Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to www.scribd.com

Scribd
Upload
364 views108 pages

Notes Structural Reliability

Notas del curso Structural Reliability

Uploaded by

Sergio Andres Zerreitug
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
364 views108 pages

Notes Structural Reliability

Notas del curso Structural Reliability

Uploaded by

Sergio Andres Zerreitug
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 108
Sas Any problem rat we addpess can incde random variables as wall 05 constant parame tors , The Inability fo detteministically updo! tre Univer + Meatory variability! pactomness of quasbihrs of attribede + €pistemic montinty: inability bo weatore + Onto lope uncantoin ty : Mt Hin S0UrCeS ap Uncen bein hy p Radom Varian” = brebability least prnetion (PDF): or deatity op A wentinvevt random tamrble, is m puncton hat duoovibes relative Veelihord per tuey random taniable to tovkee ne © eh (OF) Ie the probably Intive dettribhen poootion ss ; ea anton mince X eM m Ghee | dese fan ” x , Fre = P(Xex) 6 = [Zp (ode plas; PCa XE) 2 (D> Ae MA) a) coe mest fake ary renk argument md cedera a be reek rmber He “tense fay] iB) the prose div ay He ODE mast Be peter tee or et bo me pr wh Gime Dats as ads fe wm md 80 phe tag est Se peat fe DP ond 1 cenperbicly « qteye 4609 f ax os 4 “ e % u a s aL 4 a! 4 4 Of 4 gece! mEoeen WDM oF Rano vA RIADLES, = Tom Cae bebibity TAeeren P(E) =D rlelmide(a) 7 or, said . ane OO te on POA; le) = PCE/AD PA) wl pes Zn POEIA)P IA). Li vermabining coment You , he cot og a continuols — dishaibe fon pice) = E(ele fale) = Bages! Theore [ich pds € 1 ~~ ie 2 A Pineei] es «i y B(Er4 Jasai) « P(A asd We a (Era! Tae a) i ne Le Ose | oO @ 0.0$ OW | oy OTR o | e0s Or oar) ais BR, OA 0.25 2 Os es} 7 03 O48 oof 2 eS 0-6 oof | oo ° o form the pact rxpusmnce 7 I perlhie @ each ela ore 0, ane, a, oo ~< aw . ne REA” tot oun sped h OBR £,lE/ns tlk) = (0.1)(2) +O aH) + (a9)lo> ) +H (04) F (Hea) F eras the pest meet The mean or Expected valet r ardek 0 eI ve, all oe te May be lo oF ee. 1x) hes [ Pafalthdy = amh Maret pe evn es onl Gredmd — hevinhon To RN neepre he ree ARiaprscon trot I observed shout te. Spel bh (6 (Kp) =f beep) J O)dr vow) # £(X) “pe 5 Vem how much Pee watabtes change tye fin, Gor (X€) = E(tx-€(X)LE (- E('")) = &(xr)- @ %) Efe). ~ Coveninntt Tee results ann vale Heyerdless op the pede waity kasi en og te Caden vevblt Ma My, ne eae) a ea aaa be Aalermine fe Kibebehion oF 035) the o timer punting op normal Pwd, niahles [ERE S) povided both Road 5 1 teat, Manibien prntam emndles tern 2 al hie be pornallig dash bbed ‘eek She prodect F desmornect yaadatr rmintles cs Th mage Se chown She He daa den tion oe te parchon B 7s abso Lygnaran hee InR- Ins 6 centAAnon oov (X,1) = & L(y) (Fly) cweni= f* f "pay fiy fa (eaddady Lemmeltion (nent e A) By eta eg 4,9 8) bv(4t)=0 = El eh Ay Aadipendart —comip Ate wncoreelated “re fF vonelites, ce areal Pabln mp dare ni sone ona Virvt Sine punetin © Ge) {2 Tb Gains 1s reaabed fo oa ko if Bude 6 sacceded pee hee Apes toe, s foo beliny og ga ilone Frm tomf- Shae poeedion % + P[a So] 2, (0). S40 te eer] © fee F: frilore devin A. geen level chess, willed the & Mees CF tence Ny Was He tha? curitlce , whetie He vs age Path? PLL yan Bok 16 = oy ss In mnnmey canes) He Tatyak will mot hace peal Sedation. Heuer , in done Cores don pais: Gra-s (BS modelled a5 rooney . desta boherd DG 1s Aetwtlly “deste. anh ttn vale is o ao te luton - a oe +05" Fo Fle [Pc of] : ‘ep tebalility /ndex Bde ODF © park Shand dishdshon 2289 the polemic & — pasek corndaring TH Metralibey Yecpion op fhe (nedom tovehle G % Me 2 RS ae Low normallry dishibber RVE, 9 feis) -& 2% ng (eS) = Ian ® - dn hs Ty Skewed dvdr butions the mean % KX is ok He kame 86 the Mean 1p HX Te fone probe calien rOlved. a h[4e BY] prac Af 4 Be » Werewmlisie — OeRene pO ondn Robicbaln md ( 20.198 > 240 Ps {.eyxto> Gueftion 4 Mee? #5 eek ppeet fare Ge? Crilmce i) warn Gr k-S larroll wetted, fos fs 2 Jo- = 10 0,7 ar g Yt4b 2b = & Pr 2 23h B(-raw)s 1- % N= oe ). Aaracleasre SARA pretty Ba = fla * oF 7 typabars = Yo Re Me eR “ ko oy es $.66- Dk sa leya. by 6H, a vivens yen Silt ITE ow ecions fe prilere srpece js tt obte richly Heoting Ie fo te wodelled using & Bintan Cawbination of Toudom Veiahles fam Te hove | rormltion santet Se tad ce deg yeah operater - 2 Tt fe, a} pean Gta) = 9.650) 4 Dy.) (ke ) 1b3) The pebiehihity Index js pot Ievtniont wth reopect Fie enpuction pert te, tek abe Mapeet ® Re form ae poaching “Pay jr = Ba) weptnte GAO ES oy gts) & ns® Lietanisation weout the és bet? fp ed js: os = A 4 Bech fans mUfe)* - mn) fA(EN) BF i al PRR og pra thelepd= EP wr + yh HE 348 Fo fe + pt opem oS (3) Then) assem R ra I nemettbed, ‘elpe) . fe Gy orn ter fee | ear peo bire Side Sewer pe The honiaa aepan Lip cenit rrr = XP Me ebS] leincides evith Corn inter on ‘ TH bck -slokie Ferction ty bine Tre peovitiey — mpeete vans FF is Tnow yng j and the Cormminnts matin Is gust Iv ” not’ cotelated variable) pas gino __senris.riem, _Inprenenice Das 2h lies Linooo ego ls ees or ais ie eee apo th roe Gs hee eet co St es) b orden Semgas 29 ea : LI Ler tat op view rea ee a Stroctural Keliabilt| Maasures [Raa age BAS or soe BT) rye Prinapies AND ReavieeHaNTs FoR ACHE! Ropusrwess AAP Doeapiuiry. IT'S Some _Depiniions = P Accioentmas, DebleN strueTioN : de gion strvecln) payoine : Ce wend OR ITS EAfowoRe, ICONS FIRE, BEER inpner en Lem pmiunE + nazend me tee oe fago FON 1999, aw ne oeur RENT, AY Roneaun AEION on erndon MEM Tm taper ce ) ihe per smenern OR CebisTANCr, te EXCESSIVE OPITION pape MREWorD MiaNNBi aS. + Ser Wag Revit ere Zo 70 Casarn Brvony Wie SPP ED [ries Remarc) Pew STIs CURE. OL GRyeven heusen FE PoT weer MET, Kaodvewral Aurigu(ha) + Aetion, Owniy op [roar ooearion | gor if : re MERE “RB —eceun) VY 4 Given smvcriRe pains TE Orutind serine vee EX Loepy cnasmive . More: MpAer, a ) Sew, WIND 9nd Beste penis mar 86 Vamatie on munerm pens, byperoine re vel Ble npeRMAT ION on Sanson DIN