Release Date: January 23, 2014
This document contains important information regarding changes to the RAM Structural System. It is important that all users are aware of these changes. Please distribute these release notes and make them available to all users of the RAM Structural System.
Version 14.06.01 automatically converts databases created in previous versions to the new database format. Databases opened and saved in V14.06.01 cannot be opened in previous versions, including V14.06. Note that a backup file is created automatically when a database is converted; the name of the database is the same, with “Orig” and the version number appended to the name. The file has an extension of “.zip” and is located in the same directory as the original database.
A benefit of the new licensing procedures is that it is not necessary to be connected to the internet at the time the program is run, in order to run the RAM Structural System, as long as that machine has accessed the Bentley license server and verified a valid license within the preceding 14 days. If a machine has not connected with the license server within the preceding 14 days, the first time this occurs a 14-day trial license will be activated allowing the program to continue to be available for that period. Subsequently, it is necessary to be connected to the internet so that a valid license can be verified with the license server. This same trial license capability allows a user to try out any of the RAM Structural System modules for 14 days, even if no license has been purchased for those modules. If you want to evaluate a module, merely invoke it and the 14-day trial period will begin.
This version can be found on the Bentley SELECT Services Downloads and Updates web page at: http://selectservices.bentley.com/en-US/Support/Downloads+And+Updates/
Select “Search Downloads” and log in using your User Name and Password. Perform a Search by searching for the “RAM Products”, and select the latest version of the RAM Structural System.
For details on these new features and enhancements, refer to the manual .pdf files available from the Help menu in each module or from the Manuals folder on your hard drive.
Two new controls for the display of the text have been added to the Process – Results – Member Forces command and the Process – Results – Member Forces Envelope command. The number of decimals to be displayed can be specified, and the location of the placement of the text along the member can be modified. These options provide means for eliminating problems with overlapping text in the display.
The purpose of Slab “Penetrations” is to model the impact that penetrations through the slab (for mechanical ducts, for example) have on the effective flange width for composite beam design. If a penetration is modeled adjacent to the beam, the effective flange width on that side of the beam is limited based on the location and distance out to the penetration. If a penetration is modeled directly over the beam (the beam cuts through the slab penetration) the program designs that beam as noncomposite. Previously for this condition the program did not consider the effect of the penetration on the unbraced length; the program now considers such beams to be unbraced through the length of the penetration (or longer if the deck doesn’t brace the flange). Note that since penetrations are generally quite small, this change is not likely to have any effects on the design, but this enhancement has been made for completeness, in the event that the beam size is small or the penetration is large, such that the unbraced length through the penetration controls the design.
In the View/Update command in the RAM Steel Beam module the number of studs required for Full Composite and for Partial Composite are shown. The number of studs required for Partial composite may be controlled by any of several requirements, including strength, deflection, minimum percent composite, maximum stud spacing, etc. The user has the ability to specify any value of studs for Actual, and then have the program Analyze the beam for that stud configuration. This number should almost never be specified as less than the value shown for Partial, otherwise some criteria or Code requirement will be violated. In such cases the program provides warnings when strength or deflection requirements are not met, but previously the program did not give a warning if the user specified a fewer number of studs that violated the maximum stud spacing requirements. Warnings have now been added indicating when the user-specified studs violate the code-mandated or user-specified maximum stud spacing. This change does not change any designs, it merely clarifies the acceptability of user-specified studs.
When specifying composite deck properties for use with AISC design the Modeler limited the stud length to hr+3". This is no longer a requirement of the AISC Specification so the limit was removed. This change has no impact on design. The limit was removed; longer studs can be specified (but note that longer studs don't impact the stud capacity). For ASD 9th and LRFD 3rd the equation limiting the value of stud length used to hr+3" is enforced.
