Please report any suspected (or obvious) bugs by email to
Support@PrecastEngineer.com. Please include a description of the problem,
attach a copy of the problem file (e.g. *.bem, *.lt3) that produces
the bug, and include a copy of the report with the bug highlighted.
NOTE: Many of the bugs reported here have been fixed in the latest
releases of the programs. Please see the Release Notes (on each product's
page) for current status of any bugs.
Please use the Contact form to ask a question,
make a suggestion, or request a change.
Select a category: All Programs | Bcan | Beam |
Compmem | Lateral3 | Shearwal |
- Bug (STI Key Installer V2.0.1-bld36): The bug prevents new on-line activated licenses for a single application from activating correctly. That is, if a license is for only one of the six applications from the suite, the license will not activate correctly. During the activation process, you are presented with a message saying "Success" but the application still doesn't run. In the Info area of the utility the error code 03009200 is displayed for the application.
Licenses for more than one application, for example a modified suite license, will activate correctly with the -bld36 utility so updating the key installer utility for these licenses is optional.
Fix: There is a new of installer package, STI-Suite-V2.0.1-bld37.zip, available on the Downloads page that fixes the problem. Download the installer package and run it to replace the defective STI Key Installer utility. When you run the application after installing the fix, it should start the STI Key Installer utility and fix the license. Do not click the [Activate] or [Deactivate] buttons. Close the STI Key Installer utility without doing anything. The application should run normally now.
- Bug: Sometimes the View Results window goes missing. You've entered all data but when you click the [View Results] button nothing happens; no error message or anything. You can still print the report.
Workaround: Select Window → Cascade from the menu to bring the View Results window back into the viewable area.
- Bug (Bcan, Compmem, Lateral3): Installing Autocad 2015 may cause these three programs to begin crashing whenever you try to run them.
UPDATE: The problem continues to appear with newer versions of Auotcad and can affect all programs. The interference sometimes shows with a pop-up saying "Run Setup.exe for AutoCAD yyyy" when you start the progam. We've had reports that running Autocad Setup.exe fixed long-standing (and non-specifc) crash problems that didn't display the Autocad installer pop-up. Sometimes just running a Repair of the Autocad installation in Settings → Apps (Win 10) or Control Panel → Programs and Features (Win 7) fixes the problem.
Workaround: Autodesk has released SP1 for Auotcad 2015 that fixes the problem for that version. (We originally thought SP1 fixed the problem but it was probably just that the user re-installed Autocad with SP1 that fixed the problem.)
- Bug: Double-clicking on a file whose name contains a double space (two spaces next to each other) will result in a run-time error.
Workaround: Either don't name your files with double spaces or start the application and use File → Open to open the file.
- Bug (Shearwal V3.2.2 and Studs V4.2.2): Radio button (option) controls appear with a black background making the text unreadable. This is confirmed on Windows XP and may occur on Windows 7 and 8 for some desktop themes. (Fixed in current releases.)
Workaround: None. New builds (same version but new builds) for Shearwal V3.2.2 and Studs V4.2.2 fix the black radio button problem. The version number for the new build remains the same but the executable file is new. Download and install the whole package to replace your existing installation.
If you want to check the build number, locate the executable file in your installation folder, right-click on the file, and select Properties from the pop-up menu. On the Details tab in the Properties display you'll see the fourth part of the version number for the new build. It is 26 for Shearwal and 33 for Studs.
- Bug: Marx Crytobox reports compatibility issues with USB 3.0 ports under Windows 7. We haven't had any reports of problems. We may not use the features that cause the problem.
UPDATE: The latest version of the Marx key driver is supposed to fix this problem. Get it from the Downloads page. Check the version of CBUSetup.exe you have. The new version (on the Details tab of the File Properties) is 18.104.22.1681.
Workaround: Use a USB 2.0 port if possible. You can recognize a USB 3.0 port because the socket is blue, red or green; USB 2.0 ports are usually black or white.
- Bug: Following installation, when you try to run the application you get the message "This application is not licensed..." and the error code 07040000 is in the upper right corner of the message window.
Using the current version of the STIKeyInstaller should eliminate this problem. But if you still get the 07040000 error code, following the instructions below will fix it.
Workaround: There are two possible remedies:
- Open the installation folder and run the executable with administrator privileges.
- Uninstall and reinstall from a Command Prompt window that you start with administrator privileges.
The problem is that UAC prevents the installer process from running the application executable with the elevated privilege it needs to complete the installation so you must run the executable with elevated privilege yourself.
For the first option, start by opening the installation folder in Windows Explorer. Find the executable file, <program>.exe, where <program> is the name of the application, Beam, Lateral3, etc. Be sure you select the executable file and not a data file with a similar name. Right-click on the file and select "Run as administrator" from the pop-up menu. The application should start and run normally. After this first run as administrator, you should be able to run the application from either the desktop icon or the All Programs menu without the administrator privilege.
For the second option, start by opening a Command Prompt with administrator privilege. In the All Programs menu, select Accessories and find the Command Prompt item. Right-click on Command Prompt and select "Run as administrator" from the pop-up menu. At the command prompt, navigate to the directory where the installer package is located, that is, where you saved it when you extracted it from the ZIP. Enter these commands ('C:\>' is the command line prompt which may be different on your system. Enter only the green colored text from the lines below):
C:\> msiexec /x <program>.msi
C:\> msiexec /i <program>.msi
The installer will display the same prompts as it does when you start the process by double-clicking on the <program>.msi file. Respond in the same way. However, when you run the installer from an elevated command prompt, the UAC doesn't interfere with running the executable.
- Bug: During installation or with any subsequent attempt to run the application, you get a message box saying "IGThreed40.ocx ... not correctly registered."
Workaround: Steps as follows:
- Click on the Start button on the left side of the task bar at the bottom of the screen, then All Programs, then Accessories.
- Find the Command Prompt accessory and right-click on it. Select "Run as administrator" from the pop-up menu. Pick Ok or Continue or whatever or enter the administrator password to get the command prompt up.
- If yours is a 32-bit system, at the prompt type "regsvr32 C:\Windows\System32\igthreed40.ocx" (without the quotes) and wait for the message box that should say "DllRegisterServer in igthreed40.ocx succeeded."
- If yours is a 64-bit system, at the prompt type "regsvr32 C:\Windows\SysWOW64\igthreed40.ocx" (without the quotes) and wait for the message box.
- When you run the program you may find there are other components which haven't registered. Do the same thing for them.
Once the components are registered, you will need to run the program as an administrator to complete the installation. Open C:\Program Files\STI\<program> (that will be C:\Program Files (x86)\STI\<program> if you have a 64-bit system) and right-click on <program>.exe. Select "Run as administrator". After that first run, you should be able to run <program> as a standard user without any problems.
