46 vues

Transféré par Marcelo Varejão Casarin

- EM_Lab
- FEM Basic Theory BT1 6p
- Student Book IT
- Shoe Cover
- Stb
- Simple gabion wall example.pdf
- Guidelines for FEA Gear Modeling
- GE6253 Nov_Dec 15
- Chesterfield Special Cylinders - FEA of High-Pressure Air Bottle
- MODELING AND SIMULATION OF TURNING PROCESS
- Penyelarasan RPT Sains T6
- Publication
- 12-05 Textile Mechanics-I (TE)
- s02_t1
- Chapter 7
- Study On Vibration Analysis Of Inclined Edge Cracked Beam With Fixed Free Boundary Condition Using Ansys Software
- Introduction to Finite Elements Method
- Drilling DOF
- N Rimer 1
- rpt sains tahun 6

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 6

IN DENSE SAND

Kshama Sundar Roy

Graduate Student

Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science

Memorial University

St. Johns, NL, Canada

Bipul Hawlader

Associate Professor

Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science

Memorial University

St. Johns, NL, Canada

ABSTRACT

This paper investigates the soil restraint against lateral and

oblique motion of pipes buried in dense sand. A series of two-

and three-dimensional finite element analyses are performed for

pure lateral and combined axial-lateral relative pipeline/soil

displacement. The commercially available finite element

software package ABAQUS/Standard is used in numerical

analysis. The analyses are performed for two burial depths. The

numerical model is verified by comparing with model test

results available in the literature. The built-in Mohr-Coulomb

model in ABAQUS is used for modeling the soil. It is shown

that an advanced soil constitutive model might be required for

better modeling of pipe/soil interaction behavior.

INTRODUCTION

Buried pipelines are extensively used for transporting

water and hydrocarbons. The liquid hydrocarbon and natural

gas products are usually transported through buried pipelines,

which traverse large distances through a variety of soils.

Geohazards and the associated ground movement represent a

significant threat to pipeline integrity that may result in pipeline

damage and potential failure. In certain situations, pipelines can

be exposed to potential ground failures such as surface faulting,

liquefaction-induced soil movements, and landslide induced

permanent ground deformation (PGD). These ground

movements might cause excessive stresses in pipelines and

pipeline damage in some cases. Therefore, safe, economic and

reliable operation of pipeline transportation systems is the

primary goal of the pipeline operators and regulatory agencies.

In the current state-of-practice (e.g., Committee on Gas and

Liquid Fuel Lifelines of ASCE 1984, ALA 2002), the pipeline is

generally modeled by simplified beam, while the pipe/soil

interaction is modeled by three soil springs in the axial (or

longitudinal), transverse horizontal, and transverse vertical

directions using Winkler type model (Winkler [24]). The

properties of soil springs in three orthogonal directions are

independent which means that the deformation of soil in one

direction has no effect on pipe/soil interactions in other

directions. Theoretical and experimental studies were conducted

in the past to determine the forces on pipelines due to relative

movement of the soil in a specific direction, namely

longitudinal, transverse horizontal, or transverse vertical (e.g.

Hansen [9], Ovesen [12], Vesic [21], Audibert and Nyman [2],

Ranjan and Aurora [15], Trautmann and ORourke [18], Paulin

et al. [13], Scarpelli et al. [17], and Rizkalla et al. [16], Guo [8],

Wijewickreme et al. [23]).

The general form of the load-displacement relations

for these springs can be expressed as:

( ) ( ) ( ) z f Q y f P x f T = = = ; ; (1)

Where T, P and Q are the soil loads applied to unit length of the

pipeline and x, y and z are the relative displacements between

pipe and soil in longitudinal, lateral and vertical directions,

respectively. Several theoretical, numerical and experimental

analyses have been conducted on pipe/soil interaction and also

on load-displacement behavior of piles and anchor plates that

can be used to define the pipe/soil load-displacement behavior

for each of the three perpendicular (axial or longitudinal, lateral

horizontal and vertical) directions. These springs are usually

independent and during a 3D pipe/soil relative displacement

they cannot account for cross effects due to the shear interaction

Proceedings of the 2012 9th International Pipeline Conference

IPC2012

September 24-28, 2012, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

IPC2012-90100

2 Copyright 2012 by ASME

between different soil zones along the pipe. A number of studies

have been conducted in the past to investigate the pipe/soil

interaction during an oblique or three-dimensional pipe/soil

relative movement, which includes experimental [e.g. 6, 10],

theoretical [e.g. 5] and numerical [e.g. 4, 14] investigations. It is

shown [6, 14] that there is a considerable increase in the axial

soil restraint on the pipeline when a lateral relative

displacement occurs between pipe and soil. Therefore, more

investigations on complex loading conditions are needed to

enhance the numerical tools and to develop engineering

guidelines to assess the pipelines response in a 3D pipeline/soil

interaction event.

