Safety structural

Ben-Haim, Y. 1994 A Non Probabilistic Concept of Reliability. Structural Safety, 14, 227-245. 

Ditlevseii, O. 1997 Structural Reliability Codes for Probabilistic Design. Structural Safety, 19(3), 253-270. 

Freudentlial, A. M., Garrelts, J. M. and Sliinozuka, M. 1966 The Analysis of Structural Safety. Journal of the Structural Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, 92, STl, 261-MS. 

The chemist should explore the fields of chemicals with structures related to compounds known to be effective. He should also study new classes of structures. Safety appears to lie in numbers. The failure of several members of a new class of compounds does not prove that there are no effective members in the group. Only certain of the analogs of DDT are good insecticides. Even DDT is not effective on some species of insects. Only the gamma isomer of benzene hexachloride is highly effective. 

Fire safety design requires the same kind of approach. We must develop the necessary scientific quantitative understanding of fire so as to be able to predict the level of a building s fire safety. Again, looking at structural engineering, we see the use of simple formulas for beams, columns, joints, reenforcing rods, etc., which permit quantitative evaluation of structural safety. The phenomena of fire also results in... 

It is practical to conduct a structured safety analysis, e.g., in accordance with Figure 2, for a reaction with a given process in a given facility. 

Keywords System Safety Complexity Safety Analysis Software Engineering Formal Methods OF-FMEA Safety Claim Structure Safety Case Safety Assessment... 

Nanomaterials may in their own right possess novel and useful properties or as a composite of the same or different materials to form larger useful structures. Safety consideration is therefore of paramount importance since completely inert materials have the ability to exhibit toxic effects by virtue of a reduction in their size and associated increase in surface area-mass ratio, let alone materials manipulated specifically to impart novel properties. 

In practical terms, grout should always be pumped as rapidly as possible in order to minimize job costs. Structural safety and sometimes equipment limitations will always impose a pressure ceiling, which in turn may limit the rate at which grout is placed. 

No. 20 Specify here the maximum allowable pumping pressures, as determined by structural safety considerations. In general, these pressures can be as high as permissible values for cement grouting. 

The decision on the repair option has to be taken starting from the extent and the cause of damage, its evolution in time, the intended use and importance of the structure and the consequences of degradation for its structural safety and serviceability (Figure 18.1). The cost of the repair methods, the availability and the experience with their use in the place where the structure is located, and the time available for repair also have to be considered. Several questions should be answered during this step, which go far beyond corrosion aspects. Table 18.1 gives an example of the most frequent questions to be considered. 

In cases of damage influencing the structural safety would in the worst instance, a global or a local failure occur What would be the consequence of a failure Would the public be at risk from falling debris ... 

The term conventional repair is used in this book to indicate a repair work made on a damaged reinforced concrete structure, which is aimed at restoring protection to the reinforcement by means of replacement of non-protective concrete with a suitable cementitious material. The durability of the repair work is due to the achievement and maintenance of passivity on the reinforcement by the contact with the protective repair material. The repair work can be divided in the following steps a) assessment of the condition of the structure b) removal of concrete in well-defined parts of the structure and for specific depths c) cleaning of the exposed rebars d) application of a suitable repair material to provide an adequate cover to the reinforcement [1-6]. Each of these steps must be carried out properly in order to guarantee the effectiveness of the whole repair work. Additional protection measures can be used to increase the durability of the repair, but they must not interfere with the protection provided by the alkahnity of the repair material. Strengthening may also be required to restore the structural safety of the structure. 

Corrosion compromises structure safety and is a leading factor in the catastrophic failure in bridges, nuclear facihties, airplane components, and equipment used in chemical, petrochemical, transportation, and construction industries. Corrosion is a spontaneous, slow-progressing phenomenon. The rate is mainly governed by the environment, metal composition, and metallurgical, chemical, and electrochemical properties. Because it takes a long time to evaluate the extent of corrosion, it is often underestimated in industrial equipment and structure design. 

