Petr Konečný, M.S. Parametric study of the Safety of a Steel Bar using SBRA Method Structural Mechanics Division Department of Civil Engineering VŠB –

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Filip JORDÁN, Karel KABELE, Jan HENSEN
Advertisements

Ing. Miloš Rieger Reliability assessment of composite steel concrete cross section of roadway bridge VŠB – Technical University of Ostrava, Faculty of.
THE USE OF YIELD LINE ANALYSIS AND PANEL TESTS FOR THE DESIGN OF SHOTCRETE  by  WC JOUGHIN* and GC HOWELL** SRK Consulting, Johannesburg * Principal.
Analysis of Tri-axial Stress-strain Conditions of Pre-stressed Masonry Corner VSB-TU, Faculty of Civil Engineering Radim Cajka Pavlina Mateckova Lucie.
1 Colloquium EURO-SiBRAM’2002 Prague, June 24-26, 2002 Session 7 Szczepan Wolinski Rzeszow University of Technology, Rzeszow, Poland “Teaching reliability.
Design should address: UNDERSTRENGTH OVERLOAD
Reinforced Concrete Design
On time invariant probabilistic modelling of duration of load effects for timber Sven Thelandersson Structural Engineering Lund University.
Probabilistic Modelling of Loading Combination of APT and MLE Approach Ing. Leo Václavek, CSc., VŠB - Technical University of Ostrava, Czech Republic.
Session 4 Reference Values for Durability Design Dr. Paul J. Tikalsky, P.E., FACI The Pennsylvania State University USA.
Presentation about Reinforced concrete
Optimization Study of Beam with Sudden Profile Change Jan HlaváčekJune, 2002.
Using Monte Carlo and Directional Sampling combined with an Adaptive Response Surface for system reliability evaluation L. Schueremans, D. Van Gemert
Safety assesment of a steel frame using current code and SBRA method Petr Konečný, M.S. Structural Mechanics Division Department of Civil Engineering.
Helicopter System Reliability Analysis Statistical Methods for Reliability Engineering Mark Andersen.
Structure Analysis I. Lecture 2 Types of Structures & Loads.
THE WASHINGTON MONUMENT (1884) The purpose of this study is to show how this structure supports its own weight and wind load, by calculating its efficiency.
Leaning objectives Axial Stress
1 by Katerina Laschober. 2 Obr. 1.1 Steel column. Load arrangement. In the book called Probabilistic assessment of Structures there I have found an example.
Serviceability assessment according to SBRA Lucia Csóková Structural Mechanics Division Department of Civil Engineering VŠB – TU Ostrava Czech Republic.
Much of the material from: COL Stephen Ressler, P.E., Ph.D.
Rehabilitation and maintenance of buildings - 02 Karel Mikeš.
Sykora & Holicky - Durability Assessment of Large Surfaces… 1 Durability Assessment of Large Surfaces Using Standard Reliability Methods M. Sykora & M.
Reliability assessment of concrete structures Software package under development: -Project GA 1O3/02/1030 (Czech Grand Agency) -International project SARA.
Providing Design Standards for Frictional Compression Ground Anchors Geotechnical & Geoenvironmental Lab., Seoul Natl. Univ. Master Course Student Joo,
Dr.M.V.Rama Rao Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Palestine
CTU in Prague, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering DAF Page 1 Mean stress effect Smith‘s diagram  FL.
Reinforced Concrete Design
Application of the Direct Optimized Probabilistic Calculation Martin Krejsa Department of Structural Mechanics Faculty of Civil Engineering VSB - Technical.
TIMBER ELEMENT RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT Antonín Lokaj Euro-SiBRAM´2002 Prague, June 24 to 26, 2002, Czech Republic Department of Structural Engineering,
Unbraced Frame as Simple Series System Ing. Leo Václavek, CSc., VŠB - Technical University of Ostrava, Czech Republic Session 5.
Structural option for the Jinping neutrino central detector Contributor : Yuanqing Wang, Zongyi Wang Speaker : Zongyi Wang Department of civil engineering,
Reliability analysis of statically indeterminate steel frame (pilot study) David Pustka VŠB – Technical University of Ostrava Faculty of Civil Engineering.
Reliability Analysis of Wind Turbines
CTC 422 Design of Steel Structures Introduction. Steel as a Building Material Advantages High strength / weight ratio Properties are homogeneous and predictable.
Axial resistance of micropiles : from French to Eurocode design Roger Frank CERMES (ENPC-LCPC), Paris, France.
Truss Factor of Safety and Characterization
PROBLEMS IN THE CURRENT EUROCODE Tikkurila T. Poutanen.
Machine Design Under Uncertainty. Outline Uncertainty in mechanical components Why consider uncertainty Basics of uncertainty Uncertainty analysis for.
The Royal Plaza Hotel Collapse. Background on Collapse  Collapsed Friday 13 th August 1993 at 10:10 a.m.  The collapse took less than 10 seconds! 
Torsional Resistance of Standard Steel Shapes
BALLOON + JET ENGINE = QUALITATIVELY NEW TRANSPORTATION MEAN ??????? NO !
Roadmap Euro-SiBRAM’ Prague International Colloquium Towards Simulation-Based Probabilistic Codified Structural Design Pavel Marek.
Uncertainty in Mechanics of Materials. Outline Uncertainty in mechanics of materials Why consider uncertainty Basics of uncertainty Uncertainty analysis.
Chapter Summary Provides guidance on load values and loading methodology applicable to tension membrane structures –external loading has bigger impact.
Colloquium EURO-SiBRAM’
SBRA method as a tool for reliability analysis of structural members exposed to multi-component load effects David Pustka VŠB – Technical University of.
Warm cryostat mechanical calculations A.Catinaccio PH-DT Engineering Office, CERN Page 1 CERN, May 27th 2015.
1.The use of adhesive anchors for overhead applications has historically been limited. This has been based on the following considerations: a.fire b.creep.
How safe are our highway structures? Optimised assessment of bridges Aleš Žnidarič Slovenian National Building and Civil Engineering Institute.
1 ROAD & BRIDGE RESEARCH INSTITUTE WARSAW Juliusz Cieśla ASSESSSMENT OF PRESTRESSING FORCE IN PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BRIDGE SPANS.
Royal Plaza Hotel Collapse Thailand Group 24. Summary on Collapse Collapsed on Fri 13th August 1993 in less than 10 seconds 379 people in the Hotel were.
AXIAL LOAD CAPACITY OF CELLULAR LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE-FILLED STEEL SQUARE TUBE COLUMNS Jaksada THUMRONGVUT Department of Civil Engineering, Rajamangala.
STFC FEA Workshop Part 2 Walter Tizzano.
Concrete structures FOR BUILDINGS IN A CHANGING WORLD
Structural Reliability Aspects in Design of Wind Turbines
M. Z. Bezas, Th. N. Nikolaidis, C. C. Baniotopoulos
ISSUE OF SHOCK COMPRESSION AND EXPANSION BY DISPLACEMENT COMPRESSORS
Imprecise Probabilistic and Interval Approaches Applied to
Failures of residential buildings from fire point of view
Masaru Hoshiya Musashi Institute of Technology
Hybrid panels with I-shaped stiffeners
Axial resistance of micropiles : from French to Eurocode design
دانشگاه شهیدرجایی تهران
Effect of Earthquake on Fire Protection Systems
تعهدات مشتری در کنوانسیون بیع بین المللی
An-Najah National University
Strucural fire design of steel elements
5th International Conference on Engineering and Natural Science
Presentation transcript:

