Techno Press
You logged in as

Structural Engineering and Mechanics   Volume 48, Number 6, December25 2013, pages 879-914
Comprehensive evaluation of structural geometrical nonlinear solution techniques Part II: Comparing efficiencies of the methods
M. Rezaiee-Pajand, M. Ghalishooyan and M. Salehi-Ahmadabad

Abstract     [Buy Article]
    In part I of the article, formulation and characteristics of the several well-known structural geometrical nonlinear solution techniques were studied. In the present paper, the efficiencies and capabilities of residual load minimization, normal plane, updated normal plane, cylindrical arc length, work control, residual displacement minimization, generalized displacement control and modified normal flow will be evaluated. To achieve this goal, a comprehensive comparison of these solution methods will be performed. Due to limit page of the article, only the findings of 17 numerical problems, including 2-D and 3-D trusses, 2-D and 3-D frames, and shells, will be presented. Performance of the solution strategies will be considered by doing more than 12500 nonlinear analyses, and conclusions will be drawn based on the outcomes. Most of the mentioned structures have complex nonlinear behavior, including load limit and snap-back points. In this investigation, criteria like number of diverged and complete analyses, the ability of passing load limit and snap-back points, the total number of steps and analysis iterations, the analysis running time and divergence points will be examined. Numerical properties of each problem, like, maximum allowed iteration, divergence tolerance, maximum and minimum size of the load factor, load increment changes and the target point will be selected in such a way that comparison result to be highly reliable. Following this, capabilities and deficiencies of each solution technique will be surveyed in comparison with the other ones, and superior solution schemes will be introduced.
Key Words
    nonlinear solution techniques; benchmark problems; path-tracing ability; geometrical nonlinear behavior; comparison study; load limit points; snap-back points
M. Rezaiee-Pajand, M. Ghalishooyan and M. Salehi-Ahmadabad : Department of Civil Engineering, School of Engineering, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

Techno-Press: Publishers of international journals and conference proceedings.       Copyright © 2019 Techno Press
P.O. Box 33, Yuseong, Daejeon 305-600 Korea, Tel: +82-42-828-7996, Fax : +82-42-828-7997, Email: