Hello Dr. CEE You are 1000% right, Cold-formed-sections in RSAP are a pain and they do require a lot of manual tweaking and setting up of the database(s). Luckily or fortunately, the reference(s) that you have shared does cover all of this very well. What remains a bummer for me though is that even with all the careful and painstaking definitions and tweaking of the databases, etc. RSAP cold formed section design module seems to always display a warning message about that “……the members are made from sections for which the EC3 code does not provide the formulas for calculating the critical moment. Mcr for these sections was calculated as for bisymmetric elements ......”. In my case, this warning message does NOT go away, it is always there. CEE have also referred to the same warning message on this video tutorial (12:44) I do recall that you have indicated before that perhaps the other equations (if any) to deal with those sections as opposed to defaulting to dealing with them (sections) as bisymmetric elements may possibly not have yet been implemented by Autodesk on RSAP…… A closer look at the warning message seems that RSAP team is indicating that those equations are not even there on the EC3 code? I am reading this view from the part of the warning message that says that (…..EC3 code does not provide the formulas….). I admit that I am less conversant with the exact procedures that are required to be followed by the EC3 to design say a C or a Z cold formed section. But I would have thought that those procedures are (or ought to be) available considering that the code is primarily dedicated to .....rules for cold-formed members and sheeting….. I get that both C and Z sections can be viewed as (and they are actually) bisymmetric sections depending on the axis of reference. What bothers me is that, if the EC3 wanted to design these sections as bisymmetric sections, why then did they not just do that? and if they did just do that and designed them as bisymmetric sections, why then is RSAP warning about this approach as if the design (as bisymmetric sections) is not strictly in compliance to the EC3 code? I suppose this is one of those life mysteries that will requires me to dive deeper into the EC3 itself in order to find out what the code really uses to design these sections.😊 Thank you for your hard work /slash whooping cold-formed sections SIZED ^_^ …. I really appreciate what you do, even around such challenging topics as this particular one. I have enjoyed this video and I am looking forward to the next CEE videos Kind regards, DK
Hi there Engr. DK, it was a bit painful preparing that one to be honest. Like I had printed me out some documentation to try follow exactly what RSA is trying to tell me. I even have my "archaic" Robot Millenium hardcopy book to check, because RSA is built on Robot Millenium's DNA (back in the day I remember it was called Robobat). I kind of lost my faith in the Cold-Formed section design, it was kind of tedious and even the idea of having a "certain section list" that needs to be done in order for robot to even see that it is a cold formed section is kind of strange. What I thought about the EC3 code not providing equations was maybe due to the fact that those were taken from kind of old section databases that may not be EC3 compatible. I have to investigate to be honest. It still reverts back to first principles, so I kind of let it pass, coz you could derive equations from Mechanics of Materials, something that needs the properties of the cross section, that is provided by RSA's section database. I still have to do some reading on the EC3 code before I can give a definitive answer as to why the EC3 code does not cover those sections, I agree with you that it kind of bothers me too, but you know, I do not want to simply say: "well you see... " and give some opinion without being 100% sure about it. You are most welcome, and stay tuned for the upcoming RC structure series. Regards, CEE
Thank you very much for the video and this series in particular! I've seen warehouses being built with columns and beams made from cold formed sections too...could you make a video designing a small warehouse with this type of solution?
Hi there, I am really you found some benefits in my vids. Makes me happy. I think I would consider it, but once I finish the RC design series. Please note, as you see from this video, that RSA has its shortcomings when it comes to cold-formed sections, so I still have to find a way around to explain it in an easier fashion. Stay tuned for more content, CEE
Love your video's! They help so much. The best place to learn Robot online. Could you do a video on Load Patterns? There is very little online about it. I'm trying to find anything helpful online, but so far I've found nothing.
Hello, thank you for the very useful video. I make structural and production desings for roll forming machines like Framecad, and scottdale. I'm just changeing to Robot it would be very useful to have some specific introdution for this area. If is's not your plan nowdays is it possilbe to reach you as a personal consultant?
Sure, I can help. Currently, I am a little busy with the bridge series, non-linear FEM series and RC building design series. You can email me on: civ.eng.essentials@gmail.com I will see what I can do. Regards, CEE
I feel like Autodesk has not given much attention to Robot in terms of software improvement over the years. Revit has seen lots of improvements over the years but Robot has seen lots of stagnation. I really don't understand.
Hello Dr. CEE
You are 1000% right, Cold-formed-sections in RSAP are a pain and they do require a lot of manual tweaking and setting up of the database(s). Luckily or fortunately, the reference(s) that you have shared does cover all of this very well.
