<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://communities.bentley.com/cfs-file/__key/system/syndication/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>AISC Code Check</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/ram-staad/f/ram-staad-forum/199983/aisc-code-check</link><description>Hello, I am new to STAAD and have ran into an issue when checking a model. The model was initially checking for ACI 360-10 so I went to the STAAD Editor and changed the code check command to 2016. This changed the utilization ratio drastically on most</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>Telligent Community 12</generator><item><title>RE: AISC Code Check</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/thread/597114?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2020 22:49:55 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:3bbc16bb-5f93-40d8-9975-b7e7d94f0900</guid><dc:creator>Sye</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;The following wiki is now posted with a couple of suggested workaround&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="/products/ram-staad/w/structural_analysis_and_design__wiki/50641/staad-pro-is-considering-incorrect-cw-values-in-some-situations-leading-to-incorrect-ltb-capacity-calculations-when-designing-per-aisc-360-16"&gt;https://communities.bentley.com/products/ram-staad/w/structural_analysis_and_design__wiki/50641/staad-pro-is-considering-incorrect-cw-values-in-some-situations-leading-to-incorrect-ltb-capacity-calculations-when-designing-per-aisc-360-16&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>RE: AISC Code Check</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/thread/597016?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2020 14:22:02 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:299d4018-5b23-4465-ad8b-9f50c7360e35</guid><dc:creator>Grayson Gilliland</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Thank you Sye, this helps a lot!&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>RE: AISC Code Check</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/thread/596848?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2020 23:39:51 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:9d44b4f4-f7b0-4cd1-8c40-d75b6a41f32b</guid><dc:creator>Sye</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;We are investigating some issues with the Cw calculation for channels when designed as per the AISC 360-16 code. Due to a glitch, the software is using a higher value for Cw and that is causing the capacity to be overestimated and the utilization the ratio to go down. We are going to get this addressed in the upcoming release which is coming out in the next couple of months. For now specifically for channels, I would suggest going with the ratio that the AISC 360-10 is reporting.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>