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.
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.
To be able to evaluate the influence of local stability phenomena of slender structural components, RFEM 6 and RSTAB 9 provide you with the option of performing a linear critical load analysis on the cross-section level. The following article explains the basics of the calculation and the result interpretation.
Custom sections are often required in cold-formed steel design. In RFEM 6, the custom section can be created using one of the “Thin-Walled” sections available in the library. For other sections that do not meet any of the 14 available cold-formed shapes, the sections can be created and imported from the standalone program, RSECTION. For general information on AISI steel design in RFEM 6, refer to the Knowledge Base article provided at the end of the page.
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.
The design of cold-formed steel members according to the AISI S100-16 is now available in RFEM 6. Design can be accessed by selecting “AISC 360” as the standard in the Steel Design add-on. “AISI S100” is then automatically selected for the cold-formed design (Image 01).
The optimal scenario in which punching shear design according to ACI 318-19 [1] or CSA A23.3:19 [2] should be utilized is when a slab is experiencing a high concentration of loading or reaction forces occurring at one single node. In RFEM 6, the node in which punching shear is an issue is referred to as a punching shear node. The causes of these high concentration of forces can be introduced by a column, concentrated force, or nodal support. Connecting walls can also cause these concentrated loads at wall ends, corners, and ends of line loads and supports.
The effects due to snow load are described in the American standard ASCE/SEI 7-16 and in Eurocode 1, Parts 1 through 3. These standards are implemented in the new RFEM 6 program and the Snow Load Wizard, which serves to facilitate the application of snow loads. In addition to this, the most recent generation of the program allows the construction site to be specified on a digital map, thus allowing the snow load zone to be imported automatically. These data are, in turn, used by the Load Wizard to simulate the effects due to the snow load.
In accordance with Sect. 6.6.3.1.1 and Clause 10.14.1.2 of ACI 318-19 and CSA A23.3-19, respectively, RFEM effectively takes into consideration concrete member and surface stiffness reduction for various element types. Available selection types include cracked and uncracked walls, flat plates and slabs, beams, and columns. The multiplier factors available within the program are taken directly from Table 6.6.3.1.1(a) and Table 10.14.1.2.
The automatic creation of combinations in RFEM and RSTAB with the "EN 1990 + EN 1991‑3; Cranes" option allows you to design crane runway beams as well as support loads on the rest of the structure.
For the design of concrete surfaces, the rib component of the internal forces can be neglected for the ULS calculation and for the analytical method of the SLS calculation, because this component is already considered in the member design. To do this, select the check box in the "Details" dialog box. If no rib was defined, this function is not available.
RF-CONCRETE Members for RFEM or CONCRETE for RSTAB propose an automatically created reinforcement to the user if the "Design the provided reinforcement" option is selected in Window 1.6 "Reinforcement".
To cover the required transverse reinforcement, RF‑CONCRETE Members and CONCRETE determine the most cost-efficient transverse reinforcement as a reinforcement proposal in accordance with the predefined stirrup diameter.
In addition to the basic combination rules of EN 1990, there are other combination conditions for actions on road bridges specified in EN 1991‑2 that must be taken into account. RFEM and RSTAB provide automatic combinatorics that can be activated in the General Data when selecting the standard EN 1990 + EN 1991‑2. The partial safety factors and combination coefficients depending on the action category are preset when selecting the respective National Annex.
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.
Reinforced concrete surface design for slabs, plates, and walls is possible in the RF-CONCRETE Surfaces module according to the ACI 318-19 or the CSA A23.3-19 standard. A common approach for slab design is the use of design strips for determining the average one-way internal forces over the width of the strip. This design strip method essentially takes a two-way slab element and applies a simpler one-way approach to determine the required reinforcement needed along the strip length.
In the existing standard, there were no regulations for the distribution of snow loads for elevated solar thermal and photovoltaic systems on roofs. Only distribution of the loads was advised. It was only with the National Annex DIN EN 1991-1-3/NA: 2019-04 that specific regulations were made for this.
With RF-/STEEL EC3, you can utilize nominal temperature-time curves in RFEM and RSTAB. The standard time-temperature curve (ETK), the external fire curve and the hydrocarbon fire curve are implemented. Moreover, the program provides the option to directly specify the final temperature of steel.
Buildings often have extensions. If the roof levels are not at the same height, this height difference (if more than 0.5 m) must additionally be considered for the snow load assumption.
The wind load of rectangular rounded structural components is a complex matter. The equivalent forces from wind load depend on the strength of the circulating wind load and the component geometry.
Wind blowing parallel to the surfaces of a structure can generate friction forces on these surfaces. This effect is important mainly for very large structures.
In accordance with Sec. 6.6.3.1.1 and Sec. 10.14.1.2 of ACI 318-14 and CSA A23.3-14, respectively, RFEM effectively takes into consideration concrete member and surface stiffness reduction for various element types. Available selection types include cracked and uncracked walls, flat plates and slabs, beams, and columns. The multiplier factors available within the program are taken directly from Table 6.6.3.1.1(a) and Table 10.14.1.2.