2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0045-7949(99)00164-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sensitivity analysis and optimal design of geometrically non-linear laminated plates and shells

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
31
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As the neutral surface geometry changes, the direction of the local co-ordinate also changes from the relation described in Equation (11). Thus, this explicit dependency of the constitutive relation can be calculated as…”
Section: Direct DI Erentiation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As the neutral surface geometry changes, the direction of the local co-ordinate also changes from the relation described in Equation (11). Thus, this explicit dependency of the constitutive relation can be calculated as…”
Section: Direct DI Erentiation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consequently, the design optimization of the shell structure has been an active research area for decades [1]. Even though signiÿcant research has been reported for shell structural optimization [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11], however, the importance of design sensitivity analysis (DSA) has not been fully uncovered. The ÿnite di erence method (FDM) [2][3][4], the semi-analytical method [5; 6], the discrete method [7; 8], and the continuum method [9][10][11] have been used to calculate sensitivity information for the shell structure.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mathematical programming techniques are purely numerical and are concerned with tuning the optimizer itself rather than reformulating the problem or change the parametrization. Among others Bruyneel and Fleury [8] and Moita and co-workers [9] have applied such methodology with success. Still, these methods do not ensure convergence to the globally optimum solution.…”
Section: Orientation Optimization With Orthotropic Materialsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The difference between (10) and (11) becomes clearer when writing out the expression for e.g. three materials (phases) and comparing to (9): …”
Section: Element Level Parametrization-single Layered Structuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Analytical approaches to the optimization of ply angles (like e.g., Prager 1970;Pedersen 1989Pedersen , 1991Duvaut et al 2000;Khosravi and Sedaghati 2008;Vannucci et al 2009) are only available for geometrically simple cases. The application of mathematical programming either risks to get stuck in a local optimal solution (which may be accepted in some situations, like e.g., Topal and Uzman 2008;Johansen et al 2009) or requires extensive tuning of the optimizer itself in order to converge to the global optimal solution (e.g., Moita et al 2000;Bruyneel and Fleury 2002). So far, a transformation of the original to a convex optimization problem e.g., by lamination parameters is not available for general shell structures but only for simple geometries (Grenestedt 1990(Grenestedt , 1991Hammer et al 1997;Miki 1982;Foldager et al 1998;Abdalla et al 2007).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%