The main objective of this research program is to understand

better the complex pipeline/soil interaction and load transfer

mechanisms during combined axial/lateral relative pipeline/soil

displacements. Two- and three-dimensional continuum finite

analyses are performed using ABAQUS/Standard finite element

software. The built-in soil constitutive models in ABAQUS

cannot capture a number of important features. Implementation

of an advanced soil constitutive model in ABAQUS is currently

in progress. This paper presents some capabilities and

limitations of built-in soil model and shows why advanced soil

model is required.

FINITE ELEMENT MODEL FORMULATION

The Finite Element software package ABAQUS/Standard is

used to simulate the pipeline/soil interaction both in two- and

three-dimensional conditions. The long-term objective of this

research program is to model pipe/soil interaction behavior for

oblique loading implementing an advanced soil constitutive

model in ABAQUS FE software using a user subroutine UMAT

which is currently in progress. As the development of UMAT is

fairly complex the following steps are taken to achieve this

goal. First two-dimensional analyses have been performed and

compared with previous solutions. To compare the performance

with model test results, three-dimensional finite element model

is developed. Finally, some results for oblique loading are also

presented.

Figures 1(a) and 1(b) show the finite element mesh used in

numerical analyses for two- and three-dimensional conditions,

respectively. The dimensions are similar to the large-scale

experiments conducted by Trautmann and ORourke (1983).

In order to check the effects of bottom and right boundaries,

which are relatively close to the pipe, analyses have also been

performed with a larger soil domain where the bottom and right

boundaries respectively are at 0.8 m and 1.1 m from the pipe.

Very little difference in calculated lateral resistance using these

two different soil domains indicates that the dimensions of the

soil domains shown in Fig. 1 are sufficiently large and therefore

boundary effects are not expected on predicted lateral

resistance, displacement and failure mechanisms. The bottom of

the model (Fig. 1) is restrained from any vertical movement,

while all the vertical faces are restrained from any lateral

movement using roller supports. No displacement boundary

condition is applied on top face, and the soil can move freely.

A rigid pipe is placed at the desired location. The depth of

the pipe is measured in terms of H/D ratio, where H is the depth

of the bottom of the pipe from the ground surface and D is the

diameter of the pipe. The values of H/D used in these analyses

are 2.0 and 11.5.

The interface between pipe and soil is simulated using the

contact surface approach available in ABAQUS/Standard. This

approach allows the separation and sliding of finite amplitude

and arbitrary rotation of the contact surfaces. The Coulomb

friction model is used for the frictional interface between the

outer surface of the pipe and sand. In this method, the friction

coefficient () is defined as =tan(|

), where |

is the pipe/soil

interface friction angle. The pipe/soil interface friction angle, |

depends on the interface characteristics and the degree of

relative movement between the pipe and soil. The larger value

of |

rusty or corroded surfaces and the lower values would

correspond to pipes with smooth coating. The value of |

varies

between |' and |'/2 [22]. The value of |

is assumed to be equal

to |'/2 in this analysis.

Figure 1. Finite Element Mesh: (a) 2-D Analysis (b)

Lateral-3D and Oblique-3D Analysis

The numerical analysis is conducted in two main steps. The

first step is a geostatic stress step that accounts for the effects of

soil weight and defines the initial stress state in the soil. In the

second step, the pipe is moved in the desired direction (laterally

left, axial or in the combined axial-lateral direction) specifying

1.473m

0.3m

0.6m

2.3m

(a)

y

x

z

1.22m

2.3m

1.473m

m

0.6m

0.3m

(b)

3 Copyright 2012 by ASME

a displacement boundary condition at the reference point

(centre) of the pipe.

In the following sections the results are plotted in

dimensionless form: in the vertical axis the dimensionless force

=F/HDL and in the horizontal axis the dimensionless

displacement =/D, where L is the length of the pipe, is the

displacement of the pipe, is the unit weight of soil, H is the

distance from the ground surface to the bottom of the pipeline,

and D is the diameter of the pipe.

