MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244159234 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14655045.v1

Development of a Quasi-Exact Dynamic Finite Element (QDFE) Method For the Free Vibration Analysis of Thin Rectangular Multilayered Plates

2021· preprint· en· W4244159234 on OpenAlexafffund
Heenkenda Jayasinghe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Structure Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsFinite element methodVibrationModal analysisOrdinary differential equationDifferential equationComputer scienceFinite strip methodApplied mathematicsStructural engineeringMathematical analysisMathematicsEngineeringPhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Dynamic Finite Element (DFE) method is a well-established superconvergent semianalytical method that has been used in the past to investigate the vibration behaviour of various beam-structures. Considered as a viable alternative to conventional FEM for preliminary stage modal analysis, the DFE method has consistently proven that it is capable of producing highly accurate results with a very coarse mesh; a feature that is attributed to the fact that the DFE method uses trigonometric, frequency-dependant shape functions that are based on the exact solution to the governing differential equation as opposed to the polynomial shape functions used in conventional FEM. In the past many researchers have contributed towards building a comprehensive library of DFE models for various line structural elements and configurations, which would serve as the building blocks that would help the DFE method evolve into a fullfledged, versatile tool like conventional FEM in the future. However, thus far a DFE formulation has not been developed for plate problems. Therefore, in this thesis an effort has been made for the first time to develop a DFE formulation for the realm of two-dimensional structural problems by formulating a Quasi-Exact Dynamic Finite Element (QDFE) solution to investigate the free vibration behaviour of thin single- and multi-layered, rectangular plates. As a starting point for this work, Hamiltonian mechanics and the Classical Plate Theory (CPT) are used to develop the governing differential equation for thin plates. Subsequently, a unique quasiexact solution to the governing equation is sought by following a distinct procedure that, to the best of the author‘s knowledge, has never been presented before. Through this procedure, the characteristic equation is re-arranged as the sum of two beam-like expressions and then solved for by applying the quadratic formula. The resulting quasi-exact roots are then exploited to form the trigonometric basis functions, which in turn are used to derive the frequency-dependant shape functions; the characteristic feature of the QDFE method. Once developed, the new QDFE technique is applied to determine the vibration behaviour of thin, isotropic, linearly elastic, rectangular, homogenous plates. Subsequently, it is also employed to formulate a Simplified Layerwise Quasi-Exact Dynamic Finite Element solution for the free vibration of thin, rectangular multilayered plates. In addition, the quasi-exact solution to the plate equation is also utilised to develop a Dynamic Coefficient Matrix (DCM) method to investigate the vibrational characteristics of thin, rectangular, homogeneous plates and thin, rectangular, multilayered plates. The Method of Homogenization is used as an alternative procedure to validate the results from the Simplified Layerwise Quasi-Exact Dynamic Finite Element method and the Simplified Layerwise Dynamic Coefficient Matrix method. The results from both the QDFE and DCM methods are, in general, verified for accuracy against the exact results existing in the open literature and those produced by two in-house developed conventional FEM codes and/or ANSYS® software.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.840

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.254 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComposite Structure Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207