4.6 Article

Effects of oxidation degree of support and phosphorus modification on the catalytic cracking of coal pyrolysis tar by char-supported nickel catalysts

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2022.112028

关键词

Architectural geometry; Funicular structures; Gridshells; Cable -nets; Structural design; Monge-Ampe `re equation; Discrete differential geometry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article introduces a family of surfaces called isotropic Linear Weingarten (iLW) surfaces, which can fulfill multiple constraints in the design of curved structural building envelopes. The shapes are shown to be funicular for a uniform vertical load and the principal projected stress lines form a conjugate net. A discrete model and an optimization-based generation method are proposed based on recent advances in discrete differential geometry. The shape potential is demonstrated through several examples.
The design of curved structural building envelopes such as gridshells or cable-net roofs is challenging as it requires to account for a wide variety of constraints. In particular, the chosen shape must be mechanically efficient, fabricable, and fit the site geometry. This article shows how a family of surfaces, called isotropic Linear Weingarten (iLW) surfaces, may fulfil all these constraints together, and be used as an intuitive design tool. We start by showing that these shapes are funicular for a uniform vertical load, and that principal projected stress lines form a conjugate net. This allows in particular for the design of gridshells with planar faces and low bending moments or for the design of self-stressed cable-nets cladded by planar glass panels. We then propose a discrete model of iLW surfaces based on recent advances in discrete differential geometry. We use this model to propose an optimization-based generation method, for which the inputs are the boundary curves and two control parameters. We demonstrate the shape potential on several examples.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据