Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A surrogate model for uncertainty quantification and global sensitivity analysis of nonlinear large-scale dome structures

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Full-scale dome structures intrinsically have numerous sources of irreducible aleatoric uncertainties. A large-scale numerical simulation of the dome structure is required to quantify the effects of these sources on the dynamic performance of the structure using the finite element method (FEM). To reduce the heavy computational burden, a surrogate model of a dome structure was constructed to solve this problem. The dynamic global sensitivity of elastic and elastoplastic structures was analyzed in the uncertainty quantification framework using fully quantitative variance- and distribution-based methods through the surrogate model. The model considered the predominant sources of uncertainty that have a significant influence on the performance of the dome structure. The effects of the variables on the structural performance indicators were quantified using the sensitivity index values of the different performance states. Finally, the effects of the sample size and correlation function on the accuracy of the surrogate model as well as the effects of the surrogate accuracy and failure probability on the sensitivity index values are discussed. The results show that surrogate modeling has high computational efficiency and acceptable accuracy in the uncertainty quantification of large-scale structures subjected to earthquakes in comparison to the conventional FEM.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zhang H D, Zhu X Q, Yao S. Nonlinear dynamic analysis method for large-scale single-layer lattice domes with uncertain-but-bounded parameters. Engineering Structures, 2020, 203: 109780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Zhang H D, Zhu X Q, Liang X, Guo F Y. Stochastic uncertainty quantification of seismic performance of complex large-scale structures using response spectrum method. Engineering Structures, 2021, 235: 112096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bhattacharyya B. Global sensitivity analysis: A bayesian learning based polynomial chaos approach. Journal of Computational Physics, 2020, 415: 109539

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Wei P, Lu Z, Yuan X. Monte Carlo simulation for moment-independent sensitivity analysis. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2013, 110: 60–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gupta H V, Razavi S. Revisiting the basis of sensitivity analysis for dynamical earth system models. Water Resources Research, 2018, 54(11): 8692–8717

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Partington D, Knowling M J, Simmons C T, Cook P G, Xie Y, Iwanaga T, Bouchez C. Worth of hydraulic and water chemistry observation data in terms of the reliability of surface water-groundwater exchange flux predictions under varied flow conditions. Journal of Hydrology, 2020, 590: 125441

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Sobol I M, Tarantola S, Gatelli D, Kucherenko S S, Mauntz W. Estimating the approximation error when fixing unessential factors in global sensitivity analysis. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2007, 92(7): 957–960

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Tarantola S, Giglioli N, Jesinghaus J, Saltelli A. Can global sensitivity analysis steer the implementation of models for environmental assessments and decision-making? Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 2002, 16(1): 63–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Razavi S, Jakeman A, Saltelli A, Prieur C, Iooss B, Borgonovo E, Plischke E, Lo Piano S, Iwanaga T, Becker W, Tarantola S, Guillaume J H A, Jakeman J, Gupta H, Melillo N, Rabitti G, Chabridon V, Duan Q, Sun X, Smith S, Sheikholeslami R, Hosseini N, Asadzadeh M, Puy A, Kucherenko S, Maier H R. The future of sensitivity analysis: An essential discipline for systems modeling and policy support. Environmental Modelling & Software, 2021, 137: 104954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Nariman N A, Hussain R R, Mohammad I I, Karampour P. Global sensitivity analysis of certain and uncertain factors for a circular tunnel under seismic action. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2019, 13(6): 1289–1300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zoutat M, Elachachi S M, Mekki M, Hamane M. Global sensitivity analysis of soil structure interaction system using N2-SSI method. European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering, 2018, 22(2): 192–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Menz M, Dubreuil S, Morio J, Gogu C, Bartoli N, Chiron M. Variance based sensitivity analysis for Monte Carlo and importance sampling reliability assessment with Gaussian processes. Structural Safety, 2021, 93: 102116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Zhang K C, Lu Z Z, Wu D Q, Zhang Y L. Analytical variance based global sensitivity analysis for models with correlated variables. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 2017, 45: 748–767

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Javidan M M, Kim J K. Variance-based global sensitivity analysis for fuzzy random structural systems. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 2019, 34(7): 602–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Arwade S R, Moradi M, Louhghalam A. Variance decomposition and global sensitivity for structural systems. Engineering Structures, 2010, 32(1): 1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Boscato G, Russo S, Ceravolo R, Fragonara L Z. Global sensitivity-based model updating for heritage structures. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 2015, 30(8): 620–635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhang X F, Pandey M D. An effective approximation for variance-based global sensitivity analysis. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2014, 121: 164–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cucurachi S, Borgonovo E, Heijungs R. A protocol for the global sensitivity analysis of impact assessment models in life cycle assessment. Risk Analysis, 2016, 36(2): 357–377

