Advertisement

International Journal of Steel Structures

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 153–160 | Cite as

Reliability analysis of net cross-section resistance with accidental eccentricity of holes

  • Franc Sinur
  • Darko Beg
Article
  • 56 Downloads

Abstract

The aim of the research was to determine reliability function of net cross-section resistance in relation to accidental eccentricity of nominally centric holes. The response surface method was used by taking into account the relevant Eurocode design provisions and reliability requirements. Within the response surface method, the central composite design method and the least square method were used with the employment of Monte Carlo simulations. The probable distributed variables such as strength f y, breadth b, thickness t, diameter d 0 and eccentricity e were determined by the central composite design method. 280 different numerical simulations were set up with varying variables. A log-normal distribution for strength (f y) and a normal distribution for geometrical variables (b, t, d 0,e) were employed by taking into account the coefficients of variations: V fy=0.07, V b,=0.005, V l=0.05 and V d0=0.005. In order to determine the influence of eccentricity on partial safety factor, several normal distributions with different variation factors were applied in the analysis. The influence of the edge distance of the hole e 2 over d 0 ratio on the partial safety factor was determined by varying mean values of variable b. For comparison, two types of steel were used: structural steel S235 and high strength steel S690. Numerical simulations of the net cross-section resistance F u were performed with ABAQUS 6.7. The response surface for the net cross-section resistance was determined by introducing a quadratic approximation function and by applying the least square method. The partial safely factor was then (statistically) obtained by means of robust Monte Carlo simulations on the calculated response surface.

Keywords

Net section Bolted connections Partial safety factor Reliability Response surface design Monte Carlo simulations Eurocode 3 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Box, G. and Wilson, K. (1951). “On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 13Google Scholar
  2. CEN (2004). “Eurocode-Basis of structural design, EN 1990.” European Committee for Standardisation, Brussels.Google Scholar
  3. CEN (2005). “Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures-Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings, EN 1993-1-1.” European Committee for Standardisation, Brussels.Google Scholar
  4. CEN (2005). “Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures-Part 1-8: Design of joints, EN 1993-1-8.” European Committee for Standardisation, Brussels.Google Scholar
  5. CEN (2007). “Eurocode-Execution of steel structures and aluminium strucures-Part 2: Technical requirements for the execution of steel structures-Stage 49, prEN 1090-2.” European Committee for Standardisation, Brussels.Google Scholar
  6. Cheng, J. and Xiao, R.-C. (2005). “Probabilistic free vibration and flutter analyses of suspension bridges.” Engineering Structures, 27, pp. 1509–1518.Google Scholar
  7. Johansson, B., Maquoi, R., and Sedlacek, G. (2001). “New design rules for plated structures in Eurocode 3.” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 57, pp. 279–31Google Scholar
  8. Mohamed, A., Soares, R., and Venturini, W. S. (2001). “Partial safety factors for homogeneous reliability of nonlinear reinforced concrete columns.” Structural Safety, 23, pp. 137–15Google Scholar
  9. Može, P., Beg, D., and Lopatic, J. (2007). “Net cross-section design resistance and local ductility of elements made of high strength steel.” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 63, pp. 1431–144Google Scholar
  10. Pavlovĉiĉ, L., Detzel, A., Kuhlmann, U., and Beg, D. (2007). “Shear resistance of longitudinally stiffened panels—Part 1: Tests and numerical analysis of imperfections.” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 63, pp. 337–35Google Scholar
  11. Snijder, H. H., Ungermann, D., Stark, J. W. B., Sedlacek, G, Bijlaard, F. S. K., and Hemmert-Halswick, A. (1988a). “Evaluation of test results on bolted connections in order to obtain strength functions and suitable model factors-Part A: Results, Background report to Eurocode 3.” Eurocode 3 Editorial Group.Google Scholar
  12. Snijder, H. H., Ungermann, D., Stark, J. W. B., Sedlacek, G, Bijlaard, F. S. K., and Hemmert-Halswick, A. (1988b). “Evaluation of test results on bolted connections in order to obtain strength functions and suitable model factors-Part B: Evaluations, Background report to Eurocode 3.” Eurocode 3 Editorial Group.Google Scholar
  13. Soares, R. C, Mohamed, A., Venturini, W. S., and Lemaire, M. (2002). “Reliability analysis of non-linear reinforced concrete frames using the response surface method.” Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 75, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
  14. Wolfram (2008). “Mathematica 6.0, The user guide.” Wolfram Research, IncGoogle Scholar
  15. Wong, S. M., Hobbs, R. E., and Onof, C. (2005). “An adaptive response surface method for reliability analysis of structures with multiple loading sequences.” Structural Safety, 27, pp. 287–308.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Steel Construction & Springer 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Civil and Geodetic EngineeringUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations