Stress Categorisation

© All Rights Reserved

17 tayangan

Stress Categorisation

© All Rights Reserved

- Annexure 3 Lifting Padeye
- V 2151 102 a 216 C Design Calculation Sheet (Filter)
- bput_1470310707
- CC2030 Mathematics Study Guide
- Course Description
- me2303 notes
- Math121Calculus I Fall 2016[1342]
- Chapter 4
- ME 2254 — STRENGTH OF MATERIALS april.may 2011
- Isolated Footing Design Example and Excel Sheet
- Examples - Combined Stress
- 19850650916_ftp
- Solution of strength of materials 32321.doc
- Preliminar Project of Networks
- 200 Level Courses
- MTH 2313(Complex and Numerical) Revised Course Outlines-Dr Sazzad.doc
- 17304 2016 Winter Question Paper.pdf
- 12P304 (3)
- drvo beton.pdf
- solid lab

Anda di halaman 1dari 6

Godbole

Supak Pore

BHEL Corporate R&D Division,

Hyderabad, 500093, India

Categorization on Planes

A new method employing the fitting of a least squares plane to stress distribution obtained from a finite element analysis for evaluating categorized values is presented. The

property of a least squares fit, i.e., the preservation of volume under stress distribution

and the plane of consideration, is used in evaluating various numerical integrals. The

procedure is demonstrated through application to a typical shell nozzle junction.

DOI: 10.1115/1.4001521

Keywords: stress category, least squares fit, membrane and bending stresses

Introduction

procedure for interpreting stress distribution obtained through a

finite element FE analysis. The first of such an approach dates

back to 1973, when Kroenke 1 put forth the concept and established the procedure to compute the required quantities using

stress results obtained from FE analysis.

Categorization means breaking the given stress distribution into

the average component, the linearly varying component, and the

remaining component. The average component is called membrane M, the linearly varying component is called bending B,

and the remaining component is called peak F. M is compared

with a 2/3 yield stress, M + B is compared with yield, and M + B

+ F is considered for fatigue.

The essence of the philosophy behind resorting to stress categorization is to focus the attention beyond stress at a point. From a

point, Kroenke 1 proposed to consider distribution on a line.

What is naturally obvious is to go beyond a line and consider a

plane. In considering stress at a point, the only unambiguity offered is that there is no second opinion about which point to

consider. The point that shows maximum stress is the obvious

choice. But apart from this simplicity, the stress at a point approach ignores all important considerations regarding the nature

of distribution. The stress distribution could be highly localized

singularity, Fig. 1a, fairly localized stress concentration, Fig.

1b, fairly distributed Fig. 1c, or evenly distributed Fig.

1d. Assessing the severity of these distributions by considering

only the maximum stress reported by the FE analysis is obviously

not correct, and it is natural to conclude that attention must go

beyond the maximum stress alone. Giving due regard to the entire

distribution appears very relevant. The natural choice then is to go

from a point to a line.

If consideration of distribution on a line in the case of plane and

axisymmetric problems is viewed critically, it can be easily appreciated that consideration of a plane is implicit. In both of these

analyses, there is no variation in the third dimension thickness in

the case of plane problems and circumference in the case of axisymmetric problems, and information available on a line implicitly contains information about a plane containing the line. Thus,

even the approach put forth in Ref. 1 has an inbuilt sense of

consideration of a plane.

Once, the need for line or plane is established, there are two

major issues which do not exist in the case of point, which need

to be addressed. The first obvious one is the choice of line or

plane. The second one is that the stresses obtained by the FE

numerical value of stress alone is necessary for further interpretation. But in the case of line or plane, the FE results need further

processing. Both of these issues are addressed and being pondered

over through literature 28. There is no definite guideline for

choosing a plane location, orientation, and extent. An analyst has

to make his best judgment in the given situation. The other issue

regarding a computational procedure has been addressed with a

computer program, SOAP, as presented in Ref. 2. The present

paper concerns itself with this, i.e., the computational aspect. A

new method based on fitting a least squares plane to the two

dimensional variation of a stress quantity is presented.

Mathematics of Categorization

computations using the particular stress distribution obtained from

the FE analysis. These computations are, chiefly, the evaluation of

various definite integrals.

