I cannot understand if Robot respects the limits of the normal stress provided by the DM 14/01/2008 #220.127.116.11.2.1 or EC8 18.104.22.168.1(3)P.
For the section in the picture, taking into account only the concrete, NSD should be <= 0.65 Nrd (CDB) or NSD <= 0.55 Nrd (CDA).
Considering a 0,40x0,40 concrete section and type 32/40 concrete, you will have Fck =32 Mpa.
Considering only the concrete section The allowable Normal force should be 32 x 400 x400 x0.65 =3328kN.
It seems that Robot do not consider this limitation. In the section in the picture you will have: 3640x1.01=3676kN that seems out of allowable values.
Any suggestion ?
The model I am sending you is a really simple one. Is only a column whith an axial force that I have gruadally incremented in order to test the EC8 22.214.171.124.1(3)P and the DM14/01/2008 126.96.36.199.2.1 requirement.
I think anyway very important that structural analysis software declares clearly what kind of checks is doing especially if it declares that a given regulation is adopted.
I understand that the software is sold as is ... but ....
if you make mistakes in the design of an air conditioning system the problem will be that someone may feel hot or cold ... but..... if you make a mistake in dimensioning a structure ........
I think you'll agree with me.
I agree with GabrieleNovembr, the user should be aware of what provisions are implemented in Robot...
Furthermore, for so long i thought that this (quite important) provision was taken into account in Robot..
The development team has tentatively scheduled to deliver a fix in the next Service Pack which should be available by the end of this month. Please mind that you should have some seismic type combinations created to have this provisions checked.
Please note: Our quality assurance teams may need to reschedule some fixes. Please rely on the above timeline information as a guideline only and not a guarantee. We appreciate your understanding in this matter.
Artur, i think we all do agree that all the checkings cannot be implemented in one time, espacially because regulations are time-moving related to the feedback on project. Also because these modifications are state-ruled and then are not going by the same timeline than engineering practising.
However, as you know, robot or any other soft of the same time is largely used in the design offices world and for some project there is no alternative way chosen to check or design a structure, espacially for big structure -> checkings only consists of X software - verification.
That's why it is a key-subject to know which checkings are performed or not in order to implemented internally in some way the complementary required calculations.
The question is : Is there any document that listfor example code by code and paragraph by paragraph what is done or not.
One could think that this document should be kept secret in ordre to face other soft companies competition BUT :
1) this part of the software is "compulsory" if we considered that the soft shall be able to provide model from design to justification
2) this would not be a point to decide to choose Bentley instead of Autodesk because Robot doesn't check BS 8-1 XYZ .. it is a matter of time and not of ability to implement, the decision to choose a soft or another shall not rely on that type of consideration
3) our quality service and then credibility/reputation can be challenged with this kind of matter, what shall I say to a code consultant or a client if I provide a checking and I realized afterwards that part of it is missing ?
If this document doens't exist, could transfer this message to the appropriate service?
Thx a lot.
By the way, I grant the work you and the team provide, it is essential for "non click-modeling engineers" = enginners who do care about their job and aren't just waiting for green light saying All is OK!