MOUnGS, Keer Same coNorpT 78 Vow Ew Io < “ on DP wonyuos + vive (enero, pac, METH) ENN Shetloy magus em) au _impe Se ‘ eH ATE repottnaniond panies e Rs of Putas Wwe Poke An TT OAR ove) « (ee neers Woman GT: mercyanicm CPE OA Met tew 8 ORRIN ES. hetaniTey rene of a GolS seit oF A © patente of. conermcrton waics Smee, GApeT: DER GMED geld hewYD 1 susnin IA FUTONS Lteay ro own, GUAGRaUTY — Derenkn AND eHETED oe Moe VM CK AM ATY KTM AemTs Cpamerorin’, com pom Rad PPB —— » [poousronss |: A Sraworiag SHALL 9 piéneo aap ere uoren IN SUC RE Thar ir wa Not Borer By EU ETS Suen 4. Exprorens 2. tenpace bad 3, emrementeS oF Hemad eneme fe wt ERTET Vee propon NowaT E TO THE DGS. ase. Meee Frorad Y 5, Bx 1D penive MIS , THE USER pe) MOAADS Nave ro me limit fa (W SEaeg g)AUCIPDN G , wi rivon’ Da Pepys = © neepad) b) beveuing GVA Pee bom Gentrive 12 THY halpgad) | oe) wine ageeginré — eT — any HODLUTS yard A) cue me (MTS OR ROS Sigue PER. (407 op fae oe qoowe Ia x pore 5) o <3 Comeanen es OSES _ _Courenentey UUs Kar Levepipien, pases Co me od ee Syl, PUR Riley s weeneh (ne: brewer Pha harmed Low © Wea Ung § THe STWOEE SNOUT) BT EARN i CH way ther ee ee ee ingen, me, buewriviey avd Sap Female The srvcring aie be pecan p TO ThE Op Me inrenance , pape puridprren eve MME asiviry of A SrmucTuRe fo WIMSRAD tne Conse Bvenced _———™‘ fares wess: poor OF ews Wick Fite, Enprotrbns, in| Oe human uneonS, UATheur Bane dAmetep To AN erenT bispmep ontiourre = TO THE Oller, OVS - —~_—, rastaissive Unni PMN 0G peiLuces pound Be Dee rok MeTIVE YE Say parrrorl or fF Siete | ME amet Prepweey 1S perpen (mrionaTe 78 mae Mey EAE RB uel Smrs her Som VLG 1 > EBiiswium , deponaarion, PATEvE - Sg: remerion , Camgoara , AprenPane’ powsimenr | Nation We Lemp | BaainaTION, Pee Coanes von) Cau (cane qrancionT + TeMpouater Gators fenmaserr C4) Petinns, € vans amis (OY Yeo omarion Accoemm (A) ‘i speeueenr Ys: Gunn petenene pong (Rees rote ( AeceUEMTteN , Pee CTIAE , seTemenr -..). uN een prions x fixen (wind) (Seeriew PREE (utter GANT) (neath) Pemonss com (teed by mauce. 64.3 (uts 9] -3_wenbrintion 2p Adlon: Goy3. 2. comainrienS Op Ruclont pe asvenon 5 enicrane Ate TRACT PE riewrr_ pride Cen) 2M Beg Fhe one? Zitat Goya Gmawarions OF Ans pape peecvenon areal Phe reprerealeict wean presses, pw hs on, “ ete 5 THE Tpiet wwe , ecprore bile Arion « TH caaaeurnceSe Vatvl noocripi < Rpery proms ies me How ae STRUCTURAL PEPRAISAL oF EH STP NG OY O-mM STWCTRES ton nant eS 7 smurwme ayAM: Trey TE fem owolnen op SRD OTIRE AnD 7D Retere THis ro Seve nepineD Cepicemens fer ITS rok ee De, rer TS sree |e trenee aN OS us oe | 4 WANS 2 Benne OF (nos PURCHASER = GEES Op DiSEMESS Or OrTeMonapioy, OMbw Ws Pee ee SOnE op ince are Paco + With ENOVEN Mone The tHe Uantatnes, TNE WNOMTE — OncenrrintlEs eyes Oey paw ebpeessen i SFE |, re rere og Crier es-obi Freee. 15 keouinl © green rm acy CMENSONS. ~ 70 Mes Reouuney |e me ecHl Miviowt Ww mE Sranoans ( HEH Mo oy)| Masri (URDONILED, + gepicrey PO Danaiwes acio Tneoven AEETY yg TD AVY ENO CANES | ‘The requirements of EN 1990 Design situations, limit states and actions The verification procedure and partial factors OT Rs nh mie od Genes re temak LINKS BETWEEN THE EUROCODES En19) | ———— Actions on few too2 ensasa ew 1001 |— Deslgnanddetaing len nos entooe EN 1 few s907 EN 1998 Gaotectnical ne Selamic design Cbs; Thee Coded ane Cal aked Tepe. Pare, GE big wk natch EN 1990: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN For the design of buildings and civil engineering Works every Eurocode pat from, ‘urocode 4: Actions of Structures, and in Eurocodes EN 1992 to EN 1999 has to be used together with EN 1990 EN 4990 provides the mater independent quired for the design of buildings and civ! engineering works for the Eurocodes suite. EN 1990: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN: CONTENTS ecion 1 Ganral mn ifeoas fon Requremen Secton3 :Pincplesctiit sates Secton4 :Basioveriablos «in Loads and malercal ‘SectionS: ae ance eae, feta Sectoné :eriicatonby he paral tacormatiod ew OMY Aonexdin}i) : Applicaton orbulings (1) bdgos (2) Annexe {) :hanagemontofetucea rly or constuotonwerks ‘AanexC() :Besator paral for designand ‘etabiiyenatyie ‘AnnexD ()) : Designasslsid by tosting fre Lewd porte ats me hype op anrenes iagoratve (38 Ligh imposed jm olepigion on EN 1990; BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN EN 1990 is based on the 4._+ limitstate concept used conjunction with the I factor method on eo pert py). © 1.4 Scope F ‘© 1.2 Normative References © 1.3 Assumptions, ‘© 14 Distinction botwoen Principles and ‘Application rules, ‘© 1.5 Definitions, © 1.6 Symbols 0 ° a o EN 1990 - EUROCODE : BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN - SCOPE (1.1) £2 800 stabsos rc enafrthe sey, anes ‘Hanes, nein en svat ages pr fe ‘ed epics of rut relay. 21990 tence Incense tn EM 1911 1998 arth stu sie buldng sec otneta wos iced pense epee inpeny erisbrine se feipnoenemery 1 1980 apples forth deslgnostctars Yore thar str ofa a ape FETE To TO se oh. 1 8808 appeal forthe tac appa of xsng construction In devel te ‘eslgat eats andattratons or nasrecing changes ose eon oronatnd pcos asta} sport (ocodes. EN 1990 EUROCODE : BASIS OF ‘STRUCTURAL DESIGN 1.5. Definitions : habits a man been, Smeg" beaccvarupopetyctanickionadsen "OD ian ach ope aceesnon era arr ah = SATOTY PRU # Churagtesti hgh baad = Sn? Veco 4.5EN 1990 Definitions (Cont) ala i Obme EN 1990 Definitions (Cont) + SLnazsntzae” mens conan fon sous aad, 1 SLotesrangemen” mans the poston and magne elas {eed Se eee eC lik to se Set ne ee cee eae ae ae cede etree Tepito sheer ee waa Re eee ta ese co fs ne actin Te EN 1990 EUROCODE : BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN 1.6 Symbols, Some inpontant Terms petonsi™) *"Pamaneni Actions (6) + Varatle Actions (0) + pecdental Actions (A) + Selamie Acton (4) Representative Values of Actions + CharacterstieVabie (0) + cambnations Vale ofa Vatabie Acton (Oh) ofa Variable Aton (2) Valie of Varabie