4 views

Uploaded by api-3733260

save

- 61946709 Competitive Manufacturing Systems i 002
- MITRES2_002S10_lec01
- Pattern Search Program
- Conjugate Gradient
- Performative Architecture Reading
- Mihir Resume1
- What is Convergence in Finite Element Analysis_ How is It Calculated
- Optimization of Laminate Composite Structures_1
- Zz Error Estimator Lecture27
- 8. Chapter 8 - Types of Finite Elements _a4
- 40220130405017.pdf
- aiaa2002-5642.pdf
- Project 5
- Users5.1
- Optimal Film
- Optimal Design of Electrical Machines State of the Art Survey
- Node-Based Optimal Power Control, Routing, And Congestion Control in Wireless Networks
- pcimod3630analysisandautooptimization-150825062613-lva1-app6892.pdf
- Stresses Around Extremely Large or Interacting Multiple Holes in Orthotropic Composites
- Chapter13 - Agreggate Planning
- me471s03_sy
- Validation Bearing Capacity of Strip Footing 2016 (1)
- 2_dipart_qub
- 101 Ji, Kuchma An analytical framework for seismic fragility analysis of RC
- A Consistently Rapid Algorithm for Solving Polynomial Equations
- Finite Elements
- matlab
- 1-s2.0-S0306261915012258-main
- MSC Fastener Modeling for Joining Composite Parts 06-SpiritAero_Boshers
- Lecture 01 Ver1
- WETTON
- yeo
- white
- WOOL
- wort
- Anne_Hooper_s_Kama_Sutra._Classic_Lovemaking_techniques_reinterpeted_for_today_s_lovers
- zeronian
- years
- yannas
- wortmann
- wei
- YESIM
- wang
- yang
- warwicker
- vinis
- tabor
- ULLMAN
- t6
- versh
- statton
- str
- treloar
- terene
- VSUBRAM
- ugbolue
- tsur
- stearne
- vijayan
- stress

You are on page 1of 29

of Limp Materials

Part II : Two Dimensional Parts

Shrinivas Lankalapalli∗ †

Scientific Computation Research Center

110 Eight Street, CII 7013

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY 12180, USA

Tel: (518) 276 6195, Fax: (518) 276 4886

Jeffrey W. Eischen‡

Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering

Campus Box 7910, NC State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA

Abstract

**Pick-up locations on two dimensional limp parts that minimize a measure of deforma-
**

tion(strain energy) are obtained. The parts are modelled as shells undergoing arbitrarily

large deformations and rotations by a geometrically exact nonlinear shell finite element

formulation. The strain energy is computed from the finite element solution for deforma-

tion and the optimal locations are obtained by solving a bound constrained optimization

problem. Results are obtained for various two dimensional shapes.

Keywords: Limp materials; Pick-up locations; Finite elements; Optimization

∗

Corresponding Author

†

Post Doctoral Research Associate (slankal@scorec.rpi.edu)

‡

Associate Professor (eischen@eos.ncsu.edu)

1 Introduction

In the first part [1] of this work, we obtained optimal pick-up locations for strips of limp

materials. We used small and large deflection beam theory to model the strips and solved

the optimization problem as a continuous optimization problem. In this paper, which com-

prises part 2 of this work, we solve for pick-up locations that minimize the strain energy

of two dimensional limp parts. The limp parts are modeled as shells undergoing arbitrarily

large deformations and rotations using the geometrically exact nonlinear shell finite element

formulation described in [1]. The strain energy is computed from a finite element solution

for the deformation and requires the discretization of the limp part by a mesh. The pick-up

locations correspond to enforcing boundary conditions in the mesh, and in the finite element

method, boundary conditions can be enforced only at nodes in the mesh. Since optimization

algorthims require the evaluation of the objective function for different pick-up locations, an

automatic mesh generation procedure that locates nodes at specified pick-up locations in the

domain is required to solve the problem as a continuous optimization problem. Such a pro-

cedure was implemented when we solved for optimal locations on one-dimensional domains.

We implement a similar meshing procedure for the specific problem of 4 pick-up locations on

square/rectangular domains and solve the corresponding optimization problem as a contin-

uous problem. Since automatic meshing for two dimensional domains of arbitrary shape is

difficult, we develop a new gradient based algorithm to solve the problem as a discrete problem

on a fixed mesh. Iterative mesh refinement is used to improve the accuracy of the solution.

