Resilient Design Method for Improved Safety and Security of Structural Systems

• US 20130054200A1
• Filed: 05/10/2011
• Published: 02/28/2013
• Est. Priority Date: 05/10/2010
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Sena Kumarasena
• Original Assignee: Sena Kumarasena
• Inventors: Kumarasena, Sena
• Application Number:
  US13/697,023
• Publication Number:
  US 20130054200A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 703/1
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 2111/08 Probabilistic or stochastic CAD
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 30/13 Architectural design, e.g. computer-aided architectural design [CAAD] related to design of buildings, bridges, landscapes, production plants or roads

Abstract

In a resilient design method, input from a user (and possibly from a knowledge base and prototype designs) is accepted to establish functional, geometric and load criteria for a multi-hazard resilient design structure. A structure system design is then generated that satisfies those functional, geometric and load criteria. Various damage events are then simulated, wherein the load-bearing capacity (integrity) of members in the structure are compromised, and the redistribution of loads across members in the damaged structure and the structure stability is evaluated. The structure design is then reconfigured based on that evaluation to improve its structural stability and residual strength. These steps are iteratively repeated to incrementally improve the structural stability and residual strength of the structure across a variety of potential damage events; and a resilient structure can then be built in accord with the resulting design.

Claims

1. A computerized method for resilient design comprising:

a) accepting user input to establish functional, geometric and load criteria for a structure and its members that meets resiliency design criteria;

b) generating a structure system design including a plurality of members, wherein the design satisfies the resiliency design criteria;

c) evaluating at least one of stability of the structural system design, damage effects within the structural system design and propagation of damage effects within the structural system design, and load redistribution under a plurality of simulated damage events, wherein the integrity of particular members or components of members are compromised in the simulated damage events and evaluating structural stability and safety criteria after the damage events;

d) reconfiguring the structure system design, its geometry, and at least one of member layout and composition to improve its structural stability, residual load resistance, and structural reaction in response to the damage events;

e) iteratively repeating steps (b) through (d) using the reconfigured structure system design; and

f) outputting the structure system design to the user after or during multiple iterations of steps (b) through (d) for construction of a structure in accord with the structure system design.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the simulated damage events that are iteratively repeated include distinct simulated compromises to the integrity of each of a plurality of the members to iteratively test whether the structure design can retain its structural stability and sufficient residual strength when each of the plurality of members is removed while other members retain their integrity.

3. The method of claim 1, further comprising developing a knowledge base for structure system design, a resiliency module for simulation and evaluation of damage events, and prototype designs made in conjunction with the partial or full development of the knowledge base and resiliency module.

4. The method of claim 3, wherein the knowledge base and at least one of the prototype designs are used in combination with the user input to establish the functional, geometric and load criteria for the structure.

5. The method of claim 1, further comprising providing the user with a summary or listing of material consumption to gauge structural efficiency of the structure system design and its cost competitiveness.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein the structure is a bridge.

7. The method of claim 6, wherein the compromised members include at least one of vertical or inclined support bearings, links, columns towers, cables, hangers, connections, beams, chords, struts, frames and girders.

8. The method of claim 7, wherein the reconfiguration of the structure system design includes revision to at least one of geometry, layout, connectivity, and composition of at least one member in the structure system design.

9. The method of claim 8, wherein the reconfiguration of the structure system design includes adding an additional member.

10. The method of claim 8, wherein the member revised is selected from support bearings, links, columns, towers, cables, hangers, connections, beams, chords, struts, frames and girders.

11. The method of claim 6, wherein the compromised members include at least one selected from support bearings, links, columns, towers, cables, hangers, connections, beams, chords, struts, frames and girders.

12. The method of claim 1, wherein the design reconfiguration includes changing at least one of the following design criteria for at least one member:

surface pressure loading capacity, fire resistance, impact resistance, and cutting resistance.

13. The method of claim 1, wherein the design reconfiguration includes changing the composition of at least one member.

14. The method of claim 1, wherein the design reconfiguration includes changing at least one of the size and shape of at least one of the members.

15. The method of claim 1, wherein the design reconfiguration includes changing structural connections between the members.

16. The method of claim 1, wherein the design reconfiguration includes adding at least one hazard mitigation system selected from a dehumidification system, a sprinkler system, a protective coating, a structural shield and a hardening mechanism.

17. The method of claim 1, wherein the structure includes at least one occupancy area for human or vehicular occupancy and the design reconfiguration limits deformation and dynamic response of the occupancy area in response to the damage events.

18. The method of claim 1, wherein the design reconfiguration reduces a likelihood of members impacting due to the damage events.

19. The method of claim 1, further comprising identifying hazards to which the structure may be subjected, wherein the damage events are consequences of the identified hazards.

20. The method of claim 1, wherein the evaluation of load redistribution includes evaluating both static, dynamic forces and damage propagation resulting from the damage event.

21. The method of claim 1, wherein the reconfigured structure system design uses less material than the structure system design before the reconfiguration yet allows the reconfigured structure system design to retain its structural stability after simulated damage events that would cause the pre-reconfigured structure system design to fail.

22. The method of claim 1, wherein the iterative evaluations of the simulated damage events includes establishing at least one envelope encompassing the range of loads experienced by the members with the different damage events.

23. The method of claim 22, wherein the structure system design is reconfigured to enable the structure design to maintain its structural stability or residual capacity across the envelope of loads experienced by members with the different damage events.

24. A computer-readable medium storing non-transitory machine instructions that when executed by a computer processor cause a computer machine to perform the following steps:

a) accepting user input to establish functional, geometric and load criteria for a structure and its members that meets resiliency design criteria;

b) generating a structure system design including a plurality of members, wherein the design satisfies the resiliency design criteria;

c) evaluating at least one of stability of the structural system design, damage effects within the structural system design and propagation of damage effects within the structural system design, and load redistribution under a plurality of simulated damage events, wherein the integrity of particular members or components of members are compromised in the simulated damage events and evaluating structural stability and safety criteria after the damage events;

d) reconfiguring the structure system design, its geometry, and at least one of member layout and composition to improve its structural stability, residual load resistance, and structural reaction in response to the damage events;

e) iteratively repeating steps (b) through (d) using the reconfigured structure system design; and

f) outputting the structure system design to the user after or during multiple iterations of steps (b) through (d) for construction of a structure in accord with the structure system design.