Acton (9:0) EN 1990: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN THE REQUIREMENTS + Fundamental requirements (safety; serviceability; robustness and fire) + Reliability differentiation + Design working life + Durability + Quality Assurance The fundamental requirements in EN 1990 for the reliability of construction works include : structure shall be deslgned snd xe tow samenraie Pru ie ‘Tho undamontl quirements in EN 1090 for the veliabiiy of ‘constrctionworks include: meee at “Exons —— i i Inlet prec ont thd th reerantoterty Robustness of Buildings and Civil Engineering Works Liming potential damage trom denied hazards Basie Requirements of EN 1990: Eurocode: Basis of Structural Design give principles for initing potential damage bya numberof ‘means incluging: * avoiding, eliminating o reducing a hazard + sdeting a structural form whic has alow sensitivity othe considered hazard * using the most appropriate materials and products * rious design options similarto current UK practice Robustness - Limits of admissible damage paper Borate Amu: as = 100m ehenovere the matey meach )is the plan (@) :Notinateatimns b)stho olevation ——"obevenowed ‘Acceptable extent of collapse in the event of a loca failure in the roof structure it supports EN 1990: Fundamental requirements: Fire ¢ Fire: “In the case of fire, the structural resistance shall be adequate for the required period of time” Arkicn 5 spent pettiet speek in Hed EN 1990; BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN ‘THE REQUIREMENTS + Fundamental requirements (safety; serviceability; robustness and fire) + Reliability differentiation + Design working life + Dural + Quality Assurance EN 199C: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN Reliability differentiation ‘An appropriate degree of reliability forthe majority of structures is obtained by design and execution according to Eurocodes 1 to 8, with appropriate quality assurance measures EN 1990 provides guidance for obtaining ltferent levels of reliability EN 1990: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN ‘The choice ofthe levels of rally for a particular structure ‘Should take account of the relevant factors, including © the pile cause and ormae of ataring alent state; © the posse consauees of alae interns of sk oie, Ky, el economical losses ale perception to fale ; 1 the exporse and prcedires necessary ove the isk of fue, Caring ae) pts| Lenk Celene et Jrock Li Bb wanes fone gen ff zi ” oe be Qibing » Te prKac pecptinn hes fo $e lenbidined 29 veil u EN 1990: DEFINITION OF CONSEQUENCES CLASSES peut ‘econ amp fblng ad ty "nsuene wee Whatua Hahemeopecetraercltumnlgr Bigs Casas, ae mel amms ssiecrnimeelcoarincss hag cuseamesil wot fara shoe azn) emsl Madman eens chen, Red ess, ovenedy cmemealcaneamces palembag wee eon bute Senge ae ‘Gune220 ‘lone le) sects rye Lorenaertconanmal Janata eee Sow eon EN 1990: TOOLS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF STRUCTURALRELIABILITY Depending upon the consequences of fallure, the main tools ‘selected in EN1990 Annex B for the management of structural ‘eliabilly of construction works are: * differentiation by B (rllabllly index) values; st this stage, this is a specialist activity: * moditication of partial factors; * design supervision different + Inapection during execution EN 1990; BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN THE REQUIREMENTS + Fundamental requirements (safety; serviceability; robustness and fire) + Reliability diferentiation “Design Working life” + Durability + Quality Assurance The fundamental requirements for design working. structure is to anticipated mai necessary 2 design working life of +90 years for buildings +120 years for bridges and Is recommended in the UK National Annex to EN 1990. UK NATIONAL ANNEX TO EN1990 ~ INDICATIVE DESIGN WORKING LIFE “emponry sts) 2 01030 ——_—Raplceable strstr ent gd, ens a 181025 Agetuatané sir stuctes Bulg strctes ad oharconmon sre. nt Ietedaeeuhre sable. 5 10 ‘Monunania akg structures, ighuny andra ges ste (1) Sructre or paste fattest an be dsmaned tha veowot boing sed Soldat be consereas pony EN 19 BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN Notion of design working life useful for: + The selection of design actions (9. wind, earthquake) . * Consideration of material property deterioration (eg. fatigue, creep) + Life eycie costing + Evolve maintenance strategies EN 1990: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN THE REQUIREMENTS + Fundamental requirements (safety; serviceability; robustness and fre) + Reliability differentiation + Design work ~ Durability + Quality Assurance EN 1990: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN - Durability. + The structure should be designed in such away ‘that deterioration should not impair the durabiit hd performance ofthe stn catia ig aoe regard to the anticipated level of maintenance EN 1990: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN In order to provide a structure that corresponds to the requirements and to the assumptions made in the design, ‘appropriate quality management measures should be in place. These measures compris firtion of the reliability requirements, ‘organisational (e.g. company and individual ) measures, and ages of design, execution, use and ‘maintenance. EN ISO 9001:2000is an acceptable basis for quality ‘management measures, where relevant. EN 1990: DEFINITION OF CONSEQUENCES CLASSES cope ‘mien a MgherSan heregulin, ard, te oma,” sinmeiceninnenitcoseest iam een coueqoe Ssraret ‘Stele eg sem eral Mumps sobs Rai sees al, Chay, Somme atone oan Bolden em 2a) esanleg moots) owttan Loreen te tanigand_——_Agledn bagwgele ‘oom Sox enema amines al tal Snot senigte apd geese NBL hc preforms rg ans sap ec insets og san ides ‘se echeted eng Leurn these ‘uations I - Definitions from EN 1990 tes on tet an Sarnia Lory Nat nace acon coe Selon esti cae Khaya ines Sas aah) oa orton ssucre, Te canoge rug fom ogee Bloor ideppatnabio ee dnoar A fitaad re capo ebusngss Te abo src wnt "ren ae options near de ‘nseqvncaethunan rer wo bey roped one opoprnan me ENTOT-ET: Categorisation of Building Types (he cage amet | [Sesame rece en terol aeanieme me Eee ! i Recommended strategies for various classes ee tay parte erste: Soa S| tS ears cae aterasncte., fpartof fe nluting spr fac ome ie ctr EN 1990: Limit States: Definitions 1.5.2.12-limitstats slates beyond wich he structure no longer the relvant dos ctera 4.52.13-ultmatotmitstates: stats associated colapse or wih other ETE ey ney exon miming eeans essen 1.5.2.14-servicebitylimitstates: sites that correspond to conions| srenolongermet 1.8.2. 