**2 Minimization Problem for Two Dimensional Domains
**

The following is the minimization problem for two dimensional domains:

min f (x) : R 2n → R

x∈D (1)

**where, f (x) is the strain energy and objective function, D is the domain bounded by the
**

boundary of the limp material part and x is a (2n x 1) vector of coordinates of pick-up

locations where n is the number of pick-up locations.

2

3 Gradient Based Algorithm for a Fixed Mesh

With a fixed mesh, the pick-up locations are restricted to be at nodes in the mesh and the

solution space is discrete. The algorithm is a discrete variant of the steepest descent method

which has good global convergence properties. It consists of a systematic search procedure

using the steepest descent direction to determine the next set of nodes amongst the closest

nodes to the current nodes that result in a decrease in objective function. For a more accurate

solution, the mesh is refined in selective regions and the problem is resolved. The inputs

are: the finite element mesh of the limp part, material properties, and initial guesses (xy

coordinates) of the pick-up locations.

To describe the algorithm, we use the following notation :

n - number of pick-up locations

N - vector of node numbers of dimension n

**f (N ) - strain energy computed from finite element solution with boundary conditions applied
**

at nodes in N

**5f (N ) - gradient of strain energy with boundary conditions applied at nodes in N . This is
**

a (2n x 1) vector and is computed by finite differences. For this purpose, the x and y

coordinates of each node of N is perturbed and a new finite element solution is computed

with each perturbation.

The algorithm is as follows :

1. Read mesh data, physical properties and initial guess

2. Find N = nodes in the mesh closest to initial guess (xy coordinates) of pick-up locations

3. Compute ftrial = f (N ) and 5f (N )

4. While k < maximum allowable number of iterations

a. Find N s = nodes closest to N in the steepest descent (negative gradient) direction

3

Node at which b.c. is applied

9 6 3

Closest surrounding nodes

Unit vector in the steepest

8 5 2 descent direction

Unit vector in the direction of

7 4 1 surrounding nodes

Figure 1: Node 3 is the closest node in the steepest descent direction

b. N t = N s ; compute fnew = f (N t )

c. If (fnew < ftrial ) then

i) N = N t ; ftrial = fnew

ii) Compute 5f (N )

iii) k = k + 1; Go to 4 a.

else

**i) Find a new trial set of nodes N t (explained below)
**

If no. of tries is > maxtry then EXIT

ii) Compute fnew = f (N t )

iii) Go to 4 c.

endif

5. Refine mesh in selective areas and rerun to obtain a more accurate solution.

**The nodes of N s are found by computing the angles between the unit vectors in the steepest
**

descent direction at the corresponding nodes of N and the unit vectors in the direction of

the immediate surrounding nodes in the mesh. The closest node is the node which gives the

smallest angle. This procedure is illustrated in Figure 1.

4

The first trial set of nodes (N t ) are the nodes in the steepest descent direction (N s ). If

this does not give a decrease in function value, then N t is chosen to be a combination of nodes

from N and N s . For example, one choice for n = 4 would be N t = [Ns (1), N (2), N (3), N (4)],

i.e. only the first node of N is replaced by the node in the steepest descent direction. The

other tries involve replacing 2 nodes and 3 nodes of N by corresponding nodes in the steepest

descent direction. The total number of such combinations (maxtry) including the first trial

Pn

set is given by k=1 Ckn . For n = 4 and n = 3, maxtry is 15 and 7 respectively. When n = 1,

maxtry = 1 and the algorithm simplifies to trying only the closest node in the steepest descent

direction.

Initially, the limp part is discretized with a relatively coarse mesh and the algorithm is

run for different initial guesses. Based on the results, the mesh is refined in selective regions

and the algorithm is again run for different initial guesses. This process of iterative refinement

and solution is carried on until an accurate enough solution is obtained. Symmetry in the

problem is exploited whenever possible as it reduces the size of the problem and solution time.

4 Numerical Results

Optimal pick-up locations were obtained for several different shapes and material properties.

We first checked our algorithms by solving pick-up locations for relatively stiff parts. As the

deformations are small, the objective function is computed by solving a linear problem. This

allowed us to quickly test the optimization algorithms. Then we systematically lowered the

flexural rigidity and solved for optimal locations while the objective function was computed

from the solution to a nonlinear problem. We lowered the flexural rigidity until typical nonlin-

ear phenomena (limit points and bifurcation points) associated with shells occured frequently

resulting in divergence in the finite element element computations and hence stalling of the

optimization procedure. In order to demonstrate a practical application of the methods de-

veloped we obtained optimal pick-up location of parts used to make apparel and datawear

products. In all the results, linear isotropic material behavior was assumed and the Poisson’s

ratio was set as ν = 0.3.

