4.7 Article

An efficient framework for the elasto-plastic reliability assessment of uncertain wind excited systems

Journal

STRUCTURAL SAFETY
Volume 58, Issue -, Pages 69-78

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.strusafe.2015.09.001

Keywords

Elasto-plastic structures; Dynamic shakedown; Wind loads; Dynamic wind effects; Reliability analysis; Subset Simulation

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation (NSF) [CMMI-1462084, CMMI-1462076]
  2. Directorate For Engineering [1462084] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  3. Directorate For Engineering
  4. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn [1462076] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  5. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn [1462084] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this paper a method to efficiently evaluate the reliability of elastic-perfectly plastic structures is proposed. The method is based on combining dynamic shakedown theory with Subset Simulation. In particular, focus is on describing the shakedown behavior of uncertain elasto-plastic systems driven by stochastic wind loads. The ability of the structure to shakedown is assumed as a limit state separating plastic collapse from a safe, if not elastic, state of the structure. The limit state is therefore evaluated in terms of a probabilistic load multiplier estimated through solving a series of linear programming problems posed in terms of the responses of the underlying linear elastic model and self-stress distribution. The efficiency of the proposed procedure is guaranteed by the simplicity of the mathematical programming problem, the underlying structural model solved at each iteration, and die efficiency of Subset Simulation. The rigor of the approach is assured by the dynamic shakedown theory. The applicability of the framework is illustrated on a steel frame example. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available