Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
2
Introduction
Various sources can provide different levels of support to SA
reliability-based investigations
CEB-FIP 1978 Model Code / fib 2010 Model Code
Joint Committee on Structural Safety (JCSS) Probabilistic Model Code
ISO 2394 General principles on reliability for structures
Suite of structural Eurocodes
European reliability-based investigations to select NDPs for respective member
state
Many textbooks on the subject
3
Objectives of Presentation
Two main objectives:
2. Partial factor adjustments are possible for SA, but could they be
justified?
Is there enough reliable information (statistical) about SA levels of QC to
support PF adjustments of modifications?
4
Key Reliability Elements
Reference level of reliability ()
Basis of design issue, set by SANS 10160-1 and EN 1990
For EN standards, = 3.8 for Reference Class RC 2 structures
For SA standards, = 3.0 for the same class of structures.
5
Basis of Design Requirement
for Resistance Models
Both EN 1990 and SANS 10160-1 stipulate:
1 1 ,
= , ; = ;
,
The design value method is the practical way to ensure that the reliability
index is equal to or larger than the target value
System of partial factors, characteristic values, quality management, other
constants and coefficients are all used to control the level of structural
reliability.
6
Partial Factors for resistance
The following models are readily used during reliability
investigations (JCSS Probabilistic model code):
is the First Order Reliability Method (FORM) sensitivity factor for resistance. = .
The bulk resistance factor, , can be described by the product
7
Influence of and on
8
Influence of Distribution type
on
9
General observations
Reliability differentiation, through the specification of different
Reliability Classes, should have an effect on the values of
operational partial factors.
Differentiated Reliability Classes RC 1, RC 2, RC 3 (& RC 4 for SA)
RCs differentiated according to levels of design supervision and inspected levels
on site Each RC has different target -level
10
Implications for SA adoption
SA lacks data that reflects the influence of local practice and
production quality on the distributions of common design variables
e.g. for concrete strength ( ), steel strength ( ), reinforcement spacing () or
positioning and associated tolerances, steel geometry ( or ) and tolerances
etc.
11
Conclusions
Strictly speaking:
1. Partial factor adjustments are possible based on the levels of QC exercised
during construction
2. A higher level of reliability should require a larger set of partial factors { ; } to
satisfy the increased safety performance requirement
However:
1. Due to its lower adopted -level, SA cannot reduce or adjust EN partial factor
scheme due to lack of proper (local) reliability models and investigations
warranting such action
2. The process could be updated as local data becomes available
THE END.
QUESTIONS? COMMENTS?
13