STUDIES IN APPLIED MECHANICS 1. Mechanics and Strength of Materials (Skalmierski) 2. Nonlinear Differential Equations (FuSik and Kufner) 3. Mathematical Theory of Elastic and Elαstico-Plastic Bodies. An Introduction (NeCas and HlavαCek) 4. Variational, Incremental and Energy Methods in Solid Mechanics and Shell Theory (Mason) 5. Mechanics of Structured Media, Parts A and Β (Selvadurai, Editor) 6. Mechanics of Material Behavior (Dvorak and Shield, Editors) 7. Mechanics of Granular Materials: New Models and Constitutive Relations (Jenkins and Satake, Editors) 8. Probabilistic Approach to Mechanisms (Sandler) 9. Methods of Functional Analysis for Application in Solid Mechanics (Mason) 10. Boundary Integral Equation Methods in Eigenvalue Problems of Elastodynamics and Thin Plates (Kitahara) 11. Mechanics of Material Interfaces (Selvadurai and Voyiadjis, Editors) 12. Ljocal Effects in the Analysis of Structures (Ladeveze, Editor) 13. Ordinary Differential Equations (Kurzweil) 14. Random Vibration — Status and Recent Developments (Elishakoff and Lyon, Editors) 15. Computational Methods for Predicting Material Processing Defects (Predeleanu, Editor) 16. Developments in Engineering Mechanics (Selvadurai, Editor) 17. The Mechanics of Vibrations of Cylindrical Shells (Markup) 18. Theory of Plasticity and Limit Design of Plates (Markup) 19. Buckling of Structures—Theory and Experiment. The Josef Singer Anniversary Volume (Elishakoff, Babcock, Arbocz and Libai, Editors) 20. Micromechanics of Granular Materials (Satake and Jenkins, Editors) 21. Plasticity. Theory and Engineering Applications (Kaliszky) 22. Stability in the Dynamics of Metal Cutting (Chiriacescu) 23. Stress Analysis by Boundary Element Methods (Bala§, SIαdek and SIαdek) 24. Advances in the Theory of Plates and Shells (Voyiadjis, Karamanlidis, Editors) 25. Convex Models of Uncertainty in Applied Mechanics (Ben-Haim, Elishakoff) STUDIES IN APPLIED MECHANICS 25 C o n v ex M o d e ls of U n c e r t ; a i n t :y in A p p l i ed M e c h a n i cs Yakov Ben-Haim Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel and Isaac Elishakoff Center for Applied Stochastics Research and Department of Mechanical Engineering, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Florida, U.S.A. EL5EVIER Amsterdam — Oxford — New York — Tokyo 1990 ELSEVIER SCIENCE PUBLISHERS B.V. Sara Burgerhartstraat 25 P.O. Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands Distributors for the United States ar)d Canada: ELSEVIER SCIENCE PUBLISHING COMPANY INC. 655 Avenue of the Americas New York, N.Y. 10010, U.S.A. Library of Congress Cataloging-1n-PublIcatlon Data Ben-Haim, Yakov. 1952- Convex models of uncertainty In applied mechanics / Yakov Ben-Halm and Isaac Elishakoff. p. cm. — (Studies in applied mechanics ; 25) Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-444-88406-8 1. Convex sets. 2. Probabilities. 3. Mechanics, Applied. I. Elishakoff, Isaac. II. Title. III. Series. QA640.B45 1990 620. 1—dc20 89-77748 CIP ISBN 0-444-88406-8 (Vol. 25) ISBN 0-444-41758-3 (Series) © Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., 1990 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V./Physical Sciences & Engineering Division, P.O. Box 1991, 1000 BZ Amsterdam, The Netheriands. Special regulations for readers in the USA - This publication has been registered with the Copyright Clearance Center Inc. (CCC), Salem, Massachusetts. Information can be obtained from the CCC about conditions under which photocopies of parts of this publication may be made in the USA. All other copyright questions, including photocopying outside of the USA, should be referred to the publisher. No responsibility is assumed by the Publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or othenAñse, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instruc tions or ideas contained in the material herein. Printed in The Netheriands. To Miriam, Zvika, Eitan and Rafi Y.B.-H. To Esther, Ben and Orly I.E. vil Foreword Professors Ben-Haim and Elishakoff honored me with their request that I add some introductory remarks to those they make themselves in this book, and make better. It is perhaps disquieting that any such remarks should be desirable. Their book is timely, even overdue, and should be widely welcomed. It treats a problem that recurs in most applications of mathematics to the real world, namely that of how to accommodate uncertainties in the empirical and theoretical information which underlies such applications. That an accommodation is absolutely necessary has been recognized for a long time in the natural sciences as well as in engineering, and the traditional way of achieving it has been to equate uncertainty with probability. It is an idea that was, without question, spectacularly successful. In physics, it produced statistical mechanics and quantum theory. It entered into engineering perhaps mainly through the work of S.O. Rice on noise in electronic devices and of N. Wiener on radar fire control, and it led to C.E. Shannon's information theory, among others. Not all of these successes were unqualified, however, and engineers in particular did not accept them without questioning. Chap. 1 of this book quotes from a large literature that