28 Results
View Results:
Sort by:
The three types of moment frames (Ordinary, Intermediate, Special) are available in the Steel Design add-on of RFEM 6. The seismic design result according to AISC 341-22 is categorized into two sections: member requirements and connection requirements.
To evaluate whether it is also necessary to consider the second-order analysis in a dynamic calculation, the sensitivity coefficient of interstory drift θ is provided in EN 1998‑1, Sections 2.2.2 and 4.4.2.2. It can be calculated and analyzed using RFEM 6 and RSTAB 9.
The Steel Design add-on in RFEM 6 now offers the ability to perform seismic design according to AISC 341-16 and AISC 341-22. Five types of seismic force-resisting systems (SFRS) are currently available.
The three types of moment frames (Ordinary, Intermediate, Special) are available in the Steel Design add-on of RFEM 6. The seismic design result according to AISC 341-16 is categorized into two sections: member requirements and connection requirements.
Moment frame design according to AISC 341-16 is now possible in the Steel Design add-on of RFEM 6. The seismic design result is categorized into two sections: member requirements and connection requirements. This article covers the required strength of the connection. An example comparison of the results between RFEM and the AISC Seismic Design Manual [2] is presented.
The design of an Ordinary Concentrically Braced Frame (OCBF) and a Special Concentrically Braced Frame (SCBF) can be carried out in the Steel Design add-on of RFEM 6. The seismic design result according to AISC 341-16 and 341-22 is categorized into two sections: Member Requirements and Connection Requirements.
Creating a validation example for Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is a critical step in ensuring the accuracy and reliability of simulation results. This process involves comparing the outcomes of CFD simulations with experimental or analytical data from real-world scenarios. The objective is to establish that the CFD model can faithfully replicate the physical phenomena it is intended to simulate. This guide outlines the essential steps in developing a validation example for CFD simulation, from selecting a suitable physical scenario to analyzing and comparing the results. By meticulously following these steps, engineers and researchers can enhance the credibility of their CFD models, paving the way for their effective application in diverse fields such as aerodynamics, aerospace, and environmental studies.
Wind direction plays a crucial role in shaping the outcomes of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations and the structural design of buildings and infrastructures. It is a determining factor in assessing how wind forces interact with structures, influencing the distribution of wind pressures, and consequently, the structural responses. Understanding the impact of wind direction is essential for developing designs that can withstand varying wind forces, ensuring the safety and durability of structures. Simplified, the wind direction helps in fine-tuning CFD simulations and guiding structural design principles for optimal performance and resilience against wind-induced effects.
Both the determination of natural vibrations and the response spectrum analysis are always performed on a linear system. If nonlinearities exist in the system, they are linearized and thus not taken into account. They are caused by, for example, tension members, nonlinear supports, or nonlinear hinges. This article shows how you can handle them in a dynamic analysis.
Compliance with building codes, such as Eurocode, is essential to ensure the safety, structural integrity, and sustainability of buildings and structures. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) plays a vital role in this process by simulating fluid behavior, optimizing designs, and helping architects and engineers meet Eurocode requirements related to wind load analysis, natural ventilation, fire safety, and energy efficiency. By integrating CFD into the design process, professionals can create safer, more efficient, and compliant buildings that meet the highest standards of construction and design in Europe.
The CSA S16:19 Stability Effects in Elastic Analysis method in Annex O.2 is an alternative option to the Simplified Stability Analysis Method in Clause 8.4.3. This article will describe the requirements of Annex O.2 and application in RFEM 6.
The size of the computational domain (wind tunnel size) is an important aspect of wind simulation that has a significant impact on the accuracy as well as the cost of CFD simulations.
This article discusses the options available for determining the nominal flexural strength, Mnlb for the limit state of local buckling when designing according to the 2020 Aluminum Design Manual.
Modal analysis is the starting point for the dynamic analysis of structural systems. You can use it to determine natural vibration values such as natural frequencies, mode shapes, modal masses, and effective modal mass factors. This outcome can be used for vibration design, and it can be used for further dynamic analyses (for example, loading by a response spectrum).
The stability checks for the equivalent member design according to EN 1993-1-1, AISC 360, CSA S16, and other international standards require consideration of the design length (that is, the effective length of the members). In RFEM 6, it is possible to determine the effective length manually by assigning nodal supports and effective length factors or, on the other hand, by importing it from the stability analysis. Both options will be demonstrated in this article by determining the effective length of the framed column in Image 1.
Structure stability is not a new phenomenon when referring to steel design. The Canadian steel design standard CSA S16 and the most recent 2019 release are no exception. Detailed stability requirements can be addressed with either the Simplified Stability Analysis Method in Clause 8.4.3 or, new to the 2019 standard, the Stability Effects in Elastic Analysis method provided in Annex O.
