http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Air blast load generation for simulating structural response
Emily L. Guzas,Christopher J. Earls 국제구조공학회 2010 Steel and Composite Structures, An International J Vol.10 No.5
The current research presents a detailed methodology for generating air blast loading for use within a finite element context. Parameters describing blast overpressure loading on a structure are drawn from open literature sources and incorporated within a blast load generation computer code developed for this research. This open literature approach lends transparency to the details of the blast load modeling, as compared with many commonly used approaches to blast load generation, for which the details are not publicly available. As a demonstration, the load generation code is used with the finite element software LS-DYNA to simulate the response of a steel plate and girder subjected to explosions modeled using these parameters as well as blast parameters from other sources.
한현정,박미영,박경원,박기형,최성혜,김희진,양동원,Esther Gunaseli A/P M. Ebeneze,Yuan-Han Yang,Gurudev M. Kewalram,한설희 대한신경과학회 2022 Journal of Clinical Neurology Vol.18 No.4
Background and Purpose Oral administration of cholinesterase inhibitors is often associated with adverse gastrointestinal effects, and so developing an alternative administration route, such as transdermal, is urgently needed. The primary objective of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of the IPI-301 donepezil transdermal patch compared with donepezil tablets (control) in mild-to-moderate probable Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Methods This prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, two-arm parallel, multicenter trial included 399 patients, among whom 303 completed the trial. For randomization, the patients were stratified based on previous treatment and donepezil dose; patients in each stratum were randomized to the test and control groups at a 1:1 ratio. Results The difference between the control group and the IPI-301 group, quantified as the Hodges–Lehmann estimate of location shift, was 0.00 (95% confidence interval: -1.00 to 1.33), with an upper limit of less than 2.02. The change in Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study– Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) score differed significantly between the IPI-301 and control groups (p=0.02). However, the changes in the full-itemized ADCS-ADL scores at week 24 did not differ significantly between the two groups. There were no differences between the two groups regarding the scores for the Clinician Interview-Based Impression of Change (p=0.9097), Mini-Mental State Examination (p=0.7018), Neuropsychiatric Inventory (p=0.7656), or Clinical Dementia Rating (p=0.9990). Adverse events, vital signs, and laboratory test results were comparable between the two groups. Conclusions IPI-301 was safe and efficacious in improving cognitive function in patients with mild-to-moderate AD.