MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2276069606 · doi:10.5897/jmer.9000025

Geometrically nonlinear transient analysis of functionally graded shell panels using a higher-order finite element formulation

2010· article· en· W2276069606 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
S. Pradyumna, N Namita, yopadhyay

Bibliographic record

VenueMechanical Engineering Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Structure Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodRotary inertiaNonlinear systemTransverse planeMaterial propertiesMaterials scienceShell (structure)MechanicsFunctionally graded materialBoundary value problemTransient (computer programming)InertiaMathematical analysisGeometryStructural engineeringMathematicsPhysicsClassical mechanicsComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nonlinear transient analysis of functionally graded curved panels is carried out employing a higher-order C0 finite element formulation. The element consists of nine degrees-of-freedom per node with higher-order terms in the Taylor’s series expansion which represents the higher-order transverse cross sectional deformation modes. The formulation includes Sanders’ approximation for doubly curved shells considering the effects of rotary inertia, transverse shear and moderately large rotations in the von Karman sense. A realistic parabolic distribution of transverse shear strains through the shell thickness is assumed and the use of shear correction factor is avoided. The accuracy of the formulation is validated by comparing the results with those available in the literature. The transient dynamic responses of the functionally graded shell panels are investigated by varying the volume fraction index using a simple power law distribution. Material properties are assumed to be temperature-independent and graded in the thickness direction according to a simple power law distribution in terms of the volume fractions of the constituents. Heat conduction between ceramic and metal constituents is neglected. Effects of different panel geometry parameters, boundary conditions and loadings are studied. Key words: Functionally graded materials, higher-order formulation, geometric nonlinearity, transient analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMechanical Engineering ResearchSame topicComposite Structure Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207