Constructing large-scale tensegrity structures with bar–bar connection using prismatic elementary cells

Zhang, Li-Yuan; Zhao, Hongping; Feng, Xi‐Qiao

doi:10.1007/s00419-014-0958-3

Cited by 21 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The tensegrity plate described in this section is formed by the repetition of a tensegrity unit known as the minimal regular 3 bar prism, which is illustrated in Figure 2. This unit has been used to form tensegrity plates, 21,24,25 towers, 26,27 beams, 28 and masts. 11 The unit is called minimal because it has the minimum number of strings (nine) required to form a stable pre-stressable prism with 3 bars.…”

Section: Minimal Tensegrity Platementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analytical equations for the connectivity matrices and node positions of minimal and extended tensegrity plates

Jiang

Skelton

Hernandez

2020

International Journal of Space Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tensegrity structures are three-dimensional networks of truss members loaded in tension or compression. The location of the end points of the truss members, denoted as the nodes, and the associated node-member connectivity matrices are the fundamental descriptors in the modeling and design of tensegrity structures. This paper presents systematic analytical formulas for such node locations and connectivity matrices for tensegrity plates of two different topologies. The formulas apply to plates of any thickness, diameter, and complexity. As application examples, dynamic simulations demonstrating a strategy for morphing the planar plates toward domes are studied. The presented formulas allow for efficient computations and can be employed in the numerical analysis and design of shape-controllable antennas and mirrors, architectural constructions, and other applications based on tensegrity plate and dome-like structures.

show abstract

Section: Minimal Tensegrity Platementioning

confidence: 99%

“…where N t (1, i, k) and N b (1, i, k) are calculated using equation (32) and n p t (1, l) and n p b (1, l) are calculated using equation (33). All the node positions derived in this section are substituted into equations (24) and (25) to establish the node matrix N of the tensegrity plate.…”

Section: Minimal Tensegrity Platementioning

confidence: 99%

Analytical equations for the connectivity matrices and node positions of minimal and extended tensegrity plates

Jiang

Skelton

Hernandez

2020

International Journal of Space Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, both categorisations face a problem when trying to classify strut–cable systems. A pure tensegrity, 32 where no compression elements are ever linked to one another, may fall under the deformable or soft form class, but strut–cable systems may also assume other arrangements 95 (strut–strut connection), no longer fully complying with the class mentioned.…”

Section: First Decade Of 21st Centurymentioning

confidence: 99%

Deployable structures classification: A review

Fenci

Currie

2017

International Journal of Space Structures

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deployable structures have the capacity to transform and predictably adopt multiple predetermined configurations, moving through known paths, while deploying in a controlled and safe way. These characteristics introduce benefits when considering issues such as ease of transportation, erection and the overall sustainability of the structure by means of high material efficiency, modularisation and maximum use of natural energy resources. The aim of this article is to provide a critical review of existing attempts at classifying deployable structures identifying connections between different families through their mechanical and structural behaviours. The classifications selected consider theoretical and applied deployable structures, not focusing on a single application of deployable structures but including those ranging from spatial applications, to temporary and disaster relief structure, through to medical applications, providing coherence where terminology varies between applications. In order to gain a consistent understanding, tree diagrams were created for the review/classification to allow drawing commonalities and establishing differences between authors. A chronological approach was adopted, using key review work as focal points for the timeline, complemented by smaller more specific pieces of work. This enabled the identification of common features and divergences between the different authors, bringing to the conclusion that a clear, comprehensive, consistent and unified classification of deployable structures is currently missing within the field.

show abstract

“…Cable–strut system (Wang, 1998) is a self-equilibrium pin-jointed system comprising compressive struts and tensile cables. This kind of lightweight system is widely used in large-span structures (Cadoni and Micheletti, 2012; Cai et al, 2016; Zhang et al, 2015) because of high structural performance, esthetics, and cost-effectiveness. The need for redundancy in cable–strut system should be recognized, and the system deserves much attention during its structural design.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%