{"title":"Application of the Rosenblatt transformation in First-Order System Reliability approximations","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.strusafe.2024.102521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The reliability assessment of structural systems presents a significant challenge in structural engineering. A commonly employed approximation is the First-Order System Reliability Method (FOSRM), which estimates system reliability using the FORM component reliabilities and sensitivity factors. An essential step in FORM involves transforming the random vector <span><math><mi>X</mi></math></span> into the standard vector <span><math><mi>U</mi></math></span>, often using the Rosenblatt transformation (RT). Several studies demonstrated that different conditioning orders in the RT yield different FORM component results. This study investigates how these differences on component level propagate into the FOSRM system level. We conducted several typical engineering case studies with various failure probabilities, system sizes, and dependency structures (Gaussian and Frank Copula). For the Frank Copula, different Rosenblatt conditioning orders systematically yielded different FOSRM results, with most cases showing differences between 10% and 30% in estimated failure probability. For some systems, these differences increased with system size, suggesting that greater variations might be observed for larger systems. Notably, systems with Gaussian Copula functions also proved vulnerable to the Rosenblatt conditioning order when different components were assessed with different conditioning orders. The observed differences were larger than previously reported and should be carefully considered in uniform safety assessments.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":21978,"journal":{"name":"Structural Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167473024000924/pdfft?md5=b4507d4cb5d4385894a28e828f5bc5ee&pid=1-s2.0-S0167473024000924-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Structural Safety","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167473024000924","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The reliability assessment of structural systems presents a significant challenge in structural engineering. A commonly employed approximation is the First-Order System Reliability Method (FOSRM), which estimates system reliability using the FORM component reliabilities and sensitivity factors. An essential step in FORM involves transforming the random vector into the standard vector , often using the Rosenblatt transformation (RT). Several studies demonstrated that different conditioning orders in the RT yield different FORM component results. This study investigates how these differences on component level propagate into the FOSRM system level. We conducted several typical engineering case studies with various failure probabilities, system sizes, and dependency structures (Gaussian and Frank Copula). For the Frank Copula, different Rosenblatt conditioning orders systematically yielded different FOSRM results, with most cases showing differences between 10% and 30% in estimated failure probability. For some systems, these differences increased with system size, suggesting that greater variations might be observed for larger systems. Notably, systems with Gaussian Copula functions also proved vulnerable to the Rosenblatt conditioning order when different components were assessed with different conditioning orders. The observed differences were larger than previously reported and should be carefully considered in uniform safety assessments.
期刊介绍:
Structural Safety is an international journal devoted to integrated risk assessment for a wide range of constructed facilities such as buildings, bridges, earth structures, offshore facilities, dams, lifelines and nuclear structural systems. Its purpose is to foster communication about risk and reliability among technical disciplines involved in design and construction, and to enhance the use of risk management in the constructed environment