Sensitivity analysis-based variable screening and reliability optimisation for composite fuselage frame crashworthiness design

References

• Christensen RM. The World Wide Failure Exercise II examination of results. J Reinf Plast Compos. 2013;32(21 ):166–1672 .
   Google Scholar
• Guo S, Li D, Zhang X, et al. Buckling and post-buckling of a composite C-section with cutout and flange reinforcement. Compos Part B. 2014;60(60):119–124.
   Google Scholar
• Farooq U, Myler P. Finite element simulation of damage and failure predictions of relatively thick carbon fibre-reinforced laminated composite panels subjected to flat and round noses low velocity drop-weight impact. Thin-Walled Struct. 2016;104:82–105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hesse SH, Lukaszewicz DHJA, Duddeck F. A method to reduce design complexity of automotive composite structures with respect to crashworthiness. Compos Struct. 2015;129:236–249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bikakis GSE. Simulation of the dynamic response of GLARE plates subjected to low velocity impact using a linearized spring–mass model. Aerosp Sci Technol. 2017;64:24–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farley GL, Jones RM. Energy-absorption capability of composite tubes and beams.[Thesis].Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. 1989, Blacksburg.
   Google Scholar
• Farley GL, Jones RM. Crushing characteristics of continuous fiber-reinforced composite tubes. J Compos Mater. 1992;26(1):37–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jimenez MA, Miravete A, Larrode E., et al. Effect of trigger geometry on energy absorption in composite profiles. Compos Struct. 2000;48(1):107–111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lanzi L, Castelletti LML, Anghileri M. Multi-objective optimisation of composite absorber shape under crashworthiness requirements. Compos Struct. 2004;65(3):433–441.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin M, Wen G, Hou S, et al. Crushing analysis and multiobjective crashworthiness optimization of honeycomb-filled single and bitubular polygonal tubes. Mat Design. 2011;32(8):4449–4460.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tay YY, Bhonge PS, Lankarani HM. Crash simulations of aircraft fuselage section in water impact and comparison with solid surface. Int J Crashworthiness. 2015;20(5):464–482.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huculak RD, Lankarani HM. Methods of evaluating ES-2 leg flail in dynamic evaluation and certification tests of side-facing aircraft seats. Int J Crashworthiness. 2015;20(6):613–628.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ren Y, Xiang J. A comparative study of the crashworthiness of civil aircraft with different strut configurations. Int J Crashworthiness. 2010;15(3):321–330.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ren Y, Xiang J. Energy absorption structures design of civil aircraft to improve crashworthiness. Aeronaut J. 2014;118(1202):383–398.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carden HD, Boitnott RL, Fasanella EL. Behavior of composite/metal aircraft structural elements and components under crash type loads: What are they telling us ? Washington (DC): NASA;1990. (NASA Technical Memorandum 102681).
   Google Scholar
• Perez JG. Energy absorption and progressive failure response of composite fuselage frames [doctoral dissertation]. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Naik RA. Analysis of woven and braided fabric reinforced composites, J Compos Mater. 1994, 29, 17, 2334–2363.
   Google Scholar
• Pilkington LO. Impact response and failure of a textile composite fuselage frame [master's thesis]. Virginia Polytechnic Institute; 2004, Blacksburg.
   Google Scholar
• Matzenmiller A, Lubliner J, Taylor RL. A constitutive model for anisotropic damage in fiber-composites. Mech Mater. 1995;20(2):125–152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gao BH, Ren YR. Impact dynamic characteristics of braided composite fuselage frame. Acta Mat Compos Sin. 2017;34(8):1780–1787.
   Google Scholar
• Hallquist JO. LS-DYNA keyword user's manual [M]. Livermore Software Technol Corp. 2013:612–613.
   Google Scholar
• Suykens JAK, Vandewalle J. Least squares support vector machine classifiers. Neural Proc Lett. 1999;9(3):293–300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig KJ, Stander N, Dooge DA, et al. Automotive crashworthiness design using response surface-based variable screening and optimization. Eng Comput. 2005;22(1):38–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sobol IM. Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Math Comput Simul. 2001;55(1):271–280.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li J, Duan QY, Gong W, et al. Assessing parameter importance of the Common Land Model based on qualitative and quantitative sensitivity analysis. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci. 2013; 17(8):3279–3293.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arwade SR, Moradi M, Louhghalam A. Variance decomposition and global sensitivity for structural systems. Eng Struct. 2010;32(1):1–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Optimusver 10.15. Noesis Solutions. 2014. Reference manual.
   Google Scholar
• Storn R, Price K. Differential evolution–a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Global Optim. 1997;11(4):341–359.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loja MAR, Soares CM, Barbosa JI. Optimization of magneto-electro-elastic composite structures using differential evolution. Compos Struct. 2014;107:276–287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ho-Huu V, Do-Thi TD, Dang-Trung H, et al. Optimization of laminated composite plates for maximizing buckling load using improved differential evolution and smoothed finite element method. Compos Struct. 2016;146:132–147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiore A, Marano GC, Greco R, et al. Structural optimization of hollow-section steel trusses by differential evolution algorithm. Int J Steel Struct. 2016;16(2):411–423.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar