Safety Assessment of Existing Reinforced Concrete Beams Using Probabilistic Methods at Different Levels

Anindya Roy; Samanta Robuschi; Max A.N. Hendriks; Beatrice Belletti

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.711.958

Paper Titles

A Simplified Approach to Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Slabs Subjected to Hard Missile Impacts
p.924

Shell Modelling of a 1/13 Scaled RC Containment Vessel under Cyclic Actions with PARC_CL Crack Model
p.932

Steel Reinforcement Corrosion in a Low Calcium Fly Ash Geopolymer Concrete
p.943

Examination of the Alkali Silica Reaction on Existing Roads with Use of Cements with Different Alkali Equivalent
p.950

Safety Assessment of Existing Reinforced Concrete Beams Using Probabilistic Methods at Different Levels
p.958

Seismic Performance of a Concrete Highway Tunnel Using a Concrete Damage Plasticity Model
p.966

Environmental Impact due to Repairs by Surface Treatment on Concrete Structures Exposed to Chloride Environment
p.974

Resistance of Reinforced Concrete Frames with Masonry Infill Walls to In-Plane Vertical Loading
p.982

Printability of Magnesium Potassium Phosphate Cement with Different Mixing Proportion for Repairing Concrete Structures in Severe Environment
p.989

HomeKey Engineering MaterialsKey Engineering Materials Vol. 711Safety Assessment of Existing Reinforced Concrete...

Safety Assessment of Existing Reinforced Concrete Beams Using Probabilistic Methods at Different Levels

Abstract:

Several reliability methods available in literature combined with various modelling approaches are compared in this current work in the context of two experimental reinforced concrete (RC) beams. One beam failed in bending while the other beam failed in shear due to diagonal tension. The structural behaviour is described by analytical models and nonlinear finite element models. The changes in predicted reliability of these structures with increasing loads are evaluated by different reliability methods and the results are compared

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Concrete under Severe Conditions - Environment and Loading

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Key Engineering Materials (Volume 711)

Pages:

958-965

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.711.958

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

September 2016

Authors:

Anindya Roy, Samanta Robuschi, Max A.N. Hendriks, Beatrice Belletti*

Keywords:

Model Uncertainties, Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis (NLFEA), Probabilistic Methods, Reinforced Concrete Beams, Reliability, Safety Formats

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] JCSS. 2001. Probabilistic Model Code., Joint Committee on Structural Safety, 12th Draft, Zurich.

Google Scholar

[2] fib – International Federation for Structural Concrete. fib Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010. Berlin: Verlag Ernst & Sohn, (2013).

DOI: 10.1002/9783433604090

Google Scholar

[3] Cervenka V. 2013. Reliability-based non-linear analysis according to fib Model Code 2010. Structural Concrete 14(1): 19-28.

DOI: 10.1002/suco.201200022

Google Scholar

[4] Schlune H., Gylltoft K., Plos M. 2012. Safety formats for non-linear analysis of concrete structures. Magazine of Concrete Research, 64(7), 563-574.

DOI: 10.1680/macr.11.00046

Google Scholar

[5] Pimentel M., Brühwiler E., Figueiras J. 2011. Safety examination of existing concrete structures using the global resistance safety factor concept. Engineering Structures 33: 2350–2356.

DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.04.005

Google Scholar

[6] Belletti B., Damoni C., Hendriks M.A.M. 2011. Development of guidelines for nonlinear finite element analyses of existing reinforced and pre-stressed beams. European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering. 15(9): 1361-1384.

DOI: 10.1080/19648189.2011.9714859

Google Scholar

[7] Rots J.G., Belletti B., Damoni C., Hendriks M.A.N. 2010. Development of Dutch guideline for nonlinear finite element analyses of shear critical bridge and viaduct beams. fib Bulletin 57: 139- 154.

DOI: 10.35789/fib.bull.0057.ch09

Google Scholar

[8] Belletti B., Damoni C., den Uijl J.A., Hendriks M.A.M., Walraven J.C. 2013. Shear resistance evaluation of prestressed concrete bridge beams: fib Model Code 2010 guidelines for level IV approximations. Structural concrete, 14(3): 242-249.

DOI: 10.1002/suco.201200046

Google Scholar

[9] Vecchio F.J. & Shim W. 2004. Experimental and Analytical Reexamination of Classic Concrete Beam Tests. J. Struct. Engrg. ASCE 130(3): 460-469.

DOI: 10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(2004)130:3(460)

Google Scholar

[10] Guidelines for non-linear finite element analyses of concrete structures, Rijkswaterstaat Technisch Document (RTD), Rijkswaterstaat Centre for Infrastructure, RTD: 1016: 2012, 2012. Contributors: Hendriks, M.A.N., Uijl J. A, De Boer, A.,. Feenstra, P.H., Belletti, B., Damoni, C.

DOI: 10.1201/b16645-109

Google Scholar

[11] Selby R.G., Vecchio F.J. Three-dimensional Constitutive Relations for Reinforced Concrete, Tech. Rep. 93-02, Univ. Toronto, dept. Civil Eng., Toronto, Canada, (1993).

Google Scholar

[12] Collins M. P. & Kuchma D. (1999), How Safe Are Our Large, Lightly Reinforced Concrete Beams, Slabs, and Footings?, ACI Struct. Journal 96(4), 482-490.

DOI: 10.14359/684

Google Scholar

[13] COMITÈ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION. Eurocode 2. Design of concrete structures. Part 1: general rules for buildings. ENV 1992-1-1. CEN, Brussels, (1992).

Google Scholar