The ASCE 7-22 Standard [1], Sect. 12.9.1.6 specifies when P-delta effects should be considered when running a modal response spectrum analysis for seismic design. In the NBC 2020 [2], Sent. 4.1.8.3.8.c gives only a short requirement that sway effects due to the interaction of gravity loads with the deformed structure should be considered. Therefore, there may be situations where second-order effects, also known as P-delta, must be considered when carrying out a seismic analysis.
This article presents the basic concepts in structural dynamics and their role in the seismic design of structures. Great emphasis is given to explaining the technical aspects in an understandable way, so that readers without deep technical knowledge can gain an insight into the subject.
The three types of moment frames (Ordinary, Intermediate, Special) are available in the Steel Design add-on of RFEM 6. The seismic design result according to AISC 341-22 is categorized into two sections: member requirements and connection requirements.
The National Building Code of Canada (NBC) 2020 Article 4.1.8.7 provides a clear procedure for earthquake methods of analysis. The more advanced method, the Dynamic Analysis Procedure in Article 4.1.8.12, should be used for all structure types except those that meet the criteria set forth in 4.1.8.7. The more simplistic method, the Equivalent Static Force Procedure (ESFP) in Article 4.1.8.11, can be used for all other structures.
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. The coefficient θ is calculated as follows:$$\mathrm\theta\;=\;\frac{\displaystyle{\mathrm P}_\mathrm{tot}\;\cdot\;{\mathrm d}_\mathrm r}{{\mathrm V}_\mathrm{tot}\;\cdot\;\mathrm h}\;$$
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.
The Steel Design add-on in RFEM 6 now offers the ability to perform seismic design according to AISC 341-16 and AISC 341-22. Five types of seismic force-resisting systems (SFRS) are currently available.
The three types of moment frames (Ordinary, Intermediate, Special) are available in the Steel Design add-on of RFEM 6. The seismic design result according to AISC 341-16 is categorized into two sections: member requirements and connection requirements.
Moment frame design according to AISC 341-16 is now possible in the Steel Design add-on of RFEM 6. The seismic design result is categorized into two sections: member requirements and connection requirements. This article covers the required strength of the connection. An example comparison of the results between RFEM and the AISC Seismic Design Manual [2] is presented.
The design of an Ordinary Concentrically Braced Frame (OCBF) and a Special Concentrically Braced Frame (SCBF) can be carried out in the Steel Design add-on of RFEM 6. The seismic design result according to AISC 341-16 and 341-22 is categorized into two sections: Member Requirements and Connection Requirements.
The Geotechnical Analysis add-on provides RFEM with additional specific soil material models that are able to suitably represent complex soil material behavior. This technical article is an introduction to show how the stress-dependent stiffness of soil material models can be determined.
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.
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 earthquakes so far that the design can be performed with reasonable effort. The disadvantage of this method is that a lot of information is lost due to this simplification. One way to moderate this disadvantage is to use the equivalent linear combination when combining the modal responses. This article explains this option by describing an example.
The events of recent years remind us of the importance of earthquake engineering in seismic regions. For you as an engineer, the design of structures in earthquake-prone areas is a constant trade-off between economic efficiency – the financial possibilities – and structural safety. If a collapse is inevitable, engineers must estimate how it will affect the structure. This article aims to provide you with an option on how to perform this estimation.
The goal of using the RFEM 6 and Blender with the Bullet Constraints Builder add-on is to obtain a graphical representation of the collapse of a model based on real data of physical properties. RFEM 6 serves as the source of geometry and data for the simulation. This is another example of why it is important to maintain our programs as so-called BIM Open, in order to achieve collaboration across software domains.
A new capability within RFEM 6 when designing concrete columns is being able to generate the moment interaction diagram according to the ACI 318-19 [1]. When designing reinforced concrete members, the moment interaction diagram is an essential tool. The moment interaction diagram represents the relationship between the bending moment and axial force at any given point along a reinforced member. Valuable information is shown visually like strength and how the concrete behaves under different loading conditions.
Plastic hinges are imperative for the Pushover Analysis (POA) as a nonlinear static method for the seismic analysis of structures. In RFEM 6, plastic hinges can be defined as member hinges. This article will show you how to define plastic hinges with bilinear properties.
Windbreak structures are special types of fabric structures which protect the environment from harmful chemical particles, abate wind erosion, and help to maintain valuable sources. RFEM and RWIND are used for wind-structure analysis as one-way fluid-structure interaction (FSI).
This article demonstrates how to structural design windbreak structures using RFEM and RWIND.
This article will show you the Building Model add-on, which has been enhanced with one important advantage: calculating the center of mass and center of rigidity.
The “Modal Analysis” add-on in RFEM 6 allows you to perform modal analysis of structural systems, thus determining natural vibration values such as natural frequencies, mode shapes, modal masses, and effective modal mass factors. These results can be used for vibration design, as well as 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.
Given that realistic determination of the soil conditions significantly influences the quality of the structural analysis of buildings, the Geotechnical Analysis add-on is offered in RFEM 6 to determine the soil body to be analyzed.
The way to provide data obtained from field tests in the add-on and use the properties from soil samples to determine the soil massifs of interest was discussed in Knowledge Base article “Creation of the Soil Body from Soil Samples in RFEM 6”. This article, on the other hand, will discuss the procedure to calculate settlements and soil pressures for a reinforced concrete building.
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).
In RFEM 6, seismic analysis can be done by using the Modal Analysis and the Response Spectrum Analysis add-ons. Once the spectral analysis has been performed, it is possible to use the Building Model add-on to display story actions, interstory drifts, and forces in shear walls.
The punching shear design, in line with EN 1992-1-1, should be performed for slabs with a concentrated load or reaction. The node where the design of punching shear resistance is performed (that is, where there is a punching problem) is called a node of punching shear. The concentrated load at these nodes can be introduced by columns, concentrated force, or nodal supports. The end of the linear load introduction on slabs is also regarded as a concentrated load and therefore, the shear resistance at wall ends, wall corners, and ends or corners of line loads and line supports should be controlled as well.
Seismic Analysis in RFEM 6 is possible using the modal analysis and the response spectrum analysis add-ons. As a matter of fact, the general concept of the earthquake analysis in RFEM 6 is based on the creation of a load case for the modal analysis and the response spectrum analysis, respectively. The standard groups for these analyses are set in the Standards II tab of the model’s Base Data.
Blast loads from high-energy explosives, either accidental or intentional, are rare but may be a structural design requirement. These dynamic loads differ from standard static loads due to their large magnitude and very short duration. A blast scenario can be carried out directly in an FEA program as a time history analysis to minimize loss of life and evaluate varying levels of structural damage.