Safety factors for the structural design of glass

Abstract The safety verification of glass structures is usually made on the basis of a deterministic approach, without assessing the underlying probability of collapse. In this article, we propose to use the semi- probabilistic method in the limit-state design of glass structures by presenting properly-calibrated values of the partial safety factors of material strength, so as to obtain a probability of failure compatible with the target values indicated for each class of consequence by Eurocode 1 (EN 1990). Starting from a micromechanically-motivated model of fracture propagation, typically used for brittle materials, experimental results conducted in a previous campaign have been interpreted using the Weibull statistical distribution, taking into account that size-effect, type of stress (e.g., uniaxial vs. bi-axial) and the insidious phenomenon of subcritical crack growth (static fatigue due to fracture growth in time without increase of load) can affect the probability of failure. Actions like wind, snow and live (anthropic) loads have been modeled using the statistical distributions recommended in international structural codes. Then, the probabilistic method of level III has been applied for the verification of paradigmatic case studies, which have served to calibrate the partial safety factors to be used in the semi-probabilistic approach. A novelty, to our knowledge, is the proposal of a multiplication coefficient for the partial safety factor of material strength, instead that for the factors of loads, to distinguish in the verification the different classes of consequences, each one characterized by the probability threshold of collapse. The results of this study will furnish the basis for the design of glass structures according to the general performance requirements established by EN 1990.

[1]  Y. Murakami Stress Intensity Factors Handbook , 2006 .

[2]  Gianni Royer-Carfagni,et al.  Fail-safe point fixing of structural glass. New advances , 2009 .

[3]  Dimitris Diamantidis,et al.  The Joint Committee on Structural Safety (JCSS) Probabilistic Model Code for New and Existing Structures , 1999 .

[4]  S. Wiederhorn,et al.  Stress Corrosion and Static Fatigue of Glass , 1970 .

[5]  L. Collini,et al.  Flexural strength of glass–ceramic for structural applications , 2014 .

[6]  Ö. Bucak,et al.  Glas im Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau , 2014 .

[7]  L. Galuppi,et al.  The effective thickness of laminated glass: Inconsistency of the formulation in a proposal of EN-standards , 2013 .

[8]  G. Rosati,et al.  Progressive damage and fracture of laminated glass beams , 2010 .

[9]  J. Gyekenyesi,et al.  Slow crack growth of brittle materials with exponential crack velocity under cyclic fatigue loading , 2006 .

[10]  Sheldon M. Wiederhorn,et al.  Fracture Surface Energy of Glass , 1969 .

[11]  Niels C. Lind,et al.  Methods of structural safety , 2006 .

[12]  Anthony G. Evans,et al.  A General Approach for the Statistical Analysis of Multiaxial Fracture , 1978 .

[13]  Brian R. Lawn,et al.  Crack velocity functions and thresholds in brittle solids , 1990 .

[14]  Anthony G. Evans,et al.  A method for evaluating the time-dependent failure characteristics of brittle materials — and its application to polycrystalline alumina , 1972 .

[15]  Angelika Brückner-Foit,et al.  Discrimination of multiaxiality criteria using brittle fracture loci , 1996 .

[16]  H. L. Heinisch,et al.  Weakest Link Theory Reformulated for Arbitrary Fracture Criterion , 1978 .

[17]  Dinesh K. Shetty,et al.  Equivalence of physically based statistical fracture theories for reliability analysis of ceramics in multiaxial loading , 1990 .

[18]  Errol B. Shand Fracture Velocity and Fracture Energy of Glass in the Fatigue Range , 1961 .

[19]  Theo Fett,et al.  Ceramics: Mechanical Properties, Failure Behaviour, Materials Selection , 1999 .