FAQ 002613 EN
Did you find your question?
If not, contact us via our free e-mail, chat, or forum support, or send us your question via the online form.
Very small torsional moments in the members to be designed often prevent certain design formats.
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.
- When calculating a cable using the STEEL EC3 add‑on module, there is the error message "Incorrect characteristic stresses for material No. 1! Please correct this in Table 1.2."
- Are effective length factors determined automatically from a model in the add-on modules for the aluminum and steel design or do I have to make adjustments?
- I get the message "Existing torsion -> no stability design possible." Why does this appear and what can I do?
- I design an asymmetric cross-section and get the message: "Non-designable: ER051) Moment about z‑axis on asymmetric cross-section, taper or set of members." Why?
- How can I perform the stability analysis in RF‑/STEEL EC3 for a flat bar supported on edges, such as 100/5? Although the cross-section is rotated by 90° in RFEM/RSTAB, it is displayed as lying flat in RF‑/STEEL EC3.
- Why is there no stability analysis displayed in the results despite the activation of the stability analysis in RF‑/STEEL EC3?
- How are hot-dip galvanized components considered for fire resistance in the RF‑/STEEL EC3 add-on module?
- In RF‑/STEEL EC3, is the "Elastic design (also for Class 1 and Class 2 cross-sections)" option under "Details → Ultimate Limit State" considered for a stability analysis when activated?
- In the RF‑/STEEL EC3 add-on module, I obtain an extremely high design ratio for a member in the case of "Biaxial bending, shear and axial force." Although the axial force is relatively high, the design ratio seems to be unrealistic. What is the reason?
- I have just noticed that the STEEL EC3 add-on module also calculates with γM0 = 1.0 when designing a tension member, although it should actually be γM2 = 1.25. How can I perform the design correctly?