SOIL CONSTITUTIVE MODEL

Trautmann [19] presented a successful model test results

for lateral movement of the pipe. Several researchers later used

these test results to verify their numerical prediction and also to

develop some design guidelines. Clean, subangular,

fluvioglacial sand was used in model tests. The sand has

uniformity coefficient 2.6 and effective grain size 0.2 mm. The

minimum and maximum dry unit weights are 15.5 kN/m

3

and

18.3 kN/m

3

, respectively. The tests simulated in this study were

conducted in dry sand with unit weight of 17.7 kN/m

3

, which

gives a relative density 81%.

The Mohr-Coulomb plasticity model currently available in

ABAQUS/Standard finite element software is used to model the

soil (sand in this case). The elastic modulus can be determined

using bender elements on triaxial specimens or from unload-

reload curves with local strain measurement. A comprehensive

review of elastic properties of sand is available in Yimsiri

(2001) and Jefferies and Been (2007). Elastic modulus depends

on confining pressure, soil grain, and degree of compactness.

However, a constant value of E and Poissons ratio is assumed

in this study. The friction angle |' and dilation angle are

estimated from the direct shear test results on this sand

presented by Trautmann [19].

TWO-DIMENSIONAL LATERAL MOVEMENT OF PIPE

At first two-dimensional finite element analysis is

performed. A two-dimensional finite element model is

developed with geometry exactly similar to the experimental

setup used by Trautmann [19] as shown in Figs. 1 and 2.

Although the test setup is three-dimensional, the analysis

presented in this section is in two-dimensional plane strain

condition. For finite element modeling of soil, 8-node

biquadratic plane strain quadrilateral, reduced integration

element CPE8R and for pipe, 2-node two-dimensional rigid

beam element RB2D2 are used. The soil parameters used in the

analyses are: E = 3650 kPa, v = 0.3, |'=44, = 16, =0.4

and =17.7 kN/m

3

. For a given displacement, the load on the

pipe is obtained from the reaction force at the reference point of

the pipe.

The analyses are performed for one shallow (H/D=2) and

one deep (H/D=11.5) burial condition. The outer diameter of

the pipe is 102 mm. In both cases the bottom of the pipe is

approximately at 300 mm above the floor of the tank (Fig. 2).

Similar to experimental setup the pipe is placed at 600 mm left

from the right wall of the tank and is moved laterally to the left

until sufficient post-peak load-displacement response is

observed.

Figure 2. Two-dimensional view of experimental setup

(Trautmann and ORourke 1983)

Figures 3(a) and 3(b) show the comparison between the

experimental and numerical results for shallow and deep burial

conditions, respectively. As shown, the peak resistance obtained

from numerical analyses is reasonably matched with

experimental results. However, the post-peak behavior such as

the post-peak softening for H/D=11.5 could not be modeled

properly in this study. Also the force displacement curve

obtained from the numerical analysis does not match well with

experimental results for H/D=11.5. A higher value E might give

a closer FE result.

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

N

o

r

m

a

l

i

z

e

d

F

o

r

c

e

,

F

/

(

D

H

L

)

Normalized Displacement,

l

/D

Trautmann 1983 [Test 22]

Present analysis-Lateral-2D

(a) H/D = 2

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

N

o

r

m

a

l

i

z

e

d

F

o

r

c

e

,

F

/

(

D

H

L

)

Normalized Displacement,

l

/D

Trautmann, 1983 [Test 32]

Present Analysis-Lateral-2D

(b) H/D = 11.5

Figure 3. Normalized force-displacements curves:

(a) H/D=2.0 (b) H/D=11.5

Width = 1220 mm

4 Copyright 2012 by ASME

LATERAL MOVEMENT OF THE PIPE IN THREE-

DIMENSIONAL MODEL

The tests present by Trautmann [19] are in fact in three-

dimensional condition, although in previous section it is

modeled in a two-dimensional plain strain condition. In their

experiment, a model pipe of 610 mm length was moved

laterally in a 2300 mm 1220 mm 1473 mm (length width

thickness) tank filled with dry sand. In this section, the same

problem in three-dimensional condition is analyzed. The three-

dimensional finite element model shown in Fig. 1(b) is formed

with the geometry exactly similar to the experimental setup by

Trautmann [19]. For soil, 8-node linear brick, reduced

integration, hourglass control elements (C3D8R) and for pipe,

4-node three-dimensional bilinear rigid quadrilateral (R3D4)

elements are used. Again, a rigid pipe is used in the analysis and

the reference point is defined at the center of the pipe. The pipe

is moved laterally by applying a displacement boundary

condition at the reference point.

