Risk analysis of bridge falsework cuplok systems

References

• ANCOLD. (2003). Guidelines on risk assessment. Hobart: The Australian National Committee on Large Dams (ANCOLD).
   Google Scholar
• André, J. (2014). Determination of the main parameters affecting the performance of bridge falsework systems (PhD Thesis). Oxford, UK: Oxford Brookes University.
   Google Scholar
• André, J., Beale, R., & Baptista, A. (2012). A survey of failures of bridge falsework systems since 1970. Proceedings of the ICE – Forensic Engineering, 65, 161–172.
   Google Scholar
• André, J., Beale, R., & Baptista, A. (2013a). Experimental behaviour of bridge falsework joints. Proceedings of the IX Portuguese National Conference of Steel and Composite Construction. (p. 10). Guimarães, Portugal: The Portuguese Steelwork Association.
   Google Scholar
• André, J., Beale, R., & Baptista, A. (2013b). Recent advances and existing challenges in the design of bridge falsework systems. Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, 30, 130–145.10.1080/10286608.2012.733374
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• André, J., Beale, R., & Beale, R. (2014). Numerical investigation of bridge falsework structures. Proceedings of the 5th Portuguese Structural Engineering Conference (JPEE 2014) (p. 15). Lisbon, Portugal: Portuguese National Laboratory for Civil Engineering (LNEC).
   Google Scholar
• André, J., Beale, R., & Baptista, A. (2015a). New indices of structural robustness and structural fragility. Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 56, 1063–1093.10.12989/sem.2015.56.6.1063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• André, J., Beale, R., & Baptista, A. (2015b). Numerical analysis of bridge falsework. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Advances in Steel Structures (ICASS 2015) (p. 20). Lisbon, Portugal: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• André, J., Beale, R., & Baptista, A. (2015c). Performance of bridge falsework structures under external hazards. Proceedings of the X Portuguese National Conference of Steel and Composite Construction (p. 10). Coimbra, Portugal: The Portuguese Steelwork Association (cmm).
   Google Scholar
• Arlot, S., & Celisse, A. (2010). A survey of cross-validation procedures for model selection. Statistics Surveys, 4, 40–79.10.1214/09-SS054
   Google Scholar
• Bažant, Z., & Verdure, M. (2007). Mechanics of progressive collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and building demolitions. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 133, 308–319.10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2007)133:3(308)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bažant, Z., Le, J., Greening, F., & Benson, D. (2008). What did and did not cause collapse of World Trade Center twin towers in New York? Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 134, 892–906.10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2008)134:10(892)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beale, R. (2014). Scaffold research – A review. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 98, 188–200.10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.01.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benjamin, J., & Cornell, C. (1970). Probability, statistics, and decision–making for civil engineers. (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Bowles, D. (2003). ALARP evaluation: Using cost effectiveness and disproportionality to justify risk reduction. Proceedings of ANCOLD 2003 Conference on Dams (p. 17). Hobart, Australia: The Australian National Committee on Large Dams (ANCOLD).
   Google Scholar
• BSI. (2005). BS EN 1990:2002+A1:2005 – Basis of structural design. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• BSI. (2009). UK National annex to BS EN 1990:2002+A1:2005. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• BSI. (2010). BS EN 1991–1–4:2005+A1:2010 – Actions on structures – General actions – Part 1–4: Wind actions. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• BSI. (2011a). BS 5975:2008+A1:2011 – Code of practice for temporary works procedures and the permissible stress design of falsework (3rd ed.). London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• BSI. (2011b). BS EN 12812:2008 – Falsework. Performance requirements and general design. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Chandrangsu, T. (2010). Advanced analysis and probabilistic-based design of support scaffold systems (PhD Thesis). Sydney: University of Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• Chandrangsu, T., & Rasmussen, K. (2011). Structural modelling of support scaffold systems. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 67, 866–875.10.1016/j.jcsr.2010.12.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CIRIA. (1977). Rationalization of safety and serviceability factors in structural codes (No. 63) (p. 226). London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Das, P.. (1997). Safety of bridges. London: Thomas Telford Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Dusenberry, D., & Hamburger, R. (2006). Practical means for energy-based analyses of disproportionate collapse potential. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 20, 336–348.10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2006)20:4(336)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faber, M., & Stewart, M. (2003). Risk assessment for civil engineering facilities: critical overview and discussion. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 80, 173–184.10.1016/S0951-8320(03)00027-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., & Friedman, J. (2009). The elements of statistical learning – Data mining, inference, and prediction. (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• HSE. (1992). The tolerability of risk from nuclear power stations (p. 65). London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• HSE. (2001). Reducing risks, protecting people: HSE’s decision making process (No. R2P2). (p. 88). London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• ISO. (1998). ISO 2394:1998 – General principles on reliability for structures (3rd ed.). Geneva: Author.