Petr Konečný, M.S. Parametric study of the Safety of a Steel Bar using SBRA Method Structural Mechanics Division Department of Civil Engineering VŠB – TU Ostrava Czech Republic

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Parametric Study The safety of 26 steel bars exposed to tension and designed according to LRFD Code was investigated by students in California using SBRA Method (see Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics 14, 1998) The safety of the same set of steel bars designed according to Eurocode was evaluated using SBRA in 2001 at VŠB - TU Ostrava. The steel bars are exposed to different mutually uncorelated load effect combinations. Probabilities of failures P f are compared

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Loadings Dead Long lasting Snow Wind Short lasting

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Cross-sectional area - A [m 2 ] Cases

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Cross-sectional area - A [m 2 ] Cases

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Cross-sectional area - A [m 2 ] Cases

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Probability of failure P f Cases

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Probability of failure P f Cases

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Probability of failure P f Cases

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Summary and Observations Both codes, LRFD and Eurocode, lead in the presented parametric study to a wide range of probabilities of failure P f depending on the actual load effects combination. Significant differences between the probabilities of failure, in case of the LRFD design and Eurocode design, can be observed. More attention should be given to the substance of the load effects combination analyses in order to explain the observed differences. Simulations based approach SBRA can serve as tool in such investigation.

Thank you for your attention Petr Konečný, M.S. Structural Mechanics Division Department of Civil Engineering VŠB – TU Ostrava Czech Republic

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Loading histograms Histogram Short1 Histogram Long1.dis Histogram Snow1.dis Histogram Dead1.dis Histogram Wind1.dis

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Load effects combinations

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Design of the shapes A EC (m 2 ) Cross-sectional area is designed by Anthill TM program for design probability of failure P d = 0, A SBRA (m 2 ) Histogram Area-S Histogram T235fy01 [MPa] Histogram T235fy01 [MPa] Histogram Area-S

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Assesment by SBRA Reliability function : RF = ( R - S ) Probability of failure P f Is determined by Anthill TM program for 2 mil. simulation R – tensile bearing resistence [kN] S – load effects combinations [kN] Probability of failure : P f (RF<0) < P d

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Warp Inputs Designed shapes Probability of failure Pf Conclusions Snímek 16

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Loading ECSBRA 1   SS SBRA 1 DeadG k 1,35  G.G k G d.Dead1.dis Long lastingQ k1 1,5  Q.Q k Q d.Long1.dis SnowQ k2 1,50,6  0  Q.Q k Q d.Snow1.dis WindQ k3 1,50,6  0  Q.Q k  Q d.Wind1.dis Short lastingQ k4 1,50,7  0  Q.Q k  Q d.Short1.dis Short lastingQ k5 1,50,7  0  Q.Q k  Q d.Short1.dis Short lastingQ k6 1,50,7  0  Q.Q k  Q d.Short1.dis Load effects combinations S EC SBRA Rest of the incidental loads 1.st incidental load Dead load Histogram Extrem of the load Incidental loads Dead load

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Probability of failure P f G G+1×Q G+2×QG+3×Q G+4×Q G+5×Q G+6×Q

Euro-SiBRAM’2002 Prague June 24 to 26, 2002 Cross-sectional area - A [m 2 ] G G+1×Q G+2×QG+3×Q G+4×Q G+5×Q G+6×Q