- Bug: Running under a restricted account (Standard User or Limited User) you get a "Runtime error '75' Path/File access error" when trying to save a problem file. (Fixed in all current releases)
Workaround: All of our programs released before 2010 save the history list and program state in files kept in the installation folder. It's writing to these files that causes the error under a restricted account. The only solution is to give the user write permission to <program>.hst and <program>.ini in the installation folder.
- Bug: When you select the current problem from the file list (File menu) to reload the current file, if there are unsaved changes to the current work set, you are prompted to "Save Current Problem". The problem is if you click "Yes" the changes are saved into the current file which you just chose to reload. (Fixed in all updates released since February 2008.)
- Bug: The program crashes when you try to view or print results for file accessed with the \\<host>\<share>\<file> style of path. (This is fixed in all updates released since December 2008.)
Workaround: None. You must use <drive>:\<folder>\<file> style paths.
- Bug (V3.0.5 and earlier): Negative factor values on the Load Combinations page cause the associated "load case" to be ignored (i.e. as if the factor was zero).
Workaround: If you can't arrange the loads so all factors can be positive, you'll have to break your problem into two or more Bcan runs. Collect the load combinations with negative factors in the second run and change the sign of the loads in the second so the factors can be positive.
- Bug (V3.0.4): Any Load Case or Load Combination Description field longer than 50 characters is silently truncated when the report is generated. The Data Input screen will let you enter any length description without giving you any indication it will be truncated. (Fixed in V3.0.5)
Workaround: None. Just remember to be brief when entering descriptions.
- Bug: If you enter distributed loads with more than two decimal places in the Beginning Dist. or Ending Dist. values, you may get an erroneous warning about a Truncated loads.
Workaround: Use only two decimal places for distance values for distributed loads, concentrated loads, and joint locations.
- Bug (V3.0.4): The View Results page and other reports are blank after you've used the 'SaveAs...' menu option. (Fixed in V3.0.5)
Workaround: Close Bcan and restart it; open the file you were just working with. Everything will be back to normal. Often just reloading the current problem from the list of recent files on the File menu will fix the display.
- Bug (V3.0.4): When you enter a load that extends beyond the end of the member, the program will truncate the load and pop up a message. If you fix the problem, the message continues to appear until you close the file and reopen it. (Fixed in V3.0.5)
Workaround: None. You'll just have to close and reopen the file.
- Bug (V3.0.4): Clicking on the Input Data window always activates the User Info page. Other apps re-activate the last page you were using. (Fixed in V3.0.5)
Workaround: None. You'll just have to select the input page you want to work with.
- Bug (V3.0.4): If you add a joint to an anlaysis that uses non-uniform moment of inertia but forget to add a moment of inertia value for the new section, the program will crash when you try to run the calculations. (Fixed in V3.0.5)
Workaround: None. It's best to get in the habit of saving the problem file before running the calculations. That makes recovering easier.
- Bug (V3.0.4): At screen resolution of 1024x768 the Moment of Inertia textbox is covered by the disclaimer text. 800x600 or 1280x1024 screen resolutions are not affected. (Fixed in V22.214.171.124)
Fixed in Build 5, i.e. V126.96.36.199, which was released 5/23/07. If you downloaded Bcan before this time, please download a fresh copy and install it. To find the build number, right-click the Bcan.exe file, select Properties, and then the Version tab.
- Bug (V3.3.1 and earlier): Any entries in the last four rows of the Distributed Loads table are ignored. They don't show in the Input Data section of the report, aren't used in any calculations and aren't saved when you save the problem to a file. The first 33 rows of the table work as expected.
Workaround: None. It will be fixed in the next release.
- Bug (V3.3.1 and earlier): Adding printout points in the strand transfer region confuses the calculation of strand development values and losses. This is most apparent in the Ultimate Moment section of the report but also affects numbers in other sections.
Workaround: None really. Creative use of cantilevers with all but 0.01 strand debonded in the cantilever may get results similar to what you are looking for. Due to the way Beam handles debonding, the losses numbers will never match exactly but you can get pretty close.
- Bug (V3.3.1 and earlier): If your problem has debonded strand at the center of the simple span portion of the member, the number reported in the Misc. Production Information section for the Initial Prestress Force reflects only the not-debonded strand. The debonded strand at the center are ignored in this reported number. The Help says the Initial Prestress Force is the jacking force so all strand should be included in the calculation.
Workaround: None. It's a simple calculation you can do on your own so just be aware the number in the report is wrong in the described situation. It will be fixed in the next release.
- Bug (V3.3.1): The value calculated for Tu,min with the Tube Torsion option is wrong, usually in the range of 15% to 25% smaller than the correct value. The result of this is Beam reports torsion reinforcement is required for some distance beyond the actual requirement.
Increasing prestress makes the error more conservative (that is, the calculated Tu,min value is relatively smaller) while increasing concrete strength makes the error less conservative (though still smaller than the correct value).
The Zia-Hsu torsion calculations are not affected.
Workaround: None. You can calculate the correct Tu,min value from other numbers in the report. See the equation given in ACI 318-11 Sect. 11.5.1(b). fpc, Acp and pcp are all in the Combined Torsion and Shear Reinforcement table (be sure to use fpc and f'c in psi).
- Bug (V3.3.1): Steel areas for the ledge flexure reinforcing and ledge distribution reinforcing are reported only if you enter load values on the Ledge Design input page. That is, loads supplied on the Distributed Loads and Concentrated Loads input pages are not used in the ledge reinforcement calculations.
Workaround: If you've entered all of the loads on the Distributed Loads and Concentrated Loads input pages the report will show values in the Ledge Design section under "...selected by program". Copy these loads into the "Typ. Factored...Load..." boxes on the Ledge Design input page and the report will now include the required steel areas for ledge flexure, As, and distribution, Asl, reinforcement.
- Bug (V3.3.1): For members with cantilevers which have unsymmetric debonding of strand, the φ factor reported and used in the Ultimate Moment section of the report is sometimes greater than the maximum allowed value of 0.9 (and all values are suspect). The problem is often accompanied by note (4) warning about overlapping development lengths.
Workaround: The other results (stresses, shear and deflections) are OK. You can get satisfactory results for the moment by designing the member as simply supported (no cantilever) with the same overall length. Then enter the reactions from the cantilever case as concentrated loads in the simply supported case but with the opposite sign.
When you use this workaround, the reactions reported in the Bearing Stress section of the report for the simply supported case should be 0.
- Bug (V3.3.1 and earlier): The φ value used to calculate bearing steel area is hard-coded at 0.85 which was correct for ACI 318 prior to 2003. This causes bearing steel area reported by the program to be about a 10% lower than current code requirements.