The plane of a section, where results are to be considered, is the

local x-z plane, and the stress result fx , z is taken as a local y

variable dependent. The plane is bound by a certain curve that is

a function of in plane variables x and z. z = x would represent

this. The stress variation would, in general, be represented by y

= fx , z. In the context of the finite element method, both of these

functions, z = x and y = fx , z, would be described at a discrete

number of points. The various integrals required are presented

below:

x2

I1 =

2x

1x

x1

x2

I2z =

x1

x2

I2x =

Cgx = I2z/I1,

Cgz = I2x/I1

x2

I3z =

x2

x1

zdxdz

1x

x1

I3x =

xdxdz,

1x

2x

x1

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication

in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received May 28, 2009;

final manuscript received March 13, 2010; published online October 15, 2010. Assoc.

Editor: William J. Koves.

2x

centroid of area

2x

x2dxdz,

1x

2x

z2dxdz

1x

Downloaded 20 Jan 2011 to 144.177.100.5. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

integration. Out of the three, the last one is recommended for its

robustness and mesh insensitivity. The linearized stresses are obtained through the integration of functions representing the distribution of stress components at nodes being considered. The code

recommends the use of only those elements that contribute to a

line under consideration.

Thus, the computations for obtaining categorized stress values

are evaluations of various definite integrals. As the values of various functions to be integrated are available only at a discrete

number of points, the integrations are, without exception, numerical integrations.

In the case of categorization on a line, various integrals result

into area integrals. In the case of planes, these integrals lead to

volume integrals. This makes computations more complicated in

the case of planes. The necessity of going from a point to a line

and from a line to a plane is dictated by the physics of the situation, and the price to be paid for going close to reality is in terms

of having to deal with complicated mathematics. With robust numerical integration schemes available the basis of computations

of finite elements, the computations may not be as complicated as

they appear when put forth in closed forms as above.

Fig. 1

x2

I3xz =

I3x + I3z

x2

I4 =

x1

xzdxdz

1x

x1

Iu,v =

2x

I3x I3z

2

2

2

+ I3xz

f 2x

fx,zdxdz

f 1x

x2

I5z =

x1

x2

I5x =

x1

f 2x

xfx,zdxdz,

f 1x

f 2x

zfx,zdxdz

f 1x

Moments about the principal axes:

M u = I5x cos + I5z sin

given in Ref. 2. The computational procedure adopted here is the

Gaussian quadrature technique. A concept of cutting plane and

stress classification plane SCP is put forth. The stress classification plane is a subset of the cutting plane. The Gaussian quadrature is applied to the cutting plane, and hence only those Gaussian

points that fall on the stress classification plane are used for further processing. Thus, the entire FE results available in SCP may

not be used for further processing, and it is quite likely that an

important point may get omitted. Hence, the authors have stated

that near sharp stress changes, the method becomes unstable.

The other important aspect that needs attention is as follows.

These days, FE analyses are carried out by standard packages

available. Hence, the form in which data need to be input for SOAP

and the form in which they are available after analysis may not be

complementary. Nevertheless, this 2 may be the first of its kind,

wherein the actual computational aspect is presented and demonstrated through applications.

Another computational approach that can be used in a limited

sense is available with some packages ANSYS, for example

where the total forces and moments transferred across a section

can be obtained. These can give an average normal stress on a

plane and also two bending stresses about the chosen axes. But

this may not be sufficient to generate the entire information required for the purpose of categorization. Also, the section chosen

must contain a sufficient number of nodes and elements. This

means that a sectioning plan must be available at the time of

creation of the FE model.

Membrane stress = I4/I1

Bending stress:

About u =

Mu

v

Iu

About v =

Mv

u

Iv

reference.

The boiler and pressure vessel code laid down by ASME discusses the computational aspects to achieve the linearized components 9. Three methods are suggested. They are i the stress

integration method, ii the structural stress method based on

nodal forces, and iii the structural stress method based on stress

061206-2 / Vol. 132, DECEMBER 2010

scheme of numerical integration resorted to. The Gaussian quadrature scheme in Ref. 2 or the point by point or node by node

calculations available in some FE softwares are the ones used in

the available literature. A different type of scheme is proposed

here.

The scheme presented here is a logical extension of the numerical method for finding the area under curve fx and a base line

along x 10. The author, there, has shown that the area under the

curve is identical in the engineering sense of the word to that

between the least squares equivalent of fx and the base line.

