NASA NTRS1996
Classical structural reliability assessment techniques are based on precise and crisp (sharp) definitions of failure and non-failure (survival) of a structure in meeting a set of strength, function and serviceability criteria. These definitions are provided in the form of performance functions and limit state equations. Thus, the criteria provide a dichotomous definition of what real physical situations represent, in the form of abrupt change from structural survival to failure. However, based on observing the failure and survival of real structures according to the serviceability and strength criteria, the transition from a survival state to a failure state and from serviceability criteria to strength criteria are continuous and gradual rather than crisp and abrupt. That is, an entire spectrum of damage or failure levels (grades) is observed during the transition to total collapse. In the process, serviceability criteria are gradually violated with monotonically increasing level of violation, and progressively lead into the strength criteria violation. Classical structural reliability methods correctly and adequately include the ambiguity sources of uncertainty (physical randomness, statistical and modeling uncertainty) by varying amounts. However, they are unable to adequately incorporate the presence of a damage spectrum, and do not consider in their mathematical framework any sources of uncertainty of the vagueness type. Vagueness can be attributed to sources of fuzziness, unclearness, indistinctiveness, sharplessness and grayness; whereas ambiguity can be attributed to nonspecificity, one-to-many relations, variety, generality, diversity and divergence. Using the nomenclature of structural reliability, vagueness and ambiguity can be accounted for in the form of realistic delineation of structural damage based on subjective judgment of engineers. For situations that require decisions under uncertainty with cost/benefit objectives, the risk of failure should depend on the underlying level of damage and the uncertainties associated with its definition. A mathematical model for structural reliability assessment that includes both ambiguity and vagueness types of uncertainty was suggested to result in the likelihood of failure over a damage spectrum. The resulting structural reliability estimates properly represent the continuous transition from serviceability to strength limit states over the ultimate time exposure of the structure. In this section, a structural reliability assessment method based on a fuzzy definition of failure is suggested to meet these practical needs. A failure definition can be developed to indicate the relationship between failure level and structural response. In this fuzzy model, a subjective index is introduced to represent all levels of damage (or failure). This index can be interpreted as either a measure of failure level or a measure of a degree of belief in the occurrence of some performance condition (e.g., failure). The index allows expressing the transition state between complete survival and complete failure for some structural response based on subjective evaluation and judgment.