Workaround: None. You'll have to correct the number before designing your bearing reinforcement. This will be changed in the next release to use the assigned φ value for shear.
- Bug (V3.3.1): On the Serviceability page the selection for "Section Ht used for Shear Depth" is ignored and the "Full Height including Topping" selection is always used.
Workaround: None. We'll get a new version out as quickly as possible to fix the problem.
- Bug (V3.3.1): The note for DTs about the PCISFRAD shear reinforcement exception has a bug that turns the % sign in the "...center 80% span..." into a random number. So sometimes the note says "...center 801f span..."; sometimes it says "...center 806163720f span..."; and sometimes other random numbers are included. (Fixed in V3.3.2)
Workaround: None. Just cross out the gibberish and write in the correct 80%. :-\
- Bug (V3.3.1): The calculation for depth of tension reinforcement, d, in the shear calculations was changed in V3.3.1 to include mild steel. This has introduced a bug that causes erratic values for d and subsequently for Vcw and other values for mixed reinforcing cases.
Workaround: None. Errors are usually small but will be proportional to the amount and location of mild steel in your prestressed design. The problem doesn't seem to affect prestress-only or mild-steel-only designs that follow the recommendations of the FAQ.
- Bug (V3.2.0 and later): The check for maximum value of Vs (ACI 318-08 §188.8.131.52) is not made. (Fixed in V3.3.1)
Workaround: None. It's a relatively simple calcualtion: Vs ≤ 8 λ(√f′c)bwd
- Bug (V3.3.0): The Av,min exceptions given in ACI 318-08 and -11 Sect. 184.108.40.206 are not handled correctly. Beam still does the check only as defined in ACI 318-05 Sect. 220.127.116.11 and earlier. (Fixed in V3.3.1)
Workaround: None. The changes affect hollowcore where the 12.5 in. limit on h is not recognized and Vu can be as high as Vc, Tee beams where the 24.5 in. limit on h is not recognized, and all other beams where the 10 in. limit on h is not recognized. Section 18.104.22.168 parts (c) and (f) are not addressed nor is there any means to recognize a solid slab (as opposed to any other beam) for part (a). The checks for Tee beams limiting h relative to flange and web thickness are still correct.
- Bug (V3.2.1): The Final Tension Stresses multiplier on the Serviceability page is ignored until the value is below 7.5. It should change the CR and NS notations in the Final Stresses section of the report as the value is varied in the range from the default 12.0 to 7.5 but nothing changes until the value is 7.5 or less.
Workaround: None. The 12.0 value represents the thresshold of Class C designs in ACI 318 Sect. 18.3.3 and the 7.5 to 12.0 range is Class T designs. The multiplier is intended to allow you to change the limit you use for stresses in your designs, i.e. the stress at which the NS notation begins to appear.
- Bug (V3.1 and later): Initial stress top tension steel requirements for cantilevers can be wrong when the lift points don't coincide with final support points.
Workaround: None. Check it with both configurations and use the higher value?
- Bug (V3.3.1 and earlier): Beam doesn't check for deep beam conditions as described in ACI 318 Sect. 10.7 and the design requirements in that section and 11.7 are not addressed in the design calculations.
Workaround: None. You need to be aware of the deep beam condition and make additional checks as specified in 10.7 and 11.7 for beams in that category.
- Bug (all versions): Initial stresses are often wrong for pieces where strand development from the ends may overlap. This is especially likely when debonding strand.
Workaround: If you want to debond a strand full length, remove it from the analysis instead of entering a debond.
- Bug (V3.1.1 and later): In the Deflections section of the report the value reported for "Final cantilever deflection with live load on cantilever only" is wrong.
Workaround: None that's really helpful. You can, of course, make a separate run of Beam with the live load modified to suit and use the "Final: PS+All DL+LL" deflection value for the cantilever (which is what should be reported in the first place).
- Bug (all versions): Often for very wide sections with relatively light loads, Beam fails to converge to a solution in the strain compatibility calculation for ultimate moment.
Workaround: None really. You can reduce the width of the section (i.e. top flange) until Beam can find a solution. The reduction in the calculated value for ultimate moment will be small (and it's conservative). You'll have to enter the self-weight for the member on the Distributed loads page.
Other calculated values such as the initial and final stresses will be affected by the change in section but, again, usually conservatively. You might consider making two runs; one for ultimate moment; one for everything else.
- Bug (V3.2.1): Beam crashes as soon as you try entering data. If you look in the Windows Event Logs you will probably see that the crash happens in ntdll.dll. This suggests that the problem is a conflict with some other part of Windows but doesn't pinpoint the exact cause.
Workaround: None really. You'll have to do some work to find out what component is the other half of the conflict and eliminate that from your system. An article on the SevenForums web site offers some guidelines for troubleshooting this kind of conflict. See http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/179159-troubleshoot-application-conflicts-performing-clean-startup.html
Another possibility is a corrupted system file. If you are using Windows 7 or Vista, you can use Microsoft's System File Checker to check for corrupted files. See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929833
If you can identify a conflict, please report it to Salmons Technologies. You can use the form you find at Contact Us.
- Bug (V3.2.1): When analyzing a double tee, the note about a waiver for shear reinforcing often doesn't show when it should. If you change a load value after running the calculations, the note won't show even if both Avci and Avcw are zero. (Fixed in V3.3.0)
Workaround: A fresh restart of Beam doesn't have the problem. If Avcw is zero for all locations and Avci < 0.040 in2/ft but the note isn't showing, save your problem, then select it from the recent files list on the File menu and reload your problem. The note will appear in the report if the Avci and Avcw values are right.
- Bug (V3.2.1): The values reported for Vcw and possibly other calculated shear values sometimes are so far out of the expected range that they must be the result of a bug. The spurious values can be positive or negative values. Vcw values should never be negative. Positive values that are more than twice the surrounding values are also incorrect.
There are some special circumstances that cause a problem with Vcw (see BR 730 below) but the problem also appears without any known cause. This problem was originally noted in V3.2.0 but it likely remains in V3.2.1.
Workaround: This seems to be a problem with re-initialization of some value in the shear calculations between calls to the calculation/report generation routines. Usually if you save the problem to a file and then reload the problem from the recent files list in the File menu, the problem will be temporarily fixed.
- Bug (V3.2.1): Reading old Beam V3.0.0 to V3.0.3 files results in a "Run-time error 380" message. (These were J&A versions. V3.0.4 was the first STI version.)
Workaround: None. As a partial solution, you can send the problem file (*.bem) to Support@PrecastEngineer.com and we will return the file in the current format.
