If the calculation of a member model according to the second-order analysis is terminated with an error message, this instability is often caused by failed tension members: As soon as compressive forces appear in a tension member during a calculation step, this member is no longer considered in the following iterations. Thus, the model can become unstable.
As an alternative to the equivalent member method, this article describes the possibility to determine the internal forces of a wall at risk of buckling according to the second-order analysis, taking imperfections into account, and to subsequently perform the cross-section design for bending and compression.
The secondary reinforcement according to DIN EN 1992-1-1 9.2.1 is used to ensure the desired structural behavior. It should avoid failure without prior notification. The minimum reinforcement has to be arranged independently of the size of the actual loading.
As gravity loads act on a structure, lateral displacement occurs. In turn, a secondary overturning moment is generated as the gravity load continues to act on the elements in the laterally displaced position. This effect is also known as "P-Delta (Δ)". Sec. 12.9.1.6 of the ASCE 7-16 Standard and the NBC 2015 Commentary specify when P-Delta effects should be considered during a modal response spectrum analysis.
When modeling a reinforced concrete rib with a masonry wall above, there is the risk that the rib is underdesigned if the structural behavior of the masonry is not correctly considered and the connection between the masonry wall and downstand beam is not modeled sufficiently accurately. This article deals with this issue and shows the possible modeling options of such a structure. In this example, the reinforcement is determined only from the internal forces and without secondary minimum reinforcement.
This example is described in technical literature [1] as Example 9.5 and in [2] as Example 8.5. A lateral-torsional buckling analysis must be performed for a principal beam. This beam is a uniform structural member. Therefore, the stability analysis can be carried out according to Clause 6.3.3 of DIN EN 1993‑1‑1. Due to the uniaxial bending, it would also be possible to perform the design using the General Method according to Clause 6.3.4. Additionally, the determination of the critical load factor is validated with an idealized member model in line with the method mentioned above, using an FEM model.
This technical article presents some basics for using the Torsional Warping add-on (7 DOF). It is fully integrated into the main program and allows you to consider the cross-section warping when calculating member elements. In combination with the Stability Analysis and Steel Design add-ons, it is possible to perform the lateral-torsional buckling design with internal forces according to the second-order analysis, taking imperfections into account.
The calculation in RFEM is usually carried out in several calculation steps (iterations). It is then possible to consider particular characteristics of the model, such as objects with nonlinear functions. In addition, by using the iterative calculation, nonlinear effects are taken into account that result from changes in deformation and internal forces in case of the second-order analysis or when considering large deformations (cable theory). In case of complex models, geometric linear calculations are usually insufficient.
For structural reasons, shear connections usually include fin plates or flange angles. Main and secondary beams arranged on the top edge require notching or long fin plates. Hinged end plate connections are often welded to the web.