What is the purpose of the function "Design of longitudinal reinforcement for percentage of utilization" in the setting for nonlinear calculation in RF‑CONCRETE Members? I have selected this option, but the system is unstable anyway. Why?
I would like to calculate a hall frame with loads from a crane runway. It is not quite clear to me what the various action categories denote. Can you explain it to me?
In the RF‑CONCRETE Surfaces add-on module, I get a design failure for the serviceability limit state (SLS) and no values are displayed for the steel stresses. Also, Message 239) is displayed. Why?
I designed a wall with RF‑CONCRETE Surfaces. On the outside and inside, the program shows me the same reinforcement amount [cm²/m]. Do I have to enter As,top + As,bottom now? Or only one value (top or bottom)?
After entering the support widths in the RF‑CONCRETE Members add-on module and starting the calculation, the following error message appears: "The support width is too wide!" What should I do?
How can I perform the fatigue design of reinforced concrete and prestressed concrete in RFEM 5? I have found a result combination for fatigue, but cannot find the design in the add-on modules.
I would like to save foundations with certain dimensions as a template in the database. Is this possible? The button for this is disabled in Window "1.2 Geometry".
Why is the "By taking into account the deformation ratio of the longitudinal reinforcement" method inactive in the detail settings for the SLS design in RF‑CONCRETE Surfaces?
How can I retrace the detailed results or the intermediate results of the serviceability limit state design checks in RF‑CONCRETE Surfaces? For the required reinforcement, the SLS info button is inactive.
Is the RF‑CONCRETE Surfaces add-on module able to determine and calculate a required reinforcement with the corresponding diameter for the design without the direct crack width analysis according to EN 1992‑1‑1, 7.3.3?
Why is it possible to switch off the individual design checks in RF‑/FOUNDATION Pro? After all, this poses a risk for the user to "accidentally" disable certain design checks and possibly design a foundation that is undersized?