@incollection{PfetschAbeleAltherretal.2021, author = {Pfetsch, Marc E. and Abele, Eberhard and Altherr, Lena and B{\"o}lling, Christian and Br{\"o}tz, Nicolas and Dietrich, Ingo and Gally, Tristan and Geßner, Felix and Groche, Peter and Hoppe, Florian and Kirchner, Eckhard and Kloberdanz, Hermann and Knoll, Maximilian and Kolvenbach, Philip and Kuttich-Meinlschmidt, Anja and Leise, Philipp and Lorenz, Ulf and Matei, Alexander and Molitor, Dirk A. and Niessen, Pia and Pelz, Peter F. and Rexer, Manuel and Schmitt, Andreas and Schmitt, Johann M. and Schulte, Fiona and Ulbrich, Stefan and Weigold, Matthias}, title = {Strategies for mastering uncertainty}, series = {Mastering uncertainty in mechanical engineering}, booktitle = {Mastering uncertainty in mechanical engineering}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-030-78353-2}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-030-78354-9_6}, pages = {365 -- 456}, year = {2021}, abstract = {This chapter describes three general strategies to master uncertainty in technical systems: robustness, flexibility and resilience. It builds on the previous chapters about methods to analyse and identify uncertainty and may rely on the availability of technologies for particular systems, such as active components. Robustness aims for the design of technical systems that are insensitive to anticipated uncertainties. Flexibility increases the ability of a system to work under different situations. Resilience extends this characteristic by requiring a given minimal functional performance, even after disturbances or failure of system components, and it may incorporate recovery. The three strategies are described and discussed in turn. Moreover, they are demonstrated on specific technical systems.}, language = {en} } @article{BohrnMuchaWerneretal.2013, author = {Bohrn, Ulrich and Mucha, Andreas and Werner, Frederik and Trattner, Barbara and B{\"a}cker, Matthias and Krumbe, Christoph and Schienle, Meinrad and St{\"u}tz, Evamaria and Schmitt-Landsiedel, Doris and Fleischer, Maximilian and Wagner, Patrick and Sch{\"o}ning, Michael Josef}, title = {A critical comparison of cell-based sensor systems for the detection of Cr (VI) in aquatic environment}, series = {Sensors and actuators. B: Chemical}, volume = {Vol. 182}, journal = {Sensors and actuators. B: Chemical}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {1873-3077 (E-Journal); 0925-4005 (Print)}, pages = {58 -- 65}, year = {2013}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{MuellerSchmittLeiseetal.2021, author = {M{\"u}ller, Tim M. and Schmitt, Andreas and Leise, Philipp and Meck, Tobias and Altherr, Lena and Pelz, Peter F. and Pfetsch, Marc E.}, title = {Validation of an optimized resilient water supply system}, series = {Uncertainty in Mechanical Engineering}, booktitle = {Uncertainty in Mechanical Engineering}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-030-77255-0}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-030-77256-7_7}, pages = {70 -- 80}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Component failures within water supply systems can lead to significant performance losses. One way to address these losses is the explicit anticipation of failures within the design process. We consider a water supply system for high-rise buildings, where pump failures are the most likely failure scenarios. We explicitly consider these failures within an early design stage which leads to a more resilient system, i.e., a system which is able to operate under a predefined number of arbitrary pump failures. We use a mathematical optimization approach to compute such a resilient design. This is based on a multi-stage model for topology optimization, which can be described by a system of nonlinear inequalities and integrality constraints. Such a model has to be both computationally tractable and to represent the real-world system accurately. We therefore validate the algorithmic solutions using experiments on a scaled test rig for high-rise buildings. The test rig allows for an arbitrary connection of pumps to reproduce scaled versions of booster station designs for high-rise buildings. We experimentally verify the applicability of the presented optimization model and that the proposed resilience properties are also fulfilled in real systems.}, language = {en} } @article{AltherrJoggerstLeiseetal.2018, author = {Altherr, Lena and Joggerst, Laura and Leise, Philipp and Pfetsch, Marc E. and Schmitt, Andreas and Wendt, Janine}, title = {On obligations in the development process of resilient systems with algorithmic design methods}, series = {Applied Mechanics and Materials}, volume = {885}, journal = {Applied Mechanics and Materials}, number = {885}, publisher = {Trans Tech Publications}, address = {B{\"a}ch}, isbn = {1662-7482}, doi = {10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.885.240}, pages = {240 -- 252}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Advanced computational methods are needed both for the design of large systems and to compute high accuracy solutions. Such methods are efficient in computation, but the validation of results is very complex, and highly skilled auditors are needed to verify them. We investigate legal questions concerning obligations in the development phase, especially for technical systems developed using advanced methods. In particular, we consider methods of resilient and robust optimization. With these techniques, high performance solutions can be found, despite a high variety of input parameters. However, given the novelty of these methods, it is uncertain whether legal obligations are being met. The aim of this paper is to discuss if and how the choice of a specific computational method affects the developer's product liability. The review of legal obligations in this paper is based on German law and focuses on the requirements that must be met during the design and development process.