SpringerLink
Log in

Probabilistic risk assessment for the construction phases of a PSC box girder railway bridge system with six sigma methodology

  • Published:
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering Aims and scope

Abstract

Currently the control of prestressing force and cracks on concrete structures is designed deterministically. However, the statistical variations of materials could make additional error in the prediction and the control of errors. Therefore, to develop a probabilistic risk assessment technique in Prestressed Concrete (PSC) box girder railway bridges, the important random variables are determined by an Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method for the risk assessment of the target PSC box girder bridge constructed by a Movable Scaffolding System (MSS) method. The limit state functions are determined to investigate the risk of tensile cracks in upper and lower flange concrete, just after the moving of scaffolding, and the risks of the prestressing loss at each construction stage. In order to compose the implicit limit state function of the target PSC railway bridge, the developed linear adaptive weighted response surface method combined with a first order second moment method is applied for the evaluation of reliabilities of the considered limit states.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Canada)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ACI 318-02 (2002). Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary, American Concrete Institute.

  • Andrieu, C., Djurich, P. M., and Doucet, A. (2001). “Model selection by MCMC computation.” Signal Processing, Vol. 81, No. 1, pp. 19–37.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, M. and Papadrakakis, S. G. (2002). “Stochastic finite element analysis of shells, Comput.” Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., Vol. 191, No. 2, pp. 4781–4804.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bazant, Z. P. and Baweja, S. (1995). “Justification and refinement of model B3 for concrete creep and shrinkage-1.” Statistics and Sensitivity, Mater Struct; Vol. 28, No. 181, pp. 415–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Box, G. E. P. and Wilson, K. B. (1951). “On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions.” Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Vol. B13, No. 1, pp. 1–45.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bucher, C. G. and Bourgund, U. A. (1990). “Fast and efficient response surface approach for structural reliability problems.” Structural Safety, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 57–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, J. and Druzdzel, M. J. (2000). “An adaptive importance sampling algorithm for evidential reasoning in large bayesian networks.” Journal of Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 155–188.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, T. (2007). “Prediction of cyclic freeze-thaw damage in concrete structures based upon response surface method.” Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 2031–2040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, T., Kim, T. S., Kyung, K. S., and Hwang, Y. K. (2010). “Fatigue reliability analysis for the crack propagation compared with LRFD specification.” International Journal of Steel Structures, Vol 10, No 1, pp. 35–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deodatis, G. and Shinozuka, M. (1991). “The weighted integral method, II: Response variability and reliability.” J. Engng. Mech., Vol. 117, No. 8, pp. 1865–1877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engelund, S. and Rackwitz, R. (1993). “A benchmark study on importance sampling techniques in structural reliability.” Structural Safety, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 255–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishman, G. and Monte Carlo. (1995). Concepts, algorithms, and applications, Springer-Verlag.

  • Ghanem, R.-G. and Spanos, P.-D. (1991). Stochastic finite elements-a spectral approach, Berlin: Springer.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbertson, C. G. and Ahlborn, T. M. (2004). “A probabilistic comparison of prestress loss methods in prestressed concrete beams.” PCI Journal, Vol. JL04, No. 5, pp. 52–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guan, X. L. and Melchers, R. E. (2001). “Effect of response surface parameters variation on structural reliability estimates.” Structural Safety, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 429–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hisada, T. and Nakagiri, S. (1985). “Role of stochastic finite element method in structural safety and reliability.” Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Structural Safety and Reliability, ICOSSAR’ 85, pp. 385–395.

  • Kaymaza, I. and McMahonb, C. A. (2005). “A response surface method based on weighted regression for structural reliability analysis.” Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 11–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S. and Na, S. (1997). “Response surface method using vector projected sampling points.” Struct Safety, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. H. and Kwak, B. M. (2006). “Response surface augmented moment method for efficient reliability analysis.” Structural Safety, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 261–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minasny, B. and McBratney, A. B. (2006) “A conditioned Latin hypercube method for sampling in the presence of ancillary information.” Computers & Geoscience, Vol. 32, No. 9, pp. 1378–1388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Modjeski and Masters, Inc. (2003). Comprehensive design example for Prestressed Concrete (PSC) girder superstructure bridge with commentary, Design Step 5 Design of Superstructure.

  • Novák, D. and Lehký, D. (2006). “ANN inverse analysis based on stochastic small-sample training set simulation.” Engineer- ing Applications of Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 19, No. 7, pp. 731–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, A. S. and Cho, T. (2007). “Prediction of the combination of failure modes for an arch bridge system.” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 63, No. 12, pp. 1561–1569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papadrakakis, M. and Papadopoulos, V. (1996). “Robust and efficient methods for stochastic finite element analysis using Monte Carlo simulation.” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., Vol. 134, No. 3–4, pp. 325–340.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rackwitz, R. and Fiessler, B. (1978). “Structural reliability under combined random load sequences.” Computers and Structures, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 489–494.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rajaschekhar, M. R. and Ellingwood, B. R. (1993). “A new look at the response surface approach for reliability analysis.” Structural Safety, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 205–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rangel-Ramírez, J. G. and Sørensen, J. D. (2008). “Optimal risk-based inspection planning for offshore wind turbines.” Int. J. of Steel Str., Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 295–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, J. S. (1996). “Markov chain convergence: From finite to infinite.” Stochastic Processes and their Applications, Vol. 62, No. 1, pp. 55–72.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process, New York, McGraw-Hill.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Schniederjans, M. J. and Garvin, T. (1997). “Using the analytic hierarchy process and multi-objective programming for the selection of cost drivers in activity based costing.” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 100, No. 1, pp. 72–80.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Schuëller, G. I., Pradlwarter, H. J., and Koutsourelakis, P. S. (2004). “A critical appraisal of reliability estimation procedures for high dimensions.” Probabilist. Engrg. Mech., Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 463–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sudret, B. and der Kiureghian, A. (2002). “Comparison of finite element reliability methods.” Probabilist. Engrg. Mech., Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 337–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takada, T. (1991). “Weighted integral method in stochastic finite element analysis.” Prob. Engng. Mech, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 146–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tartakovsky, D. M. and Xu, D. (2006). “Stochastic analysis of transport in tubes with rough walls.” J. Comput. Phys., Vol. 217, No. 1, pp. 248–259.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • William, G. C. (1997). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.), John Wiley & Sons.

  • Yang, I. H. (2005). “Uncertainty and updating of long-term prediction of prestress forces in PSC box girder bridges.” Computers and Structures, Vol. 83, No. 25–26, pp. 2137–2149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Civil Engineering, Dae** University, Pocheon, 487-711, Korea

    Taejun Cho, Jeong-Bae Lee & Seong-Soo Kim

Authors
  1. Taejun Cho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeong-Bae Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Seong-Soo Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Taejun Cho.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cho, T., Lee, JB. & Kim, SS. Probabilistic risk assessment for the construction phases of a PSC box girder railway bridge system with six sigma methodology. KSCE J Civ Eng 15, 119–130 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-011-0675-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-011-0675-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation