Abacus Programs. Release Notes. RIB Software SE

Transcription

1 Release Notes RIB Software SE

2 1 Basic installation Innovations Version Version Version FETT Innovations Version Version Version Fixed defects Version Version Version STUR Innovations Version Version Version Fixed defects Version Version Version Page 2 of 10

3 1 Basic installation 1.1 Innovations Version General Modifications in the installation behavior of the base module in connection with the AutoUpdate for mixed installations of RIBTEC and abacus programs. All types of installations are now possible, only a single-user installation in combination with a client installation of a client/server solution is not supported due to technical reasons AutoUpdate The program RIB structural engineering - Automatic updates can be downloaded and installed separately. With this it is possible to download the latest Abacus programs and provide them for an installation without having to previously install the RIBTEC base module Version General Program modifications for the compatibility with Windows Version Steel construction The material selection for the steel analyses has been extended with the structural steel S275. This is considered especially in STUR General Program maintenance and support 8783 Page 3 of 10

4 2 FETT 2.1 Innovations Version Calculation Recesses at lever arms were not completely considered in the examination of the possibility to place the reinforcement Calculation The increased stress range according to Heft 600 can now be considered optionally in the fatigue analysis Output document Enhanced output of the analysis criteria for the fatigue analysis Design Revision of the recess design The calculation of the inner lever arm in the area of openings was carried out without the consideration of the reduction according to DIN EN (1) NA/DE - amendment up to now Sometimes results, which do not comply with the existing spacings, occurred for openings close to each other, as well as in the area of beam ends. Now, a design as post is carried out in between two openings, in case there is not enough space between the openings for the discontinuity areas. For this, the strut angles are optimized in a way, that the discontinuity area becomes as small as possible. Only if this is not sufficient, a post is applied in between the openings. The cotangent theta is now also specified in the area of an opening for the webs to clarify the processes. An appropriate note is issued in these cases, to make the reason for the post design clear An error message is issued at the beginning / end of a girder, if the discontinuity area can not be situated up to the support. Furthermore, the distance between the support and the opening is now used for the existing dimensions of the discontinuity area. Until now, the beam end has been considered. A note is now issued in the printout when exceeding VEd/VRdmax Design Additional control in the input for the consideration of NA /2, respectively, 6.31 (only applicable for approximately rectangular solid cross-sections). Up to now, the possible more favorable assumptions were considered for all cross-sections Version General Program modifications for the compatibility with Windows Output document The output for the fatigue analysis has been enhanced with information about the combination criteria and the leading action for the combination generation. Additionally, the dynamic factor for the fatigue load is now issued Page 4 of 10

5 2.1.3 Version Output document Upgrading of the graph headings with the information "T oo" (Point in time - infinite) Output document The analysis of the concrete compressive stress at the time t(0) has been added to the calculation in version 14.0 due to multiple requests. At the request of precast element manufacturers this analysis was made optional, since it is generally provided by material testing in the factory and the can often not be provided calculative. Therefore it can now be selected in the dialog of the material properties, whether the analysis is to be carried out or not ("Analysis sigma.c at the time t0") Design The minimum amount of shear reinforcement for structured cross-sections is to be calculated with the equation 0,256 * fctm / fyk according to DIN EN ,9.2.2(5). A button, with which the user can decide whether this regulation is to be considered or not ("Structured cross-section with prestressed tension chord"), has been added to the input dialog for the material properties in order to consider this regulation Design When specifying fctm(t) for the calculation of the transmission length, also the timedepending coefficient beta.cc is calculated under consideration of the specification. In order to clarify this beta.cc is marked with a * (like fctm(t) already). The legend for this points out, that the values marked by a * have been calculated based on the specified values Page 5 of 10

