Release Date: April 17, 2012
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.
A new version of the RAM – Revit link program, Version 4.00, was simultaneously released with version V14.04.05. The information on that release is reproduced here for your convenience: The main purpose for patch version V14.04.05 of the RAM Structural System is to make available some changes to the RAM DataAccess modules to enable enhancements in the RAM – Revit link program. The RAM – Revit Link V4.00 provides a more robust and seamless link between the two programs. It includes several powerful features, including the ability to handle multi-level continuous columns and walls, and a more straight-forward way of handling cantilevered beams. Several significant errors have been corrected, most notably some that were encountered when linking with Revit 2012. Download the new link to take advantage of the enhanced capabilities.
This version includes some refinements to some program features.
The check for the requirements of Section 13.2c of AISC 341-05 for braces in braced frames was enhanced to consider combinations with Dynamic load cases, when present and when the option to “Consider Sign for Analysis Results” is selected.
For use in third-party programs, the RAM DataAccess function CLoading_DAMan::GetLoadSetPropLoadCaseInfoArray has been enhanced to include Partition loads.
Some program errors have been identified in V14.04.0x and corrected for Version 14.04.07. The errors, when they occurred, were generally quite obvious, involving user interface and reports. Errors that potentially could have produced unconservative results are marked with an asterisk. Some corrections were made to the ISM link to allow a smoother transition between the RAM Structural System and ISM. Some corrections were also made to some RAM DataAccess functions; these changes did not impact the RAM Structural System but may have affected third-party programs written to use these functions. We apologize for any inconvenience these may have caused.
LIVE LOAD REDUCTION ON ROOF AND SNOW LOADS*: If a user assigned a Live Load reduction percentage to a beam, column or wall, the Roof loads were being reduced even if the user had specified that Roof loads were to be unreducible. Likewise, if the model had snow loads, the reduction was being applied to snow loads on members. Effect: Roof and snow loads were always getting reduced for beams, columns and walls with user-assigned Live Load Reduction values irrespective of the Live Load type and may have resulted in unconservative design of steel and concrete beams, columns and walls.
BEAM SUMMARY: The Beam Summary report listed incorrect moment capacity values for stub cantilevers for the LRFD 3rd, BS5950, CAN, Eurocode and AS4100 design codes.Effect: Report error only, the designs were correct. The Beam Design reports listed the correct values. BEAM DESIGN REPORT: The reported values for the effective modulus and deflections in the Smartbeam and Westok Cellular Beam reports were incorrect.Effect: Report error only. The designs were correct; the reported effective modulus and deflection values were incorrect.
INTERACTION COLORS*: The steel beam design colors and corresponding controlling interaction values displayed were incorrect if the Flange Stress controlled the design for the BS5950, AS4100-98 and CAN/CSA S16-01 design codes.Effect: Although beam designs were correct, the display of interaction colors and corresponding controlling interaction values were incorrect when the Flange Stress controlled the design for the BS5950, AS4100-98 and CAN/CSA S16-01 design codes. The reports were correct.
COLUMNS IN TENSION WITH BS 5950: When columns were in tension and being designed per BS 5950 the program would conservatively use the requirements of Clause 4.7.7 (simple column in compression) rather than those of Clause 18.104.22.168.Effect: Potentially slightly conservative designs for columns in tension with BS 5950.
RIGHT STUB CANTILEVER ON WALL END*: If a user has modeled a right oriented stub cantilever on a wall end then the reaction load from the stub cantilever was always not applied. Effect: The wall supporting the right stub cantilever did not see the correct vertical loading. This may have resulted in incorrect design/load on shear wall and other supporting members of that wall.
EUROCODE WIND LOAD*: The program calculated different story forces if one specified the Mean Roof Height with the Use option versus if one used either the option to use Top Story Height or Top Story Height + Parapet, even if the value specified to use was the same as the Top Story Height. In the case of the latter two options, the wind Pressures report was showing values for heights that it didn't need to, and some of those values were garbage.Effect: Calculated and reported wind story forces were not correct if the Use option was selected for Mean Roof Height.
DISPLACEMENTS AT QUARTER POINTS: When the Show Vertical Displacement values @ Qtr Pts option was selected in the Deflected Shape command, the displayed values were not updated after the Analyze command was performed; the previous values continued to be displayed. They were only updated if RAM Frame was exited and then re-entered.Effect: Display issue only. The values displayed for vertical displacements were not updated after Analyze was invoked.
DYNAMIC LOADS*: In models where only Dynamic load cases were created, the AISC 341 Section 13.2c, Lateral Force Distribution check for SCBF, no load cases for the check were performed, resulting in the program reporting that the braces failed the check.Effect: Although all other code checks for SCBF braces were correct, the program failed braces under code check 13.2c when only Dynamic load cases were created.
TAKEOFF REPORT: The Takeoff report caused the program to crash.Effect: Takeoff Report could not be obtained.
SHEAR STRENGTH OF WALL IN TENSION: Equation 11-8 of ACI 318-05 (and the corresponding equation in all subsequent versions of ACI-318) was implemented so that, for cases where a Section Cut was composed of two or more segments, the Ag used in the calculation was smaller than accurate.Effect: The shear strength of Section Cuts in tension, when using ACI 318, was smaller than accurate.