   Google Scholar
• ISO. (2009a). ISO 13824:2009 – Bases for design of structures – General principles on risk assessment of systems involving structures. Geneva: Author.
   Google Scholar
• ISO. (2009b). ISO 31000:2009 – Risk management – Principles and guidelines. Geneva: Author.
   Google Scholar
• JCSS (2001). JCSS Probabilistic model code. Copenhagen: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, M., & Johnson, K. (2013). Applied predictive modeling. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4614-6849-3
   Google Scholar
• Kohavi, R. (1995). Wrappers for performance enhancement and oblivious decision graphs (PhD Thesis). Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, M. (2008). Building predictive models in R using the caret package. Journal of Statistical Software, 28(5), 1–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, J., & Hirschberg, D. (1996). Small sample statistics for classification error rates. I: Error rate measurements. No. Technical Report No. 96-21 (p. 37). Berkeley, CA: University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, T., Harten, P., Young, D., Muratov, E., Golbraikh, A., Zhu, H., & Tropsha, A. (2012). Does rational selection of training and test sets improve the outcome of QSAR modeling? Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 52, 2570–2578.10.1021/ci300338w
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, L., Bowles, D., Hartford, D., van der Meer, J., & Vrijling, J. (2005). Risk assessment in dam safety management. Paris: International Commission of Large Dams (ICOLD), Bulletin 130.
   Google Scholar
• Melchers, R. (1999). Structural reliability analysis and prediction (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Molinaro, A., Simon, R., & Pfeiffer, R. (2005). Prediction error estimation: A comparison of resampling methods (No. Technical Report No. 96-21) (p. 20). New Haven, CT: Yale University.
   Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 2.15.1). Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/
   Google Scholar
• Sexsmith, R. (1998). Reliability during temporary erection phases. Engineering Structures, 20, 999–1003.10.1016/S0141-0296(97)00195-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sexsmith, R., & Reid, S. (2003). Safety factors for bridge falsework by risk management. Structural Safety, 25, 227–243.10.1016/S0167-4730(02)00058-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SGB (2009). Cuplok: Datasheet. Leatherhead: SGB Group (currently BRAND).
   Google Scholar
• Simões da Silva, L., Rebelo, C., Nethercot, D., Marques, L., Simões, R., & Vila Real, P. (2009). Statistical evaluation of the lateral–torsional buckling resistance of steel I-beams, Part 2: Variability of steel properties. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 65, 832–849.10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.07.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HM Treasury (2004). Management of risk – Principles and concepts (The orange book). London: Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
   Google Scholar
• UK DfT. (1999). Guidance on robustness and provision against accidental actions. The current application of requirements A3 of the building regulations 1991. Final report including background documentation. London: Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions.
   Google Scholar
• Voelkel, W. (1990). German assessment for the Cuplok scaffold system within the framework of the comparison of the procedures in different European countries – Part 1: Test report (No. T 2381/1). (p. 73). Berlin: Institut fur Bautechnik (IfB).
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, H., Chandrangsu, T., & Rasmussen, K. (2010). Probabilistic study of the strength of steel scaffold systems. Structural Safety, 32, 393–401.10.1016/j.strusafe.2010.02.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, H., Rasmussen, K., & Ellingwood, B. (2011). Reliability analysis of steel scaffold shoring structures. Applications of statistics and probability in civil engineering (pp. 2898–2906). London: Taylor & Francis Group.
   Google Scholar