Question
Why do I get different design results for a load combination (CO) and a result combination (RC) in STEEL EC3 in spite of having the same internal forces?
Answer:
The difference between designs with RC and CO lies mainly in the moment distribution applied for the calculation of the ideal elastic critical moment Mcr. For a load combination (CO), it is possible to clearly apply the moment distribution for the present load position. For a result combination of the "+" type or an RC that does not correspond to the "permanent/or" type, however, you can only analyze the enveloping moment distribution. In this case, the more unfavorable distribution (Max or Min) is applied. As a consequence, unfavorable values result for the critical load factor.
Furthermore, the design according to Section 6.3.3 of EN 1993‑1‑1 requires the moment distribution coefficients set to 1.0 (constant distribution) if the moment distribution cannot be clearly determined, which may also lead to more conservative results.
The internal forces applied for the design can be the same in COs and RCs, but the moment distribution in the result combination is applied more unfavorably to determine the critical factor. Thus, the RC provides a higher design ratio for the design with STEEL EC3.
Do you have any questions?
The RF‑/STEEL EC3 add-on module automatically transfers the buckling line to be used for the flexural buckling analysis for a cross-section from the cross-section properties. The assignment of the buckling line can be adjusted manually in the module input for general cross-sections in particular, as well as for special cases.
This technical article deals with the design of structural components and cross-sections of a welded truss girder in the ultimate limit state. Furthermore, the deformation analysis in the serviceability limit state is described.
This technical article deals with the stability analysis of a roof purlin, which is connected without stiffeners by means of a bolt connection on the lower flange to have a minimum manufacturing effort.
This technical article analyzes the effects of the connection stiffness on the determination of internal forces, as well as the design of connections using the example of a two-story, double-spanned steel frame.
- Numerous component types, such as base and end plates, web angles, fin plates, gusset plates, stiffeners, tapers, or ribs for easy input of typical connection situations
- Universally applicable basic components (such as plates, welds, bolts, auxiliary planes) for modeling complex connection situations
- Graphical display of the connection geometry with dynamic updating during the input
- Wide range of cross-section shapes: I-sections, U-sections, angles, T-sections, hollow sections, built-up cross-sections and thin-walled sections
- Library in the Dlubal Center with a large number of program-side template connections, including user-defined templates
- Automatic adaptation of the connection geometry based on the relative arrangement of the components to each other – even in case of subsequent editing of the structural components
In the ultimate configuration of the steel joint design, you have the option to modify the limit plastic strain for welds.
The "Base Plate" component allows you to design base plate connections with cast-in anchors. In this case, plates, welds, anchorages, and steel-concrete interaction are analyzed.
In the "Edit Section" dialog box, you can display the buckling shapes of the Finite Strip Method (FSM) as a 3D graphic.
What could be the reason?
Recommended Products for You