Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.

2018, 12(4): 577–593

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-017-0458-y

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Nonlinear analysis and reliability of metallic truss

structures
Karim BENYAHIa* , Youcef BOUAFIAa, Salma BARBOURAb, Mohand Said KACHIa
a
LaMoMs Laboratory, University Mouloud Mammeri of Tizi-Ouzou, 15000 Tizi-Ouzou, Algeria
b
C.N.R.S. LSPM – UPR 3407 Laboratory, Paris 13 University, Paris, France
*
Corresponding author. E-mail: benyahi.karim@yahoo.fr

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018
ABSTRACT The present study goes into the search for the safety domain of civil engineering structures. The objective
is to show how a reliability-evaluation brought by a mechanical sizing can be obtained. For that purpose, it is necessary to
have a mechanical model and a reliability model representing correctly the behavior of this type of structure.
It is a question on one hand, to propose a formulation for the nonlinear calculation (mechanical nonlinearity) of the
spatial structures in trusses, and on the other hand, to propose or to adapt a formulation and a modeling of the reliability.
The principle of Hasofer-Lind can be applied, in first approach, for the reliability index estimation, scenarios and the
probability of failure.
The made check concerned metallic in truss structures. Finally, some structures are calculated using the method adapted
by Hasofer-Lind to validate the probability approach of the reliability analysis.

KEYWORDS modeling, nonlinearity mechanical, truss, probability, reliability, response surface, probability of failure

1 Introduction Rabah [5] who extended numerical simulations to three-

The hypothesis of the behavior of linear structures has a
restricted domain of validity. Indeed, the modeling of the
material’s real behavior made calls has a non linear
relationship (stress-strains).
The basics of material nonlinear analysis were the first to
be established because of their simplicity. Two different
approaches have been proposed: the initial deformation
method and the tangent modulus (now known as the
incremental method). After a series of specific applica-
tions, the equations of a general formulation of geometric
nonlinear analysis were established by S. Yagmai [1] in
1968 for the updated Lagrangian description.
A. Grelat [2,3] was among the first to take into account
in the simulation these two types of nonlinearity. The
behavior of the compressed concrete was modeled by
Sargin law [4] and that of the tensed zones was simulated
using an original form of behavior law where the concrete
is represented by a triangular fictitious stress diagram from
the neutral fiber. His work was complemented by O. Naït-
Article history: Received Mar 20, 2017; Accepted Jul 28, 2017
dimensional structures. In order to improve the simulations
of large displacements and large rotations, F. Robert [6]
proposed to introduce a corotational description of motion
for the treatment of geometric nonlinearity.
Other authors have complemented existing codes by
developing specific finite elements such as, for example, B.
Espion [7] which proposed a finite planar beam element
with 9 degrees of freedom.
A numerical elastic 2D and elastic-plastic 3D analysis
up to shear connection collapse in the framework of the
longitudinal shear in shear connection of both floor and
bridge composite steel and concrete trusses is presented by
Josef Machacek et al. [8]. He studied the influence of the
main parameters and presented recommendations for
practical design.
Ran Feng et al. [9] proposed to use the finite element
method for the numerical analysis of concrete-filled multi-
planar CHS Inverse-Triangular tubular truss, which he
modeled according to a Pratt truss configuration with
symmetric geometry. The material and geometric non-
linearity’s of the concrete are taken into account, a
parametric study is performed in evaluating the effects of
578 Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2018, 12(4): 577–593
main influential factors on the strength and behavior of
concrete-filled multi-planar CHS Inverse-Triangular tubu-
lar truss.
Truss structures are commonly used in construction
because they can lighten the weight of a building while
ensuring greater stability. In the first part of this article, we
propose a formulation for the nonlinear material calcula-
tion of truss structures (bars elements) in static behavior
under an increasing loading until fracture. Our formulation
will be implemented in a calculation program in
FORTRAN language processing the beams elements,
which was developed in references [10,11].
The safety of a mechanical system is ensured by a safety
coefficient: the ratio between a variable loading and a
variable strength determined by a deterministic approach.
For a complex structure these efforts are poorly known,
and its strength is uncertain, so there is always a risk of the
structure fracture. To do this, the probabilistic approach
allows evaluating the risk by methods of analysis of
reliability of the mechanical systems developed during the
last years.
In structure reliability, the FORM and SORM methods
are an approximation methods allowing to determine a
particular structures design point and therefore to estimate
the failure probability. These methods are therefore
intrinsically linked to this famous design point it permit
to define the distance between the design point and the
failure surface point in the original space. This distance is
called Reliability: Reliability or Safety Index.
The so-called safety index method was also used by
Ravindra et al. [12] to design reinforced concrete beams
and structural steel members.
Karamchandani and Cornell [13] developed a method
that approximates the parameter sensitivity with respect to
distribution parameters that can take second order effect
into account, based on SORM and the finite difference
method.
N. Vu-Bac et al. [14] performed a sensitivity analysis
(SA) based on their MD results to quantify the influence of
uncertain input parameters on the predicted yield stress and
elastic modulus. The sensitivity analysis (SA) is based on
response surface (RS) models (polynomial regression and
moving least squares). They used partial derivatives (local
SA) and variance-based methods (global SA) in this study
an coefficient of determination (COD) is computed for
allowing an estimation of the quality of the approximation.
N. Vu-Bac et al. [15] used simulations of molecular
dynamics (MD) or studied the effect of single-walled
carbon nanotube (SWCNT) radius, the temperature and the
pulling velocity on interfacial shear stress (ISS). For
computational efficiency, the sensitivity analysis (SA) is
based on surrogate models (polynomial regression, mov-
ing least squares (MLS) and hybrid of quadratic poly-
nomial and MLS regressions).
N. Vu-Bac et al. [16] proposed a stochastic framework
based on sensitivity analysis (SA) methods to quantify the
key-input parameters, which used to evaluate the Young
modulus of the polymer (epoxy) clay nanocomposite
(PCNs). They compared the computation of sensitivity
indices and to the simulation time between the kriging
regression (KR) model and the quadratic regression (QDR)
model.
N. Vu-Bac et al. [17] carried out a sensitivity analysis
consisting in quantifying the influence of uncertain input
parameters on uncertain model outputs. The results are
based on a probability density function (PDF) provided for
the input parameters.
It has been demonstrated that the spline regression
model is more robust than polynomial regression model. It
is necessary to take penalized spline regression models
using global separate penalties or separate global penalties
into account in order to approximate the observed data.
N. Vu-Bac et al. [18] used a hierarchical multiscale
model brindging four (nano, micro, meso and macro)
scales to study the effect of uncertain model inputs on the
macroscopic Young’s modulus and the Poisson’s ratio.
They used sensitivity analysis (SA) methods to estimate
the effect of the uncertain correlated (dependent) inputs on
the Young's modulus and the Poisson's ratio for the
multiscale model in the context of a global SA. Estimates
for correlated parameters are performed for both first-order
and total sensitivity indices.
It is proposed in this article in the second part, first a
classical technique for the calculation of the reliability
(method Hasofer Lind level 2) which uses the probability
and the statistic and makes it possible to check the
reliability of the metallic structures and ensuring dialogue
between mechanics and reliability model with indirect
coupling method. The reliability model and its coupling
with the mechanical model are writing in FORTRAN
language.
Finally, in this paper we propose a non linear
computational calculation method for the truss structures.
We have modeled the reliability problem by the Hasofer-
Lind principle for the reliability index estimation the
failure probability. Once the mechanical model and the
reliability model have been available, they have to be
coupled by a response surface, and then the probability
laws of the random variables retained to approximate the
statistical law (real law).
2 Methodology of nonlinear analysis of
truss structures
2.1 Introduction
The elements of a truss work only in tension or
compression, thus they are modeled by finite elements
such bars. This is usually an element with two nodes,
which includes three degrees of freedom. Each node
represents the components of its movement in space. The
 Karim BENYAHI et al. Nonlinear analysis and reliability of metallic truss structures 579