14.1-trevers i serviceabitylmistates :servcea “an rare some consequences of ecorexceeding ho spoctiedeanice ‘eaurerantswilrein when the actions are removed 1.5.2.14.2-reversibieservicosbiliyliitstaas sone ity fit states ca roquierons EN 1990: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN Design Situations. ‘Tho selected design situation shall be suficionly ‘snore and so vated as to encompass all conditions ‘whch can reasonably be foreseen to occur during the ‘exceuton and use ofthe struct Design Situations for SLS Verification are classified as ofthe structure or stucural members under normals, pe, construction works yyy EN 1990: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN Design Situations for ULS Verification Design situations shall be classified as follows: Rae we wt cers dma : Se NE wi eid condtens appicable 10 the structure or toils exposure, e.g, to fire, explosion, tyr ete cseqeces eded fore . Raters tes eli obo ‘cue won sbjeced to slic events hich fer lotemparry condtons he siuclue, eg, ding execten or repar i i EN 1990: EUROCODE: BASIS OF ‘STRUCTURAL DESIGN ‘Actions are classified: () by thelr vartation in time: ‘<= permanent actions (G), e.g. sel-weight of structures, fitings, ancilaries and fixed equipment + variable actions (Q), eg. imposed loads, wind loads or Snow loads + accidental actions (A), e.g, explosions or impact ‘rom vehiaes 20 Pemanent and Variable Actions Permanent action remeron Ting : tE& incuaac, , Auge yecehan. EN 1990: EUROCODE: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN nation (Fi +a diet action, i, force (load) applied to the structure, or san je, an imposed or constrained ttlomaon ‘oran imposed acceleration caused, for example, by temperature changes, ‘moisture variation, or uneven: settlement or earthquakes EN 1990: EUROCODE: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN Actions (F) ae classified by their sat WaiatG as ‘ “ = ate, o« —* 6 + fee actions vehiwle atkon ON adges EN 1990; EUROCODE: BASIS OF ‘STRUCTURAL DESIGN Actions (Fae classified by their naturjenlor tery The strectre coulle, be = static, or non- dyranic dmadire- = dynamic. 2 EN 1990: EUROCOD! STRUCTURAL DESIGN veg Important table cinpairekion |ASIS OF Representative values of actions PERMANENT ACTIONS. ss (ana any aaa EE eatin mayb gens 16 tng oan rae ise imasstide dagen WE Gary, Feces someniteeeesenreetee ee EN 1990: EUROCODE: BASIS OF STRUCTURALDESIGN Charscereve | EN 1990: REDUCTION COEFFICIENTS (y) for Variable Actions Q, characteristic load values which are appropriate to” cases where ‘© Combination (or Rare) ‘© Frequent, or © Quastpermanent ‘occurring events are being considered The rosuction coefficients (y), are applied tothe 6 ; EN 1990: EUROCODE: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN ‘Representative values of actos EN 1990: VARIABLE ACTIONS 25 EN 1990 - EUROCODE: BASIS OF ‘STRUCTURALDESIGN Representation of partial factors, dal aneerariy in selene anaOT fects ‘Uncrate rae Ultimate limit states: EQU and example of EQU failure ‘Ge spataldsrbuion ot soe oma sgl source rest the suengs et consineton tata org oor ot governing ' 6 Urtimate limit states: STR and example of STR failure Internal flue of the ftruture or stuctral elements, including foctings, ies, basement walls et, In hich the strength of construction materials ‘eformaton of the structure governs Uttimate limit states: GEO and example of GEO allure Falure or excessive deformation ofthe ground in which the srengths of sol orrock ae significant in providing resistance GEO El Utimate limit states: FAT and example of FAT failure Feligue ise ofthe ‘sictue o sich EN 1990; ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES: Ultimate limit states EN1990: EUROCODE :BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN Verifications of static equilibrium and resistance Individual verifications are performed ‘Ultimate limit states of static equilibrium (EQU) : Eeea SEast Ultimate tnt states of resistance (STRIGEO) : Ey EN1990: EUROCODE: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN Ukimate limit states of STRIGEO - Fundamental combination {or persistent and transient design situa Expression (6.10) Zr sas TPH Te Qes "tS 1a Qs Expressions (6.10a) and (6.10b) EF sGes"*" VoP HD) Toes Oes Est sGa s+ ToP Fos Qas"*"DoiVesns 085<¢5 1,00 29 EN 1990 - ULS Verification (Persistent and Transient Design Situation) Eas Re Aoplying Equation 6.10 from EN1996: Seygtant “EP “+” Qa “+” Bostas ws Qs Serer oF EN 1990 - ULS Verification (Persistent and Transient Design Situation) Ese E CBee Gy “+ 4? “+ iQ “4” Estas Qs? 30 EN 1990 - ULS Verification (Persistent and Transient Design Situation) Design effect beecsonss HTP Yai Qer “F" Lestes Yon Qs} EN 1990 - ULS Verification (Persistent and Transient Design Situation) Design effect bons 7 PH YauQaa “+” Zertas vary Effect of 31 EN 1990 - ULS Verification (Persistent and Transient Design Staton) Design effect” Permanent actors WP pasha Fost) ides effect of EN 1990 -ULS Verification (Persistent and Transient Design Situation) Design effect Permanent actions, be EDP raids “+ Ease) wy? Combined —p Is not adding. We Combine. 