PSI - Issue 64

ScienceDirect Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2023) 000 – 000 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2023) 000 – 000 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ^ĐŝĞŶĐĞ ŝƌĞĐƚ Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ^ĐŝĞŶĐĞ ŝƌĞĐƚ

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Procedia Structural Integrity 64 (2024) 1975–1982

SMAR 2024 – 7th International Conference on Smart Monitoring, Assessment and Rehabilitation of Civil Structures Robustness versus redundancy of existing structures: critical review and application Edward Steeves a , Fadi Oudah a * a Department of Civil and Resource Engineering, Dalhousie University, 1360 Barrington Street, Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada Abstract Progressive collapse is defined as the propagation of failure from local damage that results in structural collapse. Throughout history there have been many tragic building and bridge collapses that have increased the amount of interest and research in the field of progressive collapse, albeit more so for buildings than bridges. Even though there is no universally accepted definition of robustness, structural robustness can be generally described as the ability of a system to absorb an initial damage and not collapse. Although often used interchangeably with robustness, redundancy is defined as the ability of a system to carry additional load after the first member has failed. The objectives of this paper are to 1) present a critical review of definitions for robustness versus redundancy from a structural engineering perspective, accompanied by a review of relevant robustness measures published in literature, and 2) quantify the improvement in structural robustness of a bridge after strategically upgrading elements to mitigate a brittle failure mode of the system using holistic structural robustness and structural redundancy indices. The upgrade is completed on an existing truss bridge subjected to corrosion damage. Nonlinear static finite element (FE) analyses of the bridge in intact and damaged states are first performed to assess the structural robustness of the damaged system with respect to the intact version. A strategic upgrade is then proposed for the bridge to increase its robustness and redundancy and illustrate the application of the indices when improving the safety of existing structures. Research is ongoing to optimize upgrade schemes to increase structural robustness and structural redundancy while minimizing the cost and carbon footprint associated with structural repairs. © 2024 The Authors. Published by ELSEVIER B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) SMAR 2024 – 7th International Conference on Smart Monitoring, Assessment and Rehabilitation of Civil Structures Robustness versus redundancy of existing structures: critical review and application Edward Steeves a , Fadi Oudah a * a Department of Civil and Resource Engineering, Dalhousie University, 1360 Barrington Street, Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada Abstract Progressive collapse is defined as the propagation of failure from local damage that results in structural collapse. Throughout history there have been many tragic building and bridge collapses that have increased the amount of interest and research in the field of progressive collapse, albeit more so for buildings than bridges. Even though there is no universally accepted definition of robustness, structural robustness can be generally described as the ability of a system to absorb an initial damage and not collapse. Although often used interchangeably with robustness, redundancy is defined as the ability of a system to carry additional load after the first member has failed. The objectives of this paper are to 1) present a critical review of definitions for robustness versus redundancy from a structural engineering perspective, accompanied by a review of relevant robustness measures published in literature, and 2) quantify the improvement in structural robustness of a bridge after strategically upgrading elements to mitigate a brittle failure mode of the system using holistic structural robustness and structural redundancy indices. The upgrade is completed on an existing truss bridge subjected to corrosion damage. Nonlinear static finite element (FE) analyses of the bridge in intact and damaged states are first performed to assess the structural robustness of the damaged system with respect to the intact version. A strategic upgrade is then proposed for the bridge to increase its robustness and redundancy and illustrate the application of the indices when improving the safety of existing structures. Research is ongoing to optimize upgrade schemes to increase structural robustness and structural redundancy while minimizing the cost and carbon footprint associated with structural repairs. © 2024 The Authors. Published by ELSEVIER B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) Peer-review under responsibility of SMAR 2024 Organizers Peer-review under responsibility of SMAR 2024 Organizers Keywords: Robustness; Redundancy; Structure; Nonlinear; Truss Peer-review under responsibility of SMAR 2024 Organizers Keywords: Robustness; Redundancy; Structure; Nonlinear; Truss

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 902-494-4083. E-mail address: fadi.oudah@dal.ca * Corresponding author. Tel.: 902-494-4083. E-mail address: fadi.oudah@dal.ca

2452-3216 © 2024 The Authors. Published by ELSEVIER B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) Peer-review under responsibility of SMAR 2024 Organizers 2452-3216 © 2024 The Authors. Published by ELSEVIER B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) Peer-review under responsibility of SMAR 2024 Organizers

2452-3216 © 2024 The Authors. Published by ELSEVIER B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) Peer-review under responsibility of SMAR 2024 Organizers 10.1016/j.prostr.2024.09.272

Made with FlippingBook Digital Proposal Maker