6 2.2 Fixed defects Version Output document The graphics for small openings were not always displayed correctly in FETT. For small openings, in which the strut has to be below the opening, the suspension reinforcement was not in the right position relating to the opening. Additionally there is now an information, where the strut runs (above / below) and in which angle (modified graphic to the previous version) Calculation In the design of reinforced girders with several steel layers, the lever arm of the outer steel layer has been considered up to now. Now, the calculation is carried out with the resultant of the steel layers Calculation The calculation of small circular recesses has been revised again. Too unfavorable results were compassed since the version from The inclination of the strut is now additionally issued as a result Output document For the most unfavorable position with a too small distance to other x-positions, the design of single recesses was not issued Design The changes in the last version relating to use cotangent theta from the beam design as upper limit proved to be unfavorable, since the strut angle in the web is steepened for asb < asb.min in order to reduce the stirrup spacing. This is, however, unfavorable for the recess design, respectively, caused unsymmetrical results. Now, the upper limit of 32.5 is used again for the calculation Design Not the stress resultants at the end of opening were used for the calculation of round openings, but the ones in the distance 'Width/root(2)'. For symmetrical systems it was noticed, that this causes unsymmetrical results in the recess design Design The strut width according to figure 3.3 in Heft 459 has been calculated too large for round openings Output document In certain combinations, the calculation of the openings was issued multiple times Calculation The upper limit of cotangent theta for the calculation of the widths of the discontinuity areas in the design of openings did not consider the cotangent theta from the shear design Calculation The lever arm z for the shear force design has been calculated too small in the chords of the recess design since version 17.0, whereby the shear force bearing capacity has been applied too small Design A too low ny_edj was possibly issued in the detailed output of the shear joint design, if no shear joint reinforcement was required. The wrong shear forces were possibly issued in the result list of the shear joint design, if no shear joint reinforcement was required No reduced shear forces at the beam end were issued in the shear design table, if an incomplete load input, in which only a value at the beginning of the load has been entered, existed Output document The automatic calculation of the fire resistance class malfunctioned both according to DIN EN and according to Dibt guideline Output document Up to now, the regulation smax <= uk/8 (according to DIN EN (3)) for torsion stirrups has always been additionally considered for the calculation of the minimum stirrup spacing. This is now only carried out, if a torsion stirrup reinforcement is required Calculation Load inputs in which all values were set to 0.00 and that are not placed at the end of the input were classified as possibly single loads. This caused, that the reduction of the shear force due to line loads in the area close to a support was not carried out Page 6 of 10

7 2.2.2 Version Output document For calculations in which the program FETT automatically generates proportionally many sections (e.g. many openings, many differently placed loads, etc.) it could happen, that the result graph of the shear reinforcement was shown shifted and did not correspond with the tabular results Design Due to a correction in 2015 (ID 8889) questionable tensile force resistance diagrams resulted for some systems with overhead tendons. At the same time, tendons in the area of notched supports were possibly not listed in the analysis of the anchorage Design Unsymmetrical result gradients for the shear reinforcement were generated for some symmetrical systems due to numerical inaccuracies Calculation Due to a revision from (ID Version 14.0) wrong curvatures in the cracked state resulted in some cases, which caused implausible stress peaks in the result graphs of the concrete stress and also influenced the deflection in the final state Calculation An increased required shear reinforcement was sometimes issued at positions, at which the minimum reinforcement was sufficient, in the shear design of calculations according to EN (basic Eurocode) Calculation Numerical problems occurred from too restrictive queries, which were reflected in the result graphs as stress peak and accordingly in sometimes pointless results in the stress tables Calculation In the fatigue analysis according to the simplified method (Level 1) the fatigue load Qfat has not been loaded with dynamic factor phi according to DIN EN eq.(6.3). Thereby the analysis could be too favorable. The factor is now considered for level 1 as well as level Calculation The coefficient eta2 is to be assumed as 1.4 for profiled wires and for strands according to eq.(8.20) DIN EN NA-DE. Up to now, strands were considered with the coefficient 1.2, which caused a slightly increased total anchorage length according to eq.(8.21) Version Calculation Since Build a minimum reinforcement was possibly considered although it is not allowed, respectively, no minimum reinforcement was considered although it could have been due to a faulty query Calculation A specification of cot Theta = 1.0, regardless if by the user or internal by the program, was not considered correctly. Thereby unfavorable results ensued to some extent, e.g for the longitudinal torsion reinforcement Calculation The value Vrdc for the uncracked condition according to eq. 6.4 was not considered correctly in the last version. The value was issued when decisive, but not applied in the calculation which sometimes caused more unfavorable results Calculation The minimum reinforcement in the area close to a support < d had been issued twice in the reinforcement graph, since it was interpreted as torsion reinforcement and therefore has been multiplied by 2 in the graphical output Calculation In rare cases extremely high stresses were issued for slightly loaded beams Calculation Incorrect values were issued in the torsion graphs due to a change in the last program version Calculation Is a combined analysis of shear force and torsion not necessary according to NA /2, then ast = Calculation Correction in the calculation of the reduction factor for single loads close to a support. Single loads close to a support in the area up to 2*d and evenly distributed loads at the support in the distance d are now considered correctly Page 7 of 10

