What's the difference between load combinations and result combinations? Is the only difference in nonlinear analysis for the first ones? And, in this case, why can't I make an nonlinear analysis for result combinations in RFEM? As I know, result combinations are made according to codes that you choose; and how does RFEM get load combinations?
Hello Alejandro. In RFEM, there are load cases, load combinations, and result combinations. Load cases are created by the user such as dead, live, wind, snow, etc. These are typically calculated with a linear 1st order analysis. Because they are solved with a 1st order analysis, this allows them to be combined into load combinations. RFEM has the ability to generate load combinations according to the various standards or a user can manually define them. Load combinations are run by default according to a 2nd order analysis (P-Delta) as this may be required by most standards. Finally, there are result combinations. When using the combination generator in the program, a result combination will compare multiple load combinations to output the max/min results for these combinations. It's a type of "envelope solution." There are scenarios where result combinations can be run according to a 2nd order analysis as well but there are also other scenarios where you cannot combine 2nd order results from multiple load combinations. Please see the following FAQ: www.dlubal.com/en-US/support-and-learning/support/faq/002108.
Thank you, you've made it more clear. So, if I understand it correctly: result combinations take the max/min results of each load combination that is calculated according to 2nd order analysis (as usual) and then use these results to calculate sections in Add-on Modules (maybe to avoid in some cases unnecessary long-time calculations for sections with 2nd order analysis if forces aren't the biggest or the smallest). When will it be more correct to run 2nd order analysis: with load cases or load combinations (according to Eurocode)? Or I have to click "2nd order" analysis in parameters for both load cases and load combinations?
Hi, Alejandro! Typically, you would create load cases and from those load combinations. Run those load combinations as 2nd order if needed and then create a result combination from those load combinations. The result combination then includes the envelope (max/min) of all the included load combinations. It the load combinations are run as 2nd order the result combination includes then consequently also 2nd order results. In the design module it is better to use the load combinations since we have then a unique source of results for a beam / column etc. While in a result combination the result course along a beam may be from different load combinations (depending, if it is max/min). The result combination is good to create short tables where only the max/min values are printed in a report. I suggest to look at specific webinars on our website for each module. See: bit.ly/2I8Jb1T Have a nice day!
Hi, joy! RFEM is a general FEA software. It is not only for buildings. We have clients that work in this area as well. So, yes, you can use it for sure.
Hi, Jon! For all webinars, you can visit the Dlubal website to view them listed in recently released order. www.dlubal.com/en-US/support-and-learning/learning/webinars The general videos page, lists all videos also in recently released order which you can take advantage of the search options on the right side of the page to find exactly what you're looking for. www.dlubal.com/en-US/support-and-learning/learning/videos
Hi, Ernesto! Yes, this is not a problem,. You can set units and digits in many ways. It is described in the online manual at www.dlubal.com/en/downloads-and-information/documents/online-manuals/rfem-5/11/01/03
Hi, le! We will not present this webinar again as it was done using our previous program version RFEM 5. However, we have many new webinars to view in RFEM 6 as well as in French. You can view these directly on our website and TH-cam channel. www.dlubal.com/fr/support-et-formation/apprentissage/webinaires?tz=adt&lang=fr&porder=desc&psize=10
I have seen many toturials done by you to put my slab over steel beams, and in every toturial you just avoid to do so. Can the problem do that ? or you are just avoiding it because it cannot ?? I am tired of this problem !! when I draw the slab over steel beams it just ignores the beams and the slab loading itself on the columns directly without considering the existance of steel beams !! How can I solve such problem please ??
Hi, Amin! When you draw a slab over steel beams, all elements are fully considered in the FEA analysis. The steel beams will provide additional stiffness under the slab and will be accounted for including the resulting deflections and internal forces. If you are looking for the design of composite beams (i.e. stud spacing for the shear flow between the two elements), this is currently not implemented in RFEM. If you have additional questions, please send us your model along with the detailed questions to info@dlubal.com.
Hi, Santosh! I am sorry, but at the moment we do not have these specific codes. However, RFEM is quite adjustable regarding settings. Which codes exactly are you looking for?
What's the difference between load combinations and result combinations? Is the only difference in nonlinear analysis for the first ones? And, in this case, why can't I make an nonlinear analysis for result combinations in RFEM?