2 EN 1990 - ULS Verification (Persistent and Transient Design Situation) effect Permanent bo 'S Oe EN 1990 - ULS Verification (Persistent and Transient Design Situation) Design Leading effect Permanent variable boGONO 3 EN 1990 - ULS Verification (Persistent and Transient Design Stuton) besign Leadog Stee! Parmanent vonabe setone seton be Gay Gu ms) ress Accomponving vaneble actors EN 1990 - ULS Verification - Where do parameters come from eN1990 ‘Annex A (le. AL or A2) EN1997 Defined in ENi991 moe eas 34 win atl vet ett EN 1990: Table A1.1 - Recommeyded valugs of y actors for bully Soraya EN1990 - Eurocode ; Basis of structural desi rey onli go” at Aca sgn tons :ermion 81-8 no® td ain ni a Pda YO EN1990: EUROCODE: BASIS OF ‘STRUCTURAL DESIGN Serviceabilty limit states {t shall be verified that <6, (6.13) where 4 is the limiting design value of the relevant serviceability eriterion E, Is the design value of the effects of actions specified in the serviceability criterion, determined on the basis of the relevantcombination EN1990: EUROCODE: BASIS OF ‘STRUCTURAL DESIGN ‘Serviceabilty limit states : combinations of actions 15 For function and damage to structural and non-structural elements (e.g. partition walls etc) the Characteristic Combination (irreversible SLS) should be used PO Yas 36 EN1990: EUROCODE: BASIS OF ‘STRUCTURAL DESIGN Serviceability limit states : combinations of actions Welorate the Frequent Combination ad EN1990: EUROCODE BASIS OF ‘STRUCTURAL DESIGN ‘Serviceabilty limit states : combinations of actions 37 EN 1900: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN Not designed by EN 1990! Thank you or your attention 38 Jetoe 6Ne icy WY -03- Pog Structural Appraisal of Existing Structures| for Change of Use Professor Haig Gulvanessian CBE Consulting Civil Engineer Associate, Construction Division BRE Visiting Professor, Imperial College, London Structural Appraisal ‘Scope of Presentation « Defnton of structural appraisal «© Design compared with appraisal «© Philosophy of design * Philosophy of appraisal ‘© Appraisal procedure ‘Structural Appraisal Structural appraisal aims to assess the el condition of a structure and to relate this to some defined requirement for its present or future use so that ts structural adequacy can be judged Gatlling) . Bx. coment hevtng, balding 8 ee hos pitel wk is ” * Structural Appraisal ter purpoees of Stctral Apps Those may be « tocheck abtty to sustain increased loads of alterations (without necsssally-@ Change use) "a structural examination on behalf ofthe prospective purchaser, tenant or insurance company © a structural check following signs of distress or deterioration, neglect, fire, accidental damage, {9F direction or advice to examine structures of ‘this type ) wo Structural Appraisal er ~N U avaded Design Compared with Appraisal tnoy The aprons scr pri of soto ws (9. blng)isanety iret om at alan ndeigning the structure ofa proposed works (eg. a bulling) YM pe cette £ f Structural Appraisal Design compared with Appraisal Present day oesign ‘© designed to mest regulatory standards for health and safety « then depicted on drawings and through specifications; from these the building or civil engineering works can be buitt SP 3 Br Structural Appraisal Design Compared with Appraisal Prost dy éesign ‘As a result of the process of construction, the silt properties of the structure will not ‘conform absolutly to those assumed in the design and shown in drawings and specifications, Structural Appraisal Design Compared with Appraisal Piso ote ‘© offers the opportunity to determine actual as-bull strengths and dimensions ofthe structure ‘© recagnising the real behaviour and past performance of the structure ‘Structural Appraisal Design compared with Appraisal ‘Appraisal Building o bridge already exits and embodies the flee of + Consirucion Process +s subsequent Life and Performance alteration eteroration misuse, oc SW con he reneved, wee Capt EE ° a4: Structural Appraisal ‘Appraisal Procedure Assessment ofthe Structure ‘To.comply with current Building Regulations, or other requirements and present day codes must be considered wile Aippormar fe benign A hyapisel ar wht mepet pede when Spiny horchure ? sf oe Spee hands om gov ‘Structural Appraisal Involvement of the Building Controt or other Checking Authority from the outset very important Structural Appraisal ‘Appnisal Procedure ‘Assessment of the structure for proposed change of use Eflets of ateations for the proposed change of use: These can include: + Increased loading on structure and foundations ‘+ terations to existing load paths ‘+ changes in environment and exposure ‘+ changes infie exposure and fire rang Structural Appraisal ‘Appraisal Procedure ‘= Datine the briet «+ Make an initinspeton ad appraisal using ay immetly salle Ifomaton «Decide on any immedi action needed «+ Cary out tale documentary serch and review + Cary out etald investigation ofthe works (eg. bung) + Nake assessment ofthe structure forthe proposed change of Conse structural worknended forthe proposed change of + Prepare report on ‘Structural Appraisal Appraisal Procedure a @ This must be cea defied _ ‘+ Explanto th clan the information an appraisal can provide = «Definition of such requirements as duabiliy, serviceabilly acoustic and thermal pecformance Structural Appraisal Appraisal Procedure aie the brat ae an nialnapection and sppraalusing ny immediate Dalaie nformaton hos SOY " «Decide on ay immediate ston rede Cay out dtd documenay search and review Cary out dette invesigaton ofthe works, buling) Mate asessment ofthe suc forth proposed change of ‘Consider structural workneedd forthe proposed change of Prepare report om appraisal Structural Appraisal Appraisal Procedure ‘rial nspe fon set Inspection and Apy A erp tel re stucure’ condo and the ess of change of 1 Evidence of defects and atarains | + Mor detects shouldbe reasonably evident > -2CESHL@ Ueneking. 