Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
0 of .
Results for:
P. 1
Principles of Limit State Design

# Principles of Limit State Design

Ratings: (0)|Views: 4,970 |Likes:

Published by: hitusp on Nov 12, 2009

### Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
See more
See less

07/17/2013

pdf

text

original

1
Principles of LimitState Design
1.1 Design Philosophies for Steel Structures
Steel-plated structures are likely to be subjected to various types of loads and deformationsarising from service requirements that may range from the routine to the extreme oraccidental. The mission of the structural designer is to design a structure that can withstandsuch demands throughout its expected lifetime.In design, the structure is hence required to have an adequate margin of safety againstsuch demands, the safety factor being necessary to account for various uncertainties due tonatural variability, inaccuracy in procedures used for the evaluation and control of loadsor load effects (e.g., stress, deformation), similar uncertainties in structural resistance(capacity) and its determination, and also variations in building procedures.A ‘demand’ is analogous to load, and a ‘capacity’ is analogous to strength necessaryto resist that load, both measured consistently (e.g., as stress, deformation, resistive orapplied load or moment, or energy either lost or absorbed, and so on). The partial safety-factor-based design criterion for a structure under multiple types of loads applied at thesame time is expressible as follows:
D
d
< C
d
or safety measure
=
C
d
/D
d
>
1
(
1
.
1
)
where
D
d
=
γ
0
i
D
i
(F
i
,γ
i
)
=
design ‘demand’,
C
d
=
C
/γ
M
=
design ‘capacity’,
D
i
(F
i
,γ
i
)
=
characteristic measure of demand for load type
i
, calculated from thecharacteristic measures of loads,
, and magniﬁed by the partial safety factor,
γ
, takingaccount of the uncertainties related to loads,
γ
0
=
partial safety factor taking into accountthe degree of seriousness of the particular limit state in regard to safety and serviceabilityaccounting of economical and social consequences as well as any special circumstance(e.g., the mission of the ship, type of cargo, interaction of the limit state considered withthe others, etc.),
C
=
characteristic measure of capacity,
γ
M
=
γ
m
γ
c
=
capacity-relatedsafety factor,
γ
m
=
partial safety factor taking account of the uncertainties due to materialproperties,
γ
c
=
partial safety factor taking account of the uncertainties on the capacityof the structure, such as quality of the construction, corrosion, method considered fordetermination of the capacity. More discussion about the design format may be foundin Section 1.10.

2
ULS DESIGN OF STEEL-PLATED STRUCTURES
A nominal or characteristic measure of demand or capacity is deﬁned to correspondto a speciﬁed percentage of the area below the probability curve for the correspondingrandom variable. For instance, one may base characteristic strength or capacity on a lowerbound or 95% exceedence value, while a characteristic load or demands may be basedon an upper bound or a 5% exceedence value. The partial safety factors applied may bebased on past experience, but are in principle meant to provide an acceptable level of safety or performance. To achieve a successful design, criteria similar to Equation (1.1)must be satisﬁed for each limit state for which structural performance must be assured.Limit state design is different from the traditional allowable stress design. In the allow-able stress design, the focus is on keeping the stresses resulting from the design loadsunder a certain working stress level that is usually based on successful similar past expe-rience. In the marine context, regulatory bodies or classiﬁcation societies usually specifythe value of the allowable stress as some fraction of the mechanical properties of materials(e.g., uniaxial yield or ultimate tensile strength).In contrast to the allowable stress design, the limit state design is based on the explicitconsideration of the various conditions under which the structure may cease to fulﬁll itsintended function. For these conditions, the applicable capacity or strength is estimatedand used in design as a limit for such behavior.The load-carrying capacity of a structure is for this purpose normally evaluated usingsimpliﬁed design formulations or by using more reﬁned computations such as nonlin-ear elastic–plastic large-deformation ﬁnite element analyses with appropriate modelingrelated to geometric/material properties, initial imperfections, boundary condition, loadapplication, and ﬁnite element mesh sizes, as appropriate.During the last two decades, the emphasis in structural design has been moving from theallowable stress design to the limit state design since the latter approach makes possiblea rigorously designed, yet economical, structure considering the various relevant modesof failure directly.A limit state is formally deﬁned by the description of a condition for which a particularstructural member or an entire structure fails to perform the function that is expected of it. From the viewpoint of a structural designer, four types of limit states are consideredfor steel structures, namely:
serviceability limit state (SLS);
ultimate limit state (ULS);
fatigue limit state (FLS); and
accidental limit state (ALS).SLS conventionally represents failure states for normal operations due to deteriorationof routine functionality. SLS considerations in design may address:
local damage which reduces the durability of the structure or affects the efﬁciency of structural elements;
unacceptable deformations which affect the efﬁcient use of structural elements or thefunctioning of equipment relying on them;
excessive vibration or noise which can cause discomfort to people or affect the properfunctioning of equipment; and
deformations and deﬂections which may spoil the aesthetic appearance of the structure.

PRINCIPLES OF LIMIT STATE DESIGN
3
ULS (also called ultimate strength) typically represents the collapse of the structuredue to loss of structural stiffness and strength. Such loss of capacity may be related to:
loss of equilibrium in part or of entire structure, often considered as a rigid body (e.g.,overturning or capsizing);
attainment of the maximum resistance of structural regions, members or connectionsby gross yielding, rupture or fracture; and
instability in part or of the entire structure resulting from buckling and plastic collapseof plating, stiffened panels and support members.FLS represents fatigue crack occurrence of structural details due to stress concentrationand damage accumulation (crack growth) under the action of repeated loading.ALS represents excessive structural damage as a consequence of accidents, e.g., colli-sions, grounding, explosion and ﬁre, which affect the safety of the structure, environmentand personnel.It is important to emphasize that in limit state design, these various types of limit statesmay be designed against different safety levels, the actual safety level to be attained fora particular type of limit state being a function of its perceived consequences and ease of recovery from that state to be incorporated in design. Within the context of Equation (1.1),for useful guidelines in determining the partial safety factors related to limit state designof steel structure, ISO 2394 (1998), NTS (1998) and ENV 1993-1-1 (1992) of Eurocode 3may be referred to.
1.2 Considerations in Limit State Design
1.2.1 Serviceability Limit State Design
The structural design criteria used for the SLS design of steel-plated structures are nor-mally based on the limits of deﬂections or vibration for normal use. In reality, excessivedeformation of a structure may also be indicative of excessive vibration or noise, andso, certain interrelationships may exist among the design criteria being deﬁned and usedseparately for convenience.The SLS criteria are normally deﬁned by the operator of a structure, or by establishedpractice, the primary aim being efﬁcient and economical in-service performance withoutexcessive routine maintenance or down-time. The acceptable limits necessarily dependon the type, mission and arrangement of structures. Further, in deﬁning such limits,other disciplines such as machinery designers must also be consulted. As an example,the limiting values of vertical deﬂections for beams in steel structures are indicated inTable 1.1.
Table 1.1
Serviceability limit values for vertical deﬂections of beams, seeFigure 1.1 (ENV 1993-1-1 1992).Condition Limit for
δ
max
Limit for
δ
2
Deck beams
L
/200
L
/300Deck beams supporting plaster orother brittle ﬁnish ornon-ﬂexible partitions
L
/250
L
/350

## Activity (57)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.