ABSTRACT The safety of oil depot is threatened by many factors and the results of safety evaluation are limited by the evaluation method, the accuracy of evaluation results also has been largely affected by personnel subjective factors. To overcome these defects, based on the analysis of influence factors of oil depot safety hierarchical structure safety evaluation model of oil depot is built by BP neural network method in this paper, and the evaluation model of neural network is trained by sample data. Evaluation results proved that BP neural network method is very suitable to evaluate the safety status of oil depot. 

Prior to the development of the GFRP tanks, no standards were required for buried tanks such as loads or loading conditions, minimum depths of earth cover, or structural safety factors were available. At that... 

Hoeg, K., and Tang, W. H. (1977), Probabilistic considerations in the foundation engineering for offshore structures. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Structural Safety and Reliability, Mimich, Germany, pp. 267-296. 

Structural health monitoring (SHM) is a process for evaluation of the structural safety status from structural response measurements. The ultimate goal is to develop an economical and non-destructive system for the earliest possible detection of damage. It has been attracting much attention in the past two decades. A tremendous amount of efforts have been dedicated in this area [15,18,19,25,51,52,68,69,77,101,103,106,138,142,143,149,160,168,174,185], [186,195,201,204,228,238,244,246,261,267,268,281,282]. Comprehensive literature reviews on the development of SHM can be found in Doebling et al. [69] and Sohn et al. [247] and there were also a number of workshops, [1,44,187], for example, and special issues of journals, e.g.. Journal of Engineering Mechanics in July 2000 [90] and January 2004 [26] and Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering in January 2001 [278] and May 2006 [22]. 

Au, S. K., Papadimitriou, C. and Beck, J. L. Reliability of uncertain dynamical systems with multiple design points. Structural Safety 21(2) (1999), 113-133. 

Beck, J. L. Statistical system identification of structures. In Structural Safety and Reliability, ASCE, New York, NY (1990), pp. 1395-1402. 

Bucher, C. G. Adaptive sampling - an iterative fast Monte Carlo procedure. Structural Safety 5(2) (1988), 119-126. 

Mahadevan, S., Zhang, R. and Smith, N. Bayesian networks for system reliability reassessment. Structural Safety 23(3) (2001), 231-251. 

Melchers, R. E. Importance sampling in structural systems. Structural Safety 6(1) (1989), 3-10. 

Natke, H. G. and Yao, J. T. P. Proceedings of the Workshop on Structural Safety Evaluation Based on System Ident atum Approaches. Vieweg and S(4m, Wiesbaden, Germany, 1988. 

Schueller, G. I. and Stix, R. A critical appraisal of methods to determine failure probabilities. Structural Safety 4(4) (1987), 293-309. 

We are perhaps now in a position to attempt to consider the matter of structural safety in its total context. We have looked at both structural reliability theory in dealing with parameter uncertainty, and its inadequacies in dealing with system uncertainty. In the previous section human error was discussed in relation to structural safety. With these considerations in mind the author has presented a classification of failure types which will be listed again here [96]. The basic types proposed are as follows ... 

Returning to the structural safety problem, we can use this definition to calculate a fuzzy possibility that the calculation model is perfect. The fuzzy truth restriction upon LSM is a fuzzy truth restriction on the calculation model is perfect, given the information from the lower parts of the logical hierarchy. Thus... 

This is analogous to the problem of structural safety. If a structure is a one-off design, there is no repeatable experiment which can be set up to test the statement the probability that the structure will fail in the collapse limit state of plastic mechanism X is low . It can only be done through tests and assessments made on structures and components of structures which are not precisely the same as the structure in question but the degree of similarity has to be assessed subjectively. 

Here the basic model used is one which is tested hi the laboratory and contains as much as is known about the influences of the X and Y parameters on the fatigue life. The known variabilities of the X and Y in the WOL are then used to calculate a fuzzy probability of failure which is the chance that the actual life will be less than the design life. A fuzzy logical hierarchy is then set up exactly as in the example of Section 10.5, to allow for the uncertainty associated with the application of the model in the laboratory. This new fuzzy probabUity is then again truth functionally modified to allow for the uncertainty of the matching with the WOL The procedure would then be exactly as for that example, so that a fuzzy truth restriction upon the statement, the structure is perfectly safe would result and this is the final measure of structural safety. 

---