Some deck profile properties have changed for decks manufactured by ASC, and these changes were updated in the deck properties table RAMDECKS.DCK. Specifically, the depth of ASC 2W is now 2-1/8” instead of 2”, and ASC N-24 deck has been replaced by ASC N-32 deck. To take advantage of these changes for existing models that use either of these profiles, re-specify the Composite Floor Deck Properties in the PropTable – Decking command in the Modeler; otherwise the program will continue to use the old values.
In the Shrinkage Deflection calculations for S16-09 Section 17.3.1(c) there is an ns term. The program was using the value of nt specified by the user in Criteria - Canada Parameters, but that wasn't apparent to the user, and the range of values for nt used by S16-01 is different than that used for ns by S16-09. The program has been enhanced to now calculate the value of ns when S16-09 is selected as the design code. The Beam Design report has been modified to list this value.
Some modifications were made that significantly enhance the performance (speed) of the 64 bit version of RAM Concrete Shear Wall module.
Changes were made in RAM Frame to improve the precision of the analysis. Most models will see little or no changes to the results. Models with dynamic load cases may see some nominal changes to member design forces. Re-invoke the Analyze command on models that were previously analyzed with an earlier version of the program to take advantage of this improvement to the precision of the analysis results.
In RAM Frame, in the Analysis of beams with RBS sections, if the option to Use Reduced Section Properties in Analysis was selected, the program took the simplistic approach of establishing the intermediate nodes along the beam starting with a node a distance “a” from the end of the Rigid End Zone as specified by the user. This has been enhanced so that regardless of the Rigid End Zone selection set by the user, the intermediate nodes along the beam now start at a distance “a” from the face of the column. This is unlikely to significantly affect the results, but is more accurate. The documentation has also been updated to indicate this change.
While some CAD programs allow spaces in layer names, AutoCAD and MicroStation do not (when imported as a .DXF file). If a DXF file is generated with a layer name specified by the user that includes a space, the space is automatically replaced with an underscore (‘_’) so that the DXF file is compatible with AutoCAD and MicroStation.
Some program errors have been identified and corrected for Version 14.06.01. Corrections made to graphics, reports, Modeler functions, program crashes, etc that were considered minor are not listed here. The noteworthy error corrections are listed here in order to notify you that they have been corrected or to assist you in determining the impact of those errors on previous designs. These errors were generally obscure and uncommon, affecting only a very small percentage of models, or had no impact on the results. The errors, when they occurred, were generally quite obvious. However, if there is any question, it may be advisable to reanalyze previous models to determine the impact, if any. In each case the error only occurred for the precise conditions indicated. Those errors that may have resulted in un-conservative designs are shown with an asterisk. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
CONSIDER ROOF LOADS*: Even if the option to "Consider Roof Loads" was selected as the default in the Defaults Utility, the option to "Consider Snow Loads" was used in new models. The opposite was also true.Effect: The wrong option was set in new models and used in design if user did not change this setting for the model. If the desired option was explicitly selected for the model, the correct loads were used.
DXF COLUMN & FOOTING DXF: The DXF – Column & Footing command did not function.Effect: Column and Footing DXF files could not be created.
RAM CONCEPT INTEGRATION: The RAM Concept file stored with the RAM Structural System model was accidentally deleted when converting from v14.5 to v14.6.Effect: The file contained settings relevant to the interaction between RAM Concept and RAM Structural System. These settings were lost and had to be re-entered.
JOB NAME: If the user changed the Job Name and then did a Save As, the new Job Name was not saved.Effect: Old Job Name, rather than the new Job Name, was saved with the database.
FRAME BEAMS: The ability to perform the View/Update on Frame Beams and then update the database with updated sizes was recently added to the program. As a result of this change, if a floor type was used on two or more stories and the Frame beam sizes differed between levels, performing a Design All caused the Frame beam sizes to be changed to be the same as that of the beam in the top-most occurrence of the layout type.Effect: Frame beam sizes may have been unintentionally modified.