5

4.1 4 Pick-up Locations for Square/Rectangular Domains

**The problem of 4 pick-up locations on a rectangular domain of dimensions 2a x 2b can be
**

simplified to 1 pick-up location on a quarter domain by exploiting symmetry as shown in

Figure 2. It is sufficient to solve for optimal location (x1 ,y1 ) on OABC by enforcing symmetric

boundary conditions along edges OA and OC. The meshing problem simplifies to that of

generating a mesh of quadrilateral elements for a rectangle of dimensions a x b given the

desired level of discretization and coordinates of pick-up locations (x1 ,y1 ). An automatic

meshing procedure that distributes specified number of elements in the x and y-directions to

the 4 different regions of the rectangle shown in Figure 2 (b) in proportion to the size of each

regions was developed. This procedure allows for systematic generation of nodal coordinates,

element connectivity, element numbers, node numbers where symmetric boundary conditions

are to be enforced and the node number corresponding to (x1 ,y1 ). A limitation of the procedure

is that bad meshes with quadrilateral elements of poor aspect ratio are generated when (x1 ,y1 )

is located very close to the boundary. During optimization, we prevent this from happening

by perturbing (x1 ,y1 ) away from the boundary in the search direction. Also, the initial guesses

are chosen on or away from the boundary.

The above meshing procedure was included in the nonlinear shell finite element code

used to compute the objective function and the optimization problem was solved using the

L-BFGS-B code for bound constrained optimization developed by Zhu et al [2]. The objective

function was computed by summing the areas under the load deflection curve of every node

using Equation 11 in [1]. Parameters factr = 1.0 and pgtol = 1e−8 were used to terminate

the optimization and the gradient was computed by finite differences. The variables were

bounded by the dimensions of the rectangle (i.e. 0 ≤ x1 ≤ a and 0 ≤ y1 ≤ b) and the solution

was verified by solving the problem for different levels of discretization and initial guesses.

Material properties were characterized in terms of the following nondimensional number :

wl3

γ= (2)

D

where,

w = weight per unit area

6

l = length of the square (2a = 2b = l)

Et3

D = is the flexural rigidity,

12(1 − ν 2 )

t = thickness

E = Young’s modulus

ν = Poissons ratio

Increasing values of γ result in lower flexural rigidity and greater deformation.

4.1.1 Small deformations

**We first solved the problem for a square domain of length l = 2.0m, thickness t = 0.1m,
**

γ = 0.12 and w and E corresponding to high flexural rigidity. Since the deformations are

small, the objective function can be computed from a single load step. This allows us to

quickly check our optimization algorithms. The problem was first solved as a continuous

optimization problem using the L-BFGS-B code with automatic meshing. A desired level of

discretization of 10 elements in the x and y directions was specified in the automatic meshing

procedure and different initial guesses were tried. Figure 3 shows the iteration histories plotted

on the square domain starting from different initial guesses on the boundary. Solutions from

different initial guesses converged to any accuracy within 4 decimal places. The optimal

location is at

x1 = 0.54505 m; y1 = 0.54505 m

**Next, we solved the problem as a discrete optimization problem on a fixed mesh with
**

iterative mesh refinement using the algorithm described in Section 3. The entire square domain

was discretized and all the 4 pick-up locations were solved for. Figure 4 shows the iteration

histories of the optimization on a fine mesh obtained after 3 iterations of mesh refinement.

Sets of 4 lines of the same type trace the movement of the pick-up locations from different

initial guesses as the optimization progresses. Note that the lines pass through nodes in the

mesh as boundary conditions (pick-up locations) can be applied only at nodes. Solutions

from different initial guesses converge to within an element. The final locations from different

initial guesses along with the value of the objective function are shown in Table 1. It can be

7

Table 1: Coordinates to which different initial guesses converge for the mesh in Figure 4

Line x1 y1 x2 y2 x3 y3 x4 y4 Objective

Type Function

--- 0.5445 0.5505 -0.5454 0.5382 -0.5413 -0.5584 0.5525 -0.5371 2.201E-04

- 0.5445 0.5505 -0.5454 0.5382 -0.5399 -0.5444 0.5513 -0.5524 2.206E-04

-. - 0.5445 0.5505 -0.5454 0.5382 -0.5413 -0.5584 0.5525 -0.5371 2.201E-04

**noted that there is less than 1 percent difference in objective function between the solutions
**

obtained from different initial guesses.

