Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of robustness of structures: Current state of research

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The concept of structural robustness and relevant design guidelines have been in existence in the progressive collapse literature since the 1970s following the partial collapse of the Ronan Point apartment building; however, in the more general context, research on the evaluation and enhancement of structural robustness is still relatively limited. This paper is aimed to provide a general overview of the current state of research concerning structural robustness. The focus is placed on the quantification and the associated evaluation methodologies, rather than specific measures to ensure prescriptive robustness requirements. Some associated concepts, such as redundancy and vulnerability, will be discussed and interpreted in the general context of robustness such that the corresponding methodologies can be compared quantitatively using a comparable scale. A framework methodology proposed by the authors is also introduced in line with the discussion of the literature.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. BS EN 1991-1-7:2006: Eurocode 1: Actions on structures — Part 1–7: General actions: Accidental actions. London: British Standards Institute (BSI), 2006

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bontempi F, Giuliani L, Gkoumas K. Handling the exceptions: Robustness assessment of a complex structural system. In Structural Engineering, Mechanics and Computation 3, 2007, 1747–1752

    Google Scholar 

  3. General Services Administration (GSA). Progressive Collapse Analysis and Design Guidelines for New Federal Office Buildings and Major Modernisation Projects. Washington D C, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  4. Slotine J, Li W. Applied Nonlinear Control. Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice Hall, 1991

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Beeby A W. Safety of structures, and a new approach to robustness. Structural Engineer, 1999, 77(4): 16–21

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lind N. A measure of vulnerability and damage tolerance. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 1995, 48(1): 1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Augusti G, Borri C, Niemann H J. Is Aeolian risk as significant as other environmental risks? Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2001, 74(3): 227–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hendawi S, Frangopol D M. System reliability and redundancy in structural design and evaluation. Structural Safety, 1994, 16(1–2): 47–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ellingwood B, Leyendecker E. Approaches for design against progressive collapse. Journal of the Structural Division, 1978, 104(3): 413–423

    Google Scholar 

  10. Agarwal J, Blockley D, Woodman N. Vulnerability of structural systems. Structural Safety, 2003, 25(3): 263–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Baker J, Schubert M, Faber M. On the assessment of robustness. Structural Safety, 2008, 30(3): 253–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Risk Assessment in Engineering. Principles, System Representation and Risk Criteria. Zurich: Joint Committee on Structural Safety (JCSS), 2008

  13. Bertero R, Bertero V. Redundancy in Earthquake-Resistant Design. Journal of Structural Engineering, 1999, 125(1): 81–88

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Ghosn M, Moses F. NCHRP Report 406: Redundancy in Highway Bridge Superstructures. Washington D C: Transportation Research Board, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  15. Connor R, Dexter R, Mahmoud H. NCHRP Synthesis 354: Inspection and Management of Bridges with Fracture-Critical Details. Washington D C: Transportation Research Board, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  16. Frangopol D, Curley J. Effects of damage and redundancy on structural reliability. Journal of Structural Engineering, 1987, 113(7): 1533–1549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sebastian W. Collapse considerations and electrical analogies for statically indeterminate structures. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2004, 130(10): 1445–1453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Agarwal J, Blockley D, Woodman N. Vulnerability of 3-dimensional trusses. Structural Safety, 2001, 23(3): 203–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ghosn M, Moses F, Frangopol D M. Redundancy and robustness of highway bridge superstructures and substructures. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 2010, 6(1): 257–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Schafer B, Bajpai P. Stability degradation and redundancy in damaged structures. Engineering Structures, 2005, 27(11): 1642–1651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ellingwood B R, Dusenberry D O. Building design for abnormal loads and progressive collapse. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 2005, 20(3): 194–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Starossek U, Haberland M. Measures of Structural Robustness—Requirements & Applications. In Proceedings of the Structures Congress. Reston, ASCE, 2008, 1–10

    Google Scholar 

  23. Decò A, Frangopol D. Risk assessment of highway bridges under multiple hazards. Journal of Risk Research, 2011, 14(9): 1057–1089

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lu Z, Yu Y, Woodman N J, Blockley D I. A theory of structural vulnerability. Structural Engineer, 1999, 77(18): 17–24

    Google Scholar 

  25. Smith J W. Energy approach to assessing corrosion damaged structures. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Structures and Buildings, 2003, 156(2): 121–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Nafday A M. System safety performance metrics for skeletal structures. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2008, 134(3): 499–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Starossek U, Haberland M. Evaluating Measures of Structural Robustness. In: Proceedings of the Structures Congress. Reston, ASCE, 2009, 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pinto J T, Blockley D I, Woodman N J. The risk of vulnerable failure. Structural Safety, 2002, 24(2–4): 107–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Starossek U, Haberland M. Approaches to measures of structural robustness. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 2011, 7(7–8): 625–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Arup. Review of International Research on Structural Robustness and Disproportionate Collapse. London: Department for Communities and Local Government, 2011

    Google Scholar 

  31. England J, Agarwal J. Recent developments in robustness and relation with risk. In: Proceedings of the ICE-Structures and Buildings. 2008, 161(4): 183–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Brett C, Lu Y. Developing a quantitative approach for assessment of structural robustness against collapse. In: Forde M C, ed. Structural Faults & Repair. Edinburgh: Engineering Technics Press, 2012

    Google Scholar 

  33. Wisniewski D, Casas J R, Ghosn M. Load capacity evaluation of existing railway bridges based on robustness quantification. Structural Engineering International, 2006, 16(2): 161–166

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Frangopol D, Nakib R. Redundancy in highway bridges. English Journal, 1991, 28(1): 45–50

    Google Scholar 

  35. Frangopol D, Iizuka M, Yoshida K. Redundancy measures for design and evaluation of structural systems. Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, 1992, 114(4): 285–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Frangopol D, Klisinski M. Weight-strength-redundancy interaction in optimum design of three-dimensional. Computers & Structures, 1989, 31(5): 775–787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Starossek U. Typology of progressive collapse. Engineering Structures, 2007, 29(9): 2302–2307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. BS 5950-1:2000: Structural use of steelwork in buildings-Part 1: Code of practice for design-Rolled and welded sections. London: British Standards Institute (BSI), 2001

    Google Scholar 

  39. The Building (Fifth Amendment) Regulations, 1970 (S.I. 1970/109)

  40. The Building Regulations. Approved Document A: Structure. A3 — Disproportionate Collapse. 1985 edition. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office (HMSO), 1985

    Google Scholar 

  41. UFC 4-023-03: Design of Buildings to Resist Progressive Collapse. Washington D C: Department of Defence (DOD), 2005

    Google Scholar 

  42. ASCE Standard No. 7-05: Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2005

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Infrastructure and Environment, School of Engineering, the University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH8 9YL, UK

    Colin Brett & Yong Lu

Authors
  1. Colin Brett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yong Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yong Lu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brett, C., Lu, Y. Assessment of robustness of structures: Current state of research. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 7, 356–368 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-013-0220-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-013-0220-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation