Hello
I am trying to create a GCFF file which can be imported into RAM Concept. I am struggling defining temperature and shrinkage loads so that they can be successfully imported. In this respect, can anyone point me in the right direction of how to specify temperature and shrinkage loads within a GCFF file, so that they can be imported into RAM Concept?
As an example, I have a temperature load case defined as follows:
<Table name="LoadCase"> <Column name="Key" type="Key" default="0"/> <Column name="Name" type="String"/> <Column name="LoadCaseType" type="String" default="other_dead"/> <Column name="AnalysisType" type="String" default="normal"/> <Row> <Key>1</Key> <Name>T</Name> <LoadCaseType>temperature</LoadCaseType> <AnalysisType>normal</AnalysisType> </Row> </Table>
And then I tried to specify the temperature area load as follows:
<Table name="AreaLoadForTemperature"> <Column name="Key" type="Key" default="0"/> <Column name="Location" type="Polygon2D" units="m_"/> <Column name="ALTTop" type="Double" default="20"/> <Column name="ALTBot" type="Double" default="20"/> <Column name="LoadCase" type="Key" default="0" table_reference="LoadCase"/> <Row> <Key>1</Key> <Location>[[219.0][104.95]][[220.62][104.95]][[220.62][101.85]][[219.0][101.85]]</Location> <ALTTop>20</ALTTop> <ALTBot>20</ALTBot> <LoadCase>1</LoadCase> </Row> </Table>
However, this does not work. A temperature loadcase is created, but under Loadings layer, the temperature load has the usual All Loads Plan, Point Loads Plan, etc. but no Temperature Loads Plan.
Can anyone help?
Thank you!
The GCFF format predates the Temperature and Shrinkage types of load cases in Ram Concept so it probably was never hooked up. You can add loading type in Ram Concept manually, or you can use the newer scripting API. Here's a relevant clip from the scripting API help:
Hi Seth,Thank you for your prompt response. It's a shame that this can't be done through GCFF. I am aware that I can do this manually. I was trying to automate things through GCFF.
I will look at API scripting. Ultimately, I guess, it would be a better way to go.