The logical and rather obvious extension of this important feature of the least squares fit that it preserves the integral is that

the volume formed between a general surface and the base area is

identical to that formed by the equivalent least squares surface and

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 20 Jan 2011 to 144.177.100.5. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

the same base area. This postulate is the basis for the new method

being presented here. The proof of the postulate is presented next.

the similar manner, as given in Ref. 10 for a straight line. But the

complications of the resulting algebra having to deal with the 3

3 matrix and writing an explicit inverse are obvious. Instead of

going for a mathematical proof, an alternate method is resorted to.

As the purpose of this presentation is for engineering applications,

a practical or a numerical proof would suffice.

A base area of a random shape is considered. This area is discretized into some internal points shown in Fig. 2. At each of

these points, ordinate y is calculated using some arbitrary function,

2

Y = 1.5 + 2X + 3Z + X + 1.5Z

constructed. Using fx , z values and x , z coordinates of points,

the least squares surface a + bx + cz is fitted and values of coefficients a, b, and c are determined using the usual procedure for

solving an overdetermined system of equations. The volume generated using fx , z is shown in Fig. 3a, and the corresponding

volume using a least squares fit is shown in Fig. 3b. The values

of volumes are obtained using solid model attributes. These computations are done for three levels of discretization, i.e., number of

internal points in the base area. The results of these are given in

Table 1. Table 1 shows that the postulation regarding the equality

of volumes is true within the engineering sense.

Application to Categorization

under the curve. This, if interpreted in the context of categorization, has the following meaning. If fx represents stress variation

along a line, then the least squares fit of fx is the membrane

+ bending line, and the ordinate of the least squares line at the

center of the line centroid is the membrane stress. This can be

easily shown for plane problems. The statement is valid for axisymmetric cases also. The only change required is because of the

fact that the centroid of the sectorial section does not fall at the

center of the line. It shifts. Hence, the membrane stress is the

ordinate at the centroid location.

The logical extension of this means that the least squares plane

is the membrane+ bending plane, and the ordinate at the centroid

of the base area is numerically equal to the membrane stress. If xg

and zg are the coordinates of the centroid, then a + bxg + czg is the

membrane stress. The membrane stress is also the average value

of y or fx , z, which is given by the total volume/area. This comparison is shown in Table 2.

The total load represented by the volume under fx , z would, in

general, act eccentric with respect to the centroid of the base area,

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology

Fig. 3

moments about two orthogonal axes. These would result in bending stresses. With the total volume and the offsets between the

volume centroid and the base area centroid, and the principal

properties of the base area being known, bending stresses can be

computed. These are compared with the values obtained using

least squares plane at corner locations shown in Fig. 2. This comparison is shown in Table 3.

Tables 13 clearly demonstrate the use of least squares plane

fitting in obtaining the membrane and membrane+ bending components of the distribution represented by the given fx , z.

Computational Procedure

The concept presented above for obtaining categorized components for a given distribution is condensed into a procedure that is

to be executed in post-processing the results obtained from the FE

analysis. The procedure has the following steps.

Volume units

Discretization level

Actual

LSQ

Coarse

Fine

Very fine

0.13128

0.13085

0.13074

0.1270

0.13181

0.13107

Average value units

Discretization level

Coarse

Fine

Very fine

Volume/area

LSQ

0.6605

0.6583

0.6578

0.6678

0.6631

0.6624

Downloaded 20 Jan 2011 to 144.177.100.5. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Membrane+ bending

Stress

LSQ

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0.244

0.245

0.583

0.729

1.23

0.694

0.587

0.235

0.213

0.578

0.722

1.247

0.692

0.581

Membrane

2. The stress data along with the coordinates of points with

reference to planelocal xz are stored. Local y is normal to

the plane.

3. The data are used to perform calculations to obtain coefficients a, b, and c of the least squares plane.

4. The centroid of the plane local x , z coordinates is determined.

5. With the values of centroid coordinates and coefficients a, b,

and c, the membrane stress is computed.

6. Using coordinates of points of interest all corner points and

some interior points if desired and coefficients a, b, and c,

membrane+ bending components are determined.

7. The procedure is repeated for three normal and three shear

stresses with reference to the plane.

8. Membrane components corresponding to each stress component are used to compute the membrane of the von Mises

stress.

9. The bending component corresponding to each stress is used

to compute the bending component of the von Mises stress

at each of the required locations.