nodes have no rotations freedom (thus not running); This condition, taking into account the Eq. (3), can be
because they have no physical meaning. Indeed, the writing as:
existence of a rotational freedom degree mean the presence ( ) " #( )
within the bar element (pin-ended element) of bending ΔF sn ½k mn  O Δεn
¼ (6)
moment or torsion, which is excluded. 0 O O 0

2.2 Nonlinear analysis of truss structures formed by With: 2 3

elements bars 000
6 7
O ¼ 40 0 05 (7)
We make several working hypotheses, since we consider
the truss in the three-dimensional field: 000
- The connections between the bars are considered as Internal and external tangential loads are zero for the bar
ball joints. element.
- The loads are applied only at the truss nodes. For loads acting increase, the resolution of Eq. (5) is
- These bar element a subjected only to tensile and iterative. The solution of this equation is given by:
compression (it will only axial deformation). ( ) ( )
The section is studied under the assumption of small Δεn –1
ΔF sn
strains and is defined in its main reference. ¼ ½k s  (8)
0 0
The section longitudinal normal strain εðy,zÞ in the bar
element at the coordinate point ðy,zÞ is the strain at its Note: The section stiffness matrix [ks] is singular. And to
gravity center, is given by: simplify the presentation of equilibrium equations of the
εðy,zÞ ¼ εx (1) bar element, we will keep the same dimensions of the
matrix and vectors corresponding to the beam element.
The normal strains φy , φz (rotations of the section around
the axes Gy and Gz respectively) and tangent gy , gz and the 2.3 Metal profile section’s equilibrium algorithm
torsion angle
x , as well as their increase Δφy , Δφz ,Δgy ,
Δgz , Δ
x are neglected. The equilibrium algorithm of the metal profile section for
The material nonlinearity of a bar element is taken into the bar element, is described below (Fig. 1):
account by the relation linking the normal stress  and the For a given step r,
normal strain correspond. The section’s strain increase fΔF s gr : increase efforts to step r.
under normal stresses is given by: fΔεg0 : initial strains increase.
8 9
> Δε
< x> =
fΔεn g ¼ 0 (2)
>
: >
;
0
The normal internal loads increase in the section is given
by:
2 3
100
fΔF mn g ¼ !s 6 7
E m ðy,zÞ4 0 0 0 5dS m fΔεn g
m
(3)
000
The bar element section is subjected to an external load
increase, which is given by:
8 9 Fig. 1 Equilibrium of a metallic section
> ΔN >
< =
fΔF sn g ¼ 0 (4) We consider that the section equilibrium is reached
>
: >
;
0 when, for two successive iterations, the strain’s Euclidean
norm is less than a tolerance fixed:
The section equilibrium is expressed by:  
( ) ( ) hΔεi – Δεi – 1 iðfΔεgi – fΔεgi – 1 Þ 1=2
ΔF sn ΔF mn ηs ¼ < Ts (9)
¼ (5) hεs – Δεi iðfεs g – fΔεgi Þ
0 0
Ts: precision order desired of 0.01.
580 Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2018, 12(4): 577–593

2.4 Flowchart of calculation 2.5.1 Formulation of the bar element stiffness matrix in its
intrinsic system
The flowchart of the equilibrium state search, in the metal
profile section is described below (Fig. 2): The loads on the extremity of the bar element is (Fig. 3):
fF N g ¼ fN j ,0,0,0,0,0gT (10)

Fig. 3 Bar element in the coordinate space

The corresponding displacement is:

fS N g ¼ fe,0,0,0,0,0gT (11)
With:
e ¼ L – L0 (12)
The section loads in an abscissa can be written as:
8
> N ðX Þ ¼ – N j
>
>
>
>
>
> M y ðX Þ ¼ 0
>
>
< M z ðX Þ ¼ 0
(13)
Fig. 2 Flowchart for the equilibrium state search in the metallic >
> T y ðX Þ ¼ 0
>
>
section >
>
>
> T z ðX Þ ¼ 0
>
:
M x ðX Þ ¼ 0
Note: The relationship between loads in one section and the
N: number of iterations set in advance. loads at the element nodes is given by:
Nit: number of iterations performed by the program.
fF S g ¼ ½LðX ÞfF N g (14)
2.5 Stiffness matrix of a nonlinear elastic bar element With

The method used in non-linear material calculation fF S g ¼ fN ðX Þ,0,0,0,0,0gT (15)

consists, at first, to analysis the deformed state of the bar And
element in the intrinsic coordinate system xyz related to the 2 3
deformed position of the element on the assumption of –1 0 0 0 0 0
small deformations and small displacements. The second 6 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 07
order effects are introduced in the transit from the intrinsic 6 7
6 7
system coordinate xyz to the local system coordinate 6 0 0 0 0 0 07
½LðX Þ ¼ 6
6
7 (16)
x0y0z0. Then, we establish a stiffness matrix of the element
6 0 0 0 0 0 077
in the local coordinate system, related to the element initial 6 7
6 0 07
position. Finally, we assemble the structure stiffness matrix 4 0 0 0 0 5
from the bar elements stiffness matrix in the absolute 0 0 0 0 0 0
system coordinate OXYZ. The calculation process is
described by the following formulation. The virtual works theorem allows us to write:
 Karim BENYAHI et al. Nonlinear analysis and reliability of metallic truss structures 581