1 Obisin mensional and mata! data om — deplections. Structural Appraisal ‘Appraisal Procedure © Define the brit 1 Make an inal inspection and appraisal using ary immediately ‘alae information 1 Decide on ay immedite action needed Carry out detailed documentary search and review © Carry out detailed investigation ofthe works (e.g, building) 1 Make assessment ofthe stucture forthe proposed change of + Conelderctuatural workneeded forthe propeced change of ‘»Propare report on appraisal Structural Appraisal Appnisal Procedure Fe nbeg twos Fable oe eiate Action Needed.) /e>portare lk fr. ‘sented + immediate tops neoded to reduce risk with, for example by crema (espn t or pownt porn paltry) immediate evacuation Structural Appraisal ‘Appraisal Procedure © Define the ret «Nake an iitalinspection and appraisal using any immediately salable infomation 1 Decide on any immediate action needed ‘© Carry out detailed documentary search and review ‘© Carry ou dtd investigation ofthe works (a, building) “Make assessment ofthe structure forthe proposed change of ‘+ Consider srucural work needed forthe proposed change of (Prepare rpor on appraisal Ses ___ Structural Appraisal “Appraisal Procedure focumentary search and review Two calegres of coounentary infomation ae 1 Information speci tthe particular buldng; roies, speticalne, stctual cations, constnction rca, rilerance recat, deals cf ateraions, prevs suney reps, pbs descrobone © Information describing design and constructional practice for building ofthe particular type and period, bing censinctn textboks, bling relations ard bows, cos ye ga} traci, titer ensnesting sues costa po nate ‘Structural Appraisal Appraisal Procedure 1 Define the rit “Make anita inspection and appraisal using any immesiely ‘aralabe information ‘Decide on any immediate action neoded ‘© Carry out detaited documentary search and view ‘© Carry out dete investigation of the works (ag, building) 1 Make assessment ofthe structure forthe proposed ctange of Concer structural worknaedad forthe proposed chenge of Prepare report on appraisal Structural Appraisal led investigation of the struct ‘The operations can include! © measured survey «© establishing matras, forms, elements and detils of he structure locating and identiing structural defects Cstalishing thickness and weights of existing fishes Cstablishing weights of exiting services and oer features Aigging tal pits to expose foundations and new surace ground censitions «© ctiling boreholes or carrying out other gootechrical investigations Structural Appraisal Appraisal Procedure # Define the bret Male an intialinspection and appraisal using any immediately ‘lable information «Decide on any immediate action needed ‘© Carry out detailed documentary search and review ‘Carry out tale investigation ofthe works (ag bullng) ‘ake assessment ofthe structure forthe proposed change of ‘© Consider structural worknetded forthe proposed change of «Prepare report onapraisal ‘¢Dispropertonal eolaps check «Examination of elements and connections ‘Structural Appraisal Appraisal Procedure ‘Define the bret ‘+ Nae an initalinspection and appraisal using any inmeditely avalible information ‘Decide on any immediate action neoded ‘© Carry ont dete documentary search and review ‘© Carry ont detaed investigation of the works (e.g. buldng) 1 Make assessment of he stuctre forthe proposed change of ‘Consider structural worknesded forthe proposed change of Preparereport on appraeal Structural Appraisal Appraisal ofthe Structure ‘structural work needed for the proposed Temporary bracing «Introduction of Alternative Load Path «Load testing Structural Appraisal Load Testing “nd second slage operation in appraisal 1 Objectives are to predict ase load capacity and to sssess real behaviour, usually ofa structural element corpatof the structure rather than the entre structure Sete bts et Fo care ha fo be dog red and joe tesf, IT aperd tyre the Bh TB May heparin Structural Appraisal Appraisal Procedure Define the bret «ak an inital nepection and appraisal using any immedtely avaible information «Decide en any immedi ston needed + Carty ou dete documentary serch and review Cary out detailed investigation ofthe works 9 bla) Mak aseesment ofthe structure forthe proposed change of + Consider structural workneeded forthe proposed change of + Prepare oper on appraisal Structural Appraisal © Synopsis 1 Ustof contents Bret 1 Documents examined ‘Description ofthe structure - including relevant history 1 Observations from inspction 1 Structural investigations | fe Structural Appraisal Report on Appraisal (cont) + Senpingandetng + Assossment of suc for proposed chang of use + Discuson + Concusions present condon and feel of change of we + Recommendations -incuingloa tating and worked + Anpendies investigation records, photographs tet results ‘Structural Appraisal ‘Appraisal Procedure Ascessment ofthe Structure Yin sat may pa re ems AS te arate ro Gange ctu aed aig eaters th ech many alla fr preps Chang of se, agan based onnormaleghewng el shou gees, lo, spate renting Bp tho structur is (The mest ap ope) 2 Flilophy, dippemucer <4 apt o Clinger nedved jn He assess. Srole emake Robustness: Introduction and their treatment in the Eurocodes Professor Haig Gulvanessian CBE Civil Engineering and Eurocodes Consultant Visiting Professor. Imperial College London ‘Scope of Presentation Ion tema bates bebe ce en gon ta Wshng ui be Eitig reece ofosson we vbr mac on ala Srl een aching + Riigeeeenrit leone “A4- os- La ton a | Mipos tite, Definitions from EN 1990 Petes aan a, ‘hraten uta Spent mage tls init cco gn tocar be aatgn wri ot nage acon anbe apes Irony cause sare conser Unieasapronaemaavos sion }— Pregrssiecotose Achnreaciont ‘lier sown arsgea sro al force ree as eg ‘She safapetalrsond orca “nde, easrs root (rhe corsequarns ion er wos Seng Sanaoe om enn epepeae Properties of a Robust Structure Abas stucte typaly ents the otwing quate: Duct: to avid rte fale, ass ad edstitulon ard ‘pride waning of incipient fale. © Engyatsoptine to sstan impact 1 Retrdancy. to asistload restrovon and an ably to loca dag. (agent fond post) ROBUSTNESS CASE STUDIES Ronan Paint London Murrah Eullding- Oklahoma City, USA 3. World Trade Centre Towers, Now York ‘Charles de Gaulle