- Bug (V3.2.1 and previous): For simply supported pieces, the member length used to calculate strand development should be <1/2 left brg> + <span> + <1/2 right brg>. Currently, the span is used as the member length for strand calculations.
Workaround: None. Using the shorter value for the strand length results in slightly lower strand development for a specific location along the development length but once the strand is fully developed, the calculated capacity is the same.
- Bug (V3.2.0): Calculation Methods in the Help, under Combined Torsion and Shear, Zia-Hsu eqn. 15 has a typo. The f′c in the denominator should be inside the parenthesis. The f is there; the ′c has slipped out to be at center height after the fraction. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Update to V3.2.1 to fix this problem.
- Bug (V3.2.0): For the Zia-Hsu torsion method, if the section is too small, it is reported only in the Vertical Shear and Torsion section of the report but steel areas are reported in the Summary Table as if the design was acceptable. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. Another example of why it's good to look at the full report before turning off sections for the final printout. Please update to V3.2.1.
- Bug: When using Intelliprint, the Vcw column sometimes refers you to "NOTE (3)" but Note 3 isn't included in the notes at the end of the Vertical Shear section. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. Always when using Intelliprint, check the full report for any problems while you are developing the solution and only use Intelliprint for the final printout of the report. Please update to V3.2.1.
- Bug (V3.2.0): The form suction special load for checking stripping performance is broken. It worked in V3.1.1. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None really. You can make two runs. Add the stripping load to the member self weight and use only the Initial Stress values from that run. Then remove that load and use all the other results. Please update to V3.2.1.
- Bug (V3.2.1): Vcw sometimes is wrong when a harp point coincides with a location in the report. The sign on the vertical component of the prestress force is reversed. It's usually obvious that Vcw is way out of line compared to the values on either side of it. Vcw is seldom the controlling shear value at these points.
Workaround: Move the harp point to -0.01 ft from the location..
- Bug (V3.2.0): The vertical component of prestress force used for calculating Vcw is broken. It usually remains zero (even when it shouldn't be) but occasionally will be some random value. This appears as a Vcw value that just doesn't fit with the values on either side of it. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. A vertical component of prestress force almost always increases the Vcw value, so neglecting it usually is conservative (though you may use more shear reinforcing than required). For the random value that occasionally appears, if a value just doesn't fit with its neighbors, use a linear interpolation to get a reasonable value. Please update to V3.2.1.
- Bug (V3.2.0): The strand calculations don't consider the possibility of overlapping transfer length from an in-span debond when it calcs the prestress force. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. It will use either of the two possible values when it should always use the smaller. This results in some unconservative strength estimates. Please update to V3.2.1.
- Bug (V3.2.0): In the Help > Calculation Methods > Initial Stress about mid page, in the second paragraph under Eq 3, the max stress at ends is given as 6 sqrt(f′c); should be 6 sqrt(f′ci). (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. Please update to V3.2.1.
- Bug (V3.2.0): The Vertical Shear Reinforcement and Summary of Minimal... tables are blank for some problems. The section headings, column headings and notes are printed but all of the data is missing. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: The problem occurs when 1/20th of the span equals 1/2 of the member height; so changing either of these slightly (±0.01) will get the values reported with only a small change in the results.
- Bug (V3.2.0): When you try to start Beam, the window doesn't appear. You see the program on the Task Bar but can't find the window. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: The window location saved in the Beam.ini file has been corrupted. Right-click on the Beam tab in the task bar and select Maximize from the pop-up menu. This should bring Beam back into your window. Now exit Beam to save new location data in the Beam.ini file. When you restart Beam, you can restore the window to whatever size and location you like.
If that didn't work, exit Beam, delete the Beam.ini file, and restart Beam. The program will recreate the Beam.ini file with default values and you will see the window again.
On Windows 7, the Beam.ini file is usually found in
On Windows XP, it is usually found in
"C:\Documents and Settings\<acct>\Application Data\STI"
where <acct> is the account you are logged into Windows with (i.e. your user name) and <type> is Roaming for a network account.
If you don't find Beam.ini at the path given above, open a command window and type
This will give the path to the AppData folder for your account. Beam.ini will be in the STI subfolder below the AppData path.
- Bug (V3.2.0): For short pieces with strand debonded at one end only or non-symmetric debonding in mid-span, the reported moment capacity often is wrong, being overestimated for some cases and under estimated for others. Download a discussion piece with examples from this link.(Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. Please update your version to V3.2.1 to fix the problem.
- Bug (V3.1.1): When the '02 code is selected, the limiting value for bearing on concrete still uses the φ factor from the '99 code. In the '02 code the φ value changed to 0.65 from 0.7 in the '99 code. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. For 5 ksi concrete, the limit for compressive stress is 0.85 * φ * f'c = 2.76 ksi and 85% of that is 2.35 ksi. The code prohibits factored bearing stress that exceeds the first value and you should avoid stresses above the second value. The program allows factored bearing stress up to 2.53 ksi before it prints a note advising a special study. Please update to V3.2.1.
- Bug (V3.2.0): The self weight is wrong when variable flange thickness is used. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. You can adjust NCDL to compensate but that won't help Initial Stresses. Please update to V3.2.1.
- Bug (V3.1.1): Horizontal shear uses Eq 11-13 (referred from 17.6.1) only as it appeared in ACI 318-99. The equation changed in '02. (Fixed in V3.2.0)
Workaround: None. The old equation is very similar to the minimum value for the new code (which, in practice, is often the required value).
- Bug (V3.1.1): If you enter rain/snow or wind/seismic loads on the distributed or concentrated load pages but don't select the load case that includes these loads they don't get included in factored loads but do get included in working loads. (V3.2.1 warns you about this condition)
Workaround: None. If you want the loads included in the factored loads, be sure to select a load case that includes them. If you don't want the loads included in the working loads, remove them from the Distributed and Concentrated Loads pages.
- Q (V3.1.1): What does the value reported for Stc(tpg) in the composite section properties represent? (Changed in V3.2.0)
That number is Stc(tpg) = Ic / ytpg / (Etpg / Epc). You were probably expecting just Ic / ytpg.
- Bug (V3.1.1) When you specify a full-width opening in a top flange (that is, completely remove the flange including the web portion) the calculated moment and shear values are wrong. The program still uses the top of the flange for the section height and extreme compressive fiber location. Obviously, this error is worse for thicker flanges. (Fixed in V3.2.0)
Workaround: V3.2.0 prevents you from running a problem with a full-width opening. If your section allows, you should use the variable flange thickness with the thickness set to 0.01 in. where the full-width opening occurs.
- Bug (V3.1.1): Distributed loads that change from positive at one end to negative at the other end (or vice versa) aren't handled properly.