!0 ½LðxÞTfδðxÞgdx
L The element nodes displacements in the intermediate
fS N g ¼ (17) system coordinate can be written as:
Where : fS U g ¼ ðu,v,w,0,0,0,0,0,0ÞT (27)
fδðxÞg ¼ fεðxÞ,0,0,0,0,0gT (18) Where:
8
Using the virtual work theorem and neglecting the < u ¼ uj – ui
>
element length variation in computing of the nodes v ¼ v j – vi (28)
displacements permits to write: >
:w ¼ w –w
j i

!0 ½LðxÞTfΔδðxÞgdx
L
fΔS N g ¼ (19) The relationship between the displacements and loads in
these two systems are given by:
By replacing the relations (8) and (17) in Eq. (19), one
gets the flexibility matrix of the element K N such that: fS U g ¼ ½T 0 ½S L  (29)

fΔS N g ¼ ½K N  – 1 fΔF N g (20) ½F L  ¼ ½T 0 T fF U g (30)

With : With
2 3
!0 ½LðxÞT½K S  – 1½LðxÞdx
L
½K N  – 1 ¼ (21) –1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
6 7
6 0 –1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 07
The integration is carried out by the Simpson rule by 6 7
6 –1 07
considering on the element a certain number of calculation 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 7
6 7
sections in which the matrix KS are determined at each 6 07
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
step. 6 7
Finally, we get the following relationship: ½T 0 ¼6
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07
7
6 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07
fΔF N g ¼ ½K N fΔS N g (22) 6 7
6 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07
With 6 7
6 07
2 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
½k mn  0 0 0 0 0
6 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 07
6 7 (31)
6 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 07
½K N  ¼ 6
6
7 (23)
6 0 0 0 0 0 077 The displacements increase in the intrinsic system and in
6 7 the intermediate systems, are linked by:
6 07
4 0 0 0 0 0 5
fΔS N g ¼ ½BfΔS U g (32)
0 0 0 0 0 0
Using the virtual work theorem, we can write that:

2.5.2 Formulation of the bar elements stiffness matrix in its fΔF U g ¼ ½BT fΔF N g þ ½ΔBT fF N g (33)
local system coordinate
When:
2 v w 3
The loads at the element nodes in the local system 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
coordinates x0y0z0, are: 6 L0 L0 7
60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07
6 7
fF L g ¼ ðF ix0 ,F iy0 ,F iz0 ,0,0,0,F jx0 ,F jy0 ,F jz0 ,0,0,0ÞT (24) 6 7
60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07
½B ¼ 6
6
7
7 (34)
The displacements at the element nodes in the local 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07
system coordinates x0y0z0, are: 6 7
6 7
40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05
fS L g ¼ ðui ,vi ,wi ,0,0,0,uj ,vj ,wj ,0,0,0ÞT (25)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
The element nodes loads in the intermediate system
coordinate can be written as: And ½ΔBT fF N g ¼ ½DfΔS U g (35)
fF U g ¼ ðF jx0 ,F jy0 ,F jz0 ,0,0,0,0,0,0Þ T
(26) With
582 Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2018, 12(4): 577–593

2 3 2 3
– vN j – wN j ½R0  0 0 0
6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 07 6 7
6 L0 2 L0 7 6 0 0 0 07
6 7 ½RT  ¼ 6 7 (43)
6 7 6 7
6 – vN j Nj 7 4 0 0 ½R0  0 5
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 07
6 L0 2 7
6 L0 7 0 0 0 0
6 7
6 7
6 – wN j Nj 7 The geometric transformation matrix [R0] of a three-
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 07
6 L0 2 7 dimensional bar element; it given by:
6 L0 7 2 3
½D ¼ 6
6
7
7 cx cy cz
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07 6 7
6 7 6 – c x Y S – cy Z 7
6 7 6 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07 ½R0  ¼ 6 S
6
6
7
7 6 L S 77
(44)
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07 4 –Z –X 5
6 7 0
6 07 S S
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
6 7
6 07 8 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 >
>
> L ¼ ðxj – xi Þ2 þ ðyj – yi Þ2 þ ðzj – zi Þ2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >
> qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
>
>
>
> S ¼ ðxj – xi Þ2 þ ðzj – zi Þ2
(36) >
>
>
>
Finally, the relationship between the nodes loads < xj – xi X
With cosðx,xÞ ¼ ¼ (45)
increase and the nodes displacements increase in the >
> L L
>
> yj – yi Y
local system coordinate is given by: >
> cosðy,yÞ ¼ ¼
>
>
fΔF L g ¼ ½K L fΔS L g >
> L L
(37) >
> zj – zi Z
>
: cosðz,zÞ ¼ ¼
The stiffness matrix [KL], of the bar element in the local L L
system coordinate is defined by:
Finally, the relationship between the loads increase and
½K L  ¼ ½T 0 T ð½BT ½K N ½B þ ½DÞ½T 0  (38) the displacements increase of the bar element nodes in the
absolute system coordinate OXYZ, is:
2.5.3 Formulation of the bar element stiffness matrix in the fΔF X g ¼ ½K X fΔS X g (46)
absolute system
The element stiffness matrix in the absolute system
The nodes loads increase in the absolute system coordinate coordinate can be written as:
are defined as: ½K X  ¼ ½RT T ½K L ½RT  (47)
fΔF X g ¼ ðΔF ix ,ΔF iy ,ΔF iz ,0,0,0,ΔF jx ,ΔF jy ,ΔF jz ,0,0,0ÞT
The stiffness matrix [KS] and [KN] are singular and
(39) cannot remain so, because in the resolution of the general
stiffness matrix in the global system coordinate, the null
The nodes displacements increase in the absolute system pivots will appear. For this purpose, disrupts the terms of
coordinate are defined as: the diagonal corresponding to the shear forces, instead of
being zero, are multiplied by a real coefficient between 0
fΔS X g ¼ ðΔX i ,ΔY i ,ΔZ i ,0,0,0,ΔX j ,ΔY j ,ΔZ j ,0,0,0ÞT (40)
and 1.
The relationship linking the nodes displacements After implementing the procedure described above, the
increase in the local system coordinate and the nodes other null pivots to appear due to the singularity of the
displacements increase, in the absolute system coordinate matrix [L(x)] and [B]then to solve this problem we proceed
can be written as: in the same way as for the stiffness matrix (instead of
canceled the terms of the diagonal of the matrix, they are
fΔS L g ¼ ½RT fΔS X g (41) taken equal to 10–4).
The relationship between the loads increase in the local
system coordinate and the loads increase in the absolute 2.5.4 Node displacement calculation
system coordinate is:
The nonlinear problem is solved by using an iterative
fΔF X g ¼ ½RT T fΔF L g (42)
method [19,20,21], based on the displacements method, in
With which we recalculate, for each step, the matrix structure’s
 Karim BENYAHI et al. Nonlinear analysis and reliability of metallic truss structures 583

