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.
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.
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.
Compliance with building codes, such as Eurocode, is essential to ensure the safety, structural integrity, and sustainability of buildings and structures. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) plays a vital role in this process by simulating fluid behavior, optimizing designs, and helping architects and engineers meet Eurocode requirements related to wind load analysis, natural ventilation, fire safety, and energy efficiency. By integrating CFD into the design process, professionals can create safer, more efficient, and compliant buildings that meet the highest standards of construction and design in Europe.
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.
In computational fluid dynamics (CFD), complex surfaces that are not completely solid can be modeled using porous or permeability media. In the actual world, examples of such things include windbreak fabric structures, wire meshes, perforated facades and claddings, louvers, tube banks (stacks of horizontal cylinders), and so on.
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.
RWIND 2 is a program for generating wind loads based on CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics). The wind flow numerical simulation is generated around any building, including irregular or unique geometry types, to determine the wind loads on surfaces and members. RWIND 2 can be integrated with RFEM/RSTAB for the structural analysis and design or as a stand-alone application.
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 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).
You can model and analyze masonry structures in RFEM 6 with the Masonry Design add-on that employs the finite element method for the design. Complex masonry structures can be modeled, and static and dynamic analysis can be performed, given that a nonlinear material model is implemented in the program to display the load-bearing behavior of masonry and the different failure mechanisms. You can enter and model masonry structures directly in RFEM 6 and combine the masonry material model with all common RFEM add-ons. In other words, you can design entire building models in connection with masonry.
RWIND 2 is a program for generating wind loads based on CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics). The wind flow numerical simulation is generated around any building, including irregular or unique geometry types, to determine the wind loads on surfaces and members. RWIND 2 can be integrated with RFEM/RSTAB for the structural analysis and design or as a stand-alone application.
Structures in RFEM 6 can be saved as blocks and reused in other RFEM files. The advantage of dynamic blocks with respect to non-dynamic blocks is that they allow interactive modifications of the structural parameters as a result of modified input variables. One example is the possibility to add structural elements by changing only the number of bays as an input variable. This article will demonstrate the aforementioned possibility for dynamic blocks that are created by scripting.
In RFEM 6 it is possible to save selected objects (as well as whole structures) as blocks and reuse them in other models. Three types of blocks can be distinguished: non-parameterized, parameterized, and dynamic blocks (via JavaScript). This article will focus on the first block type (non-parameterized).
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.
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.