68 Results
View Results:
Sort by:
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.
For the ultimate limit state design, EN 1998‑1, Sections 2.2.2 and 4.4.2.2 require a calculation considering the second‑order theory (P‑Δ effect). This effect may be neglected only if the interstory drift sensitivity coefficient θ is less than 0.1.
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.
In order to be able to carry out a pushover analysis, it is necessary to transform the determined capacity curve into a simplified form. The N2 method is described in Eurocode EN 1998. This article should help to explain what a bilinearization according to the N2 method involves.
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 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 dynamic analysis in RFEM 6 and RSTAB 9 is divided into several add-ons. The Modal Analysis add-on is a prerequisite for all other dynamic add-ons, since it performs the natural vibration analysis for member, surface, and solid models.
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 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.
Foundations including dimensions can be saved as a template in a user-defined database.
In RFEM 5 as well as RSTAB 8 in RF-/FOUNDATION Pro, you can save the foundation dimensions for all five foundation types as foundation templates in a user-defined database and use them later in other models.
In RF-/FOUNDATION Pro, the foundation design requires the definition of the corresponding loading (load cases, load combinations, or result combinations) for different design situations (STR, GEO, UPL, or EQU).
In RF‑/FOUNDATION Pro, reinforcement drawings are displayed after designing the foundation, where you can record all necessary structures of the reinforcement steel.
In addition to the geometry and shape of a flat roof, you can also take into account the formation of an eaves area when generating the loading.
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.
In RF‑/FOUNDATION Pro, the available reinforcing steel diameters can be adjusted by the user. The adjustment of the available rebar diameters works similarly to the same function in the RF‑/CONCRETE (Members) and RF‑/CONCRETE Columns add‑on modules.
In RF-/FOUNDATION Pro, the user can freely select the proportion of the relieving soil pressure by means of the factor kred.
In RF‑/FOUNDATION Pro, you now have the option to design a foundation at one or several nodes of the model.
In RFEM and RSTAB, different graphical representations of the foundation dimensions are available.
For foundation design, it is necessary to define the relevant loads for the respective design situations (STR, GEO, UPL, EQU).
When calculating foundations according to EC 7 or EC 2, different foundation types or sizes are usually used in one object. However, boundary conditions like the soil parameters, the materials for foundations, concrete covers, and the load combinations selected for design remain the same for all foundations, as a rule.
In RFEM and RSTAB, snow drift is considered according to 5.3.4(3) of DIN EN 1991‑1‑3 for saw-tooth roofs.
In RF-/FOUNDATION Pro, a graphical display of the result details is available. To see them, go to Window 2.2 Governing Design Criteria after the calculation. In the interactive graphic of this window, individual design-relevant values can be displayed for each design performed.
The Eurocode for DIN EN 1991‑1‑4:2010‑12 describes wind loads acting on structural systems.
In RF-/FOUNDATION Pro, you can also consider the concrete cover for the foundation according to EN 1992-1-1.
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 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.