00 mi piace00 non mi piace

3 visualizzazioni5 pagineAbstract—This paper presents an approach for estimating the structural reliability of complex technical
systems based on scenario analysis and the estimation of local and structural vulnerabilities of a system.
Two basic methods for increasing structural reliability of technical systems (namely, increasing
strength of structural components and improvement of the topology system through introduction of
additional links) are compared for the cases of ideally fragile and elastoplastic materials.

Sep 06, 2017

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT o leggi online da Scribd

Abstract—This paper presents an approach for estimating the structural reliability of complex technical
systems based on scenario analysis and the estimation of local and structural vulnerabilities of a system.
Two basic methods for increasing structural reliability of technical systems (namely, increasing
strength of structural components and improvement of the topology system through introduction of
additional links) are compared for the cases of ideally fragile and elastoplastic materials.

© All Rights Reserved

3 visualizzazioni

00 mi piace00 non mi piace

Abstract—This paper presents an approach for estimating the structural reliability of complex technical
systems based on scenario analysis and the estimation of local and structural vulnerabilities of a system.
Two basic methods for increasing structural reliability of technical systems (namely, increasing
strength of structural components and improvement of the topology system through introduction of
additional links) are compared for the cases of ideally fragile and elastoplastic materials.

© All Rights Reserved

Sei sulla pagina 1di 5

Original Russian Text N.A. Makhutov, D.O. Reznikov, 2014, published in Problemy Mashinostroeniya i Nadezhnosti Mashin, 2014, No. 5, pp. 4146.

OF MACHINES AND STRUCTURES

of Strength of Structural Elements of Technical Systems

under Serial Loading

N. A. Makhutov and D. O. Reznikov

Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

@@@

AbstractIn this paper, deterministic and probabilistic estimates of strength are compared for the

cases of serial loading based on the results of the use of the extreme value theory. The need to clarify

the traditional estimates obtained under the assumption of onetime loading is substantiated.

DOI: 10.3103/S1052618814050100

The strength of structural elements is probabilistic because of the variability of loads on structural ele

ments of technical systems, scatter of mechanical properties of structural materials, inaccuracies of geo

metrical dimensions, imperfections of test equipment and design models. Tasks of ensuring the strength

of structural elements of technical systems is traditionally solved with deterministic approaches [15].

Within these approaches uncertainty factors listed above are taken into account by introducing safety mar

gins n on main mechanisms of reaching limit states, which should exceed standard maximum allowable

values [n], i.e., n > [n].

In recent years, there has been a transition to the solution of the task of ensuring the strength of the

structural elements in a probabilistic formulation [2, 68] that assumes the estimation of the calculated

failure probability Pf of the structural element, which should not exceed the maximum allowable value

[Pf], i.e., Pf [Pf]

It is important to compare the strength criteria used in the context of deterministic and probabilistic

approaches [812].

In [13, 14] the dependence of the failure probability Pf, 1 on the selected safety margin n1 under a single

static load is studied, as well as on coefficients of variation of load and loading capacity. If the load and

loading capacity are distributed according to normal laws FL(x) = N(E{L}, S{L}) and FR(x) = N(E{R},

S{R}) (where E{L}, S{L}, E{R} and S{R} are mathematical expectations and mean square deviations of the

load L and loading capacity R), then the following relationship holds [13, 14]

n1 1

P f, 1 =

, (1)

2 + 2 n 2

l R 1

where () is the Laplace function, n1 = E{R}/E{L} is the central safety margin under a single static load

ing; L = S{L}/E{L} and R = S{R}/E{R} are coefficients of variation of the load and loading capacity

(strength).

The clarification of relationships between the safety margin and the failure probability taking into

account the serial load. In a more general formulation it is necessary to estimate the failure probability,

when the system in operation is subjected not to a single load L but to serial loads L1, L2, , Lm. In view

of existing uncertainties (variance of system parameters and external environment) the values L1, L2, ,

Lm are random. We assume that they are independent and identically distributed according to the normal

law with the distribution function FL(x) = N(E{L}, S{L}. Thus, the length of the series m is considered a

deterministic and known value. Furthermore, we assume that the loading capacity of the element is also

a random variable R distributed according to the normal law FR(x) = N(E{R}, S{R}). At the same time, we

neglect the degradation of strength properties of the material, i.e., we will take E{R} = const during the

operating life l (Fig. 1).