SIZE LABELS: In some circumstances, the look up of a steel size in the Master steel table was case sensitive so, for example, the size w10x30 would not be found if listed in the master table as W10X30.Effect: The largest impact came from models imported through Revit or ISM. User-assigned sizes were not found in the steel table so the design or analysis could not be completed.
CAN/CSA S16 COMPOSITE BEAMS WITH THIN FLANGES*: Investigations of thin flanged composite beams with stud diameters exceeding 2.5 times the flange thickness received no warning.Effect: Although beam designs were correct and provisions of Section 17.6.5 were enforced during beam size optimization, investigated user sizes were not warned of flange thickness requirements per Section 17.6.5 of the CAN/CSA S16 specification when the stud diameters exceeded 2.5 times the flange thickness.
CAN/CSA S16-09 MAXIMUM STUD SPACING: The minimum of 4 times deck thickness or 600mm was used for the maximum stud spacing rather than 1000mm.Effect: An incorrect maximum stud spacing was enforced, potentially resulting in more studs being called out than were necessary.
CAN/CSA S16-09 MINIMUM COMPOSITE: When S16-09 was selected the program limited the minimum composite to 0.50 rather than 0.40 as permitted in Section 17.9.4(a).Effect: Designs may have conservatively called out more studs than required.
COLUMN LOADS*: If a wall was supported by columns below (rather than by another wall or a beam), the self-weight of any steel beams framing into the end of the wall was not transferred down to the supporting columns.Effect: The column loads for columns supporting a wall did not include the self-weight of the beams framing in to the wall end above the column.
HANGING COLUMNS: When viewing the Column Design report for a hanger from the View/Update dialog, the self-weight of the hanger was, in some cases, calculated and reported incorrectly.Effect: Dead load used to check the design was too high. The reported design was based on this dead load which resulted in overly-conservative results. Designs may be reported to have failed which would not have failed if the correct dead load had been considered. Note that the results displayed in the View/Update dialog, on the screen and in the column design report as issued from the Reports menu were correct; only the report issued from the View/Update View Results command was wrong.
CAN/CSA S16-09 COLUMN REPORT: For columns with axial compression and strong axis moment at the bottom of the column, the design report did not include a section on Strength.Effect: Although column codes check were correct for all columns, the report for columns with axial and strong axis moment at the bottom of the column showed sections for Member and Lateral Torsional Buckling (where applicable), and failed to show a section on Strength.
BASEPLATE DESIGN*: No failure warning was given if the required baseplate dimensions (due to column size and minimum edge distances) were larger than the size of the supporting concrete column/pier.Effect: In that case, the baseplate dimensions were given as required for the column size and minimum edge distances, which exceeded the supporting concrete dimensions. The reports showed the correct design values and results, but no warning was given for this condition, even in some cases where the concrete was overstressed.
FORCE DIAGRAMS FOR DYNAMIC LOAD CASES: The Member Force diagrams for dynamic load cases may have displayed incorrect values at locations along the member.Effect: Display error only. This error did not affect the member designs.
EUROCODE ENV1991-2-4:1995 WIND*: The story forces generated for the pre-standard Eurocode ENV 1991 wind were incorrect.Effect: Incorrect design loads. (Note: the current implementation is the pre-standard, which has been replaced by EN 1991-1-4:2005.)
BRACE FIXITY*: If braces were not pinned, the program incorrectly handled the shears and moments in these braces when calculating and reporting reactions and building and frame story shears.Effect: Reported reactions and story shears were incorrect if the model contained fixed-end braces. Error did not occur if the braces were pinned.
DIRECT SOLVER: For models with two-way decks and rigid diaphragms, the execution time to solve the system was longer compared to the previous version.Effect: Excessive analysis time. In some cases, an insufficient memory issue occurred.