10. The membrane+ bending component for the von Mises

stress is obtained at each location for each of the individual

stresses.

Examples

demonstrate the utility of this approach in determining the categorized values of the given stress distribution.

The first example chosen is that of a cantilever beam of the

unsymmetrical cross section shown in Fig. 4, subjected to axial

M+B

Location in Fig. 4

MPa

Computed

MPa

On the plane

At point 1

At point 2

At point 3

At point 4

1000.0000

2493.6052

1035.0919

5953.6351

2868.1731

999.4644

2492.8620

1034.6600

5952.3730

2866.4310

values applied of membrane and bending components; hence,

the values obtained through the procedure can be easily compared.

Section properties:

Area = 39.5 mm2

Principal moments of inertia:

Iu = 59.556 mm4,

Iv = 303.02 mm4

Loads:

Px = 39,500 N,

Py = 600 N,

Pz = 1000 N

The results are given in Table 4. Table 4 shows that the numerical

accuracy of the procedure is quite adequate, and the overall concepts put forth give expected results.

The second example is of a typical shell nozzle junction. The

FE model is shown in Fig. 5. A typical plane considered for analysis and local axes x-y in plane and z out of plane used to compute stresses are shown in Fig. 6a. This figure also shows the

location of points 18 used for calculations. Stress distribution

corresponding to six stress components three normal and three

shears with respect to the plane is shown in Figs. 6b6g.

Using these values, the categorized values are computed at specified locations shown in Fig. 6a. They are given in Table 5.

Using the results of individual components given in Table 5,

von Mises stresses are computed using a standard relationship.

These stresses are usually used for deciding the acceptance, or

otherwise, of the given distribution. The von Mises stresses for the

chosen plane as computed are given in Table 6.

linearly varying, and remaining parts of given distributions individually, which represent each of the six stress components referred to with respect to a plane under consideration. The reason

behind resorting to this is that the damage potential of each of

these three parts is different. Thus, strictly speaking, these three

quantities are mathematically derived quantities. Only in the case

of stress normal to the plane in question do these three parts,

especially the linearly varying one, have physical significance. It

is from this case that the linearly varying component is termed as

Membrane= 83.565 MPa

Point No.

in Fig. 6a

Bending stress

MPa

M+B

MPa

Peak

MPa

Total

MPa

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

132.780

132.312

122.478

136.084

155.987

28.504

60.907

71.747

216.345

215.877

206.043

219.649

239.552

112.069

144.472

155.312

57.008

49.497

59.303

177.949

217.129

65.379

46.558

0.23

273.353

265.374

265.346

41.700

22.423

46.690

97.914

155.082

10

g Stress contours corresponding to six stress components.

other components. But the fact that linearly varying parts whether

they represent physical bending or not should be assessed differently from the average component remains. Hence, breaking all

stress components three normal and three shear under whatever

loading conditions into three parts is justifiable.

Conclusion

distribution is proposed, validated, and demonstrated. The numerical integration required is carried out using least squares plane

fitting for the two dimensional variation of stress data. The complexities of the numerical computations are limited only to the

extent of solving an overdetermined system of algebraic equations. The input required is that of local coordinates of points in a

chosen plane where stress results are available from the FE analysis and the stress values. The entire result available on a plane is

used, and hence the possibility of missing an important input is

avoided.

As the present day analysis is carried out mainly through a

software package, the post-processing required for this categorization would differ from one package to another the form in

which results are available, the conversion of the data into the

format that is required for the above procedure, etc.. A complete

procedure for a particular software ANSYS is developed in the

form of programs.

One significant thing to be noted here is as follows. In general,

the plane considered for analysis would have an odd shape, and

principal axes would be inclined with respect to the centroidal

axes of reference. The computation a + bx + cz x , z coordinates

of point under considerations implicitly covers the alignment

with principal axes and also the use of correct fiber distances for

the computation of the bending stress.