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Baroni G, Francke T. An effective strategy for combining variance- and distribution-based global sensitivity analysis. Environmental Modelling & Software, 2020, 134: 104851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Wei P F, Wang Y Y, Tang C H. Time-variant global reliability sensitivity analysis of structures with both input random variables and stochastic processes. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2017, 55(5): 1883–1898

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Ni P, Xia Y, Li J, Hao H. Using polynomial chaos expansion for uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of bridge structures. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2019, 119: 293–311

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ni P H, Li J, Hao H, Zhou H Y. Reliability based design optimization of bridges considering bridge–vehicle interaction by Kriging surrogate model. Engineering Structures, 2021, 246: 112989

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ni P H, Li J, Hao H, Han Q, Du X L. Probabilistic model updating via variational Bayesian inference and adaptive Gaussian process modeling. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2021, 383: 113915

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  24. Yuan Z X, Liang P, Silva T, Yu K, Mottershead J E. Parameter selection for model updating with global sensitivity analysis. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2019, 115: 483–496

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  25. Wan H P, Ni Y Q. An efficient approach for dynamic global sensitivity analysis of stochastic train-track-bridge system. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2019, 117: 843–861

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  26. Amini A, Abdollahi A, Hariri-Ardebili M A, Lall U. Copula-based reliability and sensitivity analysis of aging dams: Adaptive Kriging and polynomial chaos Kriging methods. Applied Soft Computing, 2021, 109: 107524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Xian J H, Su C, Spencer B F Jr. Stochastic sensitivity analysis of energy-dissipating structures with nonlinear viscous dampers by efficient equivalent linearization technique based on explicit time-domain method. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 2020, 61: 103080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Vazna R V, Zarrin M. Sensitivity analysis of double layer diamatic dome space structure collapse behavior. Engineering Structures, 2020, 212: 110511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Wan H P, Ren W X. Parameter selection in finite-element-model updating by global sensitivity analysis using Gaussian process metamodel. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2015, 141(6): 04014164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sun Q Q, Dias D. Global sensitivity analysis of probabilistic tunnel seismic deformations using sparse polynomial chaos expansions. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2021, 141: 106470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Vu-Bac N, Silani M, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. A unified framework for stochastic predictions of mechanical properties of polymeric nanocomposites. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96: 520–535

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Tuo R, Wang W J. Kriging prediction with isotropic Matérn correlations: Robustness and experimental designs. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 2020, 21(1): 7604–7641

    Google Scholar 

  33. Vu-Bac N, Lahmer T, Zhang Y, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. Stochastic predictions of interfacial characteristic of polymeric nanocomposites (PNCs). Composites. Part B, Engineering, 2014, 59: 80–95

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Liu B, Vu-Bac N, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. Stochastic multiscale modeling of heat conductivity of Polymeric clay nanocomposites. Mechanics of Materials, 2020, 142: 103280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Xiao S N, Lu Z Z. Structural reliability sensitivity analysis based on classification of model output. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2017, 71: 52–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Fenwick D, Scheidt C, Caers J. Quantifying asymmetric parameter interactions in sensitivity analysis: Application to reservoir modeling. Mathematical Geosciences, 2014, 46(4): 493–511

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Sheather S J, Jones M C. A reliable data-based bandwidth selection method for kernel density estimation. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B. Methodological, 1991, 53(3): 683–690

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Marrel A, Iooss B, Laurent B, Roustant O. Calculations of sobol indices for the Gaussian process metamodel. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2009, 94(3): 742–751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sudret B. Global sensitivity analysis using polynomial chaos expansions. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2008, 93(7): 964–979

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Liu T T, He Z, Yang Y. Vertical earthquake vulnerability of longspan spherical lattice shells with low rise-span ratios. Engineering Structures, 2020, 207: 110181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kaul M K. Stochastic characterization of earthquakes through their response spectrum. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 1978, 6(5): 497–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Scanlan R, Sachs K. Earthquake time histories and response spectra. Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, 1974, 100(4): 635–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Bani-Hani K A, Malkawi A I. A multi-step approach to generate response-spectrum-compatible artificial earthquake accelerograms. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2017, 97: 117–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Financial support from the Key Project of the Natural Science Foundation of Tianjin City (No. 19JCZDJC39300) is acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Civil Engineering, Tianjin Chengjian University, Tianjin, 300384, China

    Huidong Zhang, Yafei Song, Yaqiang Zhang, Hui Wang & Yingjun Gao

  2. Tianjin Key Laboratory of Civil Building Protection and Reinforcement, Tianjin, 300384, China

    Huidong Zhang

  3. School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2007, Australia

    Xinqun Zhu

Authors
  1. Huidong Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yafei Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xinqun Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yaqiang Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hui Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yingjun Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Huidong Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interests The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, H., Song, Y., Zhu, X. et al. A surrogate model for uncertainty quantification and global sensitivity analysis of nonlinear large-scale dome structures. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 17, 1813–1829 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-023-0007-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-023-0007-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation