MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4293073966 · doi:10.11159/iccste22.228

Long Span Steel Structures: Structural Typology Optimization and Enhancement- The Conceptual Design of an Aircraft Hangar

2022· article· en· W4293073966 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

venuePublié dans une revue dont le pays d'attache est le Canada.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueProceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésTypologyConceptual designStructural engineeringSpan (engineering)EngineeringComputer scienceAerospace engineeringMechanical engineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Long-span structures are generally defined as those with a span of tens of meters. They are commonly constructed as steel structures and used for a wide range of building types such as industrial buildings, warehouses, hangars, public halls, agricultural buildings, and arenas. However, the proper design of such structures improves the structural performance along the building time life. Moreover, the structural system has a significant impact on the entire project cost in terms of mass distribution efficiency. Furthermore, the failure consequences of these structures, as large-scale structures, are significant and it often causes huge economical loses at best, when there are no casualties. Consequently, it is highly important to choose the structural solution which provides less overall cost and safe operation of the intended building. This can be achieved by optimizing the structural typology of the building and choose the proper design solutions. For this purpose, this paper deals with the conceptual design of an aircraft hangar as a typical example of longspan steel structures playing a fundamental role in the airports around the world. Nowadays, and along the last decades, the leading manufacturers in the globe at the field of aviation have the passion to produce new generations of aeroplanes in their quest to ensure a better future for this service in the line with the incredible development in this industry and in the air-traffic growth. The new produced models of aircraft are wider, higher, and longer. Thus, that requires new airports facilities which are huge enough to accommodate the new large aircraft models. Heading the same way, this paper elaborated a comparative study of three suggested solutions which are possible structural systems of an aircraft hangar intended to accommodate Airbus A350 and Boeing 777 alternately. The purpose of this study is the comparison of different topologies developed to design the structural system of the building in terms of structural behaviour, the load path, and the cost. The base geometry of the building is a rectangular shape with minimum unobstructed dimensions of 8087m and total approximated free-space plan area of 7000 m 2 . These base dimensions are required to accommodate the above-mentioned models of aircraft. The models of the suggested solutions were built and analysed using the FE software AxisVM. Subsequently, the different solutions were designed, and the structural members were optimized to get higher utilization of the used mass. The study revealed that the second option produced the lighter needed structural steel material with highest mass efficiency. Nevertheless, it exhibited the highest deflection but within the limit. On the other hand, the first solution provides a very good option in the sense of global stability, with a reasonable mass efficiency and relatively large value of the used steel weight and highest lateral stiffness. About the third option, it showed an average steel weight with very accepted displacements values in the three directions, but with small mass efficiency ratio. However, choosing between the options is highly depended on the structural behaviour, the cost and the feasibility of construction and design. It turns out that the first solution is an efficient option in sense of providing a stiff and rigid behaviour. From a cost perspective, the second option least cost option. However, from a practical point of view, the third solution as a spatial truss generated relatively small values of internal forces and reasonable distribution of the stress over the building, and that means easy and more feasibility to design and construct.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: Simulation ou modélisation
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,028
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,548

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,016
Tête enseignante GPT0,220
Écart entre enseignants0,204 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle