@inproceedings{MotraDimmigOsburgHildebrand,
  author    = {Motra, Hem Bahadur and Dimmig-Osburg, Andrea and Hildebrand, J{\"o}rg},
  title     = {UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION IN CYCLIC CREEP PREDICTION OF CONCRETE},
  series = {Digital Proceedings, International Conference on the Applications of Computer Science and Mathematics in Architecture and Civil Engineering : July 04 - 06 2012, Bauhaus-University Weimar},
  booktitle = {Digital Proceedings, International Conference on the Applications of Computer Science and Mathematics in Architecture and Civil Engineering : July 04 - 06 2012, Bauhaus-University Weimar},
  editor    = {G{\"u}rlebeck, Klaus and Lahmer, Tom and Werner, Frank},
  organization    = {Bauhaus-Universit{\"a}t Weimar},
  issn      = {1611-4086},
  doi       = {10.25643/bauhaus-universitaet.2780},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:gbv:wim2-20170314-27803},
  pages     = {18},
  abstract  = {This paper presents a methodology for uncertainty quantification in cyclic creep analysis. Several models- , namely BP model, Whaley and Neville model, modified MC90 for cyclic loading and modified Hyperbolic function for cyclic loading are used for uncertainty quantification. Three types of uncertainty are included in Uncertainty Quantification (UQ): (i) natural variability in loading and materials properties; (ii) data uncertainty due to measurement errors; and (iii) modelling uncertainty and errors during cyclic creep analysis. Due to the consideration of all type of uncertainties, a measure for the total variation of the model response is achieved. The study finds that the BP, modified Hyperbolic and modified MC90 are best performing models for cyclic creep prediction in that order. Further, global Sensitivity Analysis (SA) considering the uncorrelated and correlated parameters is used to quantify the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the overall prediction uncertainty and to identifying the important parameters. The error in determining the input quantities and model itself can produce significant changes in creep prediction values. The variability influence of input random quantities on the cyclic creep was studied by means of the stochastic uncertainty and sensitivity analysis namely the Gartner et al. method and Saltelli et al. method. All input imperfections were considered to be random quantities. The Latin Hypercube Sampling (LHS) numerical simulation method (Monte Carlo type method) was used. It has been found by the stochastic sensitivity analysis that the cyclic creep deformation variability is most sensitive to the Elastic modulus of concrete, compressive strength, mean stress, cyclic stress amplitude, number of cycle, in that order.},
  subject      = {Angewandte Informatik},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{MotraHildebrandDimmigOsburg,
  author    = {Motra, Hem Bahadur and Hildebrand, J{\"o}rg and Dimmig-Osburg, Andrea},
  title     = {Assessment of strain measurement techniques to characterise mechanical properties of structural steel},
  series = {Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal},
  journal   = {Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.jestch.2014.07.006},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:gbv:wim2-20170425-31540},
  pages     = {260 -- 269},
  abstract  = {Strain measurement is important in mechanical testing. A wide variety of techniques exists for measuring strain in the tensile test; namely the strain gauge, extensometer, stress and strain determined by machine crosshead motion, Geometric Moire technique, optical strain measurement techniques and others. Each technique has its own advantages and disadvantages. The purpose of this study is to quantitatively compare the strain measurement techniques. To carry out the tensile test experiments for S 235, sixty samples were cut from the web of the I-profile in longitudinal and transverse directions in four different dimensions. The geometry of samples are analysed by 3D scanner and vernier caliper. In addition, the strain values were determined by using strain gauge, extensometer and machine crosshead motion. Three techniques of strain measurement are compared in quantitative manner based on the calculation of mechanical properties (modulus of elasticity, yield strength, tensile strength, percentage elongation at maximum force) of structural steel. A statistical information was used for evaluating the results. It is seen that the extensometer and strain gauge provided reliable data, however the extensometer offers several advantages over the strain gauge and crosshead motion for testing structural steel in tension. Furthermore, estimation of measurement uncertainty is presented for the basic material parameters extracted through strain measurement.},
  subject      = {Baustahl},
  language  = {en}
}