}, language = {en} } @article{AltherrLeisePfetschetal.2018, author = {Altherr, Lena and Leise, Philipp and Pfetsch, Marc E. and Schmitt, Andreas}, title = {Algorithmic design and resilience assessment of energy efficient high-rise water supply systems}, series = {Applied Mechanics and Materials}, volume = {885}, journal = {Applied Mechanics and Materials}, publisher = {Trans Tech Publications}, address = {B{\"a}ch}, issn = {1662-7482}, doi = {10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.885.211}, pages = {211 -- 223}, year = {2018}, abstract = {High-rise water supply systems provide water flow and suitable pressure in all levels of tall buildings. To design such state-of-the-art systems, the consideration of energy efficiency and the anticipation of component failures are mandatory. In this paper, we use Mixed-Integer Nonlinear Programming to compute an optimal placement of pipes and pumps, as well as an optimal control strategy.Moreover, we consider the resilience of the system to pump failures. A resilient system is able to fulfill a predefined minimum functionality even though components fail or are restricted in their normal usage. We present models to measure and optimize the resilience. To demonstrate our approach, we design and analyze an optimal resilient decentralized water supply system inspired by a real-life hotel building.}, language = {en} } @article{AltherrBroetzDietrichetal.2018, author = {Altherr, Lena and Br{\"o}tz, Nicolas and Dietrich, Ingo and Gally, Tristan and Geßner, Felix and Kloberdanz, Hermann and Leise, Philipp and Pelz, Peter Franz and Schlemmer, Pia and Schmitt, Andreas}, title = {Resilience in mechanical engineering - a concept for controlling uncertainty during design, production and usage phase of load-carrying structures}, series = {Applied Mechanics and Materials}, volume = {885}, journal = {Applied Mechanics and Materials}, publisher = {Trans Tech Publications}, address = {B{\"a}ch}, isbn = {1662-7482}, doi = {10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.885.187}, pages = {187 -- 198}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Resilience as a concept has found its way into different disciplines to describe the ability of an individual or system to withstand and adapt to changes in its environment. In this paper, we provide an overview of the concept in different communities and extend it to the area of mechanical engineering. Furthermore, we present metrics to measure resilience in technical systems and illustrate them by applying them to load-carrying structures. By giving application examples from the Collaborative Research Centre (CRC) 805, we show how the concept of resilience can be used to control uncertainty during different stages of product life.}, language = {en} } @incollection{AltherrLeisePfetschetal.2021, author = {Altherr, Lena and Leise, Philipp and Pfetsch, Marc E. and Schmitt, Andreas}, title = {Optimal design of resilient technical systems on the example of water supply systems}, series = {Mastering Uncertainty in Mechanical Engineering}, booktitle = {Mastering Uncertainty in Mechanical Engineering}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-030-78356-3}, pages = {429 -- 433}, year = {2021}, language = {en} } @article{TheysohnKraffEilersetal.2014, author = {Theysohn, Jens M. and Kraff, Oliver and Eilers, Kristina and Andrade, Dorian and Gerwig, Marcus and Timmann, Dagmar and Schmitt, Franz and Ladd, Mark E. and Ladd, Susanne C. and Bitz, Andreas}, title = {Vestibular effects of a 7 Tesla MRI examination compared to 1.5 T and 0 T in healthy volunteers}, series = {PLoS one}, volume = {9}, journal = {PLoS one}, number = {3}, publisher = {PLOS}, address = {San Francisco}, issn = {1932-6203}, doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0092104}, pages = {e92104}, year = {2014}, abstract = {Ultra-high-field MRI (7 Tesla (T) and above) elicits more temporary side-effects compared to 1.5 T and 3 T, e.g. dizziness or "postural instability" even after exiting the scanner. The current study aims to assess quantitatively vestibular performance before and after exposure to different MRI scenarios at 7 T, 1.5 T and 0 T. Sway path and body axis rotation (Unterberger's stepping test) were quantitatively recorded in a total of 46 volunteers before, 2 minutes after, and 15 minutes after different exposure scenarios: 7 T head MRI (n = 27), 7 T no RF (n = 22), 7 T only B₀ (n = 20), 7 T in \& out B₀ (n = 20), 1.5 T no RF (n = 20), 0 T (n = 15). All exposure scenarios lasted 30 minutes except for brief one minute exposure in 7 T in \& out B₀. Both measures were documented utilizing a 3D ultrasound system. During sway path evaluation, the experiment was repeated with eyes both open and closed. Sway paths for all long-lasting 7 T scenarios (normal, no RF, only B₀) with eyes closed were significantly prolonged 2 minutes after exiting the scanner, normalizing after 15 minutes. Brief exposure to 7 T B₀ or 30 minutes exposure to 1.5 T or 0 T did not show significant changes. End positions after Unterberger's stepping test were significantly changed counter-clockwise after all 7 T scenarios, including the brief in \& out B₀ exposure. Shorter exposure resulted in a smaller alteration angle. In contrast to sway path, reversal of changes in body axis rotation was incomplete after 15 minutes. 1.5 T caused no rotational changes. The results show that exposure to the 7 Tesla static magnetic field causes only a temporary dysfunction or "over-compensation" of the vestibular system not measurable at 1.5 or 0 Tesla. Radiofrequency fields, gradient switching, and orthostatic dysregulation do not seem to play a role.}, language = {en} }