The same soil parameters listed in previous two-

dimensional analyses are used. The FE results obtained from the

three-dimensional model are compared with the two-

dimensional results presented in the previous sections and also

with the test results as shown in Figs. 4(a) and 4(b).

As shown, the force-displacement curves obtained from the

two-dimensional modeling is very similar to that of the three-

dimensional analysis. That means any discrepancies between

the model test and finite element results are not for the three-

dimensional effects. One of the possible reasons of

discrepancies is the use of appropriate soil model. The Mohr-

Coulomb plasticity model may not simulate the soil behavior

properly in this case. An advanced soil constitutive model might

be used for better modeling of this behavior.

Figure 5 shows the shear strain in the soil around the pipe

at post-peak displacement. Two different soil failure

mechanisms are observed: local (punching) failure for deep

burial pipe and general shear failure for shallow pipe.

OBLIQUE MOVEMENT OF THE PIPE

The soil resistance to oblique movement of pipe is

investigated in this section for H/D=11.5. The three-

dimensional finite element model, shown in Fig. 1(b), is used in

the analysis. Again the pipe is modeled as rigid body while the

soil is modeled using Mohr-Coulomb plasticity model. Similar

to previous analyses, the soil parameters used in this analysis

are: E = 3650 kPa, v = 0.3, |'=44, = 16, =0.4 and

=17.7kN/m

3

. The oblique motion of the pipe is achieved by

applying two displacement boundary conditions o

a

and o

l

in

each increment at reference point maintaining tanu=o

l

/o

a

where

u is the oblique angle and o

a

and o

l

are the displacement in the

axial and lateral direction, respectively. The definition of

oblique angle is shown in Fig. 6 where is equal to 0 for pure

axial and 90 for pure lateral movement. As shown in Fig. 1(b)

that the pipe is slightly longer than the soil domain in the x-

direction. This is to accommodate the axial movement of the

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

N

o

r

m

a

l

i

z

e

d

F

o

r

c

e

,

F

/

(

D

H

L

)

Normalized Displacement,

l

/D

Trautmann 1983 [Test 22]

Present analysis-Lateral-2D

Present Analysis Lateral-3D

(a) H/D = 2

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

N

o

r

m

a

l

i

z

e

d

F

o

r

c

e

,

F

/

(

D

H

L

)

Normalized Displacement,

l

/D

Trautmann, 1983 [Test 32]

Present Analysis-Lateral-2D

Present Analysis Lateral-3D

(b) H/D = 11.5

Figure 4. Normalized Force-displacements curves from

Lateral-3D analysis for (a) H/D =2 (b) H/D =11.5

pipe during oblique loading. Roller supports are used for all the

vertical faces of soil domain to prevent any lateral movement of

soil. Therefore, the pipe can move in all three directions (axial,

lateral and vertical). In this analysis the displacement boundary

condition is applied in the axial-lateral direction at the reference

point at u=40 for H/D=11.5.

Normalized force-displacements curves for oblique motion

of the pipe are shown in the Fig. 7. As shown in this figure that

the peak lateral force calculated in oblique loading (=40) is

lower than the peak lateral force calculated in the pure lateral

loading (=90). Similar trend was found by Guo [8] for

cohesive soil. An opposite trend is found in axial force. The

peak axial force obtained in oblique loading (=40) is much

higher than the peak axial force calculated in the pure axial

loading (=0).

5 Copyright 2012 by ASME

Figure 5. Shear failure pattern for

(a) H/D =2 (b) H/D = 11.5

Figure 6. Definition of Oblique Angle in Axial-Lateral

Direction

There are two sets of test data on oblique motion of

buried pipes in dense sand which could be used to compare

numerical analysis. The first one is a large scale model test [10]

and the second one is centrifuge test [6]. The centrifuge tests [6]

give higher lateral resistance than that of in pure lateral tests.

Also it gave higher resistance than large scale tests [10].

