Use design situations to support your design checks. They allow you to collect the relevant load situations for design For example, you can define a design situation for the design of different materials.
Go to Explanatory Video
Duration: 00:00:55 min
Duration: 00:00:49 min
Duration: 00:00:50 min
Duration: 00:00:32 min
General
Duration: 00:00:52 min
Duration: 01:02:16 min
Duration: 01:02:11 min
Duration: 00:46:50 min
Different methods are available for calculating the deformation in the cracked state. RFEM provides an analytical method according to DIN EN 1992-1-1 7.4.3 and a physical-nonlinear analysis. Both methods have different features and can be more or less suitable depending on the circumstances. This article will give an overview of the two calculation methods.
When designing reinforced concrete components according to EN 1992‑1‑1 [1], nonlinear methods of determining internal forces for the ultimate and serviceability limit states are possible. In this case, the internal forces and deformations are determined with respect to their nonlinear behavior. The analysis of stresses and strains in cracked state usually provides the deflections, which clearly exceed the linearly determined values.
For reinforced concrete components and structures whose structural behavior is significantly influenced by the second-order effects, Eurocode 2 provides the general method based on a nonlinear determination of internal forces according to the second-order analysis (5.8.6), as well as an approximation method based on the nominal curvature (5.8.8).
The aim of this technical article is to perform a design according to the general design method of Eurocode 2, using the example of a slender reinforced concrete column.
The aim of this technical article is to perform a design according to the general design method of Eurocode 2, using the example of a slender reinforced concrete column.
This technical article addresses the direct deformation analysis of reinforced concrete beams considering the long-term effects of creep and shrinkage. The direct calculation according to Eurocode 2 (EN 1992-1-1, Section 7.4.3) is explained using a single-span beam. Particular emphasis is placed on tension stiffening, behavior in the cracked state based on the distribution factor (damage parameter), and consideration of shrinkage and creep behavior.
The "Nonlinear Material Behavior" add-on includes the Anistropic | Damage material model for concrete structural components. This material model allows you to consider concrete damage for members, surfaces, and solids.
You can define an individual stress-strain diagram via a table, use the parametric input to generate the stress-strain diagram, or use the predefined parameters from the standards. Furthermore, it is possible to consider the tension stiffening effect.
For the reinforcement, both nonlinear material models "Isotropic | Plastic (Members)" and "Isotropic | Nonlinear Elastic (Members)" are available.
It is possible to consider the long-term effects due to creep and shrinkage using the "Static Analysis | Creep & Shrinkage (Linear)" analysis type that has been recently released. Creep is taken into account by stretching the stress-strain diagram of the concrete using the factor (1+phi), and shrinkage is taken into account as the pre-strain of the concrete. More detailed time step analyses are possible using the "Time-Dependent Analysis (TDA)" add-on.
In the Concrete Design add-on, you can determine the required longitudinal reinforcement for the direct crack width analysis (w k).
For the design of reinforced concrete members, there is the option to automatically determine the number or diameter of rebars.
For concrete design, you can display the reinforcement results in tables separately by design situation.
When switching from the manual definition of the reinforcement areas to the automatic arrangement of the reinforcement according to window 1.4, the result of the deformation calculation changes, although the basic reinforcement has not been changed. What makes this change?
I obtain different results when comparing the deformation analysis in the RF‑CONCRETE add-on modules and another calculation program. What could be the reason for this?
Where can I find the RF‑CONCRETE NL add-on module? How can I activate it?
What information is transferred when exporting the nonlinear stiffness? Can I display the exported values graphically?
In connection with the nonlinear calculation for the serviceability limit state design checks, I obtain implausibly large values for crack width and deformation in the RF‑CONCRETE modules (see Image 01). How can I solve the problem?
Is it also possible to perform a deformation analysis in the cracked state for a 2D model in RF‑CONCRETE Surfaces?
_1.jpg?mw=350&hash=ab2086621f4e50c8c8fb8f3c211a22bc246e0552)
-querkraft-hertha-hurnaus.jpg?mw=350&hash=3306957537863c7a7dc17160e2ced5806b35a7fb)
-gigapixel-standard_v2-2x.jpg?mw=350&hash=9166b062b07ae89e60417bff40b33fe9043f9d5e){kind=tracking}