Comparing the result for (x1 ,y1 ) obtained by the two methods, we note that the discrete

solution on a fixed mesh matches upto two decimal places with the continuous solution. The

above excercise, besides providing a check of our implementation of various procedures has

served to validate the performance of the algorithm developed in Section 3.

4.1.2 Effect of flexural rigidity and size on optimal locations for square domains

**The effect of flexural rigidity and size was studied by systematically increasing the nondi-
**

mensional number γ and solving for optimal locations for different l/t ratios. Different initial

guesses and discretizations were used for each set of γ and l/t values. Figures 5 and 6 show

the variation of x and y coordinates of optimal locations as γ and l/t vary. The locations lie

along the diagonal and as the flexural rigidity is lowered (higher the value of γ), the locations

tend to move towards the corner. When the size of the domain is increased (higher the l/t

ratio) the locations tend to move towards the corner.

4.1.3 Effect of aspect ratio on optimal locations for a rectangular domain

**The effect of aspect ratio on optimal locations was studied for blue denim fabric. Material
**

properties for blue denim fabric from [1] were used and the optimal locations were obtained

8

for different aspect ratios. Figure 7 shows the variation of x1 /a and y1 /b as the aspect ratio

is varied. It can be noted that the optimal locations do not lie along the diagonal for aspect

ratios other than 1.0. Also, the change in the location of y1 /b is more compared to that in

the x1 /a

4.1.4 Optimal locations for square and rectangular fabric parts

**Optimal locations for several square and rectangular fabric parts were obtained. Figure 8
**

shows the deformed shape at optimal locations for a 30cm x 30cm square cotton twill fabric

part (γ = 474.87 and l/t = 499.16). Figure 9 shows the deformed shape of a 40cm x 24cm

rectangular blue denim fabric part.

4.2 Pick-up Locations for Arbitrary Domains

**The algorithm for a fixed mesh described in Section 3 was used to solve for optimal locations
**

for limp parts of various shapes and material properties. We present results of parts obtained

from datawear and apparel products. Dimensions of parts used to make the cover of Symbol

4340 hand held computer were obtained from Medcovers Inc. (Raleigh, North Carolina), a

company that manufactures equipment covers. Two parts (Symbol-1 and Symbol-2) made

of laminated 1000 Denier Cordura are shown in Figure 10. Dimensions of typical shirt and

short parts were obtained from the Apparel Lab, College of Textiles, North Carolina State

University. A short front and shirt front part are shown in Figure 11. The material properties

used are listed in Table 5 in [1].

4.2.1 Symbol-1 Part

**The Symbol-1 part is symmetric about the x-axis. Hence, when solving for 4 pick-up locations,
**

it is sufficient to solve for 2 pick-up locations on the domain bounded by ABCDEF by enforcing

symmetric boundary conditions along edge BC. Figure 12 shows the mesh on which solutions

from different initial guesses are shown by lines that connect the initial and final nodes.

Numbers are used to identify lines corresponding to different initial guesses. Table 2 shows

the coordinates to which different initial guesses converged along with the final objective

function values. Note that different initial guesses converge to nodes that are close by if not

9

Table 2: Coordinates to which different initial guesses converge for Symbol-1

Initial x1 y1 x2 y2 Objective

guess function

1 3.541 2.526 27.569 2.503 0.68268

2 3.541 2.526 27.569 2.503 0.68268

3 3.541 2.526 27.569 2.503 0.68268

4 3.082 3.107 27.534 2.757 0.67715

**within an element. Besides this, there is a very small difference in the value of the final
**

objective function. Although a more accurate solution could be obtained by using a more

refined mesh, for practical purposes we can consider the solution with the lowest objective

function as optimal.The deformed shape at optimal locations is shown in Figure 13.

4.2.2 Symbol-2 Part

**The Symbol-2 part is symmetric about the y-axis. We obtained 4 and 6 pick-up locations
**

by solving for 2 and 3 locations respectively on half the domain bounded by ABCDEFGH.

Symmetric boundary conditions were enforced along edges CD, EF and GH. Figure 14 shows

the mesh for 2 locations on which solutions from different initial guesses are shown by lines

that connect the initial and final nodes. Numbers are used to identify lines corresponding to

different initial guesses. In this case all the initial guesses converged to the same nodes. The

optimal locations are at

x1 = 0.8793; y1 = 2.3885

x2 = 1.5835; y2 = 26.567

The deformed shapes at optimal locations are shown in Figures 15 and 16.

