There are several options for calculating a semi-rigid composite beam. They differ primarily in the type of modeling. Whereas the Gamma method ensures simple modeling, additional efforts are required when using other methods (for example, shear analogy) for the modeling which are, however, offset by the much more flexible application compared to the Gamma method.
The following article describes a design using the equivalent member method according to [1] Section 6.3.2, performed on an example of a cross-laminated timber wall susceptible to buckling described in Part 1 of this article series. The buckling analysis will be performed as a compressive stress analysis with reduced compressive strength. For this, the instability factor kc is determined, which depends primarily on the component slenderness and the support type.
In the DYNAM Pro add‑on module for RSTAB, you can now neglect masses that may have a negative effect on the equivalent mass factor when calculating eigenvalues. To do this, you can disable the masses under [Details]. These include primarily mass points located in the support of the structures.
The previous post on this topic describes instabilities that may occur when using tension members. The example shown refers primarily to wall stiffening. Now, instability error messages can also refer to nodes within the range of supports. Truss girders and support trusses are especially susceptible to this. What causes the instability here?