Effect of Pressure on Collapse Behaviour of Stiffened Panel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During normal operations, ship and offshore structures, are subjected to combined lateral pressure and in-plane stresses. The effect of the lateral pressure is often ignored in hull girder ultimate assessments. This paper investigates the influence of the lateral pressures on the nonlinear collapse behavior of stiffened panels subjected to in-plane longitudinal stress. In this study, nonlinear finite element analyses were first conducted for the desired pressure alone; the longitudinal stress was then applied up to and beyond the collapse of the structures. Four representative stiffened panels taken from the bottoms of different double hull oil tankers were considered. The nonlinear analyses were performed using LR’s in-house finite element program VAST and following the procedure for nonlinear collapse analysis developed by LR. The numerical results indicated that the application of the initial pressure loads not only reduced the ultimate load carrying capacity of the panels significantly, but also changed the failure modes of the structures. The sensitivity of the ultimate strength to lateral pressure was dependent upon the panel geometry and whether the pressure was applied on the plate or the stiffener side. The numerical results and findings from this study are presented in this paper.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".