Abstract
AbstractStructural design standards provide the foundation of good engineering practice and a framework for addressing safety and serviceability issues rationally. Structural reliability methods provide the tools for managing uncertainties in modern codified structural design. Current probability‐based structural codes are based on performance measures expressed as notional reliabilities of structural components. These notional reliabilities, encapsulated in reliability indices, were obtained by calibrating the proposed codes to traditional practice rather than from quantitative risk analysis. Because the reliability estimates are based on models of real systems, they may not correspond to historical failure rates, and therefore confound the process of risk communication among structural engineers, building or regulatory officials, and the public. The research and professional engineering communities must work together to confront future challenges arising from new trends in structural engineering practice towards tailoring building design to performance expectations of the building owners, occupants and the public. In this context, the prospects of basing future codes on a quantitative acceptable risk measure warrant further examination.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
