首页> 外文OA文献 >Methods of Reliability Analysis for Marine Structures
【2h】

Methods of Reliability Analysis for Marine Structures

机译:海洋结构可靠性分析方法

摘要

Analytical solutions of structural reliability problems are often tedious or impossibleto obtain. The task is further complicated when the safety margin,i.e. the relation between variables and response, is implicit. Such is the casefor many practical problems, where structural response is obtained from finiteelement models and/or by semi-analytical equations. This thesis describes apractical approach to solution of such problems by response surface methods,i.e. ways of approximating the analytical safety margin by sampling at discretepoints. If each such sample is computationally demanding, it is necessary tolimit the number of sampling points without introducing unacceptable lackof-fit. Theoretically, once the response surface is given, an accurate approximationof failure probability can then be found by the Crude Monte Carlomethod. However, with low probabilities of failure and/or high dimensionality,this method becomes computationally unfeasible.Two response surface methods are tested for a stiffened panel, where the effectsof distribution types are investigated by comparing between more realisticmodels and corresponding gaussian approximations. The evaluations are performedfor a stiffened panel based on three different limit states; von-Misesstress in the plate along the midspan, axial capacity and a check according relevantclassification guidelines. For von-Mises stress and ultimate capacity limitstates, finite element software ABAQUS is used to sample the safety margin.The third is modelled from Det Norske Veritas recommended practice for bucklingof stiffened panels, corresponding to a check for plate side at midspan. Apurely quadratic response surface as suggested by Bucher and Buorgund [4],along with a hyperplane based on vector projection as suggested by Kim andNa [15] are employed. From the quadratic response surface, probability offailure is evaluated by Crude Monte Carlo, Importance Sampling and a FirstOrder Reliability method (FORM).The response surface obtained by vector projection yields similar results as thequadratic response surface in combination with simulation methods, but withsome deviations. These differences are generally larger for the non-gaussiancase than for the gaussian distributions. From the results, it can not be concludedwhether the differences are method-specific or caused by underlyingcalculations, e.g. variable transformations.Effects of probability distributions are important, and the results with all variablestaken from the gaussian distribution is highly conservative compared tousing more relevant probability densities.It is shown how the structural reliability problem can be solved for implicitlimit states in a sensible manner. The procedures shown are efficient from acomputational perspective, and the results from both approaches are equivalent.A difference between the two methods in terms of applicability is noted.The purely quadratic, "Bucher-Buorgund", response surface samples the safetymargin using two iterations with enough sampling points in each to uniquelydetermine the polynomial description, and simulations are used to find themost accurate probability of failure measure. The Vector Projection approachsamples the safety margin by continuously establishing a hyperplane approximationand shifting the sampling points until a convergence criteria is met. Theprobability of failure is evaluated simultaneously by FORM, which is highly efficientcompared to Monte Carlo. This leads to an unknown, potentially fairlylarge, number of safety margin samples but swift probability of failure calculations.If the results are considered equivalent, it can then be recommendedto use the Bucher-Buorgund approach for problems where the safety marginsamples are computationally demanding but the failure probabilities are moderate,whereas the Vector Projection approach is feasible for any probability offailure when the safety margin sampling is fast.The results in terms of failure probabilities are not thought of as directly applicableto design but are deemed valid in the sence of highlighting some importantconsiderations and show the essence of solving similar problems. A validstarting point for further analysis and design purposes would be to extend themodel with respect to boundary conditions, imperfections and an increasednumber of basic variables along with correlation effects.
机译:结构可靠性问题的解析解通常很乏味或无法获得。当安全裕度即变量与响应之间的关系是隐式的。许多实际问题就是这种情况,其中结构响应是从有限元模型和/或通过半解析方程获得的。本文描述了一种实用的方法来解决这些问题,通过响应面法,即。通过在离散点采样来近似分析安全裕度的方法。如果每个这样的样本在计算上都需要,则有必要限制采样点的数量而又不引入不可接受的拟合不足。从理论上讲,一旦给出了响应面,就可以通过蒙特卡洛方法来找到失效概率的精确近似值。但是,由于失效概率低和/或维数高,该方法在计算上变得不可行。对于刚性面板,测试了两种响应面方法,其中通过比较实际模型和相应的高斯近似值来研究分布类型的影响。根据三个不同的极限状态对加劲板进行评估。沿中跨的板中的von-Misesstress,轴向承载力并根据相关分类指南进行检查。对于von-Mises应力和极限承载力极限状态,使用有限元软件ABAQUS进行安全裕度采样。第三种方法是根据Det Norske Veritas建议的加劲板屈曲做法进行的,对应于检查中跨板侧。如Bucher和Buorgund [4]所建议的那样,适当的二次响应面,以及如Kim和Na [15]所建议的基于矢量投影的超平面。从二次响应面,通过Crude Monte Carlo,重要性抽样和一阶可靠性方法(FORM)评估概率失效,通过矢量投影获得的响应面与二次响应面结合模拟方法产生的结果相似,但有一些偏差。对于非高斯实例,这些差异通常大于对高斯分布的差异。从结果中不能得出结论,无论差异是特定于方法的还是由基础计算引起的,例如概率分布的影响很重要,并且与使用更多相关的概率密度相比,从高斯分布获取的所有变量的结果都非常保守。这表明了如何以合理的方式解决隐式极限状态的结构可靠性问题。从计算的角度来看,显示的过程是有效的,并且两种方法的结果都相同。在适用性方面,注意到两种方法之间的差异。纯二次“ Bucher-Buorgund”响应面使用两次迭代对安全边距进行采样每个采样点都有足够的采样点来唯一确定多项式描述,并且使用仿真来找到最准确的故障度量概率。矢量投影方法通过连续建立超平面近似并移动采样点直到满足收敛标准来对安全裕度进行采样。通过FORM可以同时评估故障的可能性,与蒙特卡洛相比,它是高效的。这会导致未知的,可能相当大的安全裕量样本数量,但是计算失败的机率很快。如果结果被认为是等效的,那么建议对安全裕度样本在计算上要求很高但又需要安全裕量样本的问题使用Bucher-Buorgund方法。故障概率中等,而当安全裕度采样速度快时,矢量投影方法对于任何概率故障都是可行的。关于故障概率的结果并不认为直接适用于设计,但在强调一些重要注意事项时被认为是有效的并显示解决类似问题的实质。进行进一步分析和设计目的一个有效的出发点将是关于边界条件,缺陷和基本变量数量的增加以及相关效应来扩展模型。

著录项

  • 作者

    Larsson David;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2015
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号