2017
DOI: 10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0001827
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Uniaxial Nonlocal Formulation for Geometric Nonlinearity–Induced Necking and Buckling Localization in a Steel Bar

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Kolwankar et al [ 84 ] presented a uniaxial nonlocal formulation for prismatic steel bars. In this formulation, the nonlocal strain was determined using Equations (6) and (31) by considering a bell-shaped weight function.…”
Section: Nonlocal Theories In Fatigue Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kolwankar et al [ 84 ] presented a uniaxial nonlocal formulation for prismatic steel bars. In this formulation, the nonlocal strain was determined using Equations (6) and (31) by considering a bell-shaped weight function.…”
Section: Nonlocal Theories In Fatigue Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…64,65 In this case, the use of a uniaxial nonlocal formulation for geometric nonlinearity is recommended. [65][66][67] Finally, for 3D building simulations, a multiaxial finite-strain implementation should be developed. This material model should be more suitable in addressing 3D effects at the cross-sectional level due to interaction of axial load and biaxial bending once local buckling occurs during the column response history.…”
Section: Limitations and Suggestions For Future Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although a physical length over which plastification occurs is assumed, the proposed model could still suffer from spurious mesh dependency (i.e., assumed number of integration points) due to nonobjectivity if it is utilized within a conventional force‐ or displacement‐based element 64,65 . In this case, the use of a uniaxial nonlocal formulation for geometric nonlinearity is recommended 65–67 . Finally, for 3D building simulations, a multiaxial finite‐strain implementation should be developed.…”
Section: Limitations and Suggestions For Future Workmentioning
confidence: 99%