10

4.2.3 Shirt and short front

We solved for four pick-up locations for a blue denim shirt and shorts front. Figures 17 and 18

show the deformed shape of the shirt and short part respectively when picked up at optimal

locations.

5 Conclusions

In this paper, we developed procedures to solve for optimal pick-up locations that minimize

the strain energy of two dimensional limp parts. The limp parts were modeled as shell under-

going large deformations and rotations by a geometrically exact nonlinear shell finite element

formulation. The optimal locations were solved using gradient based algorithms in which

both objective function and gradient are computed from a nonlinear finite element solution.

A novel gradient based algorithm to solve for optimal locations on a fixed mesh was developed

to overcome the need for automatic meshing of arbitrarily shaped two dimensional domains.

The methods have been successfully applied to obtain results for two dimensional domains of

different shapes.

6 Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the National Textile Center and we gratefully acknowledge the

support. We would like to thank Prof. T. G. Clapp, College of Textiles, North Carolina State

University for various useful discussions and suggestions. We would also like to acknowl-

edge the excellent computing facilities of the North Carolina Supercomputing Center which

were utilized for obtaining the numerical results. We thank Medcovers Inc. for providing us

dimensions of different products as well as fabric samples.

11

7 Literature Cited

1. Lankalapalli, S., Eischen, J. W. “Optimal Pick-up Locations for Transport and Handling

of Limp Materials, Part I : One Dimensional Strips,” Submitted to Textile Research

Journal, September 2002.

**2. Zhu, C., Byrd, R. H., Lu, P., Nocedal, J., December 1997. “Algorithm 778 : L-BFGS-B
**

: Fortran Subroutines for Large-Scale Bound Constrained Optimization,” ACM Trans-

actions on Mathematical Software, 23(4), 550-560.

12

C

B

(x2 ,y2 ) (x1 ,y1 )

2b

O A

(x3 ,y3 ) (x4 ,y4 )

2a

(a) Original Problem

y

C(0,b) B (a,b)

3 2

(x1 ,y1 )

4 1

x

O(0,0) A (a,0)

(b) Symmetry used to solve for 1 pick-up location

Figure 2: 4 pick-up locations on a rectangular domain

13

1 C B

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0 O A

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Figure 3: Iteration histories from different initial guesses

14

1

0.75

0.5

0.25

0

y

-0.25

-0.5

-0.75

-1

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1

x

Figure 4: Iteration histories from different initial guesses

15

0.85

0.8 800

500

1000

0.75 200

x /l 100

1

0.7

0.65

0.6

0.55

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100

l/t ratio

Figure 5: Effect of γ and l/t ratio on x1 /l

16

0.85

0.8 800

1000 500

200

0.75

y

1 /l 100

0.7

0.65

0.6

0.55

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100

l/t ratio

Figure 6: Effect of γ and l/t ratio on y1 /l

17

0.8

0.75 x

1/ a

0.7

0.65

0.6

Location

0.55

0.5

0.45

y /b

1

0.4

0.35

0.3

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

a/b

Figure 7: Effect of aspect ratio on x1 /a and y1 /b for blue denim fabric

18

0

-0.5

z

0 0

2 2

4 4

6 6

y 8 8

x

10 10

12 12

14 14

**Figure 8: Deformed shape of square cotton twill fabric part at optimal locations x1 = 11.16
**

cm, x2 = 11.16 cm

19

0

0

-0.5

z

5

0

2 10

4 x

6 15

y 8

10

12 20

**Figure 9: Deformed shape of rectangular blue denim fabric part at optimal locations x1 =
**

15.11 cm, x2 = 6.79 cm

20

25

20 SYMBOL-1

15

y

10

B C

5 D E

A F

0

0 10 20 30

x

30 B C

25 D

20

hole

E SYMBOL-2

15

y

F

10

hole

5 G

A H

0

0 10 20 30

x

**Figure 10: Shapes of two Symbol Parts (all dimensions in centimeters)
**

21

70

60

60

SHIRT 50 SHORT

50 FRONT FRONT

40

40

y

y

30

30

20

20

10 10

0 0

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20

x x

Figure 11: Shapes of shirt and short parts (all dimensions in centimeters)