What remains a bummer for me though is that even with all the careful and painstaking definitions and tweaking of the databases, etc. RSAP cold formed section design module seems to always display a warning message about that “……the members are made from sections for which the EC3 code does not provide the formulas for calculating the critical moment. Mcr for these sections was calculated as for bisymmetric elements ......”. In my case, this warning message does NOT go away, it is always there. CEE have also referred to the same warning message on this video tutorial (12:44)
I do recall that you have indicated before that perhaps the other equations (if any) to deal with those sections as opposed to defaulting to dealing with them (sections) as bisymmetric elements may possibly not have yet been implemented by Autodesk on RSAP……
A closer look at the warning message seems that RSAP team is indicating that those equations are not even there on the EC3 code? I am reading this view from the part of the warning message that says that (…..EC3 code does not provide the formulas….).
I admit that I am less conversant with the exact procedures that are required to be followed by the EC3 to design say a C or a Z cold formed section. But I would have thought that those procedures are (or ought to be) available considering that the code is primarily dedicated to .....rules for cold-formed members and sheeting…..
I get that both C and Z sections can be viewed as (and they are actually) bisymmetric sections depending on the axis of reference. What bothers me is that, if the EC3 wanted to design these sections as bisymmetric sections, why then did they not just do that? and if they did just do that and designed them as bisymmetric sections, why then is RSAP warning about this approach as if the design (as bisymmetric sections) is not strictly in compliance to the EC3 code?
I suppose this is one of those life mysteries that will requires me to dive deeper into the EC3 itself in order to find out what the code really uses to design these sections.😊
Thank you for your hard work /slash whooping cold-formed sections SIZED ^_^ …. I really appreciate what you do, even around such challenging topics as this particular one.
I have enjoyed this video and I am looking forward to the next CEE videos
Kind regards, DK
Hi there Engr. DK,
it was a bit painful preparing that one to be honest. Like I had printed me out some documentation to try follow exactly what RSA is trying to tell me. I even have my "archaic" Robot Millenium hardcopy book to check, because RSA is built on Robot Millenium's DNA (back in the day I remember it was called Robobat).
I kind of lost my faith in the Cold-Formed section design, it was kind of tedious and even the idea of having a "certain section list" that needs to be done in order for robot to even see that it is a cold formed section is kind of strange.
What I thought about the EC3 code not providing equations was maybe due to the fact that those were taken from kind of old section databases that may not be EC3 compatible. I have to investigate to be honest. It still reverts back to first principles, so I kind of let it pass, coz you could derive equations from Mechanics of Materials, something that needs the properties of the cross section, that is provided by RSA's section database.
I still have to do some reading on the EC3 code before I can give a definitive answer as to why the EC3 code does not cover those sections, I agree with you that it kind of bothers me too, but you know, I do not want to simply say:
"well you see... " and give some opinion without being 100% sure about it.
You are most welcome, and stay tuned for the upcoming RC structure series.
Regards,
CEE
Thank you very much for the video and this series in particular! I've seen warehouses being built with columns and beams made from cold formed sections too...could you make a video designing a small warehouse with this type of solution?
Hi there, I am really you found some benefits in my vids. Makes me happy.
I think I would consider it, but once I finish the RC design series.
Please note, as you see from this video, that RSA has its shortcomings when it comes to cold-formed sections, so I still have to find a way around to explain it in an easier fashion.
Stay tuned for more content,
CEE
Thanks!
Great you liked it. Hope you find the rest of the videos beneficial.
Love your video's! They help so much. The best place to learn Robot online.
Could you do a video on Load Patterns?
There is very little online about it. I'm trying to find anything helpful online, but so far I've found nothing.
That's a great idea!. Please remind me once I finish my RC series, it is gonna start soon and has been in the pipeline for a long time.
Regards,
CEE
Hello, thank you for the very useful video.
I make structural and production desings for roll forming machines like Framecad, and scottdale. I'm just changeing to Robot it would be very useful to have some specific introdution for this area.
If is's not your plan nowdays is it possilbe to reach you as a personal consultant?
Sure, I can help.
Currently, I am a little busy with the bridge series, non-linear FEM series and RC building design series.
You can email me on: civ.eng.essentials@gmail.com
I will see what I can do.
Regards,
CEE
Hi there, I just saw your email (it was in my spam folder). I will check out the stuff and reply this evening.
Wishing you all the best,
CEE
@@CivilEngineeringEssentials Thank you!
Great work Doctor , I hope i can work with you one day , will you accept me as internship ? 😅
Eng. Ali Omar
I wish ^_^, So far, I do not own my own consultancy company. Nevertheless, feel free to ask any question. More than happy to answer.
I feel like Autodesk has not given much attention to Robot in terms of software improvement over the years. Revit has seen lots of improvements over the years but Robot has seen lots of stagnation. I really don't understand.
I agree. Even the last update with liad takedown does not seem to offer much 🌹