stiffness connecting it’s displacements increases with loads

increases.
The structure stiffness matrix [K] is formed from an
element stiffness matrix in the absolute system coordinate
[22,23].
The nodes displacements increase {DU} linked to the
loads increase by the structure equilibrium equation:
fΔPg ¼ ½KfΔU g (48)
The nodes displacements increase are obtained by
solving the structure equilibrium equation and it can be
written as:

fΔU g ¼ ½K – 1 fΔPg (49)

The convergence of the nodes displacements is carried
out by the following equation.
 1=2
hΔU i – ΔU i – 1 iðfΔU gi – fΔU gi – 1 Þ
ηu ¼ < Tu
hU s – ΔU i iðfU s g – fΔU gi Þ
(50)
At the end of each step; the total deformations of each
section, the forces and displacements at the nodes are
calculated, accumulating the increments of this step with
the values of the previous step.
Before proceeding to a new loading step, one proceeds
to the correction of the nodes displacements {U} obtained.
This stage is indispensable for the case of structures
sensitive to second-order effects [24].
A correction step is carried out in the current step,
introducing the effect of a dummy load increase fΔP* g
given by:

fΔP* g ¼ fPg – fPint g (51)

This correction step is characterized by an iterative cycle
to balance this dummy load. It is suppressed if the loads
Euclidean norm η is less than or equal to a certain tolerance
Tf fixed a priori:
 1=2
hΔP* ifΔPg
ηf ¼ < Tf (52)
hPifPg
After this correction step, the analysis is continued with Fig. 4 Research the state of the truss structure equilibrium
flowchart
a new external loading step. The breaking load is obtained
when the resolution algorithm diverges for an increase in
the absolute value of the load which is less than or equal to 3 Reliability of structures
an accuracy fixed well before.
3.1 Introduction
2.6 Flowchart calculation steps (Fig. 4)
The safety of a mechanical system is provided by a safety
2.7 Behavior laws used factor: ratio of a variable load and a resistance variable
established by a deterministic approach. For a complex
In this present study it was used for structural steels natural structure such efforts are poorly known and its resistance is
steels; the perfect elastic-plastic law and the elastic-plastic uncertain, there is still a risk of the ruined structure. This
law with firming for describing steel behavior. probabilistic approach permit to evaluate the risk in case of
584 Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2018, 12(4): 577–593

reliability analysis methods [25,26,27], developed in Dividing the equation by norm krHðuÞkuðkÞ and by
recent years. introducing the direction cosines of H in P k we get :

HðuðkÞ Þ  
3.2 Research design point þ hαiðkÞ fugðkþ1Þ – fugðkÞ ¼ 0 (57)
krHðuÞkuðkÞ
The design point (or the most probable failure) is the point
of the limit state surface where U probability density is a It comes:
maximum; it is also defined as the point of the state limit HðuðkÞ Þ
surface as close to the origin: fugðkþ1Þ fαgðkÞ ¼ fugðkÞ fαgðkÞ – (58)
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi krHðuÞkuðkÞ
βHL ¼ min fugT fug (53)
gfxi ðuj Þg£0 rHðuðkÞ Þ
With αðkÞ ¼ is the vector cosine directors
Under constraint HðuÞ£0. krHðuÞkuðkÞ
In this study the constrained minimization problem is (or the vector of the normalized gradient) of H in P(k).
solved by using the algorithm of Hasofer-Lind-Rackwitz- In the limit when k↕ ↓1,dðuðkÞ Þ ¼ β and fug ¼ – βfαg
Fiessler which is an adaptation of a first order optimization if the algorithm is convergent. At iteration (k), let:
algorithm to the problem of research design point.
fugðkþ1Þ ¼ – βðkÞ fαgðkÞ ) βðkÞ
3.3 Optimization algorithms rackwitz-fiessler
¼ – huiðkþ1Þ fαgðkÞ (59)
There are many algorithms allow solving the optimization
problem [28,29]. In practice, Rackwitz-Fiessler algorithm This leads to the iterative relationship giving the
is the most used because of its simplicity and good results. reliability index:
The algorithm Hasofer-Lind-Rackwitz-Fiessler (HL-RF) is
an adaptation of a first order optimization algorithm to the HðuðkÞ Þ
βðkÞ ¼ – huiðkÞ fαgðkÞ þ (60)
problem of research design point. The algorithm (HL-RF) krHðuÞkuðkÞ
is an improvement of the Hasofer Lind algorithm, which
The search algorithm of reliability index stops when the
assumes that the basic variables are Gaussian and
norm
uncorrelated. As for him (HL-RF) is more general. It has
no restrictions on basic variables. The algorithm to be used kfugðkþ1Þ – fugðkÞ k£ε:
in the following is that found in the book of Lemaire [30].
The assumptions considered in the algorithm are: And fugðkþ1Þ is deducted by substituting Eq. (60) into
- The limit state function H has a gradient at the point of Eq. (59):
coordinate u.   HðuðkÞ Þ
- The gradient rHðuÞ is not null at any point in the uðkþ1Þ ¼ huiðkÞ fαgðkÞ fαgðkÞ – fαgðkÞ (61)
hyper limit state surface. krHðuÞkuðkÞ
To determine the design point, we consider a normalized
space at a point P(k) to coordinate {u}(k), the origin point of
the iteration (k). This point does not necessarily belong to 3.3.1 Summary of the algorithm
constraint and H(u) can be different from zero.
Taylor series development of the state of the limit The algorithm of Hasofer Lind-Rackwitz-Fiessler (HL-RF)
function H(u) about the point P(k) gives: is summarized by the following steps:
  1- Choose a starting point {u}(0);
HðuÞ ¼ HðuðkÞ Þ þ hrHðuÞiuðkÞ fug – fugðkÞ 2- Evaluate the limit state function H(u(K));
 2 3- Calculate the gradient of the limit state frHðuÞgðkÞ
þO fug – fugðkÞ (54)
and norm krHðuÞkðkÞ , to deduce fαgðkÞ by: αðkÞ ¼
The equation of the tangent has hyper plan H(u) as
{u}(k): rHðuðkÞ Þ
;
hrHðuÞiuðkÞ fug þ c ¼ 0 (55) krHðuÞkuðkÞ
4- Calculate the reliability index βðkÞ ;
rHðuðkÞ Þ is the gradient H(u) at the point P(k). Then, we 5- Calculate the coordinate of the next iteration {u}(k + 1);
define P(k + 1) by: 6- Convergence tests:
  If kfugðkþ1Þ – fugðkÞ k£ε, stop calculating;
Hðuðkþ1Þ Þ ¼ HðuðkÞ Þ þ hrHðuÞiuðkÞ fugðkþ1Þ – uðkÞ ¼ 0 Else put k = k + 1 and go 2.
(56)
 Karim BENYAHI et al. Nonlinear analysis and reliability of metallic truss structures 585

