Efficient approach for calibration of load and resistance factors in the limit state design of a breakwater foundation

Doan, Nhu Son; Dang, Phu Van; Huh, Jungwon; Mac, Van Ha; Haldar, Achintya

doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.111170

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, MCS is stated to be superior to the point estimate methods. The most critical disadvantage of MCS is the computing time and effort required since a huge number of calculations is needed [20]. However, the integration of the MCS with FEM has been more convenient with the aid of the computer recently.…”

Section: Fully Probabilistic Analysis For Truss Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Step 2, MCS is performed to generate a sampling set of all random input variables using the statistics defined in the first step. The size of the MCS (N MCS ), which strongly influences the calculation performance, is recommended in previous studies [3,20]. In this study, the size of MCS is chosen as 1 million so that the COV of the failure probability is not higher than 0.18 (assuming the RI is about 4.0).…”

Section: Fully Probabilistic Analysis For Truss Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A study on the probabilistic safety assessment of the truss structure designed by the LRFD code

Doan

2023

STCE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The probabilistic analyses provide a more rational approach for the safety assessment of structures since they consider the uncertainties in the calculations. Consequently, the design specifications of engineering structures are gradually transformed from the allowable stress design to the reliability-based specifications such as load and resistance factors design (LRFD) or partial safety factor design. The partial safety factors and the load andresistance factors provided in the reliability-based design codes are successfully determined from probabilistic frameworks. However, these specifications are classified into semi-probabilistic-based codes because no probabilistic analysis is required in the design practice. Thus, the actual reliability index of the design solutions maynot be as close to the target value as expected. This study employs the fully probabilistic analysis as an additional analysis to examine the reliability index of an LRFD-based design of the truss structure. A planar truss,which is designed following the semi-probabilistic code, is thoroughly examined. Several feasible sections are first designed using the LRFD code. Then, the actual reliability indexes of truss structures are evaluated to check if they meet the target reliability index specified in the reliability-based design codes. The tension and compression members concerning the strength limit state and the maximum deflection presenting for service ability are investigated as representative performances. The results of the probabilistic analyses indicate thatthe reliability indexes for the strength limit state are higher than the target value stipulated in the LRFD code. Compared to the tension members, more redundancy in terms of reliability index is observed for compression elements, although they are both designed at the limit state. Moreover, the reliability index obtained for theserviceability limit state is strongly dependent on the component (i.e., floor or roof) where the truss is utilized.

show abstract

Section: Fully Probabilistic Analysis For Truss Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fully Probabilistic Analysis For Truss Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

A study on the probabilistic safety assessment of the truss structure designed by the LRFD code

Doan

2023

STCE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This makes the probabilistic analysis superior to the CDA. MVFOSM, FORM, and MCS are the three most common reliability methods, and MCS is carried out in this study because it can deal with implicit problems [4,12,16].…”

Section: Monte Carlo Simulation Integrated With Limit Equilibrium Met...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The RI is then estimated by the distance from the most probable points to the origin. The main drawback of the FORM is it requires derivative calculations; hence, it is solely applicable to explicit performance functions [3,7,10]. MCS is a straightforward and robust method to evaluate failure probability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, MCS also derives statistical information on the performance functions, making it superior to the two abovementioned methods. Particularly, MCS is the most suitable method to directly apply to both explicit and implicit performance functions [10][11][12]. Recently, the MCSs have been progressively implemented with computer aid to overcome the repetitive calculations required in MCS.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reliability analysis and uncertainty quantification of clay and sand slopes stability evaluated by Fellenius and Bishop’s simplified methods

Doan

2023

Geo-Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Slope stabilities are mainly designed using the conventional design approach (CDA), where the limit equilibrium methods (LEMs) are performed. Fellenius and Bishop’s simplified methods are the two commonly LEMs adopted as recommended in most design codes. In the design process of CDA, the safety factors (FS) of slopes are checked with specified FSs to ensure stability. The CDA has inherent drawbacks because the design process does not account for uncertainties. Moreover, different LEMs using different assumptions to solve the safety factors might include some amount orders of approximations. This study conducts probabilistic analyses, i.e., Monte Carlo simulations (MCSs) and uncertainty quantification, to obtain insights into the two LEMs applied to clay and sand slopes. The results reveal that the reliability indexes (RIs) obtained from the two LEMs-based MCSs are relatively identical for the same slope. Concerning the soil types, however, the RIs of the clay slope are significantly lower than those estimated for the sand slope, regardless of the LEMs used. The uncertainty quantifications for the clay slopes reveal that the two LEMs have relatively similar bias factors regarding FSs. Nevertheless, using the Fellenius method underestimates the probabilistic safety (about 17% in terms of the mean of FSs) for the sand slope compared to Bishop’s simplified method. Moreover, the coefficients of variation of FS obtained from the clay slope are consistently larger than those from the sand slope. These observations imply that the clay slope is more uncertain than the sand slope, and the Fellenius method results in lower FSs for sand slopes. Therefore, the FSs specified in the design codes should be connected to the soil type or the LEMs used to achieve the same probabilistic safety levels. Finally, the equivalent FSs associated with a RI of 1.75 are derived for each slope and each LEM used.

show abstract

Reliability Analysis for Tension and Compression Designs of Steel Truss Elements Using Vietnamese Codes

Doan

2024

Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Efficient approach for calibration of load and resistance factors in the limit state design of a breakwater foundation

Cited by 10 publications

References 37 publications

A study on the probabilistic safety assessment of the truss structure designed by the LRFD code

A study on the probabilistic safety assessment of the truss structure designed by the LRFD code

Reliability analysis and uncertainty quantification of clay and sand slopes stability evaluated by Fellenius and Bishop’s simplified methods

Reliability Analysis for Tension and Compression Designs of Steel Truss Elements Using Vietnamese Codes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About