Workaround: Split the load into two loads at the zero crossing.
- Bug (V3.2.0): There are still some warnings that don't get displayed if the section of the report in which they appear isn't selected for inclusion.
Workaround: None. It's best to run the report once with all sections enabled before you commit to a design to be sure this problem doesn't apply to your choice of report options.
- Bug (all versions): The check for 1.2*Mcr is made only at points of maximum moment. This allows users to "trick" the program into accepting designs that really are inadequate by adding reinforcement only at the maximum moment point.
Workaround: None. You must clearly understand the basic assumptions of the program. The program provides assistance with code compliance but you must be the final authority of "Does this design make sense?"
- Bug (V3.1.1): Maximum load envelope doesn't recognize a negative moment (uplift) case that needs to be examined. That is, in some designs, both a positve and negative moment case needs to be examined. Beam will always select the positive moment case for its checks.
Workaround: If you have a negative moment case that needs to be checked, you must run it separately from the positive moment case. That is, you must remove the positive moment case from the selected load cases on the Serviceability page or, possibly, remove the positive load(s) from the input altogether.
- Bug (V3.1.1): Variable flange thickness will accept a zero entered for the thickness but will ignore the entry in the calculations. If you save a problem to a file with zero as a thickness, the entry will have disappeared when you reload the file.
Workaround: Use a very small value instead of zero, e.g. 0.001.
- Bug (V3.1.0): When concentrated loads are entered, the area of required hanger steel reported in the Summary of Minimum Vertical and Longitudinal Web Reinforcement Requirements is difficult to interpret. (It seems high and is by the usual interpretation.)
Workaround: Enter loads, distribution length, etc. on the Ledge Design page that are appropriate for your problem. When the program calculates hanger steel based solely on concentrated loads (from the Concentrated Loads page), it reports the total area of hanger steel required for the highest load without any attempt to distribute the steel over the distance between loads.
- Bug (V3.1.0): When you add points (on the Printout Options page) to a report that also has the Truncated Printout (if symmetrical) option selected, the report won't be truncated.
Workaround: None. You'll have to choose one option or the other in the current version of Beam.
- Bug (V3.1.0): Short pieces of mild steel (5 ft or less) added to the end(s) of a member result in an error in the provided moment capacity. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. Check the moment capacity with a longer piece first. If the moment capacity at any location goes up when the shorter piece is used, use the lower calculated capacity.
- Bug (V3.1.0): Transfer length for strand used by the program is still 50 diameters even though it has changed in ACI '02.
Workaround: Nothing really effective. You can change the "Factor Applied to Develop. Length" on the "Strand Info" page. But one number is not correct for all cases. See Eqn. 12-2 in ACI 318-02.
- Bug (V3.1.1): The change to minimum reinforcement ratio due to an oversized column as specified in ACI 318-02 Sect. 10.8.4 is not included in the minimum reinforcement calculations. Section 10.8.4 allows you to reduce the minimum reinforcement so ignoring it is conservative.
Workaround: None. If you suspect this condition applies to your column design, you will have to make the adjustment manually.
- Bug (V3.1.0): The reported moment capacity, φMn, for a negative axial load (axial tension) is wrong (UNCONSERVATIVE ERROR) for some load values. The error is in the Moment Magnifier and Factored Loads Interaction Diagram sections of the report. (Fixed in V3.1.1)
Workaround: None. Please download and install the update V3.1.1.
- Bug (V3.0.4): In the Factored Loads section of the report (moment magnifier table) no indication is given if a Pu value exceeds the maximum φ*Pn value. (Fixed in V3.1.0)
Workaround: You must check Pu against the "Max design axial load strength" reported below the table.
- Bug (V3.0.2): The Help says you should enter only positive values for Pu on the Factored Loading page but the program mistakenly allows you to enter negative values also. The calculated allowable moment is not correct for negative values of Pu. (Fixed in V3.0.4)
Workaround: None. Don't enter negative values for Pu. We will change the next version to calculate the correct moment and limit for negative Pu.
- Bug (V3.0.2 and earlier): The program will not produce service load interaction diagrams. You get the notice "WARNING: Allowable stresses are exceeded before any loads are applied." whenever you enter values for Case 1 or Case 2 under Service Load Interaction Diagram. (Fixed in V3.0.4)
Workaround: None. This will be fixed in the next update. The problem is the calculations are expecting Allowable Tension to be a negative number but the UI won't allow negative numbers to be entered.
- Bug (V4.3.0): For 2012 IBC code selection, when Building Frame System is selected for the structural system on the Building Parameters page, the defaults for Ct and X with the approximate period (Eq 12.8-7) are wrong on the Seismic Parameters I page. They should be Ct = 0.02 and X = 0.75 (see ACSE 7-10 Table 12.8-2) but instead the values for a Concrete Moment Resisting Frame are given.
Workaround: You'll have to enter the correct values (given above) yourself.
- Bug (V4.3.0): Wind loads on parapets are calculated incorrectly. The program uses a Gust Factor multiplying a Pressure Coefficient, G × Cpn where G is usually 0.85 and Cpn is a fixed value, 1.5 windward, 1.0 leeward. It should use a single combined value, GCpn, specified as 1.5 for windward and 1.0 for leeward. The error results in parapet loads about 15% below what they should be.
Workaround: You could enter the parapet height at 15% greater than it actually is. The problem will be fixed in the next release.
- Bug (V4.3.0): In the report of Input Data for 2012 IBC seismic analysis, the values for X-direction R and Y-direction Cd are switched. The values, as entered in the Code Pages of the UI, are used correctly in the calculations. It's just when they are listed with the Input Data of the report that they are switched.
Workaround: None. It will be fixed in the next release.
- Bug (V4.3.0): For 2012 IBC wind analysis, if you select to have the program calculate the eccentricity, it will always use the values calculated with Eq. 27.4-5 regardless of rigid/flexible classification. For rigid classification the eccentricity should be fixed at 15% of the building dimension.
Workaround: For rigid buildings enter the 15% eccentricity values manually. With the "Eccentricity calc'd..." box unchecked, click the [Reset] button to have the 15% values calculated for you.
- Bug (V4.3.0): For all codes, if your structure is under SDC A the program by default will apply accidental eccentricities required only for SDC B and above. It will report maximum wall loads based on the eccentric floor loads and also any torsional irregularity it finds even though neither the accidental eccentricity nor the irregularity check are required for SDC A.
Workaround: Set the seismic accidental eccentricities on the Building Parameters page to 0.0. This will cause the report to show the data for force at the C.G. for all three sets of numbers; redundant but an inflated maximum due to eccentricities will not be reported. For 2012 IBC, you'll still need to select the horizontal irregularity for torsion (if it applies) to remove the warning about the ELF applicability check.