Alport Terminal 2, France Piped ges explosions inthe UK Canistor Gas explosions UK Vehicle impacs inthe UK Ronan Point: London + Telgcedn cust dara pl om promt Resi naaeireoeNa eRe, Saeeiasr —e" + Revposonwarnastocapimaerngs (medium $726) ‘*Restepoparion daragein be saci wasraty donald tint Some rive pans bat patra pegeae abe a blog ws espa cong weal sng lve nd ‘evant Codesal ates lhe ba baerewerona Cod race [zone spestay lane carl cerca + eButsng Regdatans poco ac ape Seite ke Inv szunie ogee cogs ona oe Gages ois cea onan Point - ZA un Li fu TT tt wohelad hs 853. yas explosion at Ronan Point UK Building Regulations Revisions to avoid disproportionate collapse * prove ect harizontal and vertices 1 Whar such provisions canot be made ts Tneommended tht herve shold be beri ter alos of anand member and tha he rea of ‘alae be tnt ad oases + itis snot posible which may be the ease for smal rinoiyofbuligs) such amenber should be designed as aprouctd (ory) lon cape of Susi atonal loads rae pes of. sure ot 4 (Yi intr Sy fet, BAM DHA Accopted UK Practices For General Disproportionate Collapse Design ‘aged Ukprcenstegr repena e e iss ‘+ Abuliag tobe wed asghonn he AepmvedDoomert hole Bung Ropu Whar oul, comport of tuldngare desea ne snl tuedbrce nh} gs nbe MpraedDoamet Aol beng Regd + desqned arab, abide conse ace th asd howto agent wana deeply ctiond hn he Sean ober oplaorsaninpat Wot hreay bonbepans fre oii ba ape many reget andbdy cs Shas $e Ucn eons a eects + Bindngs wn gh cseguwessofalue ae desired on 2 Seseoimen 200: Building Categorisation Provided In The ‘Approved Document A Of The UK's Building Regulations. lott, anvstgatn ito ug Wk’ tho basis for bukig calegesein pod ite Aproved Doze A ai he UKs dng reo was cond by te thn Deptrert fo Teper, Load Goreme ard he Rgors (OTLR,2001). This study, after being further developed by FE famed th tk Tal Ao ENV 10-47 ‘nid Acton and ead an cepa are ek ken Aran the ARIA Report 63 (IRSA Bett bible Fe trobdvtrhe bralyait | @ ‘Murrah Building- Oklahoma city, USA + ecassctin oming wt be peso send consi 0 Pani slave rel shase ntna mi se + Thetis yl capa ote ey at ee Diklpnd tn tntetsretee ince gae he cr {Poach ecards gus new aoe! a, i=tass erent bpp rv eb pet te Se iateyoapepee coheed en ee, fc ss ary See ner re etn are eh Sousa sub btbe too shoves tele, World Tae Cente Towers: New York + lsplararannon ttc pte not mt + pth pre tater eevee {Stocaaod te lacs svete we el osm ences eco” + Rgeeglae cpu scans rey » Behape pirectnscemzon gemuchtomgentont omc cisterna peruano SES eat eietaer midcom » eereeint Sethe neem wena Ud de met bane ee les Ger preguersive Colhy se Influence of attacks on Murrah Building & World ‘rade Centre buildings ‘© The bombing ofthe Murah Buln in Oksana in 1985 and tho aealt mpact and sabequet fre in Wor Trade Cente bldg in 2001 made naions lok are at Ii xing Ssprporonate colpse reqs. Mare thn one singe teaceatng. member fas in ruse bugs and, ne case ofthe tres, wo hazards, arf impact nd fr, talealeed ene al te oer. These seem fo pit 0 Inadequcies inthe existing regulations based nthe curence ofa singe faz ant the poli ss ofa Sale member. Tus, tese mar fakes resulted in farerd fran adm rsp em engineers. becase th pie perception was tal the ried sks wee otra Charles de Gaulle Aport Terminal 2E is pnt apr oie Ori te ae rc rina Zemanta by ete ofa prton foot owng design favs, and pour wormaxslThoctapsecae ‘banatatjanscrtoh siesote carta son i wa(umbantansy ins fom ccna yes rch had coninoybeeiptovt tise uay nate bees htonarressreg clips coda nawe bensiprindby easier, Ath: resin ft copes cous hve tin ben ose, Oo Piped Gas, th explosions Potters Marston Experiment Relating risk and pressure Vehicle Impacts inthe UK n Vehicle Impacts Vary sve ging Progressive caapse » Annual numbers of vehicle impacts and explosions in the UK 12 EN 1990: Eurocode : Basis of Structural Design Professor Haig Gulvanessian CBE Civil Engineering and Eurocodes Consultant Visiting Professor, Imperial College London EN 1990:2002 Basis of structural design « ge as i RE et enn “wit be lt andthe roewae ashy ane LEPC AE YH DOL, EN1990: BASIS OF STRUCTURAL. DESIGN Uttimate fit states of STRIGEO - Fundamental ‘combination for persistent and transiont design situations, Expression 6.10) in EN 1990 ZyresGay"#"FeP 4 Yo "DLreWe2es Accidental desien situations Expression (6.{th) of EN 1980 LG Pe AY OF Wa IO." LV. Or, EN 1990: DEFINITION OF CONSEQUENCES CLASSES (5d Hahcomngistviel mai, Stns, Gone Be Scomagmcaomon Nips Sones sence) Neemeneocsereoome bisa pidge ‘enqate conadenbe She Sconce ‘eke ae mun = ernie) Cot Lemesance techn, te bis he Semone sod tenements elds tome inmcsronatoenaigos smug talon fetes: 4 ACCEPTED RISKS OF DEATH DUE TO STRUCTURAL FAILURE Public perception does not accept fatalities and injuries due to structural tthe work place, nd other activities otc), for the cosign working Ii structure compared to fatal from other hezards and events. «ACCEPTED » RISKS OF DEATH DUE ‘TO EXPOSURE TO VARIOUS HAZARDS: 15 EN 1991-1-7: Eurocode 1: part 1 Accidental Actions Professor Haig Gulvanessian CBE Civil Engineering and Eurocodes Consultant .9 Professor, Imperial College London EN 1991-1-7; Accidental Actions: Contents Foreword ‘Section 1 General Section 2 Classification of actions Section Design situations Seaton 4 Impact Section 5Interal Explosions ‘Annex A (Informative) Design for Consaquences of Locaisod Fellure in a building Stucure from an Unspecified Cruse ‘Annex 8 (Informative) Information on Risk Assessment «Annet (formative) Dynamic design for impact ‘© Annex 0 (lsformative)Inteal explosions EN 190147 stratogles for Accldontal Design Situations N-1901-1.7-Satoglas for lente Accidrtal Design “Situations 7 dyf, aeadifl 0 CU EEE at EN 1991-1.7-Stratagis oridonifed Acldenta Design “Situations =———— | ar zo7_ ol azar frog acu) ante deen eect: 1 Thetrscamgary iste pe thar aloe orecris gh io {pear gent ache, Asuraanrd os sha enguedsandeubahe(onierkne marae ans re icrineesona osu