As I know, result combinations are made according to codes that you choose; and how does RFEM get load combinations?
Hello Alejandro. In RFEM, there are load cases, load combinations, and result combinations. Load cases are created by the user such as dead, live, wind, snow, etc. These are typically calculated with a linear 1st order analysis. Because they are solved with a 1st order analysis, this allows them to be combined into load combinations. RFEM has the ability to generate load combinations according to the various standards or a user can manually define them. Load combinations are run by default according to a 2nd order analysis (P-Delta) as this may be required by most standards. Finally, there are result combinations. When using the combination generator in the program, a result combination will compare multiple load combinations to output the max/min results for these combinations. It's a type of "envelope solution." There are scenarios where result combinations can be run according to a 2nd order analysis as well but there are also other scenarios where you cannot combine 2nd order results from multiple load combinations. Please see the following FAQ: www.dlubal.com/en-US/support-and-learning/support/faq/002108.
Thank you, you've made it more clear.
So, if I understand it correctly: result combinations take the max/min results of each load combination that is calculated according to 2nd order analysis (as usual) and then use these results to calculate sections in Add-on Modules (maybe to avoid in some cases unnecessary long-time calculations for sections with 2nd order analysis if forces aren't the biggest or the smallest).
When will it be more correct to run 2nd order analysis: with load cases or load combinations (according to Eurocode)? Or I have to click "2nd order" analysis in parameters for both load cases and load combinations?
Hi, Alejandro!
Typically, you would create load cases and from those load combinations. Run those load combinations as 2nd order if needed and then create a result combination from those load combinations. The result combination then includes the envelope (max/min) of all the included load combinations. It the load combinations are run as 2nd order the result combination includes then consequently also 2nd order results. In the design module it is better to use the load combinations since we have then a unique source of results for a beam / column etc. While in a result combination the result course along a beam may be from different load combinations (depending, if it is max/min). The result combination is good to create short tables where only the max/min values are printed in a report.
I suggest to look at specific webinars on our website for each module.
See: bit.ly/2I8Jb1T
Have a nice day!
Can I use this software for offshore analysis?
Hi, joy!
RFEM is a general FEA software. It is not only for buildings. We have clients that work in this area as well. So, yes, you can use it for sure.
@@DlubalEN Thank you
i guess it's pretty randomly asking but does anybody know a good place to stream newly released series online ?
Hi, Jon!
For all webinars, you can visit the Dlubal website to view them listed in recently released order.
www.dlubal.com/en-US/support-and-learning/learning/webinars
The general videos page, lists all videos also in recently released order which you can take advantage of the search options on the right side of the page to find exactly what you're looking for.
www.dlubal.com/en-US/support-and-learning/learning/videos
Is there an option to change units? From engish to SI
Hi, Ernesto!
Yes, this is not a problem,. You can set units and digits in many ways. It is described in the online manual at www.dlubal.com/en/downloads-and-information/documents/online-manuals/rfem-5/11/01/03
How to have the same tutorial in French?
Hi, le!
We will not present this webinar again as it was done using our previous program version RFEM 5. However, we have many new webinars to view in RFEM 6 as well as in French. You can view these directly on our website and TH-cam channel.
www.dlubal.com/fr/support-et-formation/apprentissage/webinaires?tz=adt&lang=fr&porder=desc&psize=10
I have seen many toturials done by you to put my slab over steel beams, and in every toturial you just avoid to do so. Can the problem do that ? or you are just avoiding it because it cannot ?? I am tired of this problem !! when I draw the slab over steel beams it just ignores the beams and the slab loading itself on the columns directly without considering the existance of steel beams !! How can I solve such problem please ??
Hi, Amin!
When you draw a slab over steel beams, all elements are fully considered in the FEA analysis. The steel beams will provide additional stiffness under the slab and will be accounted for including the resulting deflections and internal forces. If you are looking for the design of composite beams (i.e. stud spacing for the shear flow between the two elements), this is currently not implemented in RFEM. If you have additional questions, please send us your model along with the detailed questions to info@dlubal.com.
No New Zealand codes ?
Hi, Santosh!
I am sorry, but at the moment we do not have these specific codes. However, RFEM is quite adjustable regarding settings. Which codes exactly are you looking for?
@@DlubalEN codes like 3603, 3604
Hi, Santosh!
Thanky you, we will look into it.