MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973957082 · doi:10.2316/p.2014.820-002

Safety Factor of Welded-Plate Beams based on Finite Element Linear Buckling Analysis

2014· article· en· W1973957082 on OpenAlexaff
Van Ngan Lê, Henri Champliaud

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBucklingStructural engineeringFinite element methodSafety factorCritical loadLinear elasticityStress (linguistics)BendingMaterials scienceWeldingEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beams made of welded plates are very common thanks to the optimum combination of weight and strength of structure. One of the most important design criteria of these beams is their safety against lateral buckling and local buckling. Linear buckling analysis by Finite Element Method (FEM) quickly gives the load multiplier factor to produce elastic buckling. This factor could be considered as the safety factor against buckling if membrane compression stresses in the most critical zone remain well below yield stress up to the buckling load. Otherwise, this interpretation could become unsafe because the combined membrane plus bending stresses in critical zones, which are neglected in linear elastic analysis, could exceed the yield stress. A correction procedure must then be used and may be summarized into the following steps: (1) Carry out a linear static FEM analysis followed by a linear buckling analysis for calculating the lowest load multiplier factor « f » to produce elastic buckling of the E structure; (2) Identify the most critical zone of the buckling mode 1 and its width “b” ; (3) Check the results of static analysis and identify the value « σmeqvL » which stands for « membrane equivalent stress linearized over the buckled width »; (4) Calculate the so called « elastic buckling stress » by ScrE = fE*σmeqvL ; (5) If ScrE is low enough, accept Scr = ScrE as the critical stress or else correct the critical stress Scr by a correction procedure to be defined by considering plastic deformation due to bending across the thickness in critical zones prior to buckling; (6) Calculate the safety factor against buckling by standard formula f = Scr/σmeqvL. In a similar philosophy of Johnson’s empirical formulas for short columns, the summarized procedure is successfully applied in this paper to numerical examples of thin and moderately thick welded-plate beams for correcting the load multiplier factor given by FEM. Numerical example results show that the proposed correction procedure, or a similar one, is a must-do step after obtaining results of linear buckling analysis by FEM, because the multiplier factor given by FEM could be unsafe or even dangerous for some weldedplate beam designs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207