Measures of Structural Robustness — Requirements and Applications

Starossek, Uwe; Haberland, Marco

doi:10.1061/41016(314)235

Cited by 38 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The two strategies are compared in the following (see also Table 2); reducing vulnerability is abbreviated by design strategy 1, and enhancing robustness by design strategy 2. This issue is further discussed by Starossek (2009).…”

Section: Reducing Vulnerability Versus Enhancing Robustnessmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In particular the types of collapse referred to as pancake-type, zipper-type and domino-type have been monitored at progressive collapses of different structures, also often as a so called mixed-type. A detailed description of the different types can be found by Starossek (2007aStarossek ( , 2009 A disproportionate collapse typically develops in three stages. First, an abnormal event, E, acts on a structure.…”

Section: Disproportionate Collapsementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Collapse resistance is defined here as the insensitivity of a structure to abnormal events (Starossek, 2009). A structure is collapse resistant if an abnormal event does not lead to disproportionate collapse.…”

Section: Collapse Resistancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The locations of the segment borders are chosen by the design engineer within the scope of the design objectives. Segment borders are formed by strong components designed to arrest an incipient collapse (high local resistance to accommodate large forces) or by weak components (structural fuses) at which failing parts can safely disconnect from the structure (eliminating continuity or reducing stiffness to accommodate large deformations and displacements); a third possibility of creating segment borders is to provide them with high ductility and large energy dissipation capacity (to accommodate large forces and large displacements at the same time) (Starossek, 2009).…”

Section: Segmentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The term progressive collapse is more suitable when referring to the physical phenomenon and mechanism of collapse. A progressive collapse can involve different mechanisms and types of collapse that depend on the type and form of a structure and its orientation in space, as well as on the type, location and magnitude of the triggering abnormal event (Starossek, 2007a(Starossek, , 2009). In particular the types of collapse referred to as pancake-type, zipper-type and domino-type have been monitored at progressive collapses of different structures, also often as a so called mixed-type.…”

Section: Disproportionate Collapsementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Robustness of structures

Starossek

Haberland

2012

IJLCPE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disproportionate collapse is prevented by ensuring collapse resistance, a property defined as the insensitivity of a structure to abnormal events. Enhancing robustness and reducing vulnerability are two different structural measures for achieving collapse resistance. The vulnerability of a structure is its susceptibility to become initially damaged by abnormal events; robustness is its insensitivity to such initial damage. Another option for preventing disproportionate collapse is the reduction of the exposure of the structure to abnormal events. The design strategy reducing vulnerability aims at preventing failure initiation whereas the strategy enhancing robustness aims at preventing disproportionate failure spreading. These two approaches are compared. Robustness can be achieved by the design methods alternative load paths and segmentation, which are also discussed. Furthermore, measures for the quantification of robustness are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Reducing Vulnerability Versus Enhancing Robustnessmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Disproportionate Collapsementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Collapse Resistancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Segmentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Disproportionate Collapsementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Robustness of structures

Starossek

Haberland

2012

IJLCPE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Robustheit von Ingenieurstrukturen

Strauß¹,

Pürgstaller²,

Pampanin³

et al. 2022

BetonKalender 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zyklisch belastete Betonstrukturen

Urban

Strauß²,

Macho³

et al. 2012

Bautechnik

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bei Ermüdungsnachweisen von Betonstrukturen, vor allem im Bereich Offshore, wird die schrittweise Degradation von Materialparametern oftmals nicht berücksichtigt. Eine Auswirkung dieser Schädigung des Materials in Teilbereichen des Betonquerschnitts in Abhängigkeit des Belastungszustands ist eine Spannungsumlagerung innerhalb des Querschnitts und somit die Verlängerung der theoretischen Nutzungsdauer der Betonstruktur. Beton wird in seinen Eigenschaften mithilfe von Materialparametern näher bestimmt. Ein sehr wichtiger Materialparameter ist der E‐Modul, auch Elastizitätskoeffizient genannt. Ein Weg, die Schädigung des Materials in einer FE‐Analyse zu berücksichtigen, ist die schrittweise Anpassung und Minimierung des E‐Moduls. Um ein Bauwerk zu bemessen, seinen internen Spannungsverlauf oder sein Verformungsverhalten vorherzusagen, ist es somit von großer Wichtigkeit, diesen Parameter genau zu bestimmen, seine Veränderung mit der Zeit und aufgrund seiner Belastungshistorie zu kennen. In diesem Beitrag wird zusätzlich zur Robustheits‐ und Redundanz‐Definition auch eine Lebenszeitberechnung des Strabag‐Testfundaments in Cuxhaven nach Model Code 1990 für die geplanten Ermüdungsversuche mit realistisch verändertem E‐Modul ausgeführt. An der Fallstudie Cuxhaven wird mithilfe eines linearen, iterativen Modellbildungsprozesses die Nutzung der Robustheit des Systems für die Verlängerung der verbleibenden Nutzungsdauer gezeigt. Concrete structures under cyclic loading – robustness and redundancy considerations for residual lifetime optimization Concerning fatigue analysis of concrete structures, especially in offshore areas, the continuous degradation of material parameters is not taken into account. One effect of the damaged material structure in parts of the concrete cross section is the stress redistribution from highly loaded (damaged) areas to low loaded (undamaged) areas and therefore an elongation of the theoretical residual service life. Concrete is described by the use of material parameters. A very important parameter is the E‐modulus, also called the modulus of elasticity. A possibility to consider the degradation process within the material concrete is the gradual adaption and minimization of the E‐modulus. In order to analyze and dimension a structure, to predict the internal stress distribution and deflection behavior, it is very important to specify this parameter and to know the variation according loading history and time. In addition to robustness and redundancy definition given in this article, a life time calculation of the Strabag gravity base test foundation in Cuxhaven according Model Code 1990 for the planned fatigue tests with realistic reduction of E‐Modulus is performed. Concerning the case study “Cuxhaven” the use of system robustness in order to extend the residual service life is been demonstrated by means of a linear iterative modeling process.

show abstract

Measures of Structural Robustness — Requirements and Applications

Cited by 38 publications

References 13 publications

Robustness of structures

Robustness of structures

Robustheit von Ingenieurstrukturen

Zyklisch belastete Betonstrukturen

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About