documents the soul-searching that went on. (The development by L.A. Zadeh of the theory of fuzzy sets and of its extensions is in a way another testimonial to this tech nological queasiness.) An engineer, as opposed to a physicist, must present a client with a design that embodies certain performance as surances. To give these, at least ideally, he should utilize only facts and information that are known to him on a comparable confidence level. The trouble, of course, is that in practice much of his information is of lower quality and hence of much greater uncertainty. Chap. 1 exhibits a gallery of cases in point. These examples also show that probability viii FOREWORD theory cannot be relied upon for help. There are situations in which it merely compounds the difficulty, even when its application makes superficial sense. In others, it makes no sense in the first place. The customary way out of the dilemma for the engineer has been his trusted safety factor. He has done so on the theory that it is better to over-design, and feel comfortable with one's performance assurances, than to under-design and run the risk of a failure. In other words, it is better to be wasteful than to court embarrassment or danger. Professors Ben-Haim and Elishakoff have a better way. They point out in this book that the designer should make clear to himself what he knows on a sufficiently high confidence level, and then use this knowl edge to place bounds on the design data and parameters that he can properly utilize. In effect, this will isolate for him a set of possible designs. The book deals with the case in which this set is convex and demonstrates that a very broad range of problems in applied mechan ics actually satisfies the convexity requirement. Their approach is novel and highly welcome. In my opinion, it is inevitable that it, and its ex tensions, will dominate the future practice of engineering. Professor-Emeritus Rudolf F. Drenick Polytechnic Institute of New York Huntington, New York August, 1989 XUl Preface If one thing today is certain, it is a feeling of uncertainty — a premonition that the future cannot be a simple extension of the present.^ Dear Reader: The monograph before you deals with analysis of uncertainty in applied mechanics. It is an ambitious book. It is not just one more rendition of the traditional treatment of the subject, nor is it intended to supplement existing structural engineering books. The ultimate goal of this volume is to fill what the writers are confident is a significant gap in the available professional literature. This book is about non- probabilistic modelling of uncertainty. We have no ambition to supplant probabilistic ideas. Rather, we wish to provide an alternative avenue for analysis of uncertainty when only a limited amount of information is available. Whether this far-reaching goal has been successfully achieved is for you to judge. Applied mechanics monographs and textbooks and associated uni versity courses have historically focussed on the basic principles of me chanics, analysis, numerical evaluation and design. These books and courses almost exclusively assume that the material properties, geomet ric dimensions, and loading of the structure are precisely known. Nobody questions the ever-present need for a solid foundation in applied mechanics. Neither does anyone question nowadays the fun damental necessity to recognize that uncertainty exists, to learn to evaluate it rationally, and to incorporate it into design. But what do we mean by "uncertain"? Webster's Ninth New Colle- ^ Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, speech of allegiance to the Dutch constitu tion, April 30, 1980. xiv PREFACE giate Dictionary provides the following definitions: "Indefinite, indeter minate; not certain to occur; problematical; not reliable; untrustwor thy; not known beyond doubt; dubious; not having certain knowledge; doubtful; not clearly identified or defined; not constant; variable, fitful". Among the numerous synonyms to "uncertainty" one finds (Rodale, 1978): unsureness, unpredictability, randomness, haphazardness, arbi trariness, indefiniteness, indeterminacy, ambiguity, variability, change ability, irregularity, and so forth. Recognition of the need to introduce the ideas of uncertainty in a wide variety of scientific fields today reflects in part some of the profound changes in science and engineering over the last decades. The natural question arises: how to deal with uncertainty? Since one of the meanings of uncertainty is randomness, a natural answer to this question was and is to apply the theory of probability and random functions. Indeed, since the pioneering work by Meier in Germany, and by Freudenthal in Israel and later in the United States, probabilistic structural mechanics has achieved a high degree of sophistication. The power of probabilistic methods has been demonstrated beyond doubt in numerous publications on engineering subjects of paramount im portance. Probabilistic modelling requires extensive knowledge of the random variables or functions involved. It leads to evaluation of the probability of successful performance by the structure, called reliability, or to its complement, the probability of failure. Is probabilistic mod eUing the only way one could deal with uncertainty? It turns out that the answer is negative. Indeed, the indeterminacy about the uncertain variables involved could be stated in terms of these variables belonging to certain sets, such as: 1. The uncertain parameter ÷ is bounded, |x| < a. 2. The uncertain function has envelope bounds, íClower(í) < X{t) < »upper(0 where a;iower(0 and Xupper(i) are deterministic functions which de limit the range of variation of x{t). 