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.
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.
The RF‑/STEEL EC3 add-on module automatically transfers the buckling line to be used for the flexural buckling analysis for a cross-section from the cross-section properties. The assignment of the buckling line can be adjusted manually in the module input for general cross-sections in particular, as well as for special cases.
Very small torsional moments in the members to be designed often prevent certain design formats. In order to neglect them and still perform the designs, you can define a limit value in RF‑/STEEL EC3 from which torsional shear stresses are taken into account.
Diagonals of double angles are used for pipe bridge construction and for truss girders, among other things. They are usually subjected to tension, but it is necessary to transfer them in smaller compression forces with regard to the load application. In the case of slender diagonals in particular, you should also consider the bending due to self‑weight.
In January 2015, DIN Committee NA 005‑08‑23 Steel Bridges applied the introduction of a modification in equation 10.5 of DIN EN 1993‑1‑5. This involves the interaction of longitudinal and transverse pressure in a buckling analysis. Now, the interaction equation provides for auxiliary factor V, which is calculated from the reduction factors of the longitudinal and transverse stresses.
For structural reasons, shear connections usually include fin plates or flange angles. Main and secondary beams arranged on the top edge require notching or long fin plates. Hinged end plate connections are often welded to the web.
Torsional buckling analysis of transverse and longitudinal stiffeners with open cross-sections is described in DIN EN 1993-1-5, Chapter 9. There is a difference between the simplified method and the precise method, which takes into consideration the warping stiffness of the buckling panel. The simplified method applies Equation 9.3 of DIN EN 1993‑1‑5. If warping stiffness is to be taken into account, either Eq. 9.3 or Eq. 9.4 should be followed. Both design methods are implemented in PLATE-BUCKLING.
In addition to the stability designs according to EN 1993‑1‑1, Sections 6.3.1 through 6.3.3, you can apply the General Method according to EN 1993‑1‑1, 6.3.4 in RF‑/STEEL EC3.
In the following example, the stability analysis of a steel frame can be performed according to the General Method in compliance with EN 1993‑1‑1, Sect. 6.3.4 in the RF‑/STEEL EC3 add-on module. The first of my three posts shows the determination of the critical load factor for design loads required by the design concept, which reaches the elastic critical buckling load with deformations from the main framework plane.
The RF‑STABILITY and RSBUCK add‑on modules for RFEM and RSTAB allow you to perform eigenvalue analysis for frame structures in order to determine critical load factors, including the buckling modes. Several buckling modes can be determined. They provide information about the model areas bearing stability risks.
The RF‑/STEEL Warping Torsion module extension of the RF‑/STEEL EC3 add‑on module allows you to design members with asymmetric cross‑sections. The new option is fully integrated in the design module and can be activated for sets of members.
The buckling analysis of plates with stiffeners is a special task for engineers. For this, EN 1993-1-5 provides three calculation methods: Effective Cross-Section Method, [1], Sect. 4-7; Reduced Stress Method, [1], Sect. 10; Finite Element Methods of Analysis (FEM), [1], Annex C.
The following article describes the design of a single-span beam subjected to bending and compression, which is performed according to EN 1993‑1‑1 in the RF-/STEEL EC3 add-on module. Since the beam is modeled with a tapered cross-section and thus it is not a uniform structural component, the design must be performed either according to General Method in compliance with Sect. 6.3.4 of EN 1993‑1‑1, or according to the second-order analysis. Both options will be explained and compared, and for the calculation according to the second-order analysis, there is an additional design format using Partial Internal Forces Method (PIFM) available. Therefore, the design is divided into three steps: design according to Sect. 6.3.4 of EN 1993‑1‑1 (General Method), design according to the second‑order analysis, elastic (warping torsion analysis), design according to the second‑order analysis, plastic (warping torsion analysis and Partial Internal Forces Method).
Critical load factors and the corresponding mode shapes of any structure can be determined efficiently in RFEM and RSTAB, using the RF-STABILITY or RSBUCK add-on module (linear eigenvalue solver or nonlinear analysis).
Buckling analysis according to the effective width method or the reduced stress method is based on the determination of the system critical load, hereinafter called LBA (linear buckling analysis). This article explains the analytical calculation of the critical load factor as well as utilization of the finite element method (FEM).
According to EN 1993-1-1 [1], it is necessary to use the equivalent geometric imperfections with values that reflect the possible effects of all types of imperfections. EN 1993-1-1, Section 5.3, specifies basic imperfections for the global analysis of frames as well as member imperfections.
A single-span beam with lateral and torsional restraint is to be designed according to the recommendations of Eurocode 3 and AISC. If the beam does not reach the required load-bearing capacity, it must be stabilized.
After running an analysis in RF-/STEEL AISC, the mode shapes for sets of members can be viewed graphically in a separate window. Select the relevant set of members in the result window and click the [Mode Shapes] button.
According to EN 1993‑1‑1 [1], it is necessary to use the equivalent geometric imperfections with values that reflect the possible effects of all types of imperfections. EN 1993‑1‑1, Section 5.3, specifies basic imperfections for the global analysis of frames as well as member imperfections.
As of the program version X.11, the filter options of small compression forces or moments for stability analysis in RF‑/STEEL EC3 have been revised. The revision of these filter options in the "Stability" tab of the "Details" dialog box allows you to work in the module transparently, since they are now independent of the design.
Shell buckling is considered to be the most recent and least explored stability issue of structural engineering. This is due less to a lack of research activities than to the complexity of the theory. With the introduction and further development of the finite element method in structural engineering practice, some engineers no longer have to deal with the complicated theory of shell buckling. Evidence of the problems and errors to which this gives rise is very well summarized in [1].
This example is described in technical literature [1] as Example 9.5 and in [2] as Example 8.5. A lateral-torsional buckling analysis must be performed for a principal beam. This beam is a uniform structural member. Therefore, the stability analysis can be carried out according to Clause 6.3.3 of DIN EN 1993-1-1. Due to the uniaxial bending, it would also be possible to perform the design using the General Method according to Clause 6.3.4. Additionally, the determination of the moment Mcr is validated with an idealized member model in line with the method mentioned above, using an FEM model.
In SHAPE-THIN, the calculation of stiffened buckling panels can be performed according to Section 4.5 of EN 1993-1-5. For stiffened buckling panels, the effective surfaces due to local buckling of the single panels in the plate and in the stiffeners, as well as the effective surfaces from the entire panel buckling of the stiffened entire panel, have to be considered.
The design of a torsional loaded beam according to AISC Design Guide 9 will be shown, based on a verification example. The design will be performed with the RF‑STEEL AISC add-on module and the RF‑STEEL Warping Torsion module extension with 7 degrees of freedom.
This article is about the stability analysis of a steel column with axial compression according to EN 1993‑1‑1, Clause 6.3.1. Additionally, a variation study is carried out aiming at steel optimization.
When designing steel columns or steel beams, it is usually necessary to carry out cross-section design and stability analysis. While the cross-section design can usually be performed without giving further details, the stability analysis requires further user-defined entries. To a certain extent, the member is cut out of the structure; therefore, the support conditions have to be specified. This is particularly important when determining the ideal elastic critical moment Mcr. Furthermore, it is necessary to define the correct effective lengths Lcr. These are required for the internal calculation of slenderness ratios.
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.
The critical factor for lateral-torsional buckling or the critical buckling moment of a single-span beam will be compared according to different stability analysis methods.