- Bug (V4.3.0 and earlier): Combination of orthogonal seismic loads is not checked per ASCE 7 Sec. 12.5.4 if horizontal irregularity Type 5 is not present.
Workaround: If your design is for SDC D, E or F for which ASCE 7 Sec. 12.5.4 applies, you should check the box for horizontal irregularity Type 5 to get the combinations checked.
- Bug (V4.3.0 and earlier): Seismic amplification factor is calculated from displacement values for the lateral force applied at the C.G. only and not at the 5% eccentric locations. The amplification factor should use the maximum and average displacements from all three locations just as they are used for the Maximum Story Drift calculation.
Also, for IBC 2012, the eccentricity values reported after the NOTE for torsional irregularity in the Floor Loads section are erroneously multiplied twice by the amplification factor. Only the reported values are wrong. The calculations are done with the correct values.
Workaround: Using only the values from the C.G. results in lower amplification values than should be used. You can adjust the eccentricity values entered for seismic to account for the lower amplification. However that means the Max. Story Drift at Building Boundaries calculations will then use these higher eccentricities too.
- Bug (V4.3.0): For 2012 IBC, selecting one of the seismic period methods that require the evaluation of Eq. 12.8-9 causes the analysis to fail with the message "Base Area must be > 0" regardless of the Base Area value.
Workaround: None. This will be fixed with a maintenance release ASAP.
- Bug (V4.3.0 and earlier): The calculation for Cs when Sec. 22.214.171.124 applies sets SDS = 1.5, not SS = 1.5. The erroneous maximum was applied when SDS ≥ 1.5. With the bug, the maximum would trigger only when SS ≥ 2.25 (for Fa = 1.0).
Workaround: None. The bug resulted in calculated loads being up to 50% higher (and never lower) than those calculated with the bug corrected.
- Bug (V4.2.x, 4.1.x): In calculating parapet load the gust factor (typically 0.85) is omitted from the pressure calculation for 2006 IBC and 2003 IBC. (Fixed in V4.3.0)
Workaround: None. The error causes slightly conservative load values to be used for parapets
- Bug (all versions): Lateral forces for wind on a sloped roof aren't calculated correctly for 2009 IBC and earlier codes.
Workaround: None. You must enter loads manually (i.e. use the "User Defined Loads" option) and enter any roof lateral load as part of the top floor load. Sloped roof forces are calculated correctly when you use the 2012 IBC.
- Bug (V4.2.3 and earlier, all codes): When you select 'Other' for the Exposure Category (to enter α and 𝓏g values) and also have topographic effects for which you leave K1 = 0 expecting the program to select the correct value for K1, the Topographic Factor, Kzt, will be 1.0, eliminating any topographic effect.
Workaround: If you use 'Other' for the Exposure Category and also have topographic effects you need to enter a value for K1. The K2 and γ (gamma) values will still be selected correctly when category 'Other' is used.
- Bug (V4.2.x): For IBC 2006, vertical irregularity 5b (extreme weak story) is not restored from a saved problem file. That is, when you open a problem that had vertical irregularity 5b checked when it was saved, the checkbox will remain unchecked after restoring (i.e. opening) the file. (Fixed in V4.3.0)
Workaround: None. The program operates correctly when the 5b irregularity is checked (it won't analyze the problem, ELF not allowed) but you'll have to re-check the box after restoring a saved file.
- Bug (V4.2.3 and previous): If the order of entries on the Story Height page is not (lowest level at top of table)-to-(highest level at bottom of table) the report won't show all levels in the Floor Loads... and Wall Forces... tables.
Workaround: None. Please remember to order the entries as described above.
- Bug (V4.2.1): For 2006 IBC, the SDC indicated by the program is wrong for Occupancy Categ. IV with S1 > 0.75. In this case, SDC should be F but the program uses SDC = D. (Fixed in V4.2.3)
Workaround: None. You shouldn't use Lateral3 V4.2.1 for this case.
- Bug (V4.2.1): The numbers in the table "Summary of Max. Story Drift.." are just plain wrong. This table is intended to help you determine when a structure is torsionally irregular. (Fixed in V4.3.0)
Workaround: You can do this by checking the Torsional Irregularities box on the Building Parameters page and the program will generate a multiplier for the eccentricity if the structure is irregular. If the structure is not irregular and this box is checked, the multiplier will be 1.0.
- Bug (V4.2.1): Trying to load a problem file that you have saved (2006 IBC only) causes a Run-time error 340: Control array element '0' doesn't exist. (Fixed in V4.2.3)
Workaround: The problem is with the Period Calculation selection on the Seismic Parameters I page. If you leave the default selection for the approximate period, Eq. 12.8-7, the file doesn't get initialized correctly before it is saved. To work around this, select the Alternate period (Eq. 12.8-9) then switch the selection back to the Approximate period (Eq. 12.8-7). That gets the file set correctly so that it won't crash next time you open it.
If you get this error when opening a file, you can email it to STI. We'll repair the file and send it back.
- Bug: Wall # (on the "Constant Wall Sections" and "Variable Wall Sections" pages) must be consecutive integers starting with one and going up to ‹however many walls there are›. You can't skip numbers. You'll get a rude run time error message if you do.
Workaround: None. You must still have Wall #'s starting at one and going up to ‹however many walls there are› but V4.3.0 will enter the next Wall # automatically and check that all required wall numbers have been entered. You should never get a run time error for this.
- Bug (V3.2.2 and earlier): The panel shear reinforcement calculation in the load reversal section of the report always shows the minimum reinforcement when Sect. 11-9 (ACI 318-08) controls.
Workaround: None. The calculation of required reinforcement is correct in the not-reversed section of the report so, if you can, arrange your lateral loads so the maximum appears in the not-reversed case.
- Bug (V3.2.2 and earlier): Panel shear calculations when Nu is negative (uplift) can be wrong. Through a series of errors the program uses Vc value from Eq. 11-27 when it should use Vc from Eq. 11-8 with a minimum of 0.0 enforced. This results in lower values for Avt and Avl than should be calculated.
With higher loads, Eq. 11-8 may still be positive for a negative Nu so the minimum doesn't apply. In this case, the program gets Avt and Avl correct.
Workaround: None. A beta test will be available ASAP for Shearwal V3.2.3 with the problem fixed. The final release will follow as soon as it's ready.
- Bug (V3.2.2 and earlier): In the panel shear calculation, Eq. 11-27 (ACI 318-08) uses only the dead load for Nu. This gives a conservative value for Vc except possibly when there is significant uplift in one of the other load types.
Workaround: None. Be aware of this if Eq. 11-27 controls the calculation of the panel shear reinforcement for an uplift case.
