Krav på robusthet i prefabricerade betongkonstruktioner
(2013)Civil Engineering (M.Sc.Eng.)
Division of Structural Engineering
- Abstract
- The ability for a damaged structure to withstand progressive collapse is often referred to as robustness. A robust building is characterized by the fact that the consequence of local damage is never more severe than the initial event. The way in which structural robustness is approached in the design of a building differs a great deal from one structural engineer to another. For a structure in consequence class 2b or higher, Eurocode requires that at least one out of three alternatives (indirect method, direct method, key element) is applied. Guidance for when and how to apply each method is appalling or completely missing. In addition to this, there are two different parts of Eurocode (EN 1991-1-7 and EN 1992-1-1) treating the subject and... (More)
- The ability for a damaged structure to withstand progressive collapse is often referred to as robustness. A robust building is characterized by the fact that the consequence of local damage is never more severe than the initial event. The way in which structural robustness is approached in the design of a building differs a great deal from one structural engineer to another. For a structure in consequence class 2b or higher, Eurocode requires that at least one out of three alternatives (indirect method, direct method, key element) is applied. Guidance for when and how to apply each method is appalling or completely missing. In addition to this, there are two different parts of Eurocode (EN 1991-1-7 and EN 1992-1-1) treating the subject and for a given set of circumstances, result in different design tensile forces. It’s difficult to conclude which part of Eurocode and which set of equations to apply. This leads to a situation where each structural engineer has to make his own individual interpretation of the code. However, by researching, reasoning and by mapping arguments from structural engineers with varying academic backgrounds (structural engineering consultants, professors and PhD students) it’s possible to identify interpretations that are more rational than others. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/4461263
- author
- Nygårdh, Kristoffer and Niklewski, Jonas
- supervisor
- organization
- year
- 2013
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- progressive collapse, consequence class 2b, robustness, Eurocode, vertical tie, horizontal tie, alternative load-path, catenary action, prefabricated concrete
- report number
- TVBK-5224
- ISSN
- 0349-4969
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 4461263
- date added to LUP
- 2014-06-12 15:33:20
- date last changed
- 2014-06-12 15:33:20
@misc{4461263,
abstract = {{The ability for a damaged structure to withstand progressive collapse is often referred to as robustness. A robust building is characterized by the fact that the consequence of local damage is never more severe than the initial event. The way in which structural robustness is approached in the design of a building differs a great deal from one structural engineer to another. For a structure in consequence class 2b or higher, Eurocode requires that at least one out of three alternatives (indirect method, direct method, key element) is applied. Guidance for when and how to apply each method is appalling or completely missing. In addition to this, there are two different parts of Eurocode (EN 1991-1-7 and EN 1992-1-1) treating the subject and for a given set of circumstances, result in different design tensile forces. It’s difficult to conclude which part of Eurocode and which set of equations to apply. This leads to a situation where each structural engineer has to make his own individual interpretation of the code. However, by researching, reasoning and by mapping arguments from structural engineers with varying academic backgrounds (structural engineering consultants, professors and PhD students) it’s possible to identify interpretations that are more rational than others.}},
author = {{Nygårdh, Kristoffer and Niklewski, Jonas}},
issn = {{0349-4969}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Krav på robusthet i prefabricerade betongkonstruktioner}},
year = {{2013}},
}