corner of the building. As no other such collapse had occurred worldwide at that time, the partial collapse of the Ronan Point Building led to major changes in building regulations with the term \"disproportionate collapse\" embodied for the first time. Since then, structural robustness, a property that makes buildings not suffer disproportionate collapse including progressive collapse, has gained much research attention and become one of the major design criteria. Structural robustness has therefore attained an unprecedented significance in today's design environment. In recent years efforts have been focused by many researchers and associations toward the understanding of structural robustness and promoting the robustness design in national and international regulations. An up-to-date comprehensive review regarding structural robustness is given by [PERSON] et al. [2] and some guidelines are provided by, e.g., JCSS [3] and Canisius [4]. In the review, the issue of structural robustness is screened within several aspects including the conceptual definitions, the bibliometric details, the evolution of codes and design recommendations, the quantification of robustness, the assessment of the risk due to progressive collapse, the present investigations on robustness by means of experimental test and numerical modelling, and the research needs in the future. The quantification of structural robustness usually is associated with the determination of the scope of structure, the structural modelling and analysis, the selection of the robustness index, and the calculation and evaluation of structural robustness. To properly understand the influence of structural performances on structural robustness, widely used methods related to structural modelling and analysis, e.g., analytical method, pushdown and pushover methods can be adopted [5; 6; 7]. Furthermore, the results of other research work, e.g., those related to shear-flexural interaction [8; 9] will also be very helpful to improve the modelling accuracy and thereafter the accuracy of the robustness in the process of structural robustness assessment. In recent decades, it has been believed that in comparison with the cast-in-place conventional concrete structures, the precast concrete structures have many favourable advantages in terms of, e.g., quality control, construction speed, environmental pollution and cost-efficiency. Therefore, the precast concrete structures have been extensively adopted in many countries such as the United States [10], New Zealand [11], Japan [12] and China [13]. In order to develop well-accepted precast concrete structural systems and to better understand the performances of the corresponding systems, researchers have paid much effort to investigate the performances of the precast concrete structures from the perspective of experimental tests [14; 15; 16; 17; 18], numerical simulations [19; 20; 21; 22; 23] and from the viewpoint of both experimental and numerical investigations [24; 25]. Despite a lot of work having been performed in both structural robustness and precast concrete structures, there are still some research gaps regarding these aspects. On the one hand, the recent research attention on the field of structural robustness has been mainly devoted to two fields of interest, namely at the one side fundamental definitions, principles and the quantification by robustness measures and on the other side structural measures for increasing robustness and the associated structural modelling of such measures. Much more research effort should be focused on combining and optimizing these two fields of research related to structural robustness. One way to combine these two fields is to develop some robustness quantification frameworks to investigate the feasibilities of available robustness measures and the effectiveness of measures to increase robustness. On the other hand, the current research on the safety of the precast concrete structures in a global way, i.e., the robustness with respect to progressive collapse is still unclear.