3.3.2 Flowchart Hasofer-Lind-Rackwitz-Fiessler (HL-RF)
The flowchart Hasofer-Lind-Rackwitz-Fiessler (HL-RF) is
described below (Fig. 5):
Where: X is the vector n basic variables, and these ci ,cij
are the coefficients of the polynomial sought.
3.4.2 Flowchart of coupling reliability-mechanical by
response surface

The flowchart of the mechanical-reliability coupling

analytical response surface is described below (Fig. 6):

Fig. 5 Flowchart Hasofer-Lind-Rackwitz-Fiessler (HL-RF)

Fig. 6 Flow chart of a mechanical-reliability coupling response
3.4 Mechanical-reliability coupling surface

To realize this coupling, there are three methods of control 4 Comparisons with numerical and
[30]: The direct coupling, the coupling response surface, experimental results
the coupling optimization.
In this present study, the mechanical-reliability coupling 4.1 Validation of the non-linear calculation of the truss
will be directed by response surface. structures

3.4.1 Method by analytical response surface 4.1.1 Plane truss beam

The analytical response surface method is to replace the A truss plane in three equal spans has been tested by
function of unknown performance g(x) by approximated LOVEGROVE and analyzed by X. SUN and S.L CHAN
function g^ðxÞ. The choice of a high order polynomial is to [31] using the finite element method.
better represent the model. Very often, a quadratic shape is The layout and dimensions of the truss are shown in
chosen for writing the substitute g^ðxÞ of the performance Fig. 7, and sections of the frames. The values of modulus
function g(x). In other words, the substitute can be written of elasticity and the elastic limit data are respectively equal
as follows: to 214 GPa, and 285.4 MPa.
Xn Xn
gðxÞ  g^ðxÞ ¼ c0 þ cX þ c X2 (62) The element passing through the point (A) is designed
i¼1 i i i¼1 ii i
such that the load applied in the vicinity makes it as the
Xn Xn – 1 Xn critical point.
gðxÞ  g^ðxÞ ¼ c0 þ cX þ
i¼1 i i i¼1
c XX
j¼iþ1 ij i j The evolution of the load versus lateral displacement at
(63) mid point (A) is shown in Fig. 8.
586 Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2018, 12(4): 577–593
Fig. 7 Plane truss beam
Fig. 8 Plane truss beam- load curve – arrow
The experimental ultimate load is given equal to 88 kN.
The calculated ultimate load is 90 kN, a difference of
2.27% (in the sense of an overstatement). By against it is
found that the shape of the calculated curve approximates
the experimental curve. The agreement between the
experiment and our calculation is pretty good.
Fig. 10
4.1.2 Bridge trusses
Figures 9 and 10 show the bridge Warren truss type of 7.32
meters in height and 36.6 meters in length. The stress-
strain relationship was supposed perfectly elastic plastic
with a modulus of elasticity of 200000 MPa.
The cross-sectional W8  18 with a yield strength of
248 MPa was used for the tension members, including the
inferior and diagonal chords. And the cross section of 305
 305  13 mm with a yield strength of 317 MPa was used
for flanges subjected to compression, including the upper
chords.
This bridge truss (Fig. 11) was the subject of a numerical
study by Seung-Eock Kim et al. [32].
The ultimate load factor (l) found from Seung-Eock
Kim et al. [32] is equal to 1.06. The ultimate load factor (l)
calculated is 1.07, a difference of 0.94%. We find that the
truss bridge to cede by rupture rather than buckling, and
that the concordance between the calculation of Seung-
Eock Kim et al. [32] and our calculation is very good.
4.2 Validation and evaluation of the reliability of the
structures studied
4.2.1 Application to the truss plane
The geometrical and material characteristics of the planar
truss studied (scope section, loading, boundary condition,
elastic modulus, elastic limit) are described in section
4.1.1.
The procedure to estimate random variables probability
distributions selected for this study in order to approximate
the statistical law (real). Most often the mean and standard
deviation of a random variable are known, however, this
Fig. 9 Bridge at truss
Loading condition of the bridge at truss
 Karim BENYAHI et al. Nonlinear analysis and reliability of metallic truss structures
Fig. 11 Plane truss- load curve – arrow
information leads to Gaussian distributions that are not
adapted to a physical representation of random variables.
For example, some random variable cannot be negative, a
log-normal or exponential distribution will best represent
it.
Fig. 12 (a) Probability distributions of the random variable P; (b) Probability distributions of the random variable δ
587
Figsures 12(a) and 12(b) show the result of estimation of
the probability distributions of random variables, by
normal distribution, lognormal and exponential.
The results in Fig. 12(a) gives; for a normal distribution
a not insignificant probability that the random variable P is
negative, and the lognormal probability of a low density,
for against the exponential law appears to better represent
this parameter compared to the two other types of law. And
those in Fig. 12(b) also gives for a normal distribution a not
insignificant probability that the random variable is
negative, as to the lognormal and exponential laws seem
better represent this parameter compared to the normal law
except the law lognormal gives a precision unknown
phenomena better than the normal distribution and the
exponential law, as it well simulates the normal law by a
bell curve with slightly picked up results that this last law.
Then the random variables used in this study are
considered continuous, independent, and they are repre-
sented by the vector X, we class as follows:
- The random output variables to limit state (P, δ), laws
588 Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2018, 12(4): 577–593

