41 Results
View Results:
Sort by:
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.
- 000487
- Modeling | Structure
- RFEM 5
-
- RF-STEEL 5
- RF-STEEL AISC 5
- RF-STEEL AS 5
- RF-STEEL BS 5
- RF-STEEL CSA 5
- RF-STEEL EC3 5
- RF-STEEL GB 5
- RF-STEEL HK 5
- RF-STEEL IS 5
- RF-STEEL NBR 5
- RF-STEEL NTC-DF 5
- RF-STEEL SANS 5
- RF-STEEL SIA 5
- RF-STEEL SP 5
- RF-ALUMINUM 5
- RF-ALUMINUM ADM 5
- RSTAB 8
- STEEL 8
- STEEL AISC 8
- STEEL AS 8
- STEEL BS 8
- STEEL CSA 8
- STEEL EC3 8
- STEEL GB 8
- STEEL HK 8
- STEEL IS 8
- STEEL NBR 8
- STEEL NTC-DF 8
- STEEL SANS 8
- STEEL SIA 8
- STEEL SP 8
- ALUMINUM 8
- ALUMINUM ADM 8
- Steel Structures
- Process Manufacturing Plants
- Stairway Structures
- Structural Analysis & Design
- Eurocode 3
- ANSI/AISC 360
- SIA 263
- IS 800
- BS 5950-1
- GB 50017
- CSA S16
- AS 4100
- SP 16.13330
- SANS 10162-1
- ABNT NBR 800
- ADM
The support conditions of a beam subjected to bending are essential for its resistance to lateral-torsional buckling. If, for example, a single-span beam is held laterally in the middle of the span, the deflection of the compressed flange can be prevented, and a two-wave eigenmode can be enforced. The critical lateral-torsional buckling moment is increased significantly by this additional measure. In the add-on modules for member design, different types of lateral supports on a member can be defined using the "Intermediate supports" input window.
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.
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‑CONCRETE Surfaces for RFEM 5 allows you to use averaged internal forces for design of concrete surfaces.
In RFEM 5 and RSTAB 8, you can design foundations according to EN 1992‑1‑1 and EN 1997‑1 in the RF‑/FOUNDATION Pro add‑on module.
In the case of open cross-sections, the torsional load is removed mainly via secondary torsion, since the St. Venant torsional stiffness is low compared to the warping stiffness. Therefore, warping stiffeners in the cross-section are particularly interesting for the lateral-torsional buckling analysis, as they can significantly reduce the rotation. For this, end plates or welded stiffeners and sections are suitable.
Shrinkage and creep are time-dependent deformation properties of concrete that usually have to be considered in the serviceability limit state design.
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".
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.
The new RF‑/DYNAM Pro - Natural Vibrations module has been available since RFEM version 5.04.xx and RSTAB version 8.04.xx were released. Masses can now be imported directly from load cases and load combinations.
For the ultimate limit state design, EN 1998-1 Section 2.2.2 and 4.4.2.2 [1] requires the 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.
If an aluminum member section is comprised of slender elements, failure can occur due to the local buckling of the flanges or webs before the member can reach full strength. In the add-on module RF-/ALUMINUM ADM, there are now three options for determining the nominal flexural strength for the limit state of local buckling, Mnlb, from Section F.3 in the 2015 Aluminum Design Manual. The three options include sections F.3.1 Weighted Average Method, F.3.2 Direct Strength Method, and F.3.3 Limiting Element Method.
In a multi-modal response spectrum analysis, it is important to determine a sufficient number of eigenvalues of the structure and to consider their dynamic responses. Regulations such as EN 1998‑1 [1] and other international standards require the activation of 90% of the structural mass. This means: to determine so many eigenvalues that the sum of the effective modal mass factors is greater than 0.9.
In RF-DYNAM Pro - Equivalent Loads, the equivalent seismic loads can be calculated according to different standards. By calculating the equivalent loads for each eigenmode, it is not directly possible to obtain the transversal shear for each story to perform an analysis afterwards. The following example describes the option to calculate the transversal shear quickly and efficiently.
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.
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.
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").
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.
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.
The response spectrum analysis is one of the most frequently used design methods in the case of earthquakes. This method has many advantages. The most important is the simplification: It simplifies the complexity of an earthquake to such an extent that an analysis can be carried out with reasonable effort. The disadvantage of this method is that a lot of information is lost due to this simplification. One way to mitigate this disadvantage is to use the equivalent linear combination when combining the modal responses. This article explains this option by describing an example.
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.
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.
The Aluminum Design Manual (ADM) 2020 was released in February 2020. The ADM 2020 gives guidance for both the allowable strength design (ASD) and load and resistance factor design (LRFD) for aluminum members to ensure reliability and safety for all aluminum structures. This latest standard was integrated in the RFEM/RSTAB add-on module RF-/ALUMINUM ADM. The text below will highlight the applicable updates relevant to the Dlubal programs.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.