@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}
}
@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}
}