2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2015.07.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A penalty approach to obtain lower bound buckling loads for imperfection-sensitive shells

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For more pictures and references related to the wider field of shell bucking see the excellent and comprehensive web-page of Bushnell [2015], and for design implications in aeronautics and astronautics [Bushnell, 1981]. The approximate analytical procedures of James Croll are nicely summarised in a recent paper by Godoy, et al [2015], and for the probabilistic approach to imperfections we can recommend the new book by Elishakoff [2014]. Other applications may lie in the wrinkling of membranes and thin films, where Takei, et al [2014] make use of a probe in their theoretical analysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For more pictures and references related to the wider field of shell bucking see the excellent and comprehensive web-page of Bushnell [2015], and for design implications in aeronautics and astronautics [Bushnell, 1981]. The approximate analytical procedures of James Croll are nicely summarised in a recent paper by Godoy, et al [2015], and for the probabilistic approach to imperfections we can recommend the new book by Elishakoff [2014]. Other applications may lie in the wrinkling of membranes and thin films, where Takei, et al [2014] make use of a probe in their theoretical analysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the work of Godoy et al [17], both reduced stiffness analysis (RSA) and reduced energy analysis (REA) were applied to the buckling analysis of cantilever cylindrical shells, with or without a fixed top roof, and subjected to wind loads. The numerical results were compared with those obtained by a geometrically nonlinear analysis including geometric imperfections, allowing them to show the advantages and drawbacks of both approaches.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%