384

THE COMPARISON OF DETERMINISTIC AND PROBABILISTIC ESTIMATES 385

R, L fR(x) L = L

Let us consider the maximum load Lmax = max{L1, L2, , Lm} acting

* max on a structural element. Obviously, this variable is also random and its

E{R} distribution function is defined by the expression

m

F Lmax ( x ) = P ( L max x ) = P ( L 1 x, L 2 x, , L m x ) = ( F L ( x ) ) ,

L1 L2 Li

Lm and the density function can be written as

F Lmax ( x ) m1

0 t1 t2 ti t* tm TE t f Lmax ( x ) =

= m [ FL ( x ) ] fL ( x ) .

x

Fig. 1. The series of actions

on the system. The condition ensuring the strength of the structural member

exposed during to a series of pulsed loads during the period of its opera

tion can be written as Lmax < R.

The condition of reaching the limit state (failure) will be written as Lmax > R.

In the considered case of serial loading the probability of failure limit state Pf, ser = P(Lmax > R) will be

defined by overlapping plots of density functions of the maximum load fLmax and strength fR. It is obvious

that Pf, ser will depend on the length of the pulse series m (Fig. 2).

Since the initial distribution of L obeys the normal law, then according to the FisherTippett

Gnedenko theorem the distribution of the maximum FLmax(x) at m has the asymptotic form corre

sponding to the extreme distribution of type I, in which functions of distribution and density distribution

have the form of a double exponential distribution [6, 15]

F Lmax ( x ) = exp [ exp { m [ (x E { L })/S { L } u m ] } ] , (2)

where u m = S { L } 2 ln m

ln ln m + ln 4 + E { L } and = 2 ln m /S { L } .

2 2 ln m

m

At the same time, the mathematical expectation and mean square deviation of the extreme distribution

are defined by expressions

E { L max } = u m + / m , ,

S { L max } = (4)

6 m

where = 0.577 is Eulers constant.

Figure 2 shows the plots of density functions of maxima Lmax|m constructed for the cases when the series

are m = 1, m = 10, m = 100, and m = 1000 pulses, and the plot of density functions of the loading capacity

f(x)

1.0 1

2

3

0.6 4

5

0.2

0 2 6 10 14 x, km

Fig. 2. Density function of maxima of loads and strength: the single load density for a series of m = 1 pulses fLmax|m = 1(x)

(1), the load maxima density for a series from m = 10 pulses fLmax|m = 10(x) (2), of m = 100 pulses f 2 (x) (3), of

Lmax|m = 10

m = 1000 pulses f 3 (x) (4), and the strength density fR(x).

Lmax|m = 10

386 MAKHUTOV, REZNIKOV

f(x)

0.9 1

m = 1000

2

100

0.7 3

10 4

0.5

5

0.3 6

1

7

0.1

0 2 6 10 14 x, km

Fig. 3. The comparison of asymptotic and exact distributions of maxima at different lengths of series of loads: the intensity

density of a single load m = 1 (1), the intensity density of maxima at m = 10 (asymptotic solution) (2), at m = 10 (the exact

solution) (3), at m = 100 (asymptotic solution) (4), at m = 100 (exact solution) (5), at m = 1000 (asymptotic solution) (6),

and at m = 1000 (exact solution) (7).

R. In the considered example, the intensity of each load pulse is a random variable distributed according

to a normal distribution with distribution parameters E{Lk} = 6 km, S{Li} = 1.2 km (i = 1, 2, , m), and

the loading capacity is also a random variable distributed according to the normal law with distribution

parameters E{R} = 13 km, S{R} = 1.1 km. The analysis of plots indicates that with the increasing number

of pulses in the series the distribution of load maxima will be significantly shifted to the right.

It can be shown that if lengths of pulse series are m 10, the use of asymptotic distributions of maxima

instead of exact distributions is quite correct. Indeed, since the initial distribution of the load pulse inten

sity obeys the normal law

x

x E(L) 2

exp dz ,

1

F L ( x ) =

S ( L ) 2

S(L)

x m

x E(L) 2

exp dz ,

1

m

F Lmax ( x ) = ( F L ( x ) ) = (5)

S ( L ) 2 S(L)

m ( F ( x ) ) m 1 exp x

f Lmax ( x ) = E ( L) 2 .