Reexamination of these results and/or more tests is required for

better understanding of this mechanism. From our analyses and

also from previous studies [7] it is found that advanced soil

model is required to compare these results especially at shallow

burial depth. Some of the limitations of Mohr-Coulomb model

could be also found in previous studies [e.g. 7]. Although some

fitting functions are used for mobilized friction angle and

dilation angle, it is clear that advanced soil constitutive model

could overcome some of the issues that could not be solved

using Mohr-Coulomb model.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

In current practice, structural analysis of the pipeline is

usually done using three independent discrete soil springs.

However, previous studies show that these three springs are not

independent and coupled effects should be considered for better

modeling. Continuum finite element modeling could be used for

better simulation of pipe/soil interaction behavior.

Figure 7. Normalized Force-displacements curves from

Oblique-3D and pure lateral, pure Axial analysis

The finite element analyses presented in this paper show

that the lateral component of soil resistance in oblique direction

is smaller than that when the pipe undergoes purely lateral

movement. However, the result is opposite for the axial

component in oblique movement i.e. axial component of the

soil resistance in oblique motion is larger than that when the

pipe undergoes purely axial movement. While the present

analyses show the similar trend as observed in model tests [6,

10], for successful quantification of the response of pipeline the

soil behavior should be modeled properly. Fortunately a large

number of researchers in geotechnical engineering are devoted

to the development of better constitutive model for sand which

can capture most of the salient features. Unfortunately, these

advanced soil constitutive models are not implemented in most

of the commercially available software such as ABAQUS.

Therefore, most of the research works on buried pipelines are

based on simple built-in model such as Mohr-Coulomb

plasticity model. The Mohr-Coulomb plasticity model has a

number of limitations including the modeling of dilation and

could be questionable at low stress level.

The implementation of an advanced soil constitutive model

in ABAQUS FE code using the user subroutine UMAT is

currently in progress. The developed finite element tool

presented above and the implement soil model will be used for

further analyses.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The work presented in this paper has been funded by RDC

and NSERC Discovery grants. The authors express their

sincerest thanks to them.

REFERENCES

[1] American Lifeline Alliance (ALA) (2002). Guidelines for

the design of buried pipe. (www.americanlifelinealliance.org).

(b) H/D =11.5; local shear

failure

(a) H/D =2; general shear

failure

6 Copyright 2012 by ASME

[2] Audibert, J. M. E., and Nyman, K. J. (1977). Soil restraint

against horizontal motion of pipes. J. Geotech. Eng. Div., Am.

Soc. Civ. Eng., 103(10), 11191142.

[3] Bolton, M. D. (1986). The strength and dilatancy of

sands. Geotechnique, 36(1), 6578.

[4] Cocchetti, G., Prisco, C., Galli, A. (2009). Soilpipeline

interaction along unstable slopes: a coupled three-dimensional

approach. Part 2: Numerical analyses. Can. Geotech. J. 46:

1305-1321.

[5] Cocchetti, G., Prisco, C., Galli, A. and Nova, R. (2009).

Soil-pipeline interaction along unstable slopes: a coupled

three-dimensional approach. Part 1: Theoretical formulation.

Can. Geotech. J. 46: 1289-1304

[6] Daiyan, N., Kenny, S., Phillips, R. and Popescu, R. (2010).

Investigation of axial/lateral interaction of pipes in dense

sand. ICPMG 2010, Int. Conf. on Physical Modeling in

Geotechnics, Zurich, Switzerland.

[7] Daiyan, N., Kenny, S., Phillips, R. and Popescu, R. (2010b).

Numerical investigation of oblique pipeline/soil interaction in

sand. IPC 2010, Int. Pipeline Conf., Calgary, Canada.

[8] Guo, P. (2005). Numerical modeling of pipe-soil interaction

under oblique loading. Journal of Geotechnical and

Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 131(2), pp. 260- 268.

[9] Hansen, J. B. (1961). The ultimate resistance of rigid piles

against transversal forces. Bulletin No. 12, Danish

Geotechnical Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark, 59.

[10] Hsu, T.W., Chen, Y.J. and Hung, W.Y. (2006). Soil

Restraint to Oblique Movement of Buried Pipes in Dense

Sand. Journal of transportation engineering, ASCE, 132(2):

175-181.

[11] Nyman, K.J. (1984). Soil response against oblique motion

of pipes. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 110(2), pp.