8 Calculation Twice the required amount of reinforcement for the minimum reinforcement of the crack width limitation has wrongly been issued since the version from February Calculation Prestressing steel was not considered in the calculation of the ideal cross-section values at the beginning and at the end of a beam. The stress at the time t0 was only calculated at the first considered section. This caused the use of incorrect ideal cross-section values in the calculation of notched beams (prestressing steel stress t0) Design The position (top/bottom) of the tendons was sometimes misjudged for very small beams, which caused, that the bearable tensile force of the tendons was not issued in the result graph Calculation For permanent single loads at the beginning of the beam (Position x=0.00) or the end of the beam (Position x=beam length) sometimes the sum of the support forces was calculated incorrectly for the safety against displacement, so that possibly this combination wrongly became decisive Design Consideration of the existing edge stress for the minimum reinforcement. Now, the calculation of the compression / tension zone height is based on the existing stress, if it is < fcteff. So far always fctm has been the basis. This is based on the comment for the DIN EN (2) (Eurocode for Germany EC2 commented version). This is a major factor for a significantly reduced minimum reinforcement for cracks. Coefficient k for eq. (7.1) is now considered with 0.8 and 0.5, instead of 1.0 and 0.65, according to the german national annex The reference width for the interpolation of the coefficient k was the member height - now it is the member width in the tension zone Reduced required reinforcement for "Thick members with restraint" has always been considered for DIN :2008. Now only if kc == 1.0 Reduced required reinforcement for "Thick members with restraint" has not been considered for DIN EN Now for kc == 1.0 The calculation of fct,eff according to DIN EN /NA-DE is now carried out like according DIN :2008 (at least 3.0 N/mm^2) The reference value for table 7.2 according to DIN EN is now 2.9 and no longer 3.0 (value from DIN ) Inconsistencies in the calculation of tension / compression zone height fixed The calculation of the concrete area of the tension zone according to DIN :2008 was sometimes too favorable. Hereby sometimes too favorable values for the minimum reinforcement resulted 8332 Page 8 of 10

9 3 STUR 3.1 Innovations Version General Program maintenance and support Version General Program modifications for the compatibility with Windows Version Analysis Up to now, the calculation terminated as soon as some cross-section part was classified in cross-section class 4. The program has been adjusted, so that the calculation of the common analyses is still carried out and a hint about the cross-section classification is issued in the protocol. Thus it is in the user's discretion, if the calculation is completed by structural actions or by adding a separate buckling analysis. The problem usually occurs, e.g. for IPE sections, in areas where the moment is ~0 and a compressive force exists. For these sections under pure compressive loading the cross-section class 4 is used according to Table 5.2 in DIN EN If it can be ensured by a buckling analysis that no buckling occurs, the lateral torsional buckling and flexural buckling analysis should be valid anyway. In this case the program assumes that Aeff=A, so the full cross-section area may be applied Steel construction The material selection for the steel analyses has been extended with the structural steel S275. For this, an additional update of the basic installation is required! Calculation Extension with the basic combination for the assembly state of precast elements according to DIN EN (NA.4) Page 9 of 10

10 3.2 Fixed defects Version Calculation The parts of the Pz loads from the second order theory were not considered in the load transfer to FUNDA Version Calculation The factors for the favorably acting permanent loads as well as for permanent loads in the assembly state were not calculated correctly in the generated load case combinations for the load transfer to FUNDA Calculation Some systems could no longer be calculated due to kinematics since version because of a bug General Program maintenance and support Version Design The ductility reinforcement was always considered in the design, even if it had been deactivated by the user previously Design In the design with effective stiffnesses increased result values, which were not comprehensible, were issued at some positions in the reinforcement distribution. This occurred due to numerical problems in the calculation. Now, no more "outliers" should occur in the reinforcement result distribution General Program maintenance and support 8805 Page 10 of 10