2012
DOI: 10.1080/19373260.2012.700790
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Design considerations for one-strut failure according to TR26 – a practical approach for practising engineers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In order to obtain a reasonable simulation of OSF, Pong et al [9] proposed a simplified method using both the 2D geotechnical software PLAXIS 2D and the 3D structural software STAAD for analyses and made assumption for the OSF case using 3D structural analyses. It was found that the reduction factor of axial stiffness after removing the failed strut, instead of removing an entire strut level, was equal to 1.5 for the OSF case if 2D modeling was applied.…”
Section: Reduction Factormentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In order to obtain a reasonable simulation of OSF, Pong et al [9] proposed a simplified method using both the 2D geotechnical software PLAXIS 2D and the 3D structural software STAAD for analyses and made assumption for the OSF case using 3D structural analyses. It was found that the reduction factor of axial stiffness after removing the failed strut, instead of removing an entire strut level, was equal to 1.5 for the OSF case if 2D modeling was applied.…”
Section: Reduction Factormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Secondly, a deep excavation, generally speaking, has multiple levels of struts and each level has more than one strut; thus, the selection of position becomes very crucial in the investigation of OSF conditions. In most cases, the lowest strut level of a deep excavation is among the most dangerous situations caused by OSF in terms of stress distribution, load transfers, and wall deflections (Whittle and Davies [1]; Goh et al [6]; Phan et al [7], Choosrithong and Schweiger [8]; Pong et al [9]). Interestingly, Liu et al [10] found that a failed strut placed at a location in the middle of a deep excavation is the most important one since its strength redundancy is the smallest compared to others.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Goh and Wong [31] performed a 3D finite element analysis to study the load change in the adjacent struts when one or two struts fail and found that transfers its load to the adjacent struts, and the bending moment on the wall does not change significantly. In addition, Pong et al [32] proposed a procedure to optimize the strut forces determined by the 2D analyses according to the results of the 3D analyses in the case of failure of a single strut because the 2D analyses require more time than the 3D analyses. Some researchers study soft soils using the numerical methods and computer-based software.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They must be associated even with comparing the stiffness of such a solution to the traditional construction and possible structure optimization, taking into account geometry changes that have an ambiguous impact on the structure. Thin-walled rectangular hollow section (RHS) struts have been confirmed to be vulnerable to various modes of interactions, and have shown sensitivity to different imperfections [ 10 ]. Due to their flexibility, most steel thin-walled components are designed to have an ultimate state in the elastic-plastic range [ 11 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%