- Bug (V3.2.2 and V3.2.1): The φ value for the Ultimate Moment by Strain Compatibility can be wrong. The program is using the full length of the piece instead of the depth to the extreme steel to calculate φ. This can give higher φ values than appropriate. The problem tends to be worse for short pieces (assuming there is steel near the tension edge).The Ultimate Moment under Lateral Reversal is not affected; that is, it is correct.
Workaround: None, really. If you think you might be having this problem you can reverse the member definition and vertical loads, that is, switch them end for end, and run the problem again. Then compare the non-reversed ultimate moment from the original with the reversed ultimate moment from the second. Use the lower value from the two runs.
- Bug (V3.2.1): When 2009 IBC or 2012 IBC are selected, the φ factor won't be adjusted (from 0.90) for transitional or compression controlled flexure (ultimate Moment). (Fixed in V3.2.2)
Workaround: The φ is calculated correctly for IBC 2006. Use that if possible. This will be fixed soon in bug-fix release.
- Bug (V3.2.1): If you have a large monitor (e.g. 1920x1080) the text for the load cases on the User Load Cases page may be obscured by the entry boxes. (Fixed in V3.2.2)
Workaround: Select one of the preset sizes under the Window > Size menu. This selection will be saved when you quit the program and reloaded next time you run Shearwal.
- Bug (V3.1.0): The requirements for the panel shear reinforcement from ACI 318 are not clearly described in the UI and Help. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
- For Panel Shear calculations using Sect. 11.10, the value used for the depth of the tension reinforcing, d, in Eqs. 11-3, 11-29, 11-30 (11-3, 11-31, 11-32 in '99) is wrong usually resulting in the 0.8 lw minimum value being used instead.
- Eqn. 11-32 (11-34 in '99) for ρl isn't implemented correctly. However, in practice this equation is usually overridden by the lower bound of 0.0025 or upper bound of ρt.
- The note for Sect. 11-10 says "Minimum spacing"; it should say "Maximum spacing". Also, Shearwal doesn't distinguish between horizontal and vertical spacing. It uses only the lw / 3 value for vertical shear reinforcement spacing instead of the lw / 5 value for horizontal shear reinforcement spacing.
- ACI Sect 14.3 puts requirements on the diameter and fy for shear steel that aren't clear from the UI or Help.
Workaround: None. Check the requirements in ACI 318 Sect. 14.3.2 for minimal reinforcement cases and Sect. 11.10 for other cases to be sure your design complies.
- Q: Shouldn't the Mu value in the "Checks for Ultimate (Design) Moment by Strain Compatibility" include the moment induced by the external applied dead and live loads? (Changed in V3.2.1; see the News item.)
A: The presentation of the factored loads equation in this section is misleading. The equation, as it is presented, is not used directly. The Mu value shown there is only the moment resulting from the horizontal wind or seismic load, the same number you entered on the Lateral & Vertical Loads page with the appropriate load factor applied.
The effect of any non-symmetric vertical dead and live loads is included in the φMn value that is calculated for each load case. So, the φMn value represents the capacity available in the wall with the given vertical loads to resist the specific horizontal wind or seismic load. If you compare the φMn for positive moment (in the OUTPUT section of the report) to φMn for negative moment (in the MOMENT REVERSAL section of the report) you will see the effect of non-symmetric dead and live vertical loads on the capacity of the wall to resist the specified wind or seismic horizontal load.
- Bug (V3.1.0): The Help says that the Sds value should be a percentage of g. The value really should be a fraction of g, normally between zero and one, but the value may be 3 or higher for some locations. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. We'll improve the Help in future releases.
- Bug (V3.1.0): N.A. iteration not converging. The message "Neutral axis iteration does not converge" will persist even after the problem that originally caused the message to appear has been fixed. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. Save the problem with the fix in place, quit Shearwal, restart Shearwal and reload the problem to eliminate the message.
- Bug (V3.1.0 and previous): When Shearwal calculates a force balance for axial (vertical) loads, it doesn't divide Pu by φ before using it to calculate the moment capacity (using strain compatibility assumptions). (Changed in V3.2.1; see the News item.)
Workaround: None. It's a fundamental part of the calculations in Shearwal. It's effect on calcualted capacities is conservative (i.e. they're lower).
There is a report of a conversation with Jerry Jacques about this issue which reportedly didn't change Jerry's mind about the approach used in Shearwal. Unfortunately, he (or anyone else) didn't leave any clear documentation of the design of Shearwal covering this topic.
- Bug (V3.2.0.b17): The load factor for wind load case 1 that appears for a new problem file (with default 2006 IBC code selected) is wrong (1.3 should be 1.6). (load factors are completely rewritten in V3.2.1)
Workaround: Select a different bldg. code on the User Info page then re-select the IBC 2006 code. That will reset the load factor to the correct value, 1.6.
- Bug (V3.1.0): Intersecting loads are treated as concentrated loads. Instead of acting only outside of the compression block, they are included in the loads in the compression block as well. (V3.2.1 eliminated intersecting loads)
Workaround: You will have to manage intersecting loads manually by removing them from the compression region, running an analysis for one direction, then adding or removing intersecting loads for the other direction and running another analysis.
- Bug (V3.1.0): The load factors on the Wind Load Factors page are reset to the default values when a problem file is recalled. That is, if you save a problem file with modified load factors, when you open the file again, the load factors will be reset to the program's default values. (load factors are completely rewritten in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. Please check the load factors for any problem files that you open.
- Bug (V3.1.0): The φ factors on the Miscellaneous page are reset to the default values when a problem file is recalled. That is, if you save a problem file with modified φ factors, when you open the file again, the φ factors will be reset to the program's default values. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. Please check the φ factors for any problem files that you open.
- Bug (V3.1.0): If you run calculations for a problem without any live load specified but leave load case 1 checked, you will get a message "Input data shows no LL, could affect Load Case I". If you subsequently uncheck load case 1 or add live load, the message will persist until you quit Shearwal, even after opening a new problem. (Fixed in V3.2.1)
Workaround: None. Save the problem with the corrections, quit Shearwal, then restart Shearwal and reload the problem.
Bug (V4.3.0): For the PCI codes, the seismic factor, selected on the More Installation input page, isn't always represented correctly in Section C of the report. The lines in the report
From (A), 0.75*Nn = nnn.n k ...
From (B), 0.75*Vn = vvv.v k ...
have the numbers reported without the 0.75 seismic factor applied. They are the same numbers reported in Sections A and B inside the parentheses. The interaction ratios and interaction equations just below those lines are correct.
For the ACI codes, the seismic factor is applied correctly to the numbers reported in those lines.
