. The structure is loaded by a concentrated force and alternatively by imposed nodal deformation over the critical limit point, when snap-through occurs. Imposed nodal deformation is used in RFEM 5 and RSTAB 8 to obtain the full equilibrium path of the snap-through. The self-weight is neglected in this example. Determine the relationship between the actual loading force and the deflection, considering large deformation analysis. Evaluate the load factor at given deflections.
A single-mass system with dashpot is subjected to constant loading force. Determine the deflection and velocity of the dashpot endpoint in the given test time.