<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="client.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<article article-type="other">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id/>
<issn/>
<banner>
<href>banner.jpg</href>
<size width="100%"/>
</banner>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta><doi>142</doi>
<title-group>
<article-title>Response of Typical Shell Structure with Mismatched Meshing</article-title>
</title-group>

<author>Nilesh S. Kitey<sup>1,a</sup>, Amit Varshney<sup>2,d</sup>, Saha Dauji<sup>2,e</sup>, Kapilesh Bhargava<sup>3</sup>, Upendra S. Deshmukh<sup>1,b</sup>, Shriram N. Patwardhan<sup>1,c</sup>, K. Agarwal<sup>2,f</sup> and S. Basu<sup>4</sup>  </author>

<aff><sup>1</sup>STUP Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Navi Mumbai, India. </aff>

<email><a href="mailto:nilesh.kitey@stupmail.com"><sup>a</sup>nilesh.kitey@stupmail.com</a></email>

<email><a href="mailto:upendra.deshmukh@stupmail.com"><sup>b</sup>upendra.deshmukh@stupmail.com</a></email>

<email><a href="mailto:patwardhan@stupmail.com  "><sup>c</sup>patwardhan@stupmail.com  </a></email>

<aff><sup>2</sup>NRPSED, NRB, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India. </aff>

<email><a href="mailto:varshney@barc.gov.in"><sup>d</sup>varshney@barc.gov.in</a></email>

<email><a href="mailto:dauji_saha@yahoo.com"><sup>e</sup>dauji_saha@yahoo.com</a></email>

<email><a href="mailto:kagar@barc.gov.in  "><sup>f</sup>kagar@barc.gov.in  </a></email>

<aff><sup>3</sup>AGM (Civil), NRPSED, NRB, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India. </aff>

<email><a href="mailto:kapil_66@barc.gov.in  ">kapil_66@barc.gov.in  </a></email>

<aff><sup>4</sup>NRB, &amp; Director, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India </aff>

<email><a href="mailto:basus@barc.gov.in ">basus@barc.gov.in </a></email>

</article-meta></front>
<body>
<abstract>
<title>ABSTRACT</title>
<p>Finite element models of complex RCC structures with openings might result in mismatched meshing on adjacent elements. The recent commercial software offer analysis with mismatched meshing without the classical mesh transitions. The responses of a typical structure for various loading conditions are compared in this article with matched and mismatched meshing by commercially available software. The results indicate that analysis with mismatched meshing would introduce errors within five percent.  </p>
<p><i>Keywords: </i>Finite Element Method (FEM), Shell element, Edge constraint, Mismatched meshing. </p>
</abstract>
<fpdf>
<href>pdflogo.jpg</href>
<hpdf>142</hpdf>
</fpdf>
</body>
</article>