- 000945
- Add-on Modules
- RF-FRAME-JOINT Pro 5
-
- JOINTS Steel | Column Base 8
- JOINTS Steel | DSTV 8
- JOINTS Steel | Pinned 8
- JOINTS Steel | Rigid 8
- JOINTS Steel | SIKLA 8
- JOINTS Steel | Tower 8
- JOINTS Timber | Steel to Timber 8
- JOINTS Timber | Timber to Timber 8
- RF-JOINTS Steel | SIKLA 5
- RF-JOINTS Steel | Column Base 5
- RF-JOINTS Steel | DSTV 5
- RF-JOINTS Steel | Pinned 5
- RF-JOINTS Steel | Rigid 5
- RF-JOINTS Steel | Tower 5
- RF-JOINTS Timber | Steel to Timber 5
- RF-JOINTS Timber | Timber to Timber 5
- FRAME-JOINT Pro 8
- Steel Structures
- Timber Structures
- Steel Connections
- Eurocode 3
- Eurocode 5
In addition to the result tables, you can create three-dimensional graphics in RF‑/FRAME‑JOINT Pro and RF‑/JOINTS. This is a realistic representation of a connection to scale.
When optimizing cross-sections in the add-on modules, you can also select arbitrarily defined cross-section favorites lists - in addition to the cross-sections from the same cross-section series as the original cross-section.
RF-/DYNAM Pro - Equivalent Loads allows you to determine the loads due to equivalent seismic loads according to the multi‑modal response spectrum method. In the example shown here, this was done for a multi‑mass oscillator.
In this article, representations of a blast scenario of a remote detonation performed in RF-DYNAM Pro - Forced Vibrations are shown, and the effects are compared in the linear time history analysis.
Both the determination of natural vibrations and the response spectrum analysis are always performed on a linear system. If nonlinearities exist in the system, they are linearized and thus not taken into account. Straight tension members are very often used in practice. This article will show how you can display them approximately correctly in a dynamic analysis.
In order to consider inaccuracies regarding the position of masses in a response spectrum analysis, standards for seismic design specify rules that have to be applied in both the simplified and multi-modal response spectrum analyses. These rules describe the following general procedure: The story mass must be shifted by a certain eccentricity, which results in a torsional moment.
When introducing and transferring horizontal loads such as wind or seismic loads, increasing difficulties arise in 3D models. To avoid such issues, some standards (for example, ASCE 7, NBC) require the simplification of the model using diaphragms that distribute the horizontal loads to structural components transferring loads, but cannot transfer bending themselves (called "Diaphragm").
DIN EN 1998-1 with the National Annex DIN EN 1998-1/NA specifies how to determine seismic loads. The standard applies to structural engineering in seismic areas.
For crane runways with large spans, the horizontal load from skewing is often relevant for the design. This article describes the origin of these forces and the correct input in CRANEWAY. The practical implementation and the theoretical background are discussed.
- 001555
- Modeling | Loading
- RFEM 5
-
- RSTAB 8
- RF-TIMBER AWC 5
- TIMBER AWC 8
- RF-TIMBER CSA 5
- TIMBER CSA 8
- RF-TIMBER Pro 5
- TIMBER Pro 8
- RF-JOINTS Timber | Timber to Timber 5
- JOINTS Timber | Timber to Timber 8
- RF-JOINTS Timber | Steel to Timber 5
- JOINTS Timber | Steel to Timber 8
- RF-LIMITS 5
- LIMITS 8
- RF-LAMINATE 5
- Timber Structures
- Laminate and Sandwich Structures
- Structural Analysis & Design
- Finite Element Analysis
- Steel Connections
- Eurocode 0
- Eurocode 5
- ANSI/AISC 360
- SIA 260
- SIA 265
In addition to determining loads, some particularities concerning the load combinatorics in timber design have to be considered. Contrary to steel structures, where the largest loading results from all unfavorable actions, in timber construction, the strength values depend on the load duration and timber humidity. Special characteristics have to be considered as well for the serviceability limit state design. The following article discusses the effects on the design of wooden elements and how this is possible with RSTAB and RFEM.
The story drift of a building provides valuable information about its structural behavior under seismic loads. These could cause large horizontal deformations and even instabilities. Some standards, therefore, call for a check of the story drift in its center of gravity. It indicates, for example, if a second-order analysis (P-Δ effect) is necessary.
- 001541
- Results
- RFEM 5
-
- RF-DYNAM Pro | Natural Vibrations 5
- RF-DYNAM Pro | Equivalent Loads 5
- RF-DYNAM Pro | Forced Vibrations 5
- RSTAB 8
- DYNAM Pro | Natural Vibrations 8
- DYNAM Pro | Equivalent Loads 8
- Concrete Structures
- Steel Structures
- Timber Structures
- Process Manufacturing Plants
- Power Plants
- Buildings
- Dynamic and Seismic Analysis
- ASCE 7
RFEM offers the option to perform a response spectrum analysis according to ASCE 7-16. This standard describes the determination of seismic loads for the American market. It might happen that the P-Delta effect has to be considered due to the stiffness of the entire structure in order to calculate the internal forces and carry out the design.