This article describes and explains the influence of bending stiffness of cables on their internal forces. Furthermore, the text provides information on how this influence can be reduced.
The data exchange between RFEM 6 and Allplan can be done using various file formats. This article describes the data exchange of a determined surface reinforcement using the ASF interface. This allows you to display the RFEM reinforcement values as level curves or colored reinforcement images in Allplan.
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.
The fatigue design according to EN 1992-1-1 must be performed for the structural components subjected to large stress ranges and/or many load changes. In this case, the design checks for the concrete and the reinforcement are performed separately. There are two alternative design methods available.
When wind-induced surface pressures on a building are available, they can be applied on a structural model in RFEM 6, processed by RWIND 2, and used as wind loads for static analysis in RFEM 6.
RWIND 2 and RFEM 6 can now be used to calculate wind loads from experimentally measured wind pressures on surfaces. Basically, two interpolation methods are available to distribute pressures measured in isolated points across the surfaces. The desired pressure distribution can be achieved using the appropriate method and parameter settings.
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 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.
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.