190-202.

[12] Ovesen, N. K. (1964). Anchor slabs, calculation methods

and model tests. Bulletin No. 16, The Danish Geotechnical

Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark.

[13] Paulin, M. J. (1998). An investigation into pipelines

subjected to lateral soil loading. PhD thesis, Memorial Univ. of

Newfoundland, St. Johns, Canada.

[14] Phillips, R., Nobahar, A. and Zhou, J. (2004). Combined

axial and lateral pipe-soil interaction relationships.

Proceedings of IPC2004, International pipeline Conference,

Calgary, Canada.

[15] Ranjan, G., and Aurora, V. B. (1980). Model studies on

anchors under horizontal pull in clay. Proc., 3rd Australia, New

Zealand Conf. on Geomechanics, Vol. 1, 6570.

[16] Rizkalla, M., Poorooshasb, F., and Clark, J. I. (1992).

Centrifuge modelling of lateral pipeline/soil interaction.

Proc., 11th Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Symp.

[17] Scarpelli, G., Sakellariadi, E., and Furlani, G. (1999).

Longitudinal pipeline-soil interaction: results from field full

scale and laboratory testing. Panel Contribution in the Proc. of

12th ECSMGE, Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

[18] Trautmann, C. H., ORourke, T. D., and Kulhawy, F. H.

(1985). Uplift forcedisplacement response of buried pipe. J.

Geotech. Eng., 111(9), 10611076.

[19] Trautmann, C.H. (1983). Behavior of pipe in dry sand

under lateral and uplift loading. PhD thesis, Cornell

University, Ithaca, NewYork

[20] Turner, J. P., and Kulhawy, F. H. (1987). Experimental

analysis of drilled shaft foundations subjected to repeated axial

loads under drained conditions. Rep. to Electric Power

Research Institute, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.

[21] Vesic, A. S. (1971). Breakout resistance of objects

embedded in ocean bottom. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., 97(9),

11831205.

[22] Yimsiri, S., Soga, K., Yoshizaki, K., Dasari, G.R. and

ORourke, T.D. (2004) Lateral and upward soil-pipeline

interactions in sand for deep embedment conditions. Journal of

geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering, 130(8): 830-

842.

[23] Wijewickreme, D., Karimian, H. and Honegger, D. (2009).

Response of buried steel pipelines subjected to relative axial

soil movement. Can. Geotech. J., 46: 735-752

[24] Winkler, E. (1867). Die lehre von elastizitat und festigkeit

(teaching on elasticity and stiffness). Prague, Czechoslov

[25] Mike Jeffereies and Ken Been (2006). Soil liquefaction :

a critical state approach. Taylor & Francis, London ; New

York.

[26] Yimsiri, S. (2001). Pre-failure deformation characteristics

of soils: anisotropy and soil fabric, Ph.D. Dissertation,

University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England.

- EM_LabTransféré parSushilkumar Magade
- FEM Basic Theory BT1 6pTransféré parpelucas
- Student Book ITTransféré parLudovico Vico
- Shoe CoverTransféré parNuur Syuhada Dzulkafly
- StbTransféré parpanjumuttaai
- Simple gabion wall example.pdfTransféré parKew Mun Seng
- Guidelines for FEA Gear ModelingTransféré parThomas Introna
- GE6253 Nov_Dec 15Transféré parVasanthKumar
- Chesterfield Special Cylinders - FEA of High-Pressure Air BottleTransféré parAnonymous P8Bt46mk5I
- MODELING AND SIMULATION OF TURNING PROCESSTransféré parSugan Nalla
- Penyelarasan RPT Sains T6Transféré parAnonymous X0vZIVuojG
- PublicationTransféré parEdú Cárdenas
- 12-05 Textile Mechanics-I (TE)Transféré parzxy_cbe
- s02_t1Transféré parAthena Eos
- Chapter 7Transféré parJanet Evan
- Study On Vibration Analysis Of Inclined Edge Cracked Beam With Fixed Free Boundary Condition Using Ansys SoftwareTransféré parIRJET Journal
- Introduction to Finite Elements MethodTransféré parmanofvalour
- Drilling DOFTransféré parDaniele Di Luca
- N Rimer 1Transféré parIrfan Shah
- rpt sains tahun 6Transféré parNorshahida Yahya
- FEM1D.pdfTransféré parMarvinEbora
- Mindlin 2013Transféré parYash
- lab6.docTransféré parTauQeer Shah
- FEM StrangTransféré parmarcos_samudio
- Prilog 11 802 Malenica Senjanovic Vladimir OnlineTransféré parAjay V Ramadas
- Statics-Exam#2.pdfTransféré parAndrew Mwanza Zulu
- IAT 3 Engineering Mechanics Question and KeyTransféré parAnonymous RJfsy8Pt
- A Coupled Distinct Element—Finite Element Method for Large Deformation Analysis of Rock MassesTransféré parali
- smTransféré parmvamsip
- fly wheel .pdfTransféré parRam Tirumalasetti

