An extension of the first-order forward-Euler method into a two-stage, second-order Runge-Kutta method [54] involving two forward-Euler integration steps is used with an incorporated adaptive substepping. To en
Fig. 6. Second order Sobol indices showing the combined effect of crystal plasticity parameters on a) the yield stress, σy, of the simulated tensile curve and b) the difference between yield stress and maximum stress, σmax − σy, of the simulated tensile curve. The sensitivity indi...
Here again the Python language is useful to find similar crystallographic orientations. In Fig. 2 neighboring orientation areas with an angle difference of less than 5 degrees are assumed to be a single orientation area. 2.2. Image manipulation EBSD data points are arranged on a regular grid. ...
A Deep Learning Approach Replacing the Finite Difference Method for In Situ Stress Prediction. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 44063–44074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] Rahneshin, V.; Chierichetti, M. An integrated approach for non-periodic dynamic response prediction of complex structures: Numerical and ...
A Deep Learning Approach Replacing the Finite Difference Method for In Situ Stress Prediction. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 44063–44074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] Rahneshin, V.; Chierichetti, M. An integrated approach for non-periodic dynamic response prediction of complex structures: Numerical and ...
Control-relevant parametric model is subsequently derived using the proposed techniques of order reduction and linearisation. The mentioned control design method is used to synthesise a robust controller that is to be used for a whole set of manipulator configurations with variable load mass geometry. ...
A Deep Learning Approach Replacing the Finite Difference Method for In Situ Stress Prediction. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 44063–44074. [CrossRef] 23. Rahneshin, V.; Chierichetti, M. An integrated approach for non-periodic dynamic response prediction of complex structures: Numerical and experimental ...
For all damage cases, the trends of difference deflection curves can be clearly seen in the figure, despite the presence of noise. The ‘DEFECT 1’ line corresponds to the damage introduced at a distance of 200 mm from the clamped side of the beam. In the camera frame, it corresponds to...
As described earlier, solving unconfined groundwater flow with a moving mesh technique using a finite difference method has some limitations. These problems do not exist when using a conforming (i.e., nodal-based) finite element technique such as the Galerkin weighted residual approach [25,26]....