Today I noticed that in the stability analysis in steel design in RFEM 6 (6.14.0002), despite the checkmark to modify XLT (Chi LT) by the factor F, nothing changes in the design because the factor kc is always assumed to be 1.
I know that in EC 3 in RSTAB 8, based on the German NA and the literature, reductions were possible and were also taken into account there. (Depending on the moment distribution)
The question is how I can change or influence the factor kc in RFEM 6 from 1 to another value?
Good day, I am very interested in how the XLT is involved in the stability analysis; this is a reduction factor that only enters the design when imperfections are taken into account.
Are you actually referring here to the steel design instead of the stability analysis?
A model or at least some images would be very helpful.
What is meant is the steel design, or more precisely the substitute bar method. I simply used the wrong terms there. The following will include images related to what I actually meant.
It is important to mention that in RSTAB 8 and RFEM 6 it is the same model and I imported the model from RSTAB 8 into RFEM 6.
I will not refer to the latest EC3 in the following, as it was not clear to me whether the updated version has already been implemented in the programs or not. Therefore, the previous versions.
The following three images are excerpts from the standard, which give the indication that a reduction is possible due to the moment distribution. In the National Annex, reference is made to literature where further cases are treated beyond what is covered in the EC. EC 3-1-1
Below are my settings of the two programs. This concerns the same beam, same location, same support conditions, same internal forces. So everything is identical. The only difference in RFEM 6 compared to RSTAB 8 is the factor kc, which for whatever reason is set to 1.0, although the moment distribution is not rectangular.
If the envelope method is chosen, no exact calculation of k_c according to EN 1993-1-1 Table 6.6 is performed in RFEM 6. In this case, k_c is always assumed to be on the safe side with 1.0.
If you have any further questions or need support, I am happy to help!