3. The uncertain function has an integral square bound: PREFACE XV OO I x\t)dt<a More examples will be found throughout the book. Instead of precise information on the probability content of random events, we possess im perfect, scanty knowledge on the uncertain quantities. This description of uncertainty is a set-theoretic, non-probabilistic one. We will limit ourselves, in this monograph, to representation of uncertain phenomena by convex sets, and will refer to this approach as convex modelling. This set-theoretic approach was independently and almost simul taneously pioneered by Schweppe and by Drenick in 1968, the former in control theory and the latter in applied mechanics, namely in mod elling of the response of structures to earthquake excitation. Schweppe summarized much of the early work in non-probabilistic modelling of uncertainty in his monograph Uncertain Dynamic Systems (1973). In dependently, and without knowledge of these works, convex models of uncertainty were applied by Ben-Haim (1985) in his monograph on assay of material with uncertain spatial variation. There is a similarity between probabilistic and convex modelling. Probabilistic modelling provides the probability of successful perfor mance which is, roughly speaking, the probability of avoidance of the distribution tails of the random variables controlling the system. In similar fashion, convex modelling provides an evaluation based on as sessments of extremal or delimiting properties of the system. In both circumstances, uncertain parameters lead to certain quantitative de scriptions, but of different kinds. Is there a contradiction between probabilistic and convex modelling? We want to preface the answer to this question by more general con siderations. Since the emergence of modern scientific methodology, to understand a natural phenomenon has meant to formulate a conceptual model which describes or predicts selected aspects of the phenomenon. To understand is to control, and the scientific model is the pre-eminent tool of the engineer in his quest for controlling man's environment. The scientific model is a distillation of reality. In attempting to explain this reality — to describe it qualitatively and quantitatively — we find that the same phenomenon can be represented by more than one model. xvi PREFACE The validity of each model can be established by checking its compati bility with other models or with experimental observations. This done, the question naturally arises: which of these models is preferable? The answer to this question lies in adopting a criterion and setting an ob jective in constructing the model. The criterion in question is clearly one of usefulness. Different models may refer to different aspects of a phenomenon and yield answers to specific questions in each case. The utilitarian approach to evaluating the multiplicity of models is both pragmatic and tolerant. Different models can "peacefully coexist" as long as they serve different purposes. So the answer to our question as to possible contradiction between probabilistic and convex modelling is negative. The engineer is a most pragmatic creature and willingly allows coexistence of both models, as long as each fills a useful role. The engineer with professional respon sibility, whose aim is in-depth study of complex phenomena, cannot allow himself to discard any useful model. The organization of the monograph is as follows. The first chapter briefly reviews probabilistic methods and discusses the sensitivity of the probability of failure to uncertain knowledge of the system. Chap ter two discusses the mathematical background of convex modelling. In the remainder of the book, convex modelling is applied to various linear and nonlinear problems. Except for the first two chapters, the material is almost exclusively based on our joint research, which con tinuously stimulates us to further the development of the subject, in nearly perfect cooperation and harmony (not free from an occasional "fight" on this or that idea, sentence or word). Accordingly, the sole responsibility for mistakes, misprints and misconceptions, as well as for successful achievement of our goals (which we hope for and count on) rests on both of us. One of our goals will be met if a serious reader, after initial perusal, is encouraged to read the book and feels that "it makes sense" despite the lack of esoteric mathematics. Many disciplines originate in the efforts of a small group of re searchers. When the ideas generated are seen to be related to real problems, they spread to a larger group. New questions then arise, stimulating the growth and spread of the discipline. If this happens as a result this book, then our goal will have been more than fully