(6)

S(L)

L

S ( L ) 2

By comparing the plots of densities of exact and asymptotic distributions for different m (Fig. 3) it can

be concluded that for the lengths of pulse series m 10 asymptotic distributions of maxima of series of load

approximate the exact distribution quite accurately. The replacement of exact distributions of the form (5)

and (6) with asymptotic distributions of the form (2) and (3) is convenient, since it makes it possible to

obtain relatively simple expressions (4) for the mathematical expectation and mean square deviation of

the maximum load in the series Lmax. This, in turn, makes it possible to estimate the safety margin and the

failure probability in serial loads.

Obviously, in the case of a series of m load pulses it is necessary to transfer from the traditional notation

of the strength condition of the form R > L to the expression R > Lmax|m. The central safety margin nser for

the case when the loading mode consists of a pulse series becomes a function of the amount of m pulses in

a series

E{R}

n ser ( x ) = . (7)

E { L max|m }

THE COMPARISON OF DETERMINISTIC AND PROBABILISTIC ESTIMATES 387

n1 length of the series (Fig. 4). In the considered example, it decreases

2 1 from n1 = 2.17 in the case of a single load m = 1 to nser(103) = 1.31

[n] at m = 1000.

2

1 By accepting the value of the allowable safety margin [n] = 1.5 it

is possible to find the maximum allowable number of pulses [m]

0 which is [m] = 39.

1 10[m] 100 m 1000

It is possible to estimate the dependence of the element failure

Fig. 4. The dependence of the safety probability on the number of pulses in a series. According to [15,

margin on the number of load 16], the dependence is given by the expression

pulses in a series: serial safety mar

gin nser (1), standard maximum

f Lmax ( x )F R ( x ) dx {1 F Lmax ( x ) }f R ( x ) dx ,

allowable safety margin [n] (2). P f, ser = =

3 1.0

2

1 4

3

0.8

0.6

P f, ser =

{ 1 exp [ exp { m[(x E { L } )/S { L } u m ] } ] }

2

2 0.4 1 ( x E { R } ) dx.

1 exp

2

0.2 S { R } 2 2S { R }

0 0

5 7 9 11 13 15 The resulting expression can be integrated numerically. How

E{R}, @ ever, given that the distribution of Lmax is very compact, it can be

roughly approximated by the normal distribution with mathemati

Fig. 5. The comparison of depen cal expectation and mean square deviation according to (4). Then,

dencies of safety margins and fail the failure probability of the element subjected to a series of m loads

ure probabilities in the case of sin

gle and serial loads with increasing

can be approximately estimated using expression (1)

load intensity. The safety margin

for a single loading n1 (1), the n ser ( m ) 1

safety margin in case of a serial P f, ser =

,

loading nser (2), the failure proba 2 + 2 n 2 ( m )

Lmax R ser

bility for a single loading Pf,1 (3),

and the failure probability in the

case of the serial loading Pser,1 (4). where () is the Laplace function, Lmax = S{Lmax}/E{Lmax} is the

coefficient of the variation of Lmax determined taking into account

expressions (4); R is the coefficient of load variation; nser(m) is the

safety margin by the maximum pulse of a series of m pulses defined with regard to expression (7).

Dependencies of safety margins for single n1 and serial nser loads and dependencies of corresponding

failure probabilities f, 1 and Pf, ser are given in Fig. 5 for varying mathematical expectation of the load

intensity in the range {L} = 515 and a fixed length of the series (m = 50 pulses).

CONCLUSIONS

By taking into account the seriality of loading of structural elements of technical systems during their

operation it is possible to significantly clarify the magnitude of the safety margin nser and the failure prob

ability Pf, ser compared to estimates of safety margins n1 of the strength Pf,1 obtained under the assumption

of onetime application of the load.

The length of the series of random load pulses is a significant factor that should be considered in esti

mating the strength of technical systems both within deterministic and probabilistic approaches. The

increase in the length of the load series leads to significant reduction in safety margin nser and increase of

the system failure probability Pf, ser.

