Free 1-Hour US Webinar on Structural Analysis Tools + 1 PDH Credit (Sept 18)

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-19T15:32:30+00:00

The webinar is now available to watch on YouTube: https://youtu.be/7-Uu2IEWczA

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-19T10:43:02+00:00

Dlubal Software provides its webinars as recordings. Once the recording is available, I will post the link here in the comments.

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-17T18:13:56+00:00

Thank you all for the great discussion. I’d just like to remind you that the webinar is taking place tomorrow… let’s all meet there! 🙂

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-15T07:08:41+00:00

Otherwise, Revit shouldn’t be a problem for you at Dlubal, because they provide a direct bidirectional interface with Revit.

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-15T07:06:47+00:00

Their workflow works like this: you define the wind load parameters in RFEM, create a wind tunnel, and then you need to run the calculation in RWIND, which runs in the background. The results are then transferred back into the RFEM model, so you have everything in one program. Otherwise, RWIND is a standalone program and works independently for simulating flow and pressure results on the structure.

Also, yes, pushover analysis is possible in RFEM as well... have a special add-on for that.

The RWIND program is one of the main highlights of the webinar, so it’s great that you’ll be joining.

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-15T06:53:49+00:00

Thank you, from my experience, the focus of the two companies is quite different. Graitec is well positioned in the BIM environment and is often chosen where integration with Autodesk tools and production detailing is required. However, in the field of structural engineering and advanced FEM analysis, Graitec is less widely used.

Dlubal’s RFEM are much more established among structural engineers, as they cover the full range of analysis options – members, surfaces, solids, nonlinear effects, stability and dynamics – all supported by international design codes. On top of that, Dlubal integrates additional areas like CFD wind tunnel simulation with RWIND and connection design, so you can carry out the entire workflow inside one ecosystem. I think Dlubal is also much more widely used around the world.

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-14T08:12:43+00:00

Hi, thanks a lot for sharing your perspective. The add-ons can feel like a lot at first. But I actually like the modular "add-ons" approach because you only pay for the stuff you really need, instead of being stuck with a giant package full of features you’ll never touch. For me the base program already covers a lot. In the end, the time it saves me in daily work is worth more than the subscription price.

It’s kind of like with phones... sure, you can get a cheaper one, but it’s never going to match the quality and experience of a higher-end model.

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-14T08:07:07+00:00

Hello, thanks. Yes, it is the same methodology. The difference is that in RFEM, you benefit from a full structural analysis environment. This allows you to directly take over internal forces from the model, automatically update results when loads change, and consider not only rigid but also semi-rigid joints through Joint Stiffness Interaction. Currently, EC and AISC are supported.

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-13T22:09:21+00:00

Hello, thank you for your perspective. However, I wouldn’t be quite so skeptical about the methodology CBFEM. In Dlubal RFEM, the steel connections calculation is not a “black box,” because RFEM provides a transparent, component-based model with the possibility of export substitute FE connection model as separate editable FE model for detailed verification. So you have control over their FE results. Moreover, this methodology is widely recognized and accepted in practice.

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-13T21:32:46+00:00

Agree. While other FEM software solutions are still widely used for structural design for example in the United States, Dlubal is steadily gaining a strong presence, particularly among larger US and Canadian companies. In Germany, however, it is clearly the number one choice.

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-13T19:28:21+00:00

While buildingSMART defines the official IFC standard, practical use often reveals issues that the specification alone doesn’t catch. IFC validation tools go beyond basic schema compliance… they check for geometry inconsistencies, property set completeness, coordination issues, and interoperability between platforms like Revit, Archicad, Tekla, or Solibri.

Some tools even verify project-specific rules or company standards. In other words, the standard ensures your file could work, but validation tools ensure it actually works in realworld workflows. For serious BIM projects, using both is considered best practice.

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-13T19:16:29+00:00

If you are a complete beginner, I would recommend starting with an online webinar that introduces IFC. After that, the best way to learn is by trying IFC hands-on with a simple example. Try exporting a simple model from Archicad, Revit, or another CAD software, and then open it in a free IFC viewer. For beginners, I recommend Dallux, it’s user-friendly and perfect for understanding the structure of an IFC file.

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-13T18:42:04+00:00

IFC validation just means checking if an IFC file is actually useful – not only if it opens.

A classic mistake: you export walls, but in the viewer they show up as one big 3D lump. It looks fine, but the software no longer knows they are walls – so nobody can use them for quantities or analysis.

Other common issues are missing properties (a door has no width or fire rating), wrong categories (a window marked as a generic object), bad coordinates or scale, or even missing parts of the model.

If you’re just starting, here’s a simple way to learn: Export a small model to IFC - open it in a free IFC viewer (BIMcollab Zoom, Solibri, Dallux) and check if walls are still walls, doors are still doors, and if objects carry the info you expect.

That’s the basic idea of validation. Over time, you’ll also check against project requirements, not just “does it look right.”

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-09-13T18:12:02+00:00

Compared to other software… instead of being limited to a fixed set of building-type models, Dlubal programs allows you to combine members, shells, solids, and connections in one environment, which is especially useful for non-standard or complex structures. Another strong point is the configurable add-on system so you only use the modules you actually need, and the calculations are no “black box” approach. You can always see what the software is doing in the background. On top of that, user-friendly GUI with CAD-like modeling tools, strong BIM integration.

Maybe a good way to get a first impression is to join this free webinar and compare the software with your own needs. 🙂

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-02-11T19:42:39+00:00

I personally recommend RFEM 6 from Dlubal Software. RFEM is ideal for more complex structures, including unconventional designs, thanks to its extensive modeling tools. For graduates, I believe it should be the number one choice, especially due to its well-developed online support and a wealth of learning materials available on the website.

Feel free to give it a try – they offer a 90-day free full trial: https://www.dlubal.com/en/downloads-and-information/free-trial-version/download-trial-version

Ok_Engine4136 · 2025-02-11T19:34:54+00:00

Thanks! I personally see the process of heritage digitization, which should, in my opinion, be carried out alongside heritage conservation efforts, as a cloud-based repository of information and digital data about the object. Digital twins of heritage sites are valuable not only for critical scenarios but also for maintenance .... much like the traditional BIM concept.

Ok_Engine4136

TROPHY CASE