of random distributions are modeled by an exponential

distribution and lognormal respectively, and whose
characteristics are given in Table 1.
- The other parameters (random variables to enter) as the
modulus of elasticity E and the yield strength e are
considered as deterministic.
The limit state function G (P, δ) is a nonlinear function
implicit (numerically known from our non-linear calcula-
tion), the failure of the system is observed when GðxÞ³0
(Fig. 8).
Given the complexity of the finite element model, it is
difficult to conduct the study with direct coupling between
the non-linear calculation program and the reliability Fig. 13 Limit state in physical space G (P,δ)
program, then it becomes necessary to construct a response
surface (Figs. 13–15).
The method of response surface with the objective of
replacing the limit state function obtained in implicit form
by another explicit function, in order to apply reliable
method for estimating the reliability index of the scenarios
and the failure probability of the studied structure. For this,
the following steps are considered:
- In a first step we need to transform the limit state
function of the physical space to a reduced centered space
with zero mean and standard deviation unit under the law
of the random variable.
T ð¼0,¼1Þ
GðP,δÞ ↕ ↓HðP,δÞ
- In a second step, it’s to make the choice of a Fig. 14 ^
Limit state approached in the reduced space centered H
mathematical form to the response surface. (P,δ)
approximate  function ^
HðP,δÞ ↕ ↓H ðP,δÞ
- The third step is the modeling of random variables.
- Finally, the fourth step is to apply the HL-RF method
to estimate the reliability index and calculate the
probability of failure.
After analysis by reliability-mechanical coupling, the
HL-RF method allowed us to obtain the following results
(Table 2):
Fig. 14 shows the limit state approach centered in the
^
reduced space HðP,δÞ and also the results of research from
the point of conception P*.
The reliability index is found β ¼ 1:29306, which
corresponds to a probability of failure of the truss
estimated Pf ¼ φð – βÞ ¼ 9:853%, or reliability of
90.147%. As for the most probable failure point, in
physical space, corresponds to the load 28.8314 kN and
displacement 0.0018 m.
Then, we proceed to another method; combining Fig. 15 Absolute value of the direction cosines of the random
between the laws of continuous random variables with variables (P,δ)

Table 1 Parameter of random variables laws to limit state

vector X random variables distribution law mean X standard deviation X
X1 P exponential 45.0 32.4037035
X2 δ lognormal 0.00463588 0.00419236
 Karim BENYAHI et al. Nonlinear analysis and reliability of metallic truss structures 589

Table 2 Results of the mechanical reliability analysis

reliability index probability of failure direction cosine (α1 ,α2 ) design point (U1, U2) design point (X1, X2)
1.29306 0.09853 ( – 0.3047, 0.9524) (0.3940, – 1.2315) (28.8314, 0.0018)

the aim of as close as possible real probability distributions
of random variables used in this example, it is retained for
seven case of combining the distribution laws. The seven
cases selected random variables are shown in Table 3 and
limit state (response surface) approached in the reduced
^
space centered HðP,δÞ are shown in Fig. 16.
4, 5, 6, 7). Consequently, there is a significant difference
between the probability of failure of the random variables
in the same distribution law (cases 1, 2, 3) and the
probability of failure of random variables act differently
distribution (cases 4, 5, 6, 7) it is because in reality the
random variables may not follow all the same law.
We also note that if four gives the greatest reliability
index β ¼ 1:29306, where reliability of 90.20%, which
confirms the validity of the first method for estimating
probability distributions that can approximate the statistics
law real of the random variable.
In our study, we considered that continuous and
independent random variables, when in reality it is still
not the case for all systems.

4.2.2 Bridge trusses

The geometrical and material characteristics of the truss

bridge studied (litters section, loading, boundary condition,
elastic modulus, yield point) are described in section 4.1.2.
Fig. 16 Limit state approached different cases in the reduced The procedure to estimate random variables probability
centered space distributions selected for this study in order to approximate
the statistics law (real).
After analysis by mechanical-reliability coupling seven Figures 17(a) and 17(b) show the result of estimation of
cases of combination between the laws of continuous the distribution of the probability distributions of random
random variables, the HL-RF method allowed us to obtain variables selected by the normal laws, lognormal and
the following results (Table 4). exponential.
It is observed for the various random variables selected The results in Fig. 17(a) give; for a normal distribution a
by using the same distribution law (cases 1, 2, 3), one not insignificant probability that the random variable l is
obtains index much smaller reliability that all the reliability negative, and the log-normal probability density less than
index found using the laws of different distributions (cases that found for the exponential law; that law seems to best
Table 3 The different case laws of distributions of random variables
distribution law
variables
case 1 case 2 case 3 case 4 case 5 case 6 case 7
P normal lognormal exponential exponential exponential lognormal lognormal
δ normal lognormal exponential lognormal normal normal exponential

Table 4 Results of the mechanical reliability analysis for the various cases treated
case reliability index probability of failure direction cosine (α1 ,α2 ) design point (U1, U2) design point (X1, X2)
case 1 0.20974 0.4169 ( – 0.1094, 0.9939) (0.0229, – 0.2084) (51.755, 0.0045)
case 2 0.11476 0.4542 ( – 0.1157, 0.9932) (0.0132, – 0.1139) (36.724, 0.0032)
case 3 0.09772 0.4611 (0.2409, – 0.9705) ( – 0.0235, 0.0948) (11.84, 0.00086)
case 4 1.29306 0.09800 ( – 0.3047, 0.9524) (0.3940, – 1.2315) (28.831, 0.0018)
case 5 0.70959 0.2390 ( – 0.2901, 0.9569) (0.2058, – 0.6790) (69.763, 0.0074)
case 6 0.82593 0.2044 ( – 0.3148, 0.9491) (0.2600, – 0.7839) (71.391, 0.0079)
case 7 0.4054 0.3426 (04997, – 0.8661) ( – 0.2026, 0.3511) (33.498, 0.0022)
590 Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2018, 12(4): 577–593
Fig. 17 (a) Probability distributions of the random variable l;
(b) Probability distributions of the random variable U/L
represent this parameter compared to the two other types of
laws. And those in Fig. 17(b) also provide for a normal
distribution a not insignificant probability that the random
variable U/L or negative, about the lognormal and
exponential laws seem better represent this parameter
compared to the normal law except that the lognormal
distribution gives an accuracy of unknown phenomena
better than normal or exponential, as it well simulates the
normal distribution curve with a more collected results that
this last law, and also because it gives a probability density
greater than the other two types of laws.
The random variables used in this study are considered
continuous, independent and are represented by the vector
X, we class as follows:
- The random variable outputs to limit state (l,U/L ),
laws of random distributions are modeled by an exponen-
tial distribution and lognormal respectively, whose char-
acteristics are given in Table 5.
- The other parameters (random input variables) as the
modulus of elasticity E and the yield stresses ðe1 ,e2 Þ are
considered as deterministic.
Table 5 Parameter of random variables laws to limit state
vector X random variables
X1 l exponential
X2 U/L
The limit state function G (l,U/L) is a nonlinear function
implicit (numerically known from our non-linear calcula-
tion), the failure of the system is observed when GðxÞ³0
(Figs. 18-20).
Fig. 18 Limit state in physical space G (l,U/L)
Fig. 19 Limit state approached in the reduced space centered
^ (l,U/L )
H
After analysis by coupling mechanical reliability
engineer, the HL-RF method allowed us to obtain the
following results (Table 6):
Figure 21 shows the state limit approached in the
reduced space centered H ^ (l,U/L) and also the results of
the research design point P*.
The reliability index is found β ¼ 1:03, corresponding
to a probability of failure of the truss estimated at
Pf ¼ Φð – βÞ ¼ 15:15%, where reliability of 84.85%.
In the following we proceed to another method;
combining between the laws of continuous random
variables with the aim of as close as possible the real
probability distributions of random variables used in this
example, it is retained for seven case of combining the
distribution law mean X standard deviation X
0.589735 0.34098745
lognormal 0.0016639 0.00179006
 Karim BENYAHI et al. Nonlinear analysis and reliability of metallic truss structures 591