22

20

15

10

y

5

4 4 2 1

3

0

1

2 3

0 10 20 30

x

Figure 12: Mesh with iteration histories for Symbol-1

23

30

25

20

0 15

x

10

z

-0.5

6 5

4

y 2

0 0

Figure 13: Deformed shape of Symbol-1 at optimal locations

24

30 1

4

25 3

2

20

y

15

10 2

5 3

4

0 1

0 5 10 15 20

x

Figure 14: Mesh with iteration histories for Symbol-2

25

30

25

20 0

-0.5

15

z

y -1

10 10

5 5 x

0 0

Figure 15: Deformed shape of Symbol-2 at optimal locations

26

30

25

20

0

15 -0.2

z

y -0.4

10 10

5 5 x

0 0

Figure 16: Deformed shape of Symbol-2 at optimal locations

27

70

60

0 50

40

z

30 x

20 20

y 10 10

0 0

Figure 17: Deformed shape of shirt front at optimal locations

28

60

0

-1 50

-2

z

40

30 30 x

20 20

y 10 10

0 0

Figure 18: Deformed shape of short front at optimal locations

29

- 61946709 Competitive Manufacturing Systems i 002Uploaded byRajueswar
- MITRES2_002S10_lec01Uploaded byorpharion
- Pattern Search ProgramUploaded byKarthik Thirumala
- Conjugate GradientUploaded byWayne Yang
- Performative Architecture ReadingUploaded bybojuskrojus
- Mihir Resume1Uploaded byanon-644031
- What is Convergence in Finite Element Analysis_ How is It CalculatedUploaded bygaliskribd
- Optimization of Laminate Composite Structures_1Uploaded byАндрей Пятыгин
- Zz Error Estimator Lecture27Uploaded bybigscribe
- 8. Chapter 8 - Types of Finite Elements _a4Uploaded byGabrielPaintings
- 40220130405017.pdfUploaded byIAEME Publication
- aiaa2002-5642.pdfUploaded byEslam Nagy
- Project 5Uploaded byThiTang
- Users5.1Uploaded byAlan Doberman
- Optimal FilmUploaded bymozoce
- Optimal Design of Electrical Machines State of the Art SurveyUploaded byAmir Mosavi
- Node-Based Optimal Power Control, Routing, And Congestion Control in Wireless NetworksUploaded bysahathermal6633
- pcimod3630analysisandautooptimization-150825062613-lva1-app6892.pdfUploaded byparmesh
- Stresses Around Extremely Large or Interacting Multiple Holes in Orthotropic CompositesUploaded bykhudhayer1970
- Chapter13 - Agreggate PlanningUploaded byMarco Tulio
- me471s03_syUploaded byHasen Bebba
- Validation Bearing Capacity of Strip Footing 2016 (1)Uploaded byJose Leo Mission
- 2_dipart_qubUploaded byNono4138
- 101 Ji, Kuchma An analytical framework for seismic fragility analysis of RCUploaded byhamadani
- A Consistently Rapid Algorithm for Solving Polynomial EquationsUploaded byAmin Alisadeghi
- Finite ElementsUploaded bysonik2099
- matlabUploaded byPrudhvi Bellamkonda
- 1-s2.0-S0306261915012258-mainUploaded bykikirdt
- MSC Fastener Modeling for Joining Composite Parts 06-SpiritAero_BoshersUploaded bySergey Fedorinov
- Lecture 01 Ver1Uploaded byTa Thanh Tung

- WETTONUploaded byapi-3733260
- yeoUploaded byapi-3733260
- whiteUploaded byapi-3733260
- WOOLUploaded byapi-3733260
- wortUploaded byapi-3733260
- Anne_Hooper_s_Kama_Sutra._Classic_Lovemaking_techniques_reinterpeted_for_today_s_loversUploaded byapi-3733260
- zeronianUploaded byapi-3733260
- yearsUploaded byapi-3733260
- yannasUploaded byapi-3733260
- wortmannUploaded byapi-3733260
- weiUploaded byapi-3733260
- YESIMUploaded byapi-3733260
- wangUploaded byapi-3733260
- yangUploaded byapi-3733260
- warwickerUploaded byapi-3733260
- vinisUploaded byapi-3733260
- taborUploaded byapi-3733260
- ULLMANUploaded byapi-3733260
- t6Uploaded byapi-3733260
- vershUploaded byapi-3733260
- stattonUploaded byapi-3733260
- strUploaded byapi-3733260
- treloarUploaded byapi-3733260
- tereneUploaded byapi-3733260
- VSUBRAMUploaded byapi-3733260
- ugbolueUploaded byapi-3733260
- tsurUploaded byapi-3733260
- stearneUploaded byapi-3733260
- vijayanUploaded byapi-3733260
- stressUploaded byapi-3733260