REFERENCES

1. Makhutov, N.A., Prochnost i bezopasnost: Fundamentalnye i prikladnye issledovaniya (Strength and Safety:

Fundamental and Applied Researches), Novosibirsk: Nauka, 2008.

388 MAKHUTOV, REZNIKOV

2. Makhutov, N.A., Akhmetkhanov, R.S., Reznikov, D.O., et al., Bezopasnost Rossii. Bezopasnost i zashchishchen

nost kriticheski vazhnykh obektov (Safety of Russia. Safety and Protection of Strategic Objects), part 1: Nauch

nye osnovy bezopasnosti i zashchishchennosti kriticheski vazhnykh dlya natsionalnoi bezopasnosti obektov (Sci

entific Foundations of Safety and Protection of Strategic Objects Critically Important for National Safety),

Moscow: Znanie, 2012.

3. Makhutov, N.A, Permyakov, V.N., Akhmetkhanov, P.O., Reznikov, D.O., et al., Analiz riskov i obespechenie

zashchishchennosti kriticheski vazhnykh obektov neftegazokhimicheskogo kompleksa. Uchebnoe posobie (Risks

Analysis and the Way to Protect Strategic Objects of Oil and Gas Sector. Students Book), Tyumen: Tyumen

State Oil and Gas Univ., 2013.

4. Makhutov, N.A., Reznikov, D.O., Petrov, V.P., et al., Normative approach to protect strategic objects, Bezopasn.

Tekhnosfere, 2011, no. 4, pp. 512.

5. Makhutov, N.A. and Reznikov, D.O., A comparative assessment of specificationbased and riskmanagement

based approaches to the security assessment of complex technical systems, J. Mach. Manuf. Reliab., 2011,

vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 579584.

6. Ang, A. and Tang, W., Probability Concepts in Engineering Planning and Design. Basic Principles, John Wiley &

Sons, 1975, vol. 1.

7. Reznikov, D.O., The way to compensate an ambiguity for protecting complicated technical systems and for opti

mizing costs of their life cycle, Probl. Mashinostr. Avtomatiz., 2013, no. 3, pp. 5764.

8. Makhutov, N.A. and Reznikov, D.O., Protection analysis and securing of strategic infrastructure objects by con

sidering risks and limit states, Probl. Bezopasn. Chrezvychain. Situats., 2012, no. 5, pp. 1436.

9. Ching, J., Equivalence between reliability and factor of safety, Probab. Eng. Mech., 2009, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 159

171.

10. Makhutov, N.A., A criterion base for assessment of strength, lifetime, reliability, survivability, and security of

machines and manmachine systems, J. Mach. Manuf. Reliab., 2013, vol. 42, no. 5, p. 364.

11. Makhutov, N.A. and Reznikov, D.O., A comparative assessment of specificationbased and riskmanagement

based approaches to the security assessment of complex technical systems, J. Mach. Manuf. Reliab., 2011,

vol. 40, no. 6, p. 579.

12. Shatov, M.M. and Chernyavskii, A.O., A method of assigning a limit probability of failure, J. Mach. Manuf.

Reliab., 2013, vol. 42, no. 1, p. 41.

13. Elishakoff, I., Safety Factors and Reliability: Friends and Foes? Dordrecht: Kluwer Acad. Publ., 2004.

14. Makhutov, H.A., Reznikov, D.O., and Zatsarinnyi, V.V., Two types of alarm scenarios in complex technical sys

tems, Probl. Bezopasn. Chrezvychain. Situats., 2014, no. 1.

15. Melchers, R., Structural Reliability Analysis and Prediction, John Wiley &Sons, 1999.

16. Makhutov, N.A., Reznikov, D.O., Petrov, V.P., et al., The way to secure protectability and to minimize exploita

tion costs and losses during strategic objects lifetime by choosing optimal technical checking and repairing works

strategy, Probl. Bezopasn. Chrezvychain. Situats., 2010, no. 3, pp. 3468.

Translated by O. Pismenov

SPELL: OK

## Molto più che documenti.

Scopri tutto ciò che Scribd ha da offrire, inclusi libri e audiolibri dei maggiori editori.

Annulla in qualsiasi momento.