ANALYSIS LOG REPORT: The report did not properly include moments from walls when reporting equilibrium check results.Effect: Report error only. Other reports and designs were not affected by this error
RESPONSE SPECTRA ANALYSIS*: If a model included a two-way deck that was specified to be considered as a Pseudo-Flexible diaphragm, the program considered the full stiffness of the diaphragm both in-plane and out-of-plane in the analysis. As a result, the Pseudo-Flexible diaphragm was analyzed as if it were a Semirigid diaphragm for the Response Spectra load cases.Effect: In an unusual set of conditions (response spectra analysis on a model with two-way deck specified as Pseudo-Flexible) the Dynamic response spectra load case results were not valid. Lateral and gravity load cases were not affected by this error.
DYNAMIC LOAD CASE REACTIONS: Incorrect moment reactions were reported in the Frame Reactions report for dynamic load cases.Effect: The report listed incorrect moment values.
CANADA S16-09 SECTION 13.3.1*: An incorrect n value was used for Class H round HS and an incorrect value may have been used for square and rectangular HSS.Effect: An incorrect n value may have resulted in unconservative designs of round HS and incorrect designs of square and rectangular HSS shapes.
CANADA JOINT CODE CHECK: The S16-01 and S16-09 Joint Code Check report listed incorrect capacities for Clause 21.3(b) when the '?' steel grade was specified for columns in the Criteria – Canada Parameters command in the RAM Manager.Effect: The reported capacities for clause 21.3(3) were incorrect for columns assigned a steel grade of '?'.
CANADA S16-09 CODE CHECK SUMMARY: The summary report may have listed some incorrect controlling clauses.Effect: Report error only, the designs listed in the report were correct but the controlling clause reference may have been incorrect.
BEAM DESIGN REPORT: The clear length and c-c length were incorrectly reported for stub cantilever members. For beams with extension cantilevers, the cantilever lengths were not reported.Effect: Report error only.
AUSTRALIA AS 3600-09: Using AS 3600-09, the column design report referenced Clause 8.25(i) which does not exist. This has been corrected to reference 8.2.5(a).Effect: Design was correct, but code reference was wrong.
AUSTRALIA AS 3600-09*: Using AS 3600-2009, the number of legs reported in the Transverse tab of the V/U dialog may have been incorrect, and the concrete capacity in shear in the minor axis direction may have been underestimated.Effect: Incorrect reporting of number of legs of shear reinforcement and of concrete capacity.
PMM DIAGRAM: When viewing the PMM diagram for a column design using any of the ACI codes, the compressive resistance (phi * Pn) shown in the diagram was sometimes marginally less than the actual calculated compressive resistance.Effect: Not impact on designs or reports, the error was only in the diagram.
CONCRETE COLUMN SUMMARY REPORT: When designing to BS8110 or CP65, columns unreinforced for shear were reported to have a Ld/Cap ratio of "#1.J" instead of "N/A".Effect: Report error only.
COUPLING BEAM SHEAR*: When designing shear wall coupling beams, the wrong load combination may have been reported as the critical one for shear.Effect: In rare case the wrong design shear was used in the design. When the error occurred, it was only with seismic load combinations, not wind load combinations.
PILE CAPACITY*: If the load on a pile exceeded capacity by 1% or less, the program accepted the pile cap design without warning.Effect: In rare cases the design of pile caps may have been unconservative, by less than 1%.
LIVE LOAD REDUCTION ON GRAVITY WALLS: If the option was selected to get gravity wall forces from RAM Steel results, the forces for the Live Load case were not reduced.Effect: Unreduced Live Loads on walls were always used in the foundation design.
(Note: RAM DataAccess errors reported here only impact programs written by third parties that use the functions indicated; these errors had no impact on results in the RAM Structural System.)
SELF-WEIGHT OF GRAVITY COLUMNS: The IForces1.GetGrvColForcesForLCase() function included the self-weight of columns even when the self-weight option in RAM Manager was not selected.Effect: The return value of the dead load for the column always included self-weight of the columns, resulting in excess loads on columns.
RAM DATA ACCESS: ILayoutHorizBraces.Add() didn't work properly when the start and end coordinates were flipped.Effect: Invalid data in the model after adding the horizontal brace.