Assessment of Variable Uncertainties for Reliability-Based Design of Foundations

Foye, K. C.; Salgado, Rodrigo; Scott, B.

doi:10.1061/(asce)1090-0241(2006)132:9(1197)

Cited by 65 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In foundation engineering, extensive RBD was performed by different researchers to evaluate performance of foundations, such as bearing capacity Srivastava and Babu, 2009;Most and Knabe, 2010;Phoon et al, 2003aPhoon et al, , 2003bLarkin, 2006;Foye et al, 2006aFoye et al, , 2006bBabu and Srivastava, 2007;, settlement (Duncan, 2000;Sivakugan and Johnson, 2004;Griffiths and Fenton, 2009;Akbas, 2007;Akbas and Kulhawy, 2009;USACE, 1999), and uplift (Phoon et al, 2003a(Phoon et al, , 2003b.…”

Section: Reliability-based Design Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of probabilistic methods to characterize soil variability and their effects on bearing capacity and settlement of shallow foundations: state of the art

Kayser

Gajan

2014

International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents the applications of probabilistic methods to analyze the load-displacement behavior of shallow foundations supported by uncertain and spatially variable soils. The paper describes the types and sources of uncertainties in soil properties that dictate the bearing capacity and settlement of shallow foundations and characterizes their probabilistic distributions. General probabilistic analysis methods that are commonly used in foundation engineering applications such as first order second moment (FOSM) method, tornado diagram method, Monte Carlo (MC) simulation method, random finite element method (RFEM), and reliability-based design (RBD) method are briefly described. A thorough summary of the applications of these methods in determining the probabilistic bearing capacity, settlement, and differential settlement of shallow foundations from the research literature is presented.

show abstract

Section: Reliability-based Design Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of probabilistic methods to characterize soil variability and their effects on bearing capacity and settlement of shallow foundations: state of the art

Kayser

Gajan

2014

International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reliability and probabilistic thinking for geostructural design (e.g., Freudenthal 1947, Kulhawy 2010) has found use in in many geotechnical design applications e.g., shallow foundation capacity (Phoon et al 2003a, 2003band Foye et al 2006a, 2006b), capacity of deep foundations (Zhang et al 2001), settlement of foundations (Akbas and Kulhawy 2009) and random-parameter finite-element methods (Schweiger 2001). If the probability of failure, which is the probability of failing to meet at least one performance requirement, is pf, then the reliability of the system is said to be rf where:…”

Section: Probability Of Failurementioning

confidence: 99%

Design of Geostructural Systems

Vardanega

Bolton

2016

ASCE-ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Eng. Syst., Part A: Civ. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper begins with an extensive review of the literature covering the development of design rules for geostructural systems, beginning with traditional global safety factors and developing through partial factors for loads and resistances, and then considering the use of mobilization factors to limit soil strains. The paper then aims to distinguish two possible functions for geotechnical factors: to compensate for the uncertainty regarding soil strength, and to limit soil deformations that could compromise the associated structure before the soil strength can be fully mobilized, whatever it is. At present, design procedures generally conflate and confuse ultimate limit state (ULS) checks and serviceability limit state (SLS) deformation checks. Furthermore, most geotechnical engineers wrongly associate ULS with soil failure rather than with structural failure. The paper addresses this fundamental confusion by advocating mobilizable strength design (MSD), which is based on assumed soil-structure deformation mechanisms rather than soil failure mechanisms. It is argued that designs using MSD can guard against damaging structural deformations, either small deformations giving SLS or large structural deformations that must be regarded as ULS even though the associated soil strength may not yet be fully mobilized. This distinction effectively challenges much of the previous literature on limit state design principles for geotechnical applications, even where probabilistic approaches have been proposed. Nevertheless, the paper is informed by the concepts and techniques of decision making under uncertainty, and the paper concludes by considering whether MSD can also be placed in a reliability framework.

show abstract

“…For a given set of testing data, t is sometimes defined as a "conservatively assessed mean (CAM)" [20]. Foye et al [21] proposed to use CAM with 80% exceedance, which is equivalent to t=0.84. These proposals were made in the development of North American practice [19].…”

Section: Concept Of Ratio Of Safety Margin (Rsm) and Formulations 21mentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative deterministic versus probability analyses based on a safety margin criterion

Chen

Li-hong

et al. 2014

Sci. China Technol. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes a new criterion called the ratio of safety margin (RSM) for use in the areas of the global factor of safety, reliability and limit states analyses with reference to their respective allowable criteria. An equation for calculating RSM based on the reliability index is formulated. Efforts for proving the applicability of this criterion include a theoretical demonstration in a simple one-variable case; an investigation on a test problem involving two random variables, followed by a slope stability study on a 156 m high embankment dam and an illustrative example presented in a EuroCode 7 guidebook. Calculation of the ratios of safety margin in the three areas provides a quantitative way to accommodate the analytical results within the same theoretical framework and makes the outcomes mutually comparable and supportive, which is much more enlightening than that would be the case by considering only one of them. Calculating RSMs for reliability and limit states methods has also helped solve the key issue concerning the uniqueness of the partial factors calibrated from a particular 'target case'.factor of safety, reliability index, partial factor, ratio of safety margin, embankment dam, reliability analysis Citation:Chen Z Y, Chen L H, Xu J C, et al. Quantitative deterministic versus probability analyses based on a safety margin criterion.

show abstract

Assessment of Variable Uncertainties for Reliability-Based Design of Foundations

Cited by 65 publications

References 16 publications

Application of probabilistic methods to characterize soil variability and their effects on bearing capacity and settlement of shallow foundations: state of the art

Application of probabilistic methods to characterize soil variability and their effects on bearing capacity and settlement of shallow foundations: state of the art

Design of Geostructural Systems

Quantitative deterministic versus probability analyses based on a safety margin criterion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About