- resumo 3Transféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 05PO_AA_3_4.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 5PA_JW_4_5.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- Gas Pipeline ITransféré parSon Nguyen Tuan
- Documento Caminhao 2Transféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 6PA_HC_4_5.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- Pipeline Design and Construction a Practical Approach M Mohitpour 2nd EdTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- Documento CaminhaoTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- NOTA TÉCNICA 002/2016 - SCMTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 1PO_CM_4_5.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 8PA_GM_4_5.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- CEsubstituiçãodevalvulas-Fuganivel1(2) 20171011141531.540 XTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- ResumoTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 11PO_ID_4_4.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- Roteiro de Lojas de Fábrica « Programa DialogarTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 02PA_JS_4_4.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 10PO_JA_4_4.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 1PA_TH_4_5.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 03_PA_MW_4_3.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 04PA_HE_4_4.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 06PO_MA_4_4.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 7PA_EL_4_5.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 03PA_KS_4_4.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 05PA-PO_BL_4_4.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 09PO_HK_4_4.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 03PO_AH_4_3.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 12PO_MP_4_4.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 08PO_DF_4_2.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 07PO_AA_4_4.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- 08PO_SH_4_4.pdfTransféré parMarcelo Varejão Casarin

- MCAT Test 1 2012 NCEATransféré parRobbie Hautea DelaVega
- Pump SiteTransféré parCharles Odada
- ACFrOgBQ4-kaE39ngCNbxdQcSS2w-declOcbTE8lb01j4DC77FR875dUccU1rVq3ls78vF5F-UQzY3M8CkUBOc4So7X4EagARjsu1NgjXXcHHEkFTVFklWwronDavtc=Transféré parfadhillah ivan
- Peer Cfp1 Mimec2015Transféré parMochamad Safarudin
- B.tech EC SchemeTransféré parsssds
- Calculation of Uf Factor 2Transféré parShail Endra Ramchurn
- Kollmorgen S300 Servo Drive ManualTransféré parCarlos Salazar
- Fracciones Parciales StewartTransféré parcegale
- PETE 410 Design Project 17Transféré parNural Muradli
- Homework as PDF-fileTransféré paryu1rt
- Current ElectricityTransféré parNimmi Nims
- AstropheTransféré parvarun_jhunjhunwalla
- Surface IntegralsTransféré parTushar Gupta
- cell biology test study guideTransféré parapi-257190713
- Thermodynamic,Engine Types&Overview NezarTransféré parMachineryeng
- emd-IA2Transféré parSivabala Krishnan
- States of MatterTransféré parKainshk Gupta
- 33494836-UMTSTransféré parwassim_chinoui
- 7j1 electric circuits HOMEWORK PACK.docTransféré parMaogageoffrey
- Draft Standard for Current Ratings of LT PVC cables to IS 1554 Pt(1).docxTransféré parRavi Shankar
- Triterpene Saponin Content in the Roots of Red Beet (Beta VulgarisTransféré parUlfa Yasmin Shahab
- Econometrics-I-1Transféré parChitrakalpa Sen
- Motor From Cheap MagnetsTransféré parPrashanth Penta Reddy
- Chemistry Stpm Semester 2 Group 2Transféré parChong Yin Ping
- SENSORSECTION.pdfTransféré pareuqehtb
- Michael Faraday, D Wood, Edward J Goetz - Experimental Researches in Chemistry and Physics (1990, Nabu Press)Transféré parEnzo Victorino Hernandez Agressott
- Bio-applications of nanoparticles.pdfTransféré parTaboada Cristhian
- Yad97584Transféré parKunal Singh
- Math discrete mathsTransféré parJayant Arora
- PROB SETTransféré parMary Daphne Buti