Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T07:44:55.015Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Qualitative modeling and analysis of lateral load resistance in frames

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

Renate Fruchter ,
Helmut Krawinkler  and
Kincho H. Law
Renate Fruchter
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, U.S.A.
Helmut Krawinkler
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, U.S.A.
Kincho H. Law
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper discusses a work in progress in the development of computer tools for qualitative modeling analysis and evaluation of conceptual structural designs. In the conceptual design stage the description of a structure is incomplete and imprecise, and does not permit the use of traditional numerical analysis tools. We describe a prototype system, QLRS, for qualitative evaluation of lateral load resistance in frames. The primary goal of the evaluation of structural response is to identify undesirable structural behavior. In QLRS, the evaluation process consists of three basic tasks. (1) identification of the story and structure models comprising the lateral load resisting system. We term this task structural system interpretation. (2) Qualitative analysis of the story and structure models, and approximate evaluation of the story drifts. We term this task structural behavior interpretation. (3) Assessment of the performance of the lateral load resisting system, in which the results of the structural system interpretation and the structural behavior interpretation are compared against the requirements for complete load path and relative story drift. Currently, QLRS is able to reason about load path discontinuities and soft-story behavior problems in 2-D moment resisting frames.

Type
Research Article
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 7 , Issue 4 , November 1993 , pp. 239 - 256
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bobrow, D. G. 1984. Qualitative Reasoning about Physical Systems, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bozzo, L. M. and Fenves, G. L. 1993. Reducing ambiguity in qualitative reasoning, 5th International ASCE Conference on Computing in Civil Engineering, Anaheim.Google Scholar
Cagan, J. and Agogino, A. M. 1987. Innovative design of mechanical structures from first principles, AI EDAM 1(3), 169–186.Google Scholar
DeKleer, J. 1984. How circuits work, Artificial Intelligence 24, 205–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKleer, J. and Brown, J. 1984. A qualitative physics based on confluences, Artificial Intelligence 24, 7–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbus, K. D. 1984. Qualitative process theory, Artificial Intelligence 24, 85–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fruchter, R., Law, K. H. and Iwasaki, Y. 1993. An approach for qualitative structural analysis, AI EDAM 7(3), 189–207.Google Scholar
Ganguly, J., Kausel, E. and Sriram, D. 1989. A knowledge-based system for deriving qualitative seismic behavior, Computer Utilization in Structural Engineering, Proceedings of the ASCE Structures Congress, ed Nelson, J. K., pp 418–427.Google Scholar
Iwasaki, Y. 1989. Qualitative reasoning. In The Handbook of Artificial Intelligence, Vol. IV, ed. Barr, A., Cohen, P. R. and Feigenbaum, E. A.Addison-Wesley: New York, pp 323–414.Google Scholar
Iwasaki, Y. and Simon, H. A. 1986. Causality in device behavior, Artificial Intelligence 29, 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rivero, M. G. 1988. Qualitative structural analysis for teaching structural behavior, Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Google Scholar
Roddis, K. W. and Martin, J. L. 1992. Qualitative reasoning about steel bridge fatigue and fracture, IEEE Expert August 41–48.Google Scholar
Schwartz, D. I. and Chen, S. S. 1993. Order of magnitude reasoning for qualitative matrix structural analysis, 5th International ASCE Conference on Computing in Civil Engineering, Anaheim.Google Scholar
Simmons, R. 1986. Commonsense arithmetic reasoning, Proceedings of AAAI86, San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, pp 118–124.Google Scholar
Slater, J. H. 1986. Qualitative physics and the prediction of structural behavior, Proceedings of ASCE Symposium Expert Systems in Civil Engineering, ed. Kostem, C. N. and Maher, M. L., pp 239–248.Google Scholar
Weld, D. S. and deKleer, J. (eds) 1990. Readings in Qualitative Reasoning about Physical Systems, San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufman.Google Scholar