Table 6 Results of the mechanical reliability analysis

reliability index probability of failure direction cosine (α1 ,α2 ) design point (U1, U2) design point (X1, X2)
1.0300 0.1515 ( – 0.2794, 0.9601) (0.2878, – 0.9889) (0.3622, 0.000639)

Table 7 The different case laws of distributions of random variables

distribution law
variables
case 1 case 2 case 3 case 4 case 5 case 6 case 7
λ normal lognormal exponential exponential exponential lognormal lognormal
U/L normal lognormal exponential lognormal normal normal exponential

Fig. 21 Limit state approached different cases in the reduced

centered space

found by using the laws of different distributions (cases 4,

Fig. 20 Absolute value of the cosine directors of random
variables (l,U/L)
distribution laws. The seven cases selected random
variables are shown in Table 7 and approached their limit
state (response surface) in the reduced space centered H^ (l,
U/L) are shown in Fig. 21.
After analysis by a coupling mechanical-reliability
seven cases of combination between the continuous
random variables laws, the HL-RF method allowed us to
obtain the following results (Table 8):
It is observed for the different selected random variables
using the same distribution law (cases 1, 2, 3) obtain with
much smaller reliability index that all reliability index
5, 6, 7). Therefore, there is a gap between the failure
probability of the random variables in the same distribution
laws (cases 1, 2, 3) and the failure probability of the
random variables in different distribution laws (cases 4, 5,
6, 7). In reality, the random variables may not follow all the
same law.
There is also the case 4 gives the greatest reliability
index β ¼ 1:03, where a reliability of 84.85%, which
confirms the validity of the first method for estimating
probability distributions that can approximate the real
statistical law of the random variable.
In our study, we found that continuous and independent
random variables, when in reality it is still not the case for
all systems.

