2017
DOI: 10.1002/best.201700019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Zuverlässigkeit schlanker Betonstützen

Abstract: In diesem Beitrag werden Berechnungen und vergleichende experimentelle Ergebnisse des Stabilitätsverlusts von schlanken Stahlbetonstützen aus einer Versuchsreihe präsentiert. Das primäre Ziel der Arbeit war der Vergleich der Bemessungsmethoden bei der Ermittlung der globalen Zuverlässigkeit schlanker Stahlbetonstützen. Der Schlankheitsgrad der Stützen betrug λ > 90, wobei die untersuchten Stützen nach EN 1992‐1‐1 dimensioniert wurden. Die oben erwähnten experimentellen Untersuchungen dienten zudem als Grundlag… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In a non-linear analysis of concrete structures, Sucharda et al [18] examined the behavior and performance of RC beams without shear reinforcement. For this purpose, the researcher used stochastic modelling (Valašík et al [19]; Strauss et al [20]; Wu, et al [21]). Kozielova et al [22] used Newton-Rapson method for modelling of interaction of a RC slab with subsoil.…”
Section: A C T E Dmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a non-linear analysis of concrete structures, Sucharda et al [18] examined the behavior and performance of RC beams without shear reinforcement. For this purpose, the researcher used stochastic modelling (Valašík et al [19]; Strauss et al [20]; Wu, et al [21]). Kozielova et al [22] used Newton-Rapson method for modelling of interaction of a RC slab with subsoil.…”
Section: A C T E Dmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a further step, the reliability and the sensitivity analyses were also performed for the N-M gradients with respect to the associated I-Ds by using the non-linear finite element (NLFEM) elaborations [3,32]. These probabilistic NLFEM studies, as allowed in EN 1992-1-1 [8], also primarily served to evaluate the proposed safety factors for NLFEM considerations [33].…”
Section: Reliability Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All of the variables shown in Equation ( 9) on the right are basic variables which are described using PDFs. Depending on the analysis method, e.g., (a) based on the analytical formulation of the code regulations or (b) based on the NLFEM studies, the resistance side (K R • R) in Equation ( 9) corresponds to the interaction diagram (I-D) which corresponds to the function of the maximum permissible N-M values, while the action side (K E •(g + q)) of Equation ( 9) corresponds to the acting N-M load path so that the intersection of the N-M load path with the I-D characterizes the maximum permissible N-M values; further details can also be found in [33,34]. Both strategies have it in common that the model uncertainties are taken into account in determining the necessary partial safety factors.…”
Section: Probabilistic Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nonlinear calculations were compared with a series of experimentally verified slender columns. 4,[6][7][8][9] State of the Art "Design of Slender Columns" EN 1992-1-1 10 includes the general method ( §5.8.6), the procedure with nominal stiffness ( §5.8.7) and the method with nominal curvatures ( §5.8.8) hence basically providing three verification methods for the design of slender compressive elements. We believe the results with these three methods should be compared with those proposed in this paper.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%