The send ater rates be pelicans tt Chiba, eh rsa tenn stad rc al ‘esen) Ths pe ofhazalhasbeore moe mors at ‘ronset9 Seplorbr 200 . ‘egy aon Spi hese as ‘Sebesnnledy gous supercon ad quay crkeurg at ‘Syesal elie and by scene omer ‘menu clube lath neertesoare s Relevant Identifiable Hzard fr Structural Safety EN 1991.17 - Strategies fr Accidents Design Situations ‘oes forking te extent Locals Fare You candot ay ris Fh 1 u g 4-7 Sratgles for Accidental Design Situ he ett of aetna Internal Explosions Enposions fora pas othe bing rd aber chi erginoaing structures whee gos is tuned erred, o where else mate sucha explosive gases or us farming exo var cr oasis sod, are ered tobe consdeed. Sold high explosives are rot cvere in EN 198147. “The aopon of statis fr Ito the extent oflocalsed damage ay provide akenate rtustnes apis tose accel acins cased by exter exposions, ware and errs aces, or ary ‘he actors recut fom an unspecified case, wich ae ol specticaly deal wih in EN 1601-17, 20 Internal Explosions EN199147 eines salon de tinea! cxphions 1a 1 ast explosions in ems, vessels on bunkers aad cas eosin rns: es and vgn exgksons rat and cal urns ‘The ance onthe agri ofan txplsion of several comected os Mod wh exasve dust gas or vais ek tad in EN 191-17, Internal Explosions - Principles of Design to resist progressive collapse resulting from an internal explosion. Structural elements may be allowed to fail provided they are not key elements and do ‘not result in overall collapse or loss of structural integrity of the structure. 21 Intemal Explosions ~ Principles of Design to resist progressive collapse resulting from an intemal explosion. To reduce confined explosion pressures and to tithe consoqiones of explosions the following gulgalinos are ion fy EN 1904-47 ‘design the structure to resist the maximum explosion verprissure: © use venting panls with defined venting pressures © separate adjacent sections of the structure containing explosive materi limite area of structures exposed to explosion risks; «@ provde dedicated protective measures between adjacent ‘Stucures exposed 10 explosion risks to avoid pressure propagation Internal Explosions - Advanced Design For advanced design for explosions EN 1991-1-7 species the use of one or several of the following aspects: ‘© explosion pressure calculations, including the effects of confinements and venting pan ‘© dynamic non linear structural calculations; « probabilistic aspects and analysis of consequences ; ‘© economic optimisation of mitigating measures. 2 ‘Accidental Design situations ~ Strategies for limiting the extent of Localised Failure ‘Annex A Design for Consequences of Localised Fallureina building Structure fom an Unspecified Cause 9 Amer Aprodes res and metheds fe designing blings ‘osistan an exter f localsd flue fom an unspectiod case witout dspepariraie cols, EN 1091-17 ~ Accidental Adions: localised fallure iting the extent of ‘Adopting the stestogy fo inlng the extent of localized fur shout provide 2 bulcng with suffclont robustness to survivo a reasonable] Fange of undefined aecldenial actons depending on thelr possi “ove adap foe es srune geal to om eo (mn ‘Sit terdes Senigs a an + ponte vette tos ccknes shou fered to rece twee bode = olen) + tees al upn the steal moval fo tpn ri beam ow, 1 thats aren 103207 2 ‘Categorisation of Building Types Recommended strategies for various classes ey mits of admigsible damage as 18% othe floor = 100m whichevere ‘aecent storys o v a) isthe plan (@) :totonal 1) isthe olevation um Design Example 1- Unkdentied Accktental Action {Internal T, and perimeter ties T, Cons 2 ame stuctre 5 stoey wi sy FOF 2, consequences class 2 upper group. The a 7.2mand he pn ice $61. G.= Q,= 4 cents face y = 08 Intl cae, eae with exper (A) end (2) retina (7) and einer (7) foes maybe cated Yom HG Osho TN, weve get (8.1). Te20MG,+ y Ole THN, whee geste 2) seg 0 Ti 08 + 05% 4 (x72)= 20,98 land T= 10068 1 Design Example 1~ Unidentified Accidental Action |» (cont) + Vera tis of ramed buildings Each odu and wal shal bet continuously fr te fours 1th ea ea “he cours ant was cain veil actions shoud be ‘ciple resisting an acetal design tense face eq the ayes design vera permanent and vail oa recto sped fo th conn fem ay on see Sich ciel Gesgn lating shoud rot be assumed oat simutanecusly wih pemanent and varbleacions tht may be aatng onthe struct. Unidentified Accidental Actions — ‘Load:-bearing wall construction orc tp a Thy i Sere debt gifs th ne fapetowtea rok Th phlei crc a 26 Unidentified Accidental Actions ~ Load-bearing wall constuction ‘he vera es mayb conse ect ‘naan conpresse strength of § Now In aco eran oe sea messin mt ese! oro sgt sistant flevng veal foe: Nor 100 Mint wa whichever th greater, (AS) Mi becostercond tin mothe easing cing isha 4, the voi te te grouped at maxi cats lng the wand eur nogeaterthn 23 mom anuwestosedend athe ul Design Example 2~ Unidentified Accidental beethgstd pe of stnci,conroqence 2 Upper + Fama ands = mandr he noe aS . ET sivas and7,= 4 s4o.um vang he GI + Theva ing foe isgrenby plese teste nylon mae entrar er ‘Salve gpescl sara sonar a of Class } structure In gonerattnre wtb 88 Sbuling stl: 1 abuldng, using estaished constucton arangererts,ayous Snd echnologies bt when exceeselhe size is aresor ‘Storeya)of Class 28, 2.3. Lage ofee rela, eentalsr med ‘developments whch arena thorrespecs 9 slandardClase 28 cealegon ‘¢abuling which accommodetesiare nunbersotpeoph 0.9. Sporissiadtum, theatre. + sbukiingwhien, because oft ocatin, use orowerstip ‘herein some way.e.9. potentaitenaet gets cra ‘harciaorT conte; milan stuctures;bulding hovsng an Inlaremablfexplosve ndueial process, using whichis unusualethern tems of ts contguntion, use ‘tmatoral, ructuralfom, or which has igniiant ptetiaior Simaurlinstabityduing constuction, ag-Many ofthe [Enda siuctures fatto this eategor e.g. London Chek, (tom) the Dome (nalts and fom). aetna Thank you for your attention aphanessien@ bre + Carm.vle 28

You might also like