Table 8 Results of the mechanical reliability analysis for the various cases treated
case reliability index probability of failure direction cosine (α1 ,α2 ) design point (U1, U2) design point (X1, X2)
case 1 0.3385 0.3674 ( – 0.4174, 0.9086) (0.1413, – 0.3076) (0.6942, 0.0014)
case 2 0.2506 0.4010 ( – 0.5398, 0.8417) (0.1353, – 0.2109) (0.6406, 0.0012)
case 3 0.2360 0.4067 (0.2460, – 0.9692) ( – 0.0580, 0.2287) (0.226, 0.00033)
case 4 1.0300 0.1515 ( – 0.2794, 0.9601) (0.2878, – 0.9889) (0.362, 0.00063)
case 5 0.7535 0.2255 ( – 0.2558, 0.9667) (0.1928, – 0.7283) (0.6811, 0.0013)
case 6 0.4710 0.3188 ( – 0.2491, 0.9684) (0.1173, – 0.4561) (0.7426, 0.0014)
case 7 0.4364 0.3312 (0.4279, – 0.9037) ( – 0.1867, 0.3944) (0.476, 0.00077)
592 Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 2018, 12(4): 577–593
5 Conclusion
Steel real behavior laws are used in this present study to
treat the structures non-linear calculation. This calculation
gives best estimates the real displacement of structures.
The formulation proposed for a bar element, in the case
of steel truss, and its implementation allowed to treat the
nonlinear material analysis of truss structures under
increasing monotonic loading until failure.
Finally, we addressed the reliability problems on some
examples to estimate their reliability index and determine
their failure probability. The results obtained by combina-
tion of the continuous random variables laws show that the
method for estimating probability distributions used in the
first approach approximate correctly the real statistical
distribution of the random variable.
The reliability model coupled to the mechanical model
applied to the truss structures; assess the reliability index
relating to the ruins of mechanical systems with nonlinear
behavior and not normal variables.
Notations
Ea: Young modulus of steel,
εe : Steel yielding strain,
e : Steel yielding stress,
εu : Steel ultimate strain,
εx : Strain in the gravity center of the total area caused by the normal force N,
{Fmn}: Contribution caused by the concrete and / or metal profile,
Sm: The metal profile’s cross-section.
Em (y,z): The longitudinal elastic modulus at a current point of the metal
profile cross-section.
Δm ðy,zÞ: Normal stress in a current point of the metal profile,
[kmn]: Section stiffness matrix,
{Fsn}: Vector of the sections normal forces,
e: Element length increase,
L0: Element initial length,
L: Element length after deformation,
[B]: Geometric transformation matrix,
[KL]: Element stiffness matrix in the local coordinate,
[R0]: Geometric transformation matrix,
[KX]: Element stiffness matrix in the absolute coordinates,
[KN]: Bar element’s stiffness matrix in the intrinsic system coordinate.
[KU]: Element Stiffness matrix in the intermediate local coordinate system,
{FX}: The nodes load vector in the absolute system coordinate,
{SX}: The nodes displacements vector in the absolute coordinate system,
[FL]: The nodes load in the local coordinate system.
[SL]: The nodes displacements vector in the local system coordinate.
[FU]: The nodes loads vector in the intermediate system coordinate.
[SU]: The nodes displacements vector in the intermediate system coordinate.
ui, vi, wi : Components of the displacement vector in the local coordinate
system,
½S S i – 1 : Sections flexibility matrix of the iteration (i-1),
εs : Strains balanced in the previous step,
fΔF s gr : Forces increase in the step r,
fΔεg0 : Initial strains increase,
[K]i: Structure stiffness matrix at the iteration (i),
{Us}: Node displacement vector at the latest stable step,
fΔPgr : Applied load increase in the r step,
{P}: External structures applied loads,
{Pint}: Internal structures applied loads,
Φ: The normal law distribution function reduced centered (mean 0 and
standard deviation 1),
mR: Means strength,
mS : Means loads,
R : Standard deviations of the strength,
S : Standard deviations of the loads,
P*: Point of the most probable failure,
αðkÞ : Vector cosine directors.
References
1. Yaghmai S. Incremental analysis of large deformations in mechanics
of solids with applications to axisymmetric sheus of revolution.
Technical Report SESM 68–17, Univ. Califorma, Berkeley, 1968
2. Grelat A. Nonlinear analysis of reinforced concrete hyperstatics
frames, Doctoral thesis Engineer. University Paris VI, 1978
3. Grelat A. Non-linear behavior and stability of reinforced concrete
frames, Annals of I.T.B.T.P., N° 234, 1978, France
4. Sargin M. Stress-Strain relationship for concrete and the analysis of
structural concrete sections. Solid Mechanics division, University
of waterloo, Canada, 1971
5. Rabah O N. Numerical simulation of nonlinear behavior of frames
Space, Doctoral Thesis. Central School of Paris, France, 1990
6. Robert F. Contribution to the geometric and material nonlinear
analysis of space frames in civil engineering, application to
structures, Doctoral Thesis. National Applied Sciences Institute,
Lyon, France, 1999
7. Espion B. Contribution to the nonlinear analysis of plane frames.
Application to reinforced concrete structures, Doctoral Thesis in
Applied Science, vol. 1 and 2. Free University of Brussels, Belgium,
1986
8. Machacek J, Charvat M. Design of Shear Connection between Steel
Truss and Concrete Slab. Structures and Techniques, 2013, 57:
722–729
9. Feng R, Chen Y, Gao S, Zhang W. Numerical investigation of
concrete-filled multi-planar CHS Inverse-Triangular tubular truss.
Thin-walled Structures, 2015, 94: 23–37
10. Adjrad A, Kachi M S, Bouafia Y, Iguetoulène F. Nonlinear
modeling structures on 3D, In: Proc. 4th Annu.icsaam 2011.
Structural Analysis of Advanced Materials, Romania, pp. 1-9, 2011
11. Kachi M S. Modeling the behavior until rupture beams with external
 Karim BENYAHI et al. Nonlinear analysis and reliability of metallic truss structures
prestressing, Doctoral Thesis. University of Tizi-Ouzou, Algeria,
2006
12. Ravindra M K, Lind N C, Siu W. Illustration of reliability-based
design. Journal of the Structural Division, 1974, 100(9): 1789–
1811
13. Karamchandani A, Cornell C. Sensitivity estimation within first and
second order reliability methods. Structural Safety, 1992, 11(2): 95–
107
14. Vu-Bac N, Lahmer T, Keitel H, Zhao J, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T.
Stochastic predictions of bulk properties of amorphous polyethylene
based on molecular dynamics simulations. Mechanics of Materials,
2014, 68: 70–84
15. Vu-Bac N, Lahmer T, Zhang Y, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. Stochastic
predictions of interfacial characteristic of polymeric nanocompo-
sites (PNCs). Composites. Part B, Engineering, 2014, 59: 80–95
16. Vu-Bac N, Silani M, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. A unified
framework for stochastic predictions of mechanical properties of
polymeric nanocomposites. Computational Materials Science, 2015,
96: 520–535
17. Vu-Bac N, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Nguyen-Thoi T, Rabczuk T. A
software framework for probabilistic sensitivity analysis for
computationally expensive models. Advances in Engineering Soft-
ware, 2016, 100: 19–31
18. Vu-Bac N, Rafiee R, Zhuang X, Lahmer T Uncertainty quantifica-
tion for multiscale modeling of polymer nanocomposites with
correlated parameters. Composites. Part B, Engineering, 2015, 68:
446–464
19. Crisfield M A. Non-linear Finite Element Analysis of Solids and
Structures – Vol 1. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Chichester, England,
1991
20. Crisfield M A. Non-linear Finite Element Analysis of Solids and
Structures – Vol 2. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Chichester, England,
593
1997
21. Carlos A. Felippa. Nonlinear finite element methods. University of
Colorado Boulder, Colorado 80309-0429, USA, 2001
22. Liu G R, Quek S S. The Finite Element Method: A Practical Course,
Butterworth-Heinemann. Elsevier Science Ltd., 2003
23. Fish J, Belytschko T. A First Course in Finite Elements. John Wiley
& Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex
PO19 8SQ. England, 2007
24. Greco M, Venturini W S. Stability analysis of three-dimensional
trusses. Latin American Journal of Solids and Structures, 2006, 3:
325–344
25. Lemaire M.Probabilistic approach to dimensioning: Modeling
uncertainty and approximation methods, Technical editions engi-
neering, 2012
26. Deheeger F. Reliability-mechanical coupling: SMART- Statistical
learning methodology in reliability, Doctoral Thesis. University
BLAISE PASCAL- Clermont II, 2008
27. Pendola M, Mohamed A, Hornet P, Lemaire M. Structural reliability
in context of uncertainty Statistics, XV mechanics French Congress,
Nancy, 3-7, 2001
28. Köylüolu H U, Nielsen S R K. New approximations for SORM
integrals. Structural Safety, 1994, 13(4): 235–246
29. Low B K. FORM, SORM, and spatial modeling in geotechnical
engineering. Structural Safety, 2014, 49: 56–64
30. Lemaire M. Structural reliability: static reliability-mechanical
coupling. Editions Hermes Lavoisier, Paris, 2005
31. Sun X, Chan S L. Design and second-order analysis of trusses
composed of angle sections. International Journal of Structural
Stability and Dynamics, 2002, 02(03): 315–334
32. Kim S E, Park M H, Choi S H. Practical advanced analysis and
design of three-dimensional truss bridges. Journal of Constructional
Steel Research, 2001, 57(8): 907–923