Nomenclature

a, b, c coefficients of the least squares plane

B bending stress linearly varying component

Cgx , Cgz x , z coordinates of the centroid of the base

area

F peak stress

I1 area of the section

I2z first moment of area about the z-axis

I2x first moment of area about the x-axis

Stress

Sx

Sy

Sz normal

Sxy

Syz

Szx

Membrane+ bending

at specified points shown in Fig. 6a MPa

Membrane

MPa

6.460

26.407

98.139

1.328

0.581

0.93

16.43

30.84

237.95

9.63

1.62

3.22

17.61

28.27

236.65

9.61

1.56

3.24

17.67

26.17

225.26

8.98

1.48

3.08

19.07

23.72

45.25

6.14

0.90

0.73

10.99

11.74

69.08

7.85

0.96

1.31

3.03

42.92

84.22

0.11

0.63

0.45

14.50

63.78

72.57

1.06

0.74

0.07

14.89

77.56

147.25

3.11

1.40

0.99

I3z

I3x

I3xz

Iu,v

I4

I5x

I5z

M

M u, M v

P x, P y , P z

S x, S y , S z

Sxy, Sxz, Syz

u, v

u ,

x, y, z

second moment of area about the x-axis

product moment of area

principal moment of inertia

volume under stress distribution

moment of volume of stress distribution about

the x-axis

moment of volume of stress distribution about

the z-axis

membrane stress average component

moments about the principal axes

applied forces along the x, y, and z directions

normal stresses

shear stresses

principal axes

coordinates of a point in the principal frame of

reference

local variables with respect to the plane of

results

orientation angle of the principal axes

References

1 Kroenke, W. C., 1973, Classification of Finite Element Stresses According to

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

ASME Section. III Stress Categories, ASME Winter Annual Meeting, Detroit,

MI, November, pp. 107140.

Hsu, K. H., and McKinley, D. A., 1990, SOAPA Computer Program for

Classification of Three Dimensional Finite Element Stresses on a Plane,

ASME Pressure Vessel and Piping Conference and Exhibition, Tennessee, PVP

185, pp. 1119.

Hechmer, J. L., and Hollinger, G. L., 1989, Code Evaluation of 3-D Stresses

on a Plane, PVP Am. Soc. Mech. Eng., 161, pp. 3346.

Hechmer, J. L., and Hollinger, G. L., 1987, Three-Dimensional Stress

Criteria-Application of Code Rules, PVP Am. Soc. Mech. Eng., 120, pp.

189195.

Hechmer, J. L., and Hollinger, G. L., 1991, The ASME Code and 3-D Stress

Evaluation, ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 113, pp. 481487.

Hollinger, G. L., and Hechmer, J. L., 1986, Three Dimensional Stress

CriteriaA Weak Link in Vessel Design and Analysis, PVP Am. Soc. Mech.

Eng., 109, pp. 914.

Hechmer, J. L., and Hollinger, G. L., 1988, Considerations in the Calculations

of the Primary Plus Secondary Stress Intensity Range for Code Stress Classification, PVP Am. Soc. Mech. Eng., 136, pp. 1733.

Maekawa, O., Aoki, M., Nishimura, Y., and Nishiguchi, I., 1995, JPVRC

Activities to Establish Stress Classification for 3-D FEA Results, PVP Am.

Soc. Mech. Eng., 313-1, pp. 377392.

ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, 2007, Linearization of

Stress Results for Stress Classification, Annex 5.A, Division 2Alternative

Rules, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY.

Godbole, P. B., 1989, A Method of Quadrature Using Least Square Straight

Line Fit, Adv. Eng. Software, 113, pp. 156158.

- Annexure 3 Lifting PadeyeDiunggah olehvpkaranam1
- V 2151 102 a 216 C Design Calculation Sheet (Filter)Diunggah olehEngineering Mechanics
- bput_1470310707Diunggah olehPramod Kumar
- CC2030 Mathematics Study GuideDiunggah olehLedzf
- me2303 notesDiunggah oleh2arunagiri
- Course DescriptionDiunggah olehMatthew Delgado
- Math121Calculus I Fall 2016[1342]Diunggah olehmahindra27
- Chapter 4Diunggah olehSiimple Opinion Final
- ME 2254 — STRENGTH OF MATERIALS april.may 2011Diunggah olehKarthi San
- Isolated Footing Design Example and Excel SheetDiunggah olehAmjid Afridi
- Examples - Combined StressDiunggah olehamdeva
- 19850650916_ftpDiunggah olehGerman Villalba
- Solution of strength of materials 32321.docDiunggah olehF. Claudiu
- Preliminar Project of NetworksDiunggah olehAnonymous vsEWkzxo
- 200 Level CoursesDiunggah olehZahoor Ahmad Khan
- MTH 2313(Complex and Numerical) Revised Course Outlines-Dr Sazzad.docDiunggah olehAhmad Norfirdaus
- 17304 2016 Winter Question Paper.pdfDiunggah olehSharad Dhanawde
- 12P304 (3)Diunggah olehRAJA
- drvo beton.pdfDiunggah olehSonja Dragovic
- solid labDiunggah olehbali
- teori BDiunggah olehmulyana
- Nananan ADiunggah olehthabo
- Sad DemoDiunggah olehkumar
- Design of Boundary Combined Footings of TrapezoidaDiunggah olehDennise Shughni
- GATE 2019 Syllabus for ME(Gatepsu.in) (1)Diunggah olehRupesh kashyap
- Spreader Beam One PagerDiunggah olehShanice McAlister-Bishop
- Solution of strength of materials problems.docDiunggah olehlonerx14
- Syllabus_CSIRNETDiunggah olehSnehamoy Dhar
- C14-M-305102018Diunggah olehSrikanth Ch
- 2-Integration and Differential Equation123Diunggah olehBunty Adda