Workaround: None. For printed reports with PCI codes you can just cross out the 0.75 factor in those lines. The factor will be applied correctly in the next release.
- Bug (V4.3.0): PCI shear calculation limits Y and BED by limiting the spacing between rows to 3*le. This limit isn't specified by the Handbook.
Workaround: You can check the concrete shear values for the correct BED by reducing the spacing so that the 3*le limit isn't exceeded then increasing the front edge distance (de3) so the BED remains the same. You may need to check the tension strength separately with the actual spacing of studs in the layout.
Bug (V4.3.0): The yield strength in the Studs Library distributed with the program for studs 1/2" dia. and larger (Type B in the PCI Handbook, 7 ed, Table 6.5.1) is wrong. It should be 51 ksi, not the 59 ksi that is there.
In Studs, the yield strength, fy, is used only for a check that the ultimate strength, fut, is not greater than 1.9 fy or fut is limited to 1.9 fy. So you shouldn't have to go back and check all the calculations you've done in the past.
Workaround: You can change those values in the library yourself using the Stud Library editor. Under Edit on the menu select Edit Stud Library. Change the values, and click [OK] to save the new values.
Editing the library won't change the value in any of the problem files you have saved before making the edit. When you load any of those old files with the value from before the edit, you'll get a notice that the stud properties have changed. The stud type will change to "Custom" and the original value will persist until you re-select the stud type from the drop-down list on the Stud/Plate Layout page.
Bug (V4.3.0): When you add columns on the 'Stud/Plate Layout' page, the labels on the columns will be Y1, Y2, etc. They should be X1, X2, etc.
When you reload a problem file, the labels for column spacing in the reloaded problem will be Y1, Y2, etc.
Workaround: If you close the 'Edit Input Data' window by clicking the [X] in the upper right corner of that child window and re-open it by selecting Edit → Input Data or by pressing [F2] or clicking the 'Edit Input Data' icon on the toolbar, the correct labels will be restored.
- Bug (V4.2.2 and earlier): Eqs. D-19 and D-20 (ACI 318-05 § D.6.1.2) have limits on futa that the program doesn't check. (Fixed in V4.3.0)
Workaround: None. You'll have to check that the values entered for Ultimate Stren. and Yield Strength on the Layout pages comply with the limits, futa < 1.9 fya < 125,000 psi.
All of the studs in the Studs Library shipped with the program comply with these limits. Some of the bolt materials in the Bolt Materials Library have futa values greater than 125 ksi.
- Bug (V4.2.2): Pop-up notices displayed during calculation contain the wrong error message. When one of these notices appears there is a condition that the program should notify you about but the wrong message is displayed. (Fixed in V4.3.0)
Workaround: Use the table below to determine what the message should be.
|What the message says
||What the message really is
|Couldn't write temporary file.
||Minimum concrete thickness for cover...
|>>>WARNINGs are included in the report.
||Minimum suggested plate thickness is...
|Minimum concrete thickness for cover...
||Minimum stud/bolt spacing is...
|Minimum suggested plate thickness is...
||Concrete strength is limited to...
|Minimum stud/bolt spacing is...
||Ultimate strength is limited to...
|Concrete strength is limited to...
||Selected edge case seems inconsistent
|Ultimate strength is limited to...
||Eccentricity too large (tension)...
|Selected edge case seems inconsistent
||Eccentricity too large (shear)...
|Eccentricity too large (tension)...
||Bracket depth too small!
|Eccentricity too large (shear)...
||Corner reinforcement not necessary
- Bug (V4.2.1): The PCI 6th ed. Handbook equation for Side Edge Breakout has a typo that we, not recognizing the error, included in the program. The error is in Eq. 126.96.36.199 for CY1. In cases where ny > 1 the limit on CY1 should be ≤ ny, not ≤ 1.0. The error results in (sometimes hughly) conservative values for the breakout strength. (Fixed in V4.2.2)
Workaround: None really. The error has been corrected in the 7th ed. Handbook and will be corrected in the program at the next update. You can calculate the correct value for CY1 yourself and multiply the breakout value reported by the program with your value for CY1. But this doesn't fix interaction values, etc., which likely will all reflect the incorrect value for breakout.
- Q: I'm using the PCI Handbook design criteria. The SED/BED ratio in my problem is 0.20. Why do I still get corner breakout calculations?
A: The paragraph below Eq. 6-21 (188.8.131.52 6th ed.) in the handbook states "If the ratio...is close to the 0.2 value, it is recommended that a corner breakout condition be investigated, as it may still control for large BED values." So we use SED/BED = 0.18 as the cutoff for corner conditions.
- Bug (V4.2.1): Editing the Post-Installed Anchors library sometimes results in a corrupted library file. You'll know when it happens. You get an endless bunch of dialogs telling you it failed. You'll have to use Task Manager to kill the Studs session. (Post-installed anchors are no longer supported.)
Workaround: After you've killed the Studs session, use an editor such as Notepad to delete the garbage rows that were added to the library file.
Adding anchors to the library by editing the library file directly is not a recommended practice because the values are not labeled in the file making it easy to get them in the wrong order. That's why the edit dialog is provided. But if you can't get the editor to work, add the values using Notepad (or similar) then use the built-in Studs library editor to check and correct if necessary the values you entered with Notepad.
- Bug (V4.2.1): For post-installed anchors, the φ factors that originally populate the entry boxes are not correct (in an unconservative way). (Fixed in V4.2.2)
Workaround: You should use the [Reset Defaults] button to get the correct values to display in the boxes. If the button is inactive, changing any of the φ values will activate it.
- Bug (V4.2.1): In the report, the ultimate moment calculated for Applied Loads has units of ft-k. Shouldn't this be k-in? (Fixed in V4.2.2)
A: Yes, that should be k-in. Workaround: None. You'll have to make the correction on the report yourself. This will be fixed in the next release.
- Bug (V4.2.1): Studs will crash when you try to open a V4.0.x problem file if the Vu value in the file is zero.
Workaround: None. You can send the file to STI. We will convert it to V4.2.x format and send it back.
- Bug (V4.2.1): With the PCI Hdbk 6th ed. selected, the value reported for Cc3 in the special case of SED/BED > 3 and de1 ≤ 2.5 seems to be random (sometimes it's zero, sometimes something else). (Fixed in V4.2.2)
Workaround: None. The value reported for Vco3 is correct even when the value reported for Cc3 is wrong.
- Bug (V4.2.1): When a problem file that contains a custom Post-Installed-Anchor is reloaded, it corrupts the PIA library. (Post-installed anchors are no longer supported.)
Workaround: None. This only happens if the anchor used in the problem file is not in the library. So it's only a potential problem if you share problem files with others who use a different PIA library.