- API 650-Annex PDiunggah olehSachin
- Heat TreatingDiunggah olehSachin
- Ansi Pipe ScheduleDiunggah olehRameshBM
- To Do ListDiunggah olehSachin
- Seismic ValveDiunggah olehSachin
- Growth Plan_Mechanical GroupDiunggah olehSachin
- T-707-Calculations Based on Actual Thickness-R2Diunggah olehSachin
- Man Hour EstimationDiunggah olehSachin
- 94510-2BDiunggah olehSachin
- Bolt TorqueDiunggah olehSachin
- BASEPLT9Diunggah olehSachin
- allnozldDiunggah olehSachin
- PV Newsletter - Volume 2012 Issue 8Diunggah olehSachin
- Use of Appendices 1-9 and 1-10 of ASME Section VIII Division 1Diunggah olehSachin
- Heirarchy_of_Vessel_Pressures.pdfDiunggah olehSachin
- Copy of Bspl 1242 Iot2 Me Cal 0004 Rev.a1Diunggah olehSachin
- Hydro TestDiunggah olehSachin
- Collapse StressDiunggah olehSachin
- Heirarchy of Vessel PressuresDiunggah olehSachin
- Boiler Riser TubesDiunggah olehSachin

- Elliptic Curve Cryptography – an Implementation TutorialDiunggah olehmehmetibrahim
- Lesson SimulationDiunggah olehaparnajvarma5257
- MP EM Ass 10: Current and ResistanceDiunggah olehBlueAstro
- Reasoning InferenceDiunggah olehCecilia
- andreussi2017.pdfDiunggah olehEder Ruiz Hernandez
- C MaterialDiunggah olehSur Esh
- AB Breathers FillersDiunggah olehBalaji Jayadevan
- Automation and RoboticsDiunggah olehNick Te
- Dunnage Calculation TheoryDiunggah olehralina10
- ProjectDiunggah olehJyoti Kale
- 4024_w13_ms_11Diunggah olehSudibyo Gunawan
- Digital circuits unit 1(I)Diunggah olehhari
- GESTRA 20Condensate 20ManualDiunggah olehjeevanmark
- org-nomDiunggah olehmf720383270
- DCL CommandsDiunggah olehSuganthi Sethouramane
- Unlock BENDDiunggah olehMirela Djogo
- ALtium ShortcutsDiunggah olehMauricio Villalobos
- Duff Mechanics 1905Diunggah olehkatevazo
- pka DBUDiunggah olehpepe_nabas
- Gender and Translation AccuracyDiunggah olehankydeswal
- Rajghat PowerstationDiunggah olehKirti Gupta
- Copernican TheoryDiunggah olehs99happy
- Establishing TrustworthinessDiunggah olehrosegoncalves27
- BSeries_Maintenance_Operation.pdfDiunggah olehMohammedShoga
- Stats Problems Solutions[1]Diunggah olehManthan Kulkarni
- Edic Installation GuideDiunggah olehJuan Fernandez
- A Detailed Lesson Plan in Mathematics VDiunggah olehMicko Quinto
- Measurement-uncertainity.docxDiunggah olehHanaa Elnegme
- nave-manual.pdfDiunggah olehssampling
